Stitched Together / drain souls and Slaughter

[Dolomyte]

I know this is a resolved thread, but frankly I don't care.

This ruling is terrible. Its not a democracy so we don't get a vote, but people surely should be allowed to voice their opinion on it. If I draw shared slaughter in a tournament with neverborn there is no reason not to take three stitched together where I get a 15 soulstone handicap. I can play lilith, camp soulstones and hide the rest of my models. The stitched will kill at least one model, and then all I need to do is drain souls with lilith and have a gaurunteed 2 vp to 0 victory. Bodyguard makes it 4, and toss in breakthrough for 6. the opponent could do NOTHING to stop that.

This is probably an issue with slaughter more then anything. but its a ridiculous ruling. It needs to be talked about some more on wyrds end.

[mythicFOX]

I don't understand why there would be any hesitation in ruling the opposing player gets credit for killing stitched together when does not die triggers, if I'm missing how that breaks something, anything else in the game, please let me know.

It's not the place of a rules marshal to change the rules of the game. RAW and RAI Stitched work a specific way. It's not for the RM's to change that.

This isn't a rules issue, it's a game balance issue.

Edited July 27, 2011 by mythicFOX
SPAG

[Buhallin]

Here: A bunch of "I'm right because I declare it so" theorycrafting and namecalling. Alternately, "The middle of a useless discussion" would also have been accepted.

This is not a rules discussion. It does not belong in the rules forum. Honestly, it's not even a tactics discussion. If you think it's unbalanced, PLAY IT. If you think the way to prove it's unbalanced is to abuse as many people as you can with it to make them complain, I feel sorry for the people unfortunate enough to play with you. If the best argument you can come up with is "FANBOY!" then I feel sorry for the rest of us.

Not a single person in this thread has shown up and said "Our last tournament was ruined because of this" or even "I lost a game because of this". Nobody's done SQUAT to prove that it's any less fair than having to face Kirai or (as mentioned) Perdita in something like Treasure Hunt. Is it strong? Sure. Unbeatable? Not even close. Game demolishing in its complete lack of sanity? Get serious.

There's a big, BIG gap between "I don't like this" - which is perfectly fine - and "This is so obviously horribly broken I can't believe Wyrd is stupid enough to rule it like this".

[Ciaran]

I wish I could G+1 a couple of posts there! mythicFOX and Buhallin called it, and called it well.

[Dolomyte]

1. I never called anyone a fanboy.

2. Plenty of people have agreed that its a broken mechanic based on a ruling made by the rules marshalls.

Just because no one has shown up to say our tournament was ruined by this does not mean we should not look at it and it certainly does not mean that it should not be changed.

You're Right Buh, the chances of this effecting the outcome of a tournament are staggeringly low. I mean look at how much has to happen. A neverborn player and someone else need to flip shared slaughter, or slaughter would have had to been a pre-chosen strategy. Then, said neverborn player would have to use a list that actually had stitched together in it. And for it to be impactful, that neverborn player really should be undefeated to that point, because if its the difference between finishing 21st and 25th, its not really impacting the event.

But, just because a situation is going to be uncommon, does not mean to me that it should be ignored.

Mythicfox stated its not a rules issue, but he said its a game balance issue, am I wrong in assuming that means you agree its an issue Mythic? if so, why should we not discuss it.

Buh, you asked is it less fair then having to face kirai, or perdita, or some of the other lists in treasure hunt?

Yes, its less fair, in treasure hunt EVERY faction has models and a master that can get the token on the first round and get it into and or mostly into their deployment zone.

ONLY neverborn can take the stitched together, If everyone had a model with does not die that you could take 3 of, or had a model that self sacrificied as a consequence of normal use, I woulden't consider this a problem.

[jmp_mydog]

If I remember right isn't slaughter just one of like what 13+ possible strategies that you might flip.

In a character driven game each model has some things they're really good at and some weak points. Kinda the basis for any game really.

If you have an opponent that continues to use a "cheesey" crew talk to them about it and explain that you're not having fun. If you continue to experience the same issue stop playing them.

Most groups have that guy the finds the "broken" combo, eventually players stop playing against them because it's not fun and there-by eliminates the issue.

It's understandable you don't like the ruling but that's what it is and it won't change because of a "OMG IT'S SO BROKEN" forum post. Opinions being what they are everyone is entitled to theirs, however dragging things out isn't doing anyone any favors.

