DA2 once again the player wasn’t told before hand that they were only going to have one of the twins and it happens so early in the game that you aren’t emotionally invested in their survival to begin with. It’s was a more of a ‘oh, I’m a fighter/mage and my fighter/mage sibling died forcing me to have party synergy in the first bit’
When the fate of the second twin is decided, that has more of a player choice involvement. Your actions led to their fate so a player is more emotionally invested in the outcome.
Once again, neither of these two story points were remotely spoiled by BioWare before the game was released, and those choices added more replayability than ‘I now have to replay this entire game to see the other companions dialogs’ which seems a bit forced IMO.
I can’t comment on the other game you mentioned however.
Don't need to ever play the game to know what's in it. I would be more than happy to spend a few hours watching a stream in place of wasting my time and money actually playing the game myself.
And yet you've spent hours if not tens of hours over these past months commenting about, reading about, and following the news about a game that you seem to have, at best, a minuscule desire to play. Doesn't seem like you're being all that judicious with your time.
Can I suggest a compromise to the folks who are incessantly negative on here? To the folks who are almost certain they won't buy the game?
Start a separate thread, please. Share your grievances among each other there. Repeat the same grievances there as much as you like. Conjecture as much as you like about the latest news there. But I cannot be the only one who is tired of scrolling thru a dozen posts every week that essentially say the same things people were saying about the game back in April. This is the thread for news and developments about the game.
Look, this group of forums is a good community to discuss these kinds of RPG. And I respect y'all's commentary on several topics here -- you guys know this. But, if someone was filling the Kingmaker thread, for example, with the same critiques of the game over and over and over -- over a six month timeframe, that would be rude towards the community at large, right?
Stop telling other forum members to shut up or go away, Dino. If there's anything I'm tired off, it's you complaining about people having different opinions than you, and trying to police what people are and are not allowed to say on here.
in dos 2 after you left the starting island any party memeber you did not pick up is left there forever. the same is being assumed for bg 3 as this is just larian's style.
Stop telling other forum members to shut up or go away, Dino. If there's anything I'm tired off, it's you complaining about people having different opinions than you, and trying to police what people are and are not allowed to say on here.
And what's wrong with opening a new topic where anyone can express their opinions on BG3? This suppose to be an announcement topic which, for lack of alternative, turned to be the only place where we can discuss BG3. Noone wants you to shut up, @DinoDin just said there is a group of forum members who visit this *announcement* thread to read about BG3 *announcements*, not to be forced to scroll down neverending fights between two group of people, those who are enthusiastic about BG3 and those who are not.
Stop telling other forum members to shut up or go away, Dino. If there's anything I'm tired off, it's you complaining about people having different opinions than you, and trying to police what people are and are not allowed to say on here.
And what's wrong with opening a new topic where anyone can express their opinions on BG3? This suppose to be an announcement topic which, for lack of alternative, turned to be the only place where we can discuss BG3. Noone wants you to shut up, @DinoDin just said there is a group of forum members who visit this *announcement* thread to read about BG3 *announcements*, not to be forced to scroll down neverending fights between two group of people, those who are enthusiastic about BG3 and those who are not.
it feels like to me people want an echo chamber. all the people that love bg 3 in here and those that have issues with it in their own thread.
This isn't some "announcements only" thread. It's just a general thread about BG3. The title doesn't say "announcements", it says "announced" because "BG3 has been announced was literally the first news about the game.
"Now - could they be lying? Of course. Until we have more information, I'm not going to assume they're being insincere since Larian doesnt have a track record to lying or misleading anyone that I've seen."
Well, aside from calling a game BG3 that has more in common with DoS2 and tabletop than the game series its named for...
Similar comments will be deleted in the future without any warning. What has been mentioned many times already, shouldn't be mentioned again BY THE SAME USERS or it's spam.
The whole party camping mechanic sounds exactly like DA which is good. I just hope it's not so black and white between npcs who are against the illithids and those want to keep their powers. In bg2 I tend to play a good party with Viconia and by TOB I think even the devs noticed this was popular and created the alignment change opportunity... After going from bg1 to tob, I really enjoyed that character arc. So I hope we can do the same in Bg3 and bring a slightly mixed team through to the end.
NONE of that matters to players more interested in the story. The only players worried about that level or 2 are powergamers.
