User talk:SpectralTime

From 1d4chan

Are you waiting for me to make something before you add to it?

new homebrew, same guy[edit]

im looking for people to help me on a new homebrew called warhammer 40,000 for pokemon tabletop united, basically i had a thought about pokemon in the universe of warhammer 40k and wanted to make it a thing for pokemon tabletop united. i need people who couid do the game design, fluff writing, or editing if you are interested inquire on my user talk page. Savagereaper (talk) 06:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC

Naw. Just checking the "recent changes" page for stuff I'm interested in. Also, when you post on discussion pages, link four tilde signs (~) together after your post, so people can tell who's doing the writing. --SpectralTime (talk) 17:09, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

So, basically like this? TheWiseDane (talk) 11:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Oh, thats just magical. Look how much of a noob I am! Anyway, I just thought it was funny that someone added to everything I made, and am basically happy about it, so no biggie. TheWiseDane (talk) 11:32, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I am now considering you my stalker. TheWiseDane (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Oh? Is there a way to get a trigger warning permanently added to the article? I'd be satisfied with a small one down the bottom, honestly. Anything is fine so long as this executive guy doesn't revert it and then threaten rape and dox me again.

For now, tempers are running high. Just calm down, and stop doing this. We'll see what can be done. The answer might be nothing. There is a great deal of hostility towards the perceived excesses of political correctness" here. The best answer might be to just edit the intro to include mention of rape, rather than outright calling it "trigger warning." Would that address your concerns? --SpectralTime (talk) 02:35, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes it would, thank you. I'll add something to the intro now, and try and keep it relatively bland.

Did it for you. --SpectralTime (talk) 02:37, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
I would insist on putting my foot down right here. I don't want to see this wiki turned over to bullshit political correctness. If you gotta do these edits, keep them clean, and go no further than adding an NSFW Tag with Template:NSFW Evilexecutive (talk) 02:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
That's why I asked, when I made the edit, if it addressed both your concerns, namely, his desire not to have to learn the hard way that he was opening a can of Rape-a-Cola when the label only had monstergirls, and your desire not to have the wiki turn into a dance of everyone skittering over eggshells. Is it acceptable? --SpectralTime (talk) 02:40, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Upsurd Deja'vu aside(Coulda swore I've seen "opening a can of Rape-a-cola" before, or possibly that entire paragraph you posted), I'm satisfied with this outcome. Evilexecutive (talk) 02:41, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Nuts. I thought that was an original, and felt rather clever and witty for having fashioned it. Now I know I'm probably unconsciously knicking it from somewhere... --SpectralTime (talk) 02:43, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The SJW page[edit]

Thank you for fixing this and sorry for using strike-through, but that guy was totally wrong. - Ben (talk) 13:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Request for Help[edit]

Sure, I'd be happy to offer you what assistance I can. Now, Dark Sun 2e isn't actually something I've studied all that extensively, although I do have it in my collection. Still, after a little poking around on the internet, I found out that Dray first appeared in the Dark Sun Monstrous Compendium Appendix 2; they also appeared in City By The Silt Sea, and were planned to appear in Dregoth Ascending, although TSR going under ended that. Apparently, has pieced together that third book and is hosting it on their site, but I haven't checked it out.

You can read their Monstrous Compendium writeup online here:

For the books proper, just in case... check out this archive here; it's absolutely loaded with every D&D book, as far as I can tell. Just checking it out, I can confirm that it's got City by the Silt Sea and the DS MCA 2 (by the title of "Monstrous Compendium Appendix II B"), both under the Advanced D&D (Unsorted) folder:

Historical Section[edit]

Hi, just cleared up a portion of this section, didn't want to add any new information really but just cleaned up what was there in the first instance. Please let me know if this isn't warranted however. Thanks.