[Dolomyte]

If I remember right isn't slaughter just one of like what 13+ possible strategies that you might flip.

In a character driven game each model has some things they're really good at and some weak points. Kinda the basis for any game really.

If you have an opponent that continues to use a "cheesey" crew talk to them about it and explain that you're not having fun. If you continue to experience the same issue stop playing them.

Most groups have that guy the finds the "broken" combo, eventually players stop playing against them because it's not fun and there-by eliminates the issue.

It's understandable you don't like the ruling but that's what it is and it won't change because of a "OMG IT'S SO BROKEN" forum post. Opinions being what they are everyone is entitled to theirs, however dragging things out isn't doing anyone any favors.

My issue is not the friendly game or local weekly gaming group jmp,

Answer me this question, if at gencon, or any tournament you payed money to play in for that matter, lets say you make it to the championship game, you and your opponent flip or are assigned shared slaughter. You field a perfectly normal arcanist list for slaughter (raspy?) and your opponent ends up fielding a stitched inclusive neverborn list. Is it fair to you that your opponent is going to have a 15 ss handicap?

If you think that does not matter, I'll shut up and assume you guys are right.

[Calmdown]

The issue is really simple.

Just because various crews can *tactically*, by *playskill* and *strategy*, affect the outcome of various things, doesn't mean that a mechanic that is inherently broken should be allowed to exist.

And just because the rules work in RAW, does not mean that they are a) right or shouldn't be changed. Game designers fail all the time; it's why we have errata and it's why we change things. Refusing to do so because of RAW is either idiotic or lazy.

[ProdigalPunk]

If I remember right isn't slaughter just one of like what 13+ possible strategies that you might flip.

In a character driven game each model has some things they're really good at and some weak points. Kinda the basis for any game really.

If you have an opponent that continues to use a "cheesey" crew talk to them about it and explain that you're not having fun. If you continue to experience the same issue stop playing them.

Most groups have that guy the finds the "broken" combo, eventually players stop playing against them because it's not fun and there-by eliminates the issue.

It's understandable you don't like the ruling but that's what it is and it won't change because of a "OMG IT'S SO BROKEN" forum post. Opinions being what they are everyone is entitled to theirs, however dragging things out isn't doing anyone any favors.

I think part of the reason for this post is people on the Infinity Forums were saying Malifaux could not be played competitively. Most people got up in arms by that comment, I am going to read into what you are saying here and assume that you completely agree with it.

[jmp_mydog]

My issue is not the friendly game or local weekly gaming group jmp,

Answer me this question, if at gencon, or any tournament you payed money to play in for that matter, lets say you make it to the championship game, you and your opponent flip or are assigned shared slaughter. You field a perfectly normal arcanist list for slaughter (raspy?) and your opponent ends up fielding a stitched inclusive neverborn list. Is it fair to you that your opponent is going to have a 15 ss handicap?

If you think that does not matter, I'll shut up and assume you guys are right.

Since you insist on goading a response through PM I'll indulge you, this one time.

First let's be sure we're on the same page with Shared Slaughter.

+1 VP if you kill or sacrifice more SS worth of models than your opponent.

+1 VP if you kill or sacrifice 1.5X more SS worth of models than your opponent

+1 VP if your opponent has no leaders left

+1 VP if your opponent has less than half their starting SS worth of models

That said and the Stitched player pulls the drain souls trick you're harping about they are down 15 SS worth of models in a 30-35 stone game that typically equates to half their starting total. They've given you +1 VP

Rasputina excells at turtling seeing your opponents crew your declare hold-out and body guard. Then proceed to sit in your DZ and make pillars forcing them to come to you. As they approach you sling spells at relevant targets and push them away with other abilities (snowstorm maybe).

Protecting your DZ and your master gains you 4VP plus the one the "handicap" gives you.

Don't see the issue here.

[Dolomyte]

Since you insist on goading a response through PM I'll indulge you, this one time.

First let's be sure we're on the same page with Shared Slaughter.

+1 VP if you kill or sacrifice more SS worth of models than your opponent.