I would be willing to bet that in BG2, more than 90% of players use the exact same set of characters in Ust Natha as they do in Suldenesselar. I could perhaps see a small argument for people who hate Imoen (heathens that they be) switching her out for someone else, but the other 4 companions are probably almost always the same.
and to be fair - I dont think that Just because I dont switch my party members out means I'm a power gamer or uninterested in the story.
Except Larian makes it seem your party is locked (and the rest dead or gone) after Act/chapter 1. ONE. Whereas you'll be going to rescue Imoen in Act/Chapter 4, and you have at least the opportunity to switch out party members in Act/chapter 6.
Also, you might be misreading that quoted line. Your argument against switching out party members was unbalanced XP. I said that specific argument is only relevant for powergamers. While powergamers might have been too strong, but if that is your only reason for dismissing the opportunity to switch party members, what would you call it?
There are RPG videogames like DA2 or Drakensang: TROT where you can only save one of your party members (your siblings in DA2 and the mage or the HE ranger in drakensang) and you have to play several times the game to see the full content. I hope it´s the case in Bg3.
There's a difference between NOT being able to save ONE, and ONLY being able to save THREE.
@BallpointMan "Dont forget the inevitable BG4, which will be like BG3, which has more in common with DoS2, which has more in common with DoS1, which has..."
I'm not, which has me depressed...
"It is still valid?"
Yes. Criticism is valid no matter how much you like or want to like something. A concept this thread seems to have a great deal of trouble with.
@JuliusBorisov "Similar comments will be deleted in the future without any warning. What has been mentioned many times already, shouldn't be mentioned again BY THE SAME USERS or it's spam."
Then I expect comments from users who have praised the game already to have their further comments aboutt he game deleted as well. If negative feedback is spam, then so is positive. Anything else is hypocrisy.
Oh, and a criticism does not cease to be valid because its repeated. Its very telling that not a single person has been able to address them without a false equivalence.
Neither negative nor positive feedback is spam. But rehashing the same argument on each 5th page of the thread is spam. Almost anyone commenting about BG3 continues to discuss new details about the game. But some prefer to just repeat the same argument over and over.
@JuliusBorisov gotta agree. I am not really what I would consider a regular visitor these days and probably only come on once or twice a week at most but the reason that I have started to avoid coming here is due to exactly what you describe. It’s just the same thing every time I come on to have a look if there have been any updates. It just makes me want to avoid the forum sometimes. I have to skim through pages of the same arguments I saw two weeks prior just to see if any new info is being discussed. And it’s always the same few that seem to want to have these repeat arguments/discussions.
Yet moderation is only occuring after non-positive feedback. I have yet to see a mod comment and say, "Hey now champ, you've shared that praise a few too many times. We're gonna have to start deleting your comments."
Oh, and a criticism does not cease to be valid because its repeated. Its very telling that not a single person has been able to address them without a false equivalence.
The criticism is only valid if supporting evidence can be cited. No one has ever managed to show Larian say that the default playing expectation for the game is MP and not SP. I would *love* to see some evidence to back this up because while I like the idea of MP, I absolutely do not want this to be an MP first SP second game.
The reality of the situation from what I've seen is:
MP and SP are coequal in terms of how you can play the game, and you lose absolutely nothing by playing it SP. They just want total and full operational ability in event people play in groups.
That doesnt mean MP > SP. It's been a disingenuous argument from the get-go (Unless there's evidence out there to support it - which I very much want to see, and will happily admit I'm wrong if such evidence can be provided).
Generally speaking, the positive feedback I've seen in this thread is based on the things being discussed in the latest updates. Again generally speaking, most of the negative feedback is that the game still isn't RTwP or that the title is Baldur's Gate 3. Not only are those old grievances, but no one's mind is going to be changed at this point.
And no one's mind needs to be changed! Those are subjective preferences. You're not wrong if you want the game to be RTwP; you're simply just not getting that game here.
There's no reason to keep bringing those things up in this particular thread. If those two points matter to you, then the game isn't for you. And that's not a bad thing. Not everything is for everyone. But to keep derailing the thread where people want to discover new information with old grievances from when the game was first announced is spam.