4e Tone Adjustment[edit]

So, did you catch my notice about going ahead with tweak the "tone" of articles, in particular the ancient mess that is the Aasimar?--QuietBrowser (talk) 22:10, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I did not. I'll look around though. And I'm glad you are trying. --SpectralTime (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Allow me to quote myself from my own page, just so it's easier to find. Also, putting something on your user page would make it a lot easier to talk to you.--QuietBrowser (talk) 03:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Go right ahead and tweak it. So long as you acknowledge that there were legitimate complaints about the classic Alignment 9-grid, and that what 4e was trying to do was to give alignment an easy-to-understand, solid definition that wouldn't leave players arguing if the definition of Lawful means either having an internal code of behavior or following all external codes (and don't bullshit me, I SAW that exact argument go on for at least half a dozen pages on Paizo's forums), I really don't care. As for the aasimar... wow, that's freaking ancient, I haven't touched that page in months. I never really meant for it to come off as venomous, but aasimar were kind of the forgotten sibling in comparison. Yeah, I know that genasi didn't even get a variable features table, but, still, tieflings were always the big hitters. The "problem with aasimar" sidebar from Worlds & Monsters is reprinted word for word on the Deva page, so... yeah, go right ahead and rewrite it, but I'd like if you could try and point out that the perceived "weakness" of aasimar as a race whose identity boiled down to "I'm super-duper goody-good!" was why the devas were invented. Heck, aasimar did actually sneak back into the game, via the Deva Heritage bloodline feat in Dragon Magazine #374's "Ecology of the Deva", which actually made aasimars more mechanically akin to their 2e fluff - now you had any base race, and a racial daily power that surrounded you in a protective aura of holy light.--QuietBrowser (talk) 07:11, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Aasimar Adjustment[edit]

I tried to clean up the Aasimar page like you asked. Take a look and see if it looks better now.--QuietBrowser (talk) 21:23, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

It removes most of the complaining about them being grid-filling, and, section about them being boring aside, I'm happy enough that I didn't feel the need to comment. Think I'll correct that personally, mind. --SpectralTime (talk) 21:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

FE Page adjustment[edit]

If there are some sections that are too whiny, then feel free to remove them. Make sure you don't go too far in the opposite direction though, and notable fandom controversies should be noted. For example, Fire Emblem Warriors did basically exclude Archanea, it had zero stages, no Camus(Major recurring character plots are based around), inaccurate info, ETC. Oh to explain IS's financial situation quickly, console FE games like Path of Radiance or Three Houses cost a lot more money to make then the handheld entries. Admiral Apathy (talk) 08:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