+1 VP if you kill or sacrifice 1.5X more SS worth of models than your opponent

+1 VP if your opponent has no leaders left

+1 VP if your opponent has less than half their starting SS worth of models

That said and the Stitched player pulls the drain souls trick you're harping about they are down 15 SS worth of models in a 30-35 stone game that typically equates to half their starting total. They've given you +1 VP

Rasputina excells at turtling seeing your opponents crew your declare hold-out and body guard. Then proceed to sit in your DZ and make pillars forcing them to come to you. As they approach you sling spells at relevant targets and push them away with other abilities (snowstorm maybe).

Protecting your DZ and your master gains you 4VP plus the one the "handicap" gives you.

Don't see the issue here.

I did not goad you, I simply asked you to reply because I was genuinely curious about your answer. Ignore the lilith list, i've said many times now that was broken(broken as in terrible, stupid, not worth using, not overpowered), I'm talking about a legitimate game, raspy was just a hypothetical, you can use her if you want though.

Is it fair for your opponent to have a 15ss handicap? would you be ok with that, or would you think losing to that is bull$$$$$$$$?

[ProdigalPunk]

If a model heals via Slow to Die (ie Bette) they don't count as killed.

I regularly play an opponent who routinely runs 3 Stitched (they're his favourite model, and frankly I've never had a problem with them. Granted, they're a solid 5SS model, but they do go down pretty easily for their cost - even with Does Not Die. Compared to a 4SS Belle they're pretty much made of toilet paper. They do make a good mobile smokescreen but they rarely all last till turn 4 (the trick is to pop them before they activate).

Right, my question is more with who gets credit for the kill if she is out of play at the end of the game. I get the sense that people want to say the opponent, but that would seem counter-intuitive to the rest of the way the rules work, the stitched being a good example, where you actually killed the model and still don't get credit.

Also I have seen some lists with stitched in them that I am almost certain would place in a Gen-Con tournament. I understand that most people do not see them as that powerful, and to be honest the stuff I see as being near broken and the stuff Wyrd and the boards see as near broken are very different, but I guess the only way that will get changed is by going to more tournaments (So far I have only been to Templecon, and my playgroup took 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, by a decent margin, but I'll admit one tournament does not an expert make).

[jmp_mydog]

I did not goad you, I simply asked you to reply because I was genuinely curious about your answer. Ignore the lilith list, i've said many times now that was broken(broken as in terrible, stupid, not worth using, not overpowered), I'm talking about a legitimate game, raspy was just a hypothetical, you can use her if you want though.

Is it fair for your opponent to have a 15ss handicap? would you be ok with that, or would you think losing to that is bull$$$$$$$$?

Fair enough.

It's not a "handicap" your opponent is giving you a free VP and you don't have to do anything.

The stitched are a weird concept that captures the fluff and rules well. Are they a pain? Yes. Are they easily ignored? Yes. Can a smart player beat them? Yes. Is it frustrating for a new player? Probably. Does it need errata? I don't think so. Will you continue to harp on this? Probably. Will I? Nope.

[Calmdown]

ed are a weird concept that captures the fluff and rules well. Are they a pain? Yes. Are they easily ignored? Yes. Can a smart player beat them? Yes. Is it frustrating for a new player? Probably. Does it need errata? I don't think so. Will you continue to harp on this? Probably. Will I? Nope.

Stitched are easily ignored?

You just threw your legitimacy out of the window. They're one of the best (read:overpowered) single models in the game and GyL is positively ridiculous.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Calmdown

[ProdigalPunk]

Since you insist on goading a response through PM I'll indulge you, this one time.

First let's be sure we're on the same page with Shared Slaughter.

+1 VP if you kill or sacrifice more SS worth of models than your opponent.

+1 VP if you kill or sacrifice 1.5X more SS worth of models than your opponent

+1 VP if your opponent has no leaders left

+1 VP if your opponent has less than half their starting SS worth of models

That said and the Stitched player pulls the drain souls trick you're harping about they are down 15 SS worth of models in a 30-35 stone game that typically equates to half their starting total. They've given you +1 VP

Rasputina excells at turtling seeing your opponents crew your declare hold-out and body guard. Then proceed to sit in your DZ and make pillars forcing them to come to you. As they approach you sling spells at relevant targets and push them away with other abilities (snowstorm maybe).

Protecting your DZ and your master gains you 4VP plus the one the "handicap" gives you.

Don't see the issue here.

I really do not want to go back and forth with then I would do this and that ideas, but With the Lilith list he plays I would just hide behind as much cover that I could and then jump into your deployment zone. Lilith would transposition a Gamin with a stitched and then attack one of the DP corners while the two other stitched take out the gamin.

