Post originally by Sergio Mascarenhas at 2004-04-03 05:03:14
Converted from Phorums BB System

<< Actually, it had nothing to do with alignment (in the D&D sense) at all. I was just saying that there aren't clearly defined "good guy" and "bad guy" nations. >>

True. That's why in my first point I put 'aligments' Within double commas. Yet, if I commented on this is first, because you don't wrote "good guy / bad guy" but instead "good / evil", two concepts that in rpgs are usually associated with DnD. And, second, the comment is only meaningful for a DnD player or a player of a DnD-derived game. It seemed to me that you were pointing to DnD but, since I was not sure about it, and as I just said, I qualified the expression 'aligments'.

<< I really can't understand what your objection is to that. I never claimed any sort of exclusivity or ingenuity >>

In the context of a stream of comments in the review that pointed - in my reading, let me repeat - to DnD, I pointed to the fact that this was nothing special.

You see, I don't mind if a reviewer decides in his review to make references to DnD since this game is the dominant game in the market. I just hope that this is stated openly. It seemed to me that you were doing this but, instead of referring to DnD, referred to "most other games". Now, this is a different thing. I reacted because I've seen this being done in plenty of reviews here at RPGnet and I find it enerving. That was my point (that may be wrong, of course). From there it moved in a nasty direction, regretably.

Sergio