See, the minute you demand I start covering fanbase drama, you floor the accelerator straight into the brick wall of relevancy. Like, FE#? Fair enough; that game's fanbase drama single-handedly tanked it. Extremely minor translation differences within the various handheld titles that only a very small number of internet weirdos know or care about? Why? It had no impact on either the financial success or the critical reception of the games. And considering how measured and even-handed my original commentary on those titles was, and how bitchy and butthurt the sections you replaced them with are, well... I am not filled with confidence that you will be satisfied with actual neutral analysis that takes note of the good and the bad. I fucked up on Awakening introducing Casual Mode, I own that. I don't think that warrants wiping out, say, the fact that the Support system was introduced well before Elibe. And when other people edited or corrected my work, I was fine with that. It's not that I can't handle being corrected, it's that I don't like it when someone comes in and undoes something I spend a full workday of eight hours on just because, seemingly, I'm not one of those FE oldfags who hates having new players in my fandom because it makes me fell less special.
And I had thought my initial write-up pinned the blame for the company's financial difficulties on Radiant Dawn. And, I do think it's extremely, extremely rich of you to claim that FEW "basically excluded" Archanea. It got the most popular set of characters, in the form of Marth/Caeda/Navarre/Tiki/Minerva. It was the entire rest of the series that got the shaft in favor of Archanea and the most recent title, like always, and while I do not like or appreciate that, that's why. --SpectralTime (talk) 12:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Your write up repeatedly claimed that the DS remakes were flops when they infact sold great. In Japan alone, Shadow Dragon sold 274,786' in its recorded sales in 2009 and New Mystery of the Emblem: Heroes of Light and Shadow sold 247,248. Those are both numbers many other games would kill for. Similarly your edits on Thracia 776 complained about the game. Similarly saying the only reason Awakening is criticized is because "old fags new people in the fandom" is a massive straw man of legitimate criticism about Awakening's handling of sexy fanservice, writing and continuity.
Marth/Caeda/Navarre/Tiki/Minerva are 'not are the most popular set of characters. Camus is central to the plot of both Shadow Dragon and Mystery of the Emblem, mentioned constantly and relevant throughout the game, whilst he's basically the main character of Archanea Saga. I should also mention Navarre was on disc DLC, while a fan favorite, he's also not particularly plot relevant either. Not to mention, Camus's lance fighting would add something to the game's practically lance empty roster and help the weapon triangle they focused on. Other titles got more hosed, but for a so called focus title, Archanea got nothing in Warriors and this is frequently mentioned when reviewing the game. Admiral Apathy (talk) 18:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Didn't mean to make them sound like financial flops, and I apologize if that was the case. I know that's incorrect information, and I went out of my way to focus on the critical apathy to the titles rather than suggesting they sold poorly. My Thracia 776 write-up had a lot of complaining because it was a poorly-received game with what are generally regarded as a bunch of bad ideas that had hefty, well-documented design issues at the end of a nightmarish production cycle. It does not and should not get a free pass for those things just 'cause it's old any more than Radiant Dawn should 'cause it's new. And complaining about "continuity problems and sexy fanservice" as a member of the English language fandom build by FE7, a title with many well-documented continuity problems which features a leading lord who's showing some leg in all her battle poses, a class whose basic uniform involves a miniskirt and stockings even though they ride flying horses, and a major villain who is a busty lady literally assuming a pinup pose in every piece of official art of her ever released just makes my opinion of your intelligence and/or ability to think outside of a blinkered bubble plummet.
We clearly aren't going to get along and agree... I guess I'll just have to live with it. --SpectralTime (talk) 19:16, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Thracia 776 was very well received by both major publications at its time and modern reviewers, many of its mechanics like build and rescue were implemented into modern Fire Emblem, so I'm wondering where you got those ideas? Blazing Blade having Blade Lord Lyn briefly show her leg if you look closely at her battle animations or a unsympathetic seductress villain making a sexy pose in a piece of official battle is massively different then a prepubescent girl that acts like a child as well(and yes, young Manaketes are children, even the english version of Awakening confirms that), wearing a bikini and being presented as romantic interest, or at least two scantily clad characters that talk about their "boing bits" in their dialogue and mainly just obsess over the player's avatar. And you mentioned no continuity problems, let alone as big as Awakening retconning or ignoring almost everything from Archanea.
I am going to try, if you are willing to try? Admiral Apathy (talk) 19:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Well, that's the thing. You've given me absolutely no reason to believe that you are willing to try in anything even approximating good faith at any point in this process or this conversation, demanding everything and offering nothing in return at every step along the way, so why should I believe you and engage in an physically-and-mentally stressful and unhealthy process with a brick wall instead of just shrugging and cutting a toxic influence that would worsen my life while offering nothing in return out of it? Hell, you're not even an active community member who's around here that often. Better to just let you be the tyrant king of your little fiefdom here on the wiki and wash my hands of ya. --SpectralTime (talk) 20:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't want the article to be negative either and I think the Awakening section needs work to be more neutral(both versions are too negative), but if you don't want to talk, that is your choice and I'll respect it. Admiral Apathy (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
sigh ...Then, against my better judgment, I'll give it a good, honest, working-man's try, and we'll see I guess. --SpectralTime (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Nevermind. I see your vision, and it's shit. It's awful, and I hate it, and you couldn't be more wrong about a shitload of things, and man, this is just bad for me. I believe that you believe that you're being fair, that you're just reporting the facts here, but you've already cut my tongue out of my fucking mouth and stuffed it down the whirling garbage disposal once for not agreeing with you, so why should I think you care at all about what I have to say? You can say you don't like how it's too negative all you want, you cut all my analysis out and replaced it with the same old tired-out hive-minded unoriginal tumblr whinefest I've been reading for more than half a decade, delivered in fucking bullet points. I hate your vision, but I'm not a rude asshole or an edit warrior, so I won't just erase all of it in a fit of pique, and I'll instead just tell you that I am ashamed I ever thought you were a decent person talking with me about this stuff in good faith. --SpectralTime (talk) 20:43, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
I re-added your analysis and the criticism on Thracia 776 if you're ok with it? See it here. Admiral Apathy (talk) 21:14, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
...sigh Thank you, I guess, for being patient with me, but... Spending several hours nostalgia questing through all my old Fire Emblem memories to try to write all those sections was a very pleasant experience for me, and the absolute state of the Awakening section as it is now makes my blood boil every time I try to read it. I just don't feel like investing a lot of time and energy back into the article knowing it could all go down the drain any second now. To be scrupulously fair to you, yeah, I should've brought up Rescue. It wasn't particularly well-implemented in that game, but it was an important contribution that worked and was well-liked, as opposed to Fatigue, something everyone hated, or Fog of War, which no one liked when it game up in later games. Honestly, a lot of your complaints about my work were well-founded, and I don't think we'd be having this conversation if you'd just edited them in instead of starting by erasing everything I'd done outright. But I find my will completely drained at this juncture. If that changes in the future, I guess we'll see. Good luck, and sorry for blowing up. --SpectralTime (talk) 21:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Its ok, I make mistakes too. And I'm sorry for reverting earlier when I should've just rewrote certain sections. Admiral Apathy (talk) 21:41, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