Provided Lilith is still alive and I went Breakthrough I would have:

2 points Breakthrough

2 Points Broad Mother

1 Point Slaughter

1 Point 1.5 Slaughter

1 Point Master

You Would have

2 Points BG

1 Point Master

1 Point 50% or more

[Dolomyte]

It's not a "handicap" your opponent is giving you a free VP and you don't have to do anything.

Its not giving your opponent a free VP, thats what I think makes the overpowered only related to slaughter. I am still going to use them in an attempt to kill your models, and I'm not going to recklessly or needlessly let them get killed. I want them to live and do as much damage as possible, but I'm not hurt if you end up killing them.

The stitched are a weird concept that captures the fluff and rules well. Are they a pain? Yes. Are they easily ignored? Yes. Can a smart player beat them? Yes. Is it frustrating for a new player? Probably. Does it need errata? I don't think so. Will you continue to harp on this? Probably. Will I? Nope.

I loved the stitched together, I think fluff and rules wise they are perfectly fine. I enjoy playing them and think they are an interesting and challanging model to play against. My concern is solely with Does not Dies interaction with slaughter.

[ProdigalPunk]

It's not a "handicap" your opponent is giving you a free VP and you don't have to do anything.

Its not giving your opponent a free VP, thats what I think makes the overpowered only related to slaughter. I am still going to use them in an attempt to kill your models, and I'm not going to recklessly or needlessly let them get killed. I want them to live and do as much damage as possible, but I'm not hurt if you end up killing them.

The stitched are a weird concept that captures the fluff and rules well. Are they a pain? Yes. Are they easily ignored? Yes. Can a smart player beat them? Yes. Is it frustrating for a new player? Probably. Does it need errata? I don't think so. Will you continue to harp on this? Probably. Will I? Nope.

I loved the stitched together, I think fluff and rules wise they are perfectly fine. I enjoy playing them and think they are an interesting and challanging model to play against. My concern is solely with Does not Dies interaction with slaughter.

And mostly shared Slaughter at that. Each player having their own objective sort of helps alleviate the problem a little bit as now you have to tailor your list to two strategies. The same can be said about Shared Deliver a Message too. Not that I think that all the Shared Strategies are broken, just that the individual ones tend to have more self-correcting. I also think it is more interesting when both people are working at different things, and you have to play offense and defense, but that is not really important for the argument.

[Buhallin]

Just because various crews can *tactically*, by *playskill* and *strategy*, affect the outcome of various things, doesn't mean that a mechanic that is inherently broken should be allowed to exist.

...

Refusing to do so because of RAW is either idiotic or lazy.

Just because you say it's inherently broken does not make it so. Declaring yourself right over and over does not make it so. Making the only options for anyone who doesn't agree with you 'idiotic' or 'lazy' is crude, rude, and DOES NOT MAKE IT SO.

I'm completely baffled at the frothing incoherent outrage over this. The entire Resurrectionist faction ends up on the short end of Slaughter - bringing out new models for you to score points on is one of their code mechanics, but I have yet to see any of the people flinging insults and declarations of their omniscience complain about that before today - hell, or even TODAY.

Some factions are better at certain strategies than others. Some masters and crews are better or worse at certain strategies than their faction. This is how Malifaux works.

If you want to go after every THAT'S NOT FAIR!! because of every setup that a faction or crew has that makes them stronger or weaker, it's a very, VERY long list. Take a number, and decide where you're going from here - you've started somewhere in the middle, so I'd suggest worrying about the bigger imbalances first.

This is Malifaux. This is the way it's going to work. There will be games where your opponent has a nasty advantage for the strategy, and there are going to be games where they end up well and truly hosed by it. That's why Schemes exist. Just like faction vs. crew balance, those issues resolve on the macro scale, and they don't make Malifaux useless as a competitive game.

At the very least, we're a week away from GenCon, and the biggest crucible to test this. I'm pretty sure that we should know after whether or not this is a problem, and I expect Wyrd will deal with it based on that - specifically, whether it's a problem, not whether it offends your sense of fairness that one faction out of 5 has a strong advantage in a strategy that will come up 8% of the time.