@BallpointMan "The criticism is only valid if supporting evidence can be cited. No one has ever managed to show Larian say that the default playing expectation for the game is MP and not SP. I would *love* to see some evidence to back this up because while I like the idea of MP, I absolutely do not want this to be an MP first SP second game."
Oh yeah, because this sums up all the criticism levelled at this game...
@BallpointMan "The criticism is only valid if supporting evidence can be cited. No one has ever managed to show Larian say that the default playing expectation for the game is MP and not SP. I would *love* to see some evidence to back this up because while I like the idea of MP, I absolutely do not want this to be an MP first SP second game."
Oh yeah, because this sums up all the criticism levelled at this game...
You're not even adding anything with this post, just being snarky.
I was clearly replying to a quote about MP being favored over SP being a valid criticism. Either there's evidence to support that, or not.
Don't need to ever play the game to know what's in it. I would be more than happy to spend a few hours watching a stream in place of wasting my time and money actually playing the game myself.
And yet you've spent hours if not tens of hours over these past months commenting about, reading about, and following the news about a game that you seem to have, at best, a minuscule desire to play. Doesn't seem like you're being all that judicious with your time.
Yes, because it is a Baldur's Gate game and a Forgotten Realms game, and I care a great deal about those. I didn't automatically decide immediately after the game was announced that I didn't like the game. That conclusion came about gradually as I learned more and more about the game. Furthermore, I have never said categorically that I won't ever play the game, only that I won't play it anytime soon. I still keep open the possibility, however remote, that I may be willing to try the game years after its release if I see it at a bargain price. So this comment is utterly devoid of any value and completely asinine, the kind of comment that I would expect a moderator to have something to say about if the moderating here was even remotely even-handed between the yay side and the nay side.
MP and SP are coequal in terms of how you can play the game, and you lose absolutely nothing by playing it SP. They just want total and full operational ability in event people play in groups.
That doesnt mean MP > SP. It's been a disingenuous argument from the get-go
Nobody has "evidence" for any argument, pro or con, because we would all have to break into Larian to get any such evidence. We only have what Larian tells us, and clearly they won't openly tell us things they specifically don't want us to know. So it is eminently reasonable for us, and especially those of us with criticisms, to use our informed judgment to speculatively fill in what we see as blanks.
For me, then, Larian's decision to reduce party size from six to four was driven by wanting to size the party and balance all encounters for four-person co-op play. Similarly, I see such game design concepts as the "origin" companions and the current controversial issue of locking party composition at the end of Act 1 and possibly killing off companions who are not in the active party at that point as things that were driven by what is best for co-op play. You are free to disagree, of course, but your disagreement does not invalidate my views in any way.
in dos 2 after you left the starting island any party memeber you did not pick up is left there forever. the same is being assumed for bg 3 as this is just larian's style.
They manage to survive and come back as enemy bosses later in the game, tho. That was a nice touch.
On an unrelated note, I think that having this game in GOG it´s good news. Not really a fan of Epic Games, steam or stadia.
Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer to own my games and have a hard copy of them he he.
In the latest community update they confirmed that “Direct Connect” is possible between platforms so playing with your friends would not be a problem if both have the same patch installed.
There is not enough data for arguments. We don't know how the companions will be implemented, we have no idea if we lose the ones in Chapter One and later meet new ones. We have to wait until the EA is released to have any proper idea how anything will work.
Not even EA, because EA would be the first chapter with only 5 of the companions. We do not know if you lose them for good the rest of the game until full release.
Nobody has "evidence" for any argument, pro or con, because we would all have to break into Larian to get any such evidence. We only have what Larian tells us, and clearly they won't openly tell us things they specifically don't want us to know. So it is eminently reasonable for us, and especially those of us with criticisms, to use our informed judgment to speculatively fill in what we see as blanks.
For me, then, Larian's decision to reduce party size from six to four was driven by wanting to size the party and balance all encounters for four-person co-op play. Similarly, I see such game design concepts as the "origin" companions and the current controversial issue of locking party composition at the end of Act 1 and possibly killing off companions who are not in the active party at that point as things that were driven by what is best for co-op play. You are free to disagree, of course, but your disagreement does not invalidate my views in any way.
A theory based on no verifiable evidence = a conspiracy theory. It's nothing more. Judging a game based on information that we dont have doesnt really make a lot of sense.
