I thought I'd do just an anonymous poll to see where views fall on this.

There's no need to post replies, I'd stick them in the actual discussion but I'm just curious.

A reply is merited, there's one option left out.

"I believe it makes sense and helps reduce a common and obvious powergaming build, regardless of who changed it or had input on it. I wish it were not this way, that people would only take 1 class of barbarian/fighter/ranger/monk if it truly made sense for their character, but I realize that the reality of this is very different."

Oro, the poll questions are very biased. If you're gonna do this, at least use neutral tones, for fairness.

This is a tad biased, though. There's one positive answer, one neutral answer, and three negative answers.

Garem A reply is merited, there's one option left out.

"I believe it makes sense and helps reduce a common and obvious powergaming build, regardless of who changed it or had input on it. I wish it were not this way, that people would only take 1 class of barbarian/fighter/ranger/monk if it truly made sense for their character, but I realize that the reality of this is very different."

Oro, the poll questions are very biased. If you're gonna do this, at least use neutral tones, for fairness.

Garem, that's option 1.

I did assume that no one was going to say "I love the change but still wish the DMs had asked us." I could stick that one up.

This isn't about powergaming either. The DMs said emphatically it is not about power gaming but about them disliking these builds. Please refer to the discussion.

The one positive answer sums up the positive views succinctly, whereas you have more room to explain if you disagree why you disagree that being more important. Its not bias, its trying to see a pattern.

another missing option is ...why didn't they enforce this earlier?

Turbospew another missing option is ...why didn't they enforce this earlier?

I think you're safe with 1 there too.

Okay with this and trust DMs completely? What if you only do one?

You left out the "Needs more cowbell" option.

Totally okay with it, I trust the DMs fully.

lol Biased as it might be, check the results ;)

The poll probably isnt the best structured. Because people DO trust the d.m's or they wouldnt be on this server.

What needed to be polled what simply peoples attitude on barbarian/fighters specifically , not peoples attitudes on the d.m's.

You could have even expanded the poll to include peoples attitudes on restricting (not banning) other builds by forcing them through the application process.

I dont see much argument about druid/monks being restricted even though they are simply a combination of two core classes, as oro said never seen one on this server at all.

The core question is barbarian/fighters.

I'd point out to anyone who's apparently upset that the playerbase wasn't "consulted" that we've decided against this decision before it was even implemented in part because of the discussion.

Howland I'd point out to anyone who's apparently upset that the playerbase wasn't "consulted" that we've decided against this decision before it was even implemented in part because of the discussion.

I especially appreciate that the player base was listened to after the DMs made a decision which a portion of the player base heartily disagreed with seeing implemented.

I likely was the most vocal proponent for not seeing this implemented, and I'm going to be the first to say that this merely confirms that the DMs are normal people who do their best to make sure the server reflects both their own wants and their player's wants.

Hear hear! May I just say that I am incredibly pleased to see that the DMs respond so incredibly to the player base. I personally voted to support the DMs, but good arguments persuaded me (and the DMS, apparently). Anyways, I just count this as one of the many times that I've seen controversial issues dealt with quickly and smoothly.

Right, right, DMs are nice people, players have good ideas, blah blah blah...

<LOCKED DUE TO EXCESS LOVING>

-Cross