im starting a new project does anyine seem interested in getting shit done?[edit]

hey, savagereaper here. do you want to help me with my new rpg setting hr giger's dark world its based on a /v/ called dark seed if you are interested in GETTING SHIT DONE talk to me on my user talk page Savagereaper (talk) 02:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

edit war[edit]

dude your asking the wrong website for conflict resolution

You started the whole FE Conflict[edit]

You can see in the Fire Emblem talk page, you were the one who suggested deleted everything. And you can see earlier then that, we discussed earlier either all games would be open to criticism or none of them would, we agreed to do the former, but then you went back on the argument by later changing the article to only whine about pre-Awakening games, accusing anyone who didn't like Awakening, Fates, TMS, and Warriors of being a nostalgia blind blind and using blatantly false info to praise them. You've gone completely out of your way to cause Skub simply out of an illogical hate boner for games you haven't even played and refused any attempts at reconciliation. Admiral Apathy (talk) 16:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

shrug Says the man who's calmly and unyieldingly refused any and all edits short of effusive, fault-glossing praise for the earliest titles, and the harshest, most poorly-written criticism for the 3DS era, never giving an inch, never actually responding. Whose work I've shown to multiple people on other websites, many of them with drastically-different tastes in Fire Emblem than me, one of them a bona-fide Shadow Dragon stan, just to be sure I'm not the asshole here, all of whom agreed without exception or reservation that you're being unreasonable, thin-skinned, and deaf to conversation or reason. And says the guy who insists I somehow broke the truce by editing factual, game-neutral information onto the class page, without mentioning pre-Awakening titles once in a non-historical context.
But you win. Pure endurance, but your complete inability to accept compromise or criticism has broken me down, for now. I give up. Not, to be absolutely clear, because you're right, because everyone I've ever talked to agrees you're dead wrong (except for certain factual corrections that I went out of my way to keep, many of which you've deleted), but because you've proven you're such a stubborn, idiotic asshole that I can't reason or compromise with you and will just have to live with you getting your way or sink to your level. Besides, you're not even interested in tabletop games, since you only come here to stir up shit on video game pages anyway, so it's not like I gotta worry about your stink metastatizing onto the rest of the wiki, whose poor moderation in response to your shit is the only reason things to this state in the first place.
You win! Now fuck off and leave me alone. Don't contact me anymore, and I won't contact you. Or do you need to upgrade your shitty attitude to outright stalking me now? --SpectralTime (talk) 16:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
I let you criticize earlier games and toned down or removed the original page edits that were too negative about the 3DS era. You agreed to this on this very talk page, but then weeks later made an [edit] accusing anyone of giving criticism of the 3DS games of being a neckbeard, whilst increasing criticism for any FE game prior to Awakening. I have always made attempts at neutral descriptions rather then making broad statements like "anyone who has any criticism for this game is a stupid weeaboo or neckbeard." So yes that does make you the asshole and the instigator.
One anonymous user=/= veryone agreeing with you. If you want no criticism fine, but we should at least cover the basic history of the FE games. I've written a bit on tabletop games, but if you're just interested in insulting me, fine. Admiral Apathy (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
The earlier summaries of each game have been restored, but with the praise/criticism sections removed. Thats how the page will stay now unless there are any objections. Admiral Apathy (talk) 17:29, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Die, Vecna, Die![edit]