[Dolomyte]

Just because you say it's inherently broken does not make it so. Declaring yourself right over and over does not make it so. Making the only options for anyone who doesn't agree with you 'idiotic' or 'lazy' is crude, rude, and DOES NOT MAKE IT SO.

I'm completely baffled at the frothing incoherent outrage over this. The entire Resurrectionist faction ends up on the short end of Slaughter - bringing out new models for you to score points on is one of their code mechanics, but I have yet to see any of the people flinging insults and declarations of their omniscience complain about that before today - hell, or even TODAY.

Some factions are better at certain strategies than others. Some masters and crews are better or worse at certain strategies than their faction. This is how Malifaux works.

If you want to go after every THAT'S NOT FAIR!! because of every setup that a faction or crew has that makes them stronger or weaker, it's a very, VERY long list. Take a number, and decide where you're going from here - you've started somewhere in the middle, so I'd suggest worrying about the bigger imbalances first.

This is Malifaux. This is the way it's going to work. There will be games where your opponent has a nasty advantage for the strategy, and there are going to be games where they end up well and truly hosed by it. That's why Schemes exist. Just like faction vs. crew balance, those issues resolve on the macro scale, and they don't make Malifaux useless as a competitive game.

At the very least, we're a week away from GenCon, and the biggest crucible to test this. I'm pretty sure that we should know after whether or not this is a problem, and I expect Wyrd will deal with it based on that - specifically, whether it's a problem, not whether it offends your sense of fairness that one faction out of 5 has a strong advantage in a strategy that will come up 8% of the time.

You admit its a problem though, thats what I dont understand, if you acknowledge there is an issue, and its a simple one line fix, why are you so vehemently opposed to it?

Are there other problems? Sure. This is one that can be solved easily.

[ProdigalPunk]

So we should ignore things because they only come up every once and awhile? Does this apply only to Malifaux or to life in general? I would love to stop wearing condoms because my girlfriend can only get pregnant a couple days of the month. Why do people always assume schemes make up for everything? Is there a rule somewhere I missed where if your crew is at a disadvantage you get more schemes? As far as I can tell each play gets two (I will not even go into the fact that those are imbalanced, and that some of them your opponent can do absolutely nothing about).

Well I am not 100% sure I agree with you that the Rezzers get shafted with Slaughter, but I can going to take your word for it. Just out of curiosity what Strategies shaft the Neverborn? The bigger principle behind this whole argument is that Malifaux can be an actual competitive game, on a tournament level. If you are saying that certain factions are worse then others, then either things need to be adjusted to fix that, or it is more of a casual game (which is fine I have plenty of fun playing it casually). I don't think it should be chess, where everyone gets the same pieces and everything is level, but there is a difference between things being fair and things being balanced. In Magic: The Gathering they try to make every color a viable option for play, and that has had by far the most success then any other game out there. I see nothing wrong with that philosophy, each color has its tools, but if in Malifaux the rules themselves specifically hinder one faction and favor another that is not ok.

Personally I think that a lot of the strategies could use a little tinkering, but not so much that it is important to argue about right now. Over all they are pretty balanced, my only issue is with Slaughter, and you seem to agree that Slaughter is also a problem. At some point they will redo the rules, or make new scenarios and when that happens, I would be more then happy if Slaughter was done away with. They may chose not to listen, there have been plenty of things they have done that I think were terrible rulings, but that does not mean I would not like my case plead.

[Buhallin]

You admit its a problem though, thats what I dont understand, if you acknowledge there is an issue, and its a simple one line fix, why are you so vehemently opposed to it?

Are there other problems? Sure. This is one that can be solved easily.

I admit it's an imbalance, and I've said I don't really like it. That's not the same as it being a problem deserving of a fix, and it's certainly not something so utterly heinous as to deserve the sort of rabid attention this issue seems to have drawn all of a sudden.

The problem is an issue of stability. Could they fix it? Sure. But there are two risks to that. First, there are a ton of imbalances in the game. Malifaux is designed like that - small-scale imbalances that work themselves out in the macro. If you start chasing every one, it's a neverending cycle.

But more importantly, - there are about 4 people right now who seem pretty convinced that the game is doomed, Wyrd are idiots, and Malifaux will die a horrible flaming death only to be remembered as one of the great potential games of our time, if only they'd not been such idiots about the Stitched Slaughter. You're very loud, very vocal, very convinced you're right, but... None of you have even put it into a game yet. But you're dead sure it has to be changed, because you said so.