Being upset at 4 man party? Justified, if you dont like that. Being upset about the possibility that the game may emphasize MP over SP despite no actual information to support that fear (including none of the DOS games, which never favored MP over SP) = unjustified. It's just a manifestation of bias.
Edit - The 4 man party size was the size of the party in DOS:2. It's also the default size of a 5e D&D party.
Not even EA, because EA would be the first chapter with only 5 of the companions. We do not know if you lose them for good the rest of the game until full release.
This - although I suspect they'll comment upon this aspect a bit more in the future. So we may know more before the game releases, although not from EA.
in dos 2 after you left the starting island any party memeber you did not pick up is left there forever. the same is being assumed for bg 3 as this is just larian's style.
They manage to survive and come back as enemy bosses later in the game, tho. That was a nice touch.
I would not be surprised if they do the same thing for BG3.
About the game, we already know that they have guys of WoTC working with them, including Chris Perkins after his team finished IWD: RoTFM Soo, my question. Do you think they will include some of the features of the several sourcebooks? And I do not mean setting books like Eberron or Wyldemount, but pure rulebooks like Xanathar`s, Volo or the recent Tasha´s cauldron.
Specifically the new spells, subclasses, feats and variant rules that could be useful in the game.
Well, to be honest there´s one in the Tasha´s one that I do not particularly care about, the one about
"Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything adds an optional way of creating a character where players can choose from a selection of traits to create a custom linage. If you want to make the archetypical elf, a hypothetical character Crawford jokingly named “Elfy McElferson,” you can. However, “if your elf skipped longsword practice and lacks longsword proficiency and speaks a language other than Elvish and has a bonus to Charisma,” that’s now a valid option"
Because it takes away the point to choose different races not for their looks. But the others...
Well, the fun fact is that I DO WANT to read criticisms about BG3. Valid concerns are something that I'm really interested to hear. There are many valid points brought up my the folks in this very topic. It's just sometimes, some folks come up with a new ways just to bash the game, turning even good bits of info into flaws that suddenly are "gamebreaking". I can engage in a discussion with someone making valid and sensitive points, but I'm tired to discuss old grievances. It's not that I can persuade the other party to change their minds, so why bother?
Anyway, personally I don't see a point to have separate threads to say good and bad stuff about BG3, but I do agree that announcement thread should stay for news only.
About the game, we already know that they have guys of WoTC working with them, including Chris Perkins after his team finished IWD: RoTFM Soo, my question. Do you think they will include some of the features of the several sourcebooks? And I do not mean setting books like Eberron or Wyldemount, but pure rulebooks like Xanathar`s, Volo or the recent Tasha´s cauldron.
Specifically the new spells, subclasses, feats and variant rules that could be useful in the game.
Well, to be honest there´s one in the Tasha´s one that I do not particularly care about, the one about
"Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything adds an optional way of creating a character where players can choose from a selection of traits to create a custom linage. If you want to make the archetypical elf, a hypothetical character Crawford jokingly named “Elfy McElferson,” you can. However, “if your elf skipped longsword practice and lacks longsword proficiency and speaks a language other than Elvish and has a bonus to Charisma,” that’s now a valid option"
Because it takes away the point to choose different races not for their looks. But the others...
I'm super curious about this too. I'm hopeful that they'll include additional rules into the game. I dont know if we should consider this a likely launch feature (Specifically, the Tasha's Cauldron of Everything bit) - but Larian did support DOS:2 for a long time.
I think they know they have a market to keep updating the game, adding new optional rules and new archetypes from other source books. I kind of hope these are paid DLC, but I'll consider them if the game is good enough and the DLCs are packaged at a good price point.
Well, the fun fact is that I DO WANT to read criticisms about BG3. Valid concerns are something that I'm really interested to hear. There are many valid points brought up my the folks in this very topic. It's just sometimes, some folks come up with a new ways just to bash the game, turning even good bits of info into flaws that suddenly are "gamebreaking". I can engage in a discussion with someone making valid and sensitive points, but I'm tired to discuss old grievances. It's not that I can persuade the other party to change their minds, so why bother?
Anyway, personally I don't see a point to have separate threads to say good and bad stuff about BG3, but I do agree that announcement thread should stay for news only.
Very much this. Criticism is perfectly fine. Repeating the same thing over, and over and over is boring and frustrating.