I overhauled "Reception". --Zimriel (talk) 23:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Was thinking about doing it myself, 'cept I kept seeing it on my phone and not on my computer. I appreciate it. ...I assume. Now to read it... --SpectralTime (talk) 04:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I Summon Thee, Awake, Oh Sage[edit]

So, of course, the same idjit from the NET site has taken advantage of the restoration of the ORG site to turn the Resident Evil page in an RE6-bashing and RE2make-shilling fest. Is it worthwhile trying to reason with him that all the stuff RE2make does right does not cover up the fact its stories make no effort to fit together, or should I just wash my hands of the whole mess? I truly am sick and tired of being sick and tired over this bullshit.--QuietBrowser (talk) 07:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wash your hands. For better or worse, this guy represents the general opinions of the general fandom, and whether you agree or not, personally, is immaterial. Time and tastes will change or they won't, and the wiki should reflect the general opinions of the general fandom anyway. Besides, I speak from the bitter experience you can see above me on this Talk page that sometimes even that isn't enough, and you still just gotta throw up your hands and let the person who wants it more have their way. Someone came along and fixed it eventually on the other site, or was starting to, so hope isn't gone, but you just can't hold onto that forever. --SpectralTime (talk) 14:57, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay. Thank you for your input. If it's not too much trouble, I actually have been altering the article on the NET site to try and make a more neutral tone; I would really appreciate your opinion on if you think it looks better than it did before.--QuietBrowser (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Paul Kidd's D&D Novels/Characters[edit]

Since you've been doing some large-scale edits about Paul Kidd's novelisations of classic modules, do you think it'd be appropriate to do an article about his characters? Like, there's a Justicar article already because of a Grey Knights unit, but maybe it could be expanded to also include Paul Kidd's grim ranger protagonist of the same name? Or maybe just stick all the details for them on the Paul Kidd page? They did get an article in Dragon Magazine #290 with a full lore/history writeup and D&D 3.0 statblocks, after all...--QuietBrowser (talk) 22:16, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn’t mind it, but I’m currently putting off the last novel until after I finish my thesis, and I’d prefer to wait to write such an article until after I’d finished the series. —SpectralTime (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
That's fair enough. I actually added a basic run-down of the Justicar and his party based on their Dragon 290 article to the Paul Kidd page, but that's set post-Descent and prior to their final appearance in Queen of the Demonweb Pits. Still, it'll hold until you feel suited to writing a proper article on the topic.--QuietBrowser (talk) 23:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I mean, put whatever wherever! I can always edit details in later. --SpectralTime (talk) 01:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm just here to thank you for your hard work on all these pages. Even (or especially) when you called shenanigans on my stuff. What a treasure you are here. --Zimriel (talk) 00:08, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I really appreciate that, honestly. 's good to hear that kind of thing. Just tryin' to do my part. --SpectralTime (talk) 01:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Question tho': if Paul Kidd's anti-religious streak is an issue for Q1: Queen of the Demonweb Pits why is this not an issue for the article for Paul Kidd proper? I had figured all I was doing for Kidd's article was to transfer what you'd said about Kidd's tendencies earlier... --Zimriel (talk) 02:14, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

I mean, if it's only really a problem in one book in his work, I dunno if it ought to get a full paragraph on his author page? If that makes sense? I guess if it is also a thing in his Gamma World material I'd be more comfortable with it, but as is it feels like saying Peter Jackson's work is strongly defined by anti-fast food themes just 'cause he made Bad Taste, or something. --SpectralTime (talk) 02:16, 1 July 2021 (UTC)