Consider next week, when 3 different people get very loud about how that other strategy is horribly unbalanced if I take 7 Guild Autopsies, and how horrible that is, and how Wyrd are lazy idiots for letting it through, and it has to be changed RIGHT NOW. None of them have actually tested it, or played it, or really care that it only possibly affects about 2% of the games that are played, and even then isn't an auto-win. It's UNFAIR, so it must be fixed NOW - hell, NOW is too late! Wyrd needs to make a time machine so they can fix it LAST WEEK!

Do I love the ruling, or how Slaughter works? No. But in the grand scheme of the game, it's honestly relatively trivial. Hell, even if it is the auto-win button for Neverborn in Shared Slaughter - which I don't believe it is - it doesn't deserve the level of both panic and vitriol this has escalated to. This doesn't scare me any more than facing Perdita or Kirai in Treasure Hunt, or Hamelin in Contain Power. Do I know I'm at a disadvantage? I do, but the game's still a long way from lost.

So I say again - calm down. Stop asserting your superiority and insulting everyone who disagrees with you, play it out for at least a game or two, and see what happens at GenCon, rather than continuing to make up fictional theorycrafted scenarios backed up by nothing but assertions that you're right. You've taken a minor issue, blown it up beyond any sense of proper perspective, and honestly annoyed everyone so much in the process that I almost hope they keep it, just to see that vein in your temple throb every time you have to deal with it.

But I'm done with this "discussion". It stopped being productive about post #0.

Edited July 27, 2011 by Buhallin

[WEiRD sKeTCH]

Keep the tempers in check everyone.

I'd hate to hand out infractions or bannings if it gets too heated.

[Calmdown]

Just because you say it's inherently broken does not make it so. Declaring yourself right over and over does not make it so. Making the only options for anyone who doesn't agree with you 'idiotic' or 'lazy' is crude, rude, and DOES NOT MAKE IT SO.

Wearing a henchmen tag and saying that it's not has no more legitimacy.

I'm completely baffled at the frothing incoherent outrage over this. The entire Resurrectionist faction ends up on the short end of Slaughter - bringing out new models for you to score points on is one of their code mechanics, but I have yet to see any of the people flinging insults and declarations of their omniscience complain about that before today - hell, or even TODAY.

I play Rezzers as my main faction. I dont lose Slaughter very often at all. Why? Because I am in control of what happens. With stitched, Im not. I'm not sure why you think this is frothing, incoherent outrage; this is perfectly coherent aggravation with rules issues that you seem to agree with and yet you still don't want them to change. Is frothing incoherent fanboyism part of being a henchman?

This is Malifaux. This is the way it's going to work. There will be games where your opponent has a nasty advantage for the strategy, and there are going to be games where they end up well and truly hosed by it. That's why Schemes exist. Just like faction vs. crew balance, those issues resolve on the macro scale, and they don't make Malifaux useless as a competitive game.

Im sorry, but if you believe this, you need to go back to the drawing board on your basic game theory. My opponent gets schemes too, and why should he choose ones that he is any less likely to complete than me? An imbalance is an imbalance.

[jmp_mydog]

HA! you're all wrong

Seriously guys is this really going anywhere?

Edited July 27, 2011 by WEiRD sKeTCH
Unnecessary.

[Buhallin]

Wearing a henchmen tag and saying that it's not has no more legitimacy.

To be clear - I've never said it's not imbalanced. I have agreed that it is. I've said that even if it is, in the grand scheme of the game it's no worse than a host of other advantages/disadvantages that certain factions/crews have in dealing with certain strategies.

But more importantly, I've suggested over and over that people actually play it and find out. I've said I don't think it's as unbeatable as some people seem to think, but I've never just said "No, you're wrong, it's trivial to beat" and I've certainly never just said "I'm right, deal with it."

Go back and take a look at the arguments. One side is saying "It's so broken we can see it without even bothering to play it, and anyone who doesn't agree with us is a lazy idiot" and the other is saying "Well, there are ways to handle it, try playing a few games and see how it affects the game as a whole."

If you really think those two arguments are equivalent, there's really not much I can do.

[Dolomyte]

Keep the tempers in check everyone.

I'd hate to hand out infractions or bannings if it gets too heated.

Out of Curiousity Weird, what is your opinion on the Stitched Togethers interaction with Slaughter?