Well, the fun fact is that I DO WANT to read criticisms about BG3. Valid concerns are something that I'm really interested to hear. There are many valid points brought up my the folks in this very topic.
Repeating the same thing over, and over and over is boring and frustrating.
I can empathise with you. It's just that some people feel that their grievances have not been adequately or sincerely addressed, which is why some arguments keep on repeating to other arguments. I made the criticism thread as a pressure release valve so people who feel that way can voice their opinions without being belligerent or demeaning to others, and without being called out in return, as long as such behaviour is within the limits of the forum rules. I hope that is understandable.
Comments
When the fate of the second twin is decided, that has more of a player choice involvement. Your actions led to their fate so a player is more emotionally invested in the outcome.
Once again, neither of these two story points were remotely spoiled by BioWare before the game was released, and those choices added more replayability than ‘I now have to replay this entire game to see the other companions dialogs’ which seems a bit forced IMO.
I can’t comment on the other game you mentioned however.
And yet you've spent hours if not tens of hours over these past months commenting about, reading about, and following the news about a game that you seem to have, at best, a minuscule desire to play. Doesn't seem like you're being all that judicious with your time.
Can I suggest a compromise to the folks who are incessantly negative on here? To the folks who are almost certain they won't buy the game?
Start a separate thread, please. Share your grievances among each other there. Repeat the same grievances there as much as you like. Conjecture as much as you like about the latest news there. But I cannot be the only one who is tired of scrolling thru a dozen posts every week that essentially say the same things people were saying about the game back in April. This is the thread for news and developments about the game.
Look, this group of forums is a good community to discuss these kinds of RPG. And I respect y'all's commentary on several topics here -- you guys know this. But, if someone was filling the Kingmaker thread, for example, with the same critiques of the game over and over and over -- over a six month timeframe, that would be rude towards the community at large, right?
And what's wrong with opening a new topic where anyone can express their opinions on BG3? This suppose to be an announcement topic which, for lack of alternative, turned to be the only place where we can discuss BG3. Noone wants you to shut up, @DinoDin just said there is a group of forum members who visit this *announcement* thread to read about BG3 *announcements*, not to be forced to scroll down neverending fights between two group of people, those who are enthusiastic about BG3 and those who are not.
it feels like to me people want an echo chamber. all the people that love bg 3 in here and those that have issues with it in their own thread.
BUT: please stop spamming the same arguments over and over again.
Similar comments will be deleted in the future without any warning. What has been mentioned many times already, shouldn't be mentioned again BY THE SAME USERS or it's spam.
Except Larian makes it seem your party is locked (and the rest dead or gone) after Act/chapter 1. ONE. Whereas you'll be going to rescue Imoen in Act/Chapter 4, and you have at least the opportunity to switch out party members in Act/chapter 6.
Also, you might be misreading that quoted line. Your argument against switching out party members was unbalanced XP. I said that specific argument is only relevant for powergamers. While powergamers might have been too strong, but if that is your only reason for dismissing the opportunity to switch party members, what would you call it?
There's a difference between NOT being able to save ONE, and ONLY being able to save THREE.
I'm not, which has me depressed...
"It is still valid?"
Yes. Criticism is valid no matter how much you like or want to like something. A concept this thread seems to have a great deal of trouble with.
@JuliusBorisov "Similar comments will be deleted in the future without any warning. What has been mentioned many times already, shouldn't be mentioned again BY THE SAME USERS or it's spam."
Then I expect comments from users who have praised the game already to have their further comments aboutt he game deleted as well. If negative feedback is spam, then so is positive. Anything else is hypocrisy.
Oh, and a criticism does not cease to be valid because its repeated. Its very telling that not a single person has been able to address them without a false equivalence.
The criticism is only valid if supporting evidence can be cited. No one has ever managed to show Larian say that the default playing expectation for the game is MP and not SP. I would *love* to see some evidence to back this up because while I like the idea of MP, I absolutely do not want this to be an MP first SP second game.
The reality of the situation from what I've seen is:
MP and SP are coequal in terms of how you can play the game, and you lose absolutely nothing by playing it SP. They just want total and full operational ability in event people play in groups.
That doesnt mean MP > SP. It's been a disingenuous argument from the get-go (Unless there's evidence out there to support it - which I very much want to see, and will happily admit I'm wrong if such evidence can be provided).
And no one's mind needs to be changed! Those are subjective preferences. You're not wrong if you want the game to be RTwP; you're simply just not getting that game here.
There's no reason to keep bringing those things up in this particular thread. If those two points matter to you, then the game isn't for you. And that's not a bad thing. Not everything is for everyone. But to keep derailing the thread where people want to discover new information with old grievances from when the game was first announced is spam.
Oh yeah, because this sums up all the criticism levelled at this game...
You're not even adding anything with this post, just being snarky.
I was clearly replying to a quote about MP being favored over SP being a valid criticism. Either there's evidence to support that, or not.
For me, then, Larian's decision to reduce party size from six to four was driven by wanting to size the party and balance all encounters for four-person co-op play. Similarly, I see such game design concepts as the "origin" companions and the current controversial issue of locking party composition at the end of Act 1 and possibly killing off companions who are not in the active party at that point as things that were driven by what is best for co-op play. You are free to disagree, of course, but your disagreement does not invalidate my views in any way.
On an unrelated note, I think that having this game in GOG it´s good news. Not really a fan of Epic Games, steam or stadia.
Call me old-fashioned, but I prefer to own my games and have a hard copy of them he he.
In the latest community update they confirmed that “Direct Connect” is possible between platforms so playing with your friends would not be a problem if both have the same patch installed.
A theory based on no verifiable evidence = a conspiracy theory. It's nothing more. Judging a game based on information that we dont have doesnt really make a lot of sense.
Being upset at 4 man party? Justified, if you dont like that. Being upset about the possibility that the game may emphasize MP over SP despite no actual information to support that fear (including none of the DOS games, which never favored MP over SP) = unjustified. It's just a manifestation of bias.
Edit - The 4 man party size was the size of the party in DOS:2. It's also the default size of a 5e D&D party.
This - although I suspect they'll comment upon this aspect a bit more in the future. So we may know more before the game releases, although not from EA.
I would not be surprised if they do the same thing for BG3.
Specifically the new spells, subclasses, feats and variant rules that could be useful in the game.
Well, to be honest there´s one in the Tasha´s one that I do not particularly care about, the one about
"Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything adds an optional way of creating a character where players can choose from a selection of traits to create a custom linage. If you want to make the archetypical elf, a hypothetical character Crawford jokingly named “Elfy McElferson,” you can. However, “if your elf skipped longsword practice and lacks longsword proficiency and speaks a language other than Elvish and has a bonus to Charisma,” that’s now a valid option"
Because it takes away the point to choose different races not for their looks. But the others...
For those who want to discuss positive aspects of BG3 in peace without being interrupted by critics every now and then: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/80567/why-bg3-is-amazing-positive-only-thread-no-criticism
For those who want to voice out their concerns, criticisms, grievances and disappointments about BG3 in a civil manner: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/80568/the-problem-with-bg3-criticism-thread/
And for those who want to engage in a CIVIL DEBATE regarding BG3: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/80569/bg3-worth-it-or-not-debate-thread/
Please let's just keep this announcements thread simply for announcements. I hope we all understand. Thank you.
Anyway, personally I don't see a point to have separate threads to say good and bad stuff about BG3, but I do agree that announcement thread should stay for news only.
I'm super curious about this too. I'm hopeful that they'll include additional rules into the game. I dont know if we should consider this a likely launch feature (Specifically, the Tasha's Cauldron of Everything bit) - but Larian did support DOS:2 for a long time.
I think they know they have a market to keep updating the game, adding new optional rules and new archetypes from other source books. I kind of hope these are paid DLC, but I'll consider them if the game is good enough and the DLCs are packaged at a good price point.
Very much this. Criticism is perfectly fine. Repeating the same thing over, and over and over is boring and frustrating.
Feel free to visit the criticism thread.
It's good we can agree there.
Just did that to ease the ongoing conflict and give everyone some breathing space without hurting anybody's ego. I hope you understand.
I can empathise with you. It's just that some people feel that their grievances have not been adequately or sincerely addressed, which is why some arguments keep on repeating to other arguments. I made the criticism thread as a pressure release valve so people who feel that way can voice their opinions without being belligerent or demeaning to others, and without being called out in return, as long as such behaviour is within the limits of the forum rules. I hope that is understandable.