Wow I just read your article on the Rdm, and I have to say you provided a lot of mindless dribble. The actual acticle contains nothing, just you repeating things that are either odvious or Cliché. You provided no insight on the any sub jobs. Perhaps of you would have spent time actually stating the strengths, weakness, practical and potential uses of each sub job. But rather you chose to just say what anyone could know on their own. Of course if you choose sub war you will be more melee, of course you will heal more with sub whm, and nuke more with sub blm….. Why not make actual citations of instances where each class provided its own uniqueness. Something along the lines of “Blm sub was usefull for light nukes but provided considerable mana for debuffs and Dots, useful for soloing root spawns such as worms” or maybe note something about how useful/unuseful your weapon buffs are. What you have writen is just a copy and paste solution, requiring a minimal effort by you. All you did was attempt to sound unique by adding some quasi-flavorful language. Please stop being lazy in future articles and actually provide some information of substenance. Something useful perhaps??
-Anonymous-
Dear Anonymous…
In reading the letter again, perhaps you will notice the gentleman did not ask me for a detailed philibuster on the pros and cons of the assortment of subjobs available to the Red Mage. He merely asked me to speculate on “why” they argue. Thus, I felt no need to ramble on about matters off topic any more than necessary. My task was to explain to him, as informatively as possible, why exactly Red Mages tend to debate the meaning of their existence more so than other classes. A final answer may never be reached, as Red Mages are a wishy-washy sort, and fear commitment.
As for the length of my reply, when giving advice or insight, I reserve the right to interject my own banter and opinions as I see fit. (Sometimes, I get a little carried away in my own fits of fancy.) I am sorry that you failed to find information useful to you in my reply to another man’s query. (May I be so bold in suggesting that this may be due to the fact that the topic did not pertain to you?)
Perhaps I should clarify that I do not claim to be a scholar of the idiosyncrasies pertaining to subjobs, nor do I ever intend to be. In addition, am I not a statistician bent on regurgitating numbers and data. There are “guides” available for such things, as well as “forums” where the specifics surrounding these topics are discussed ad nauseum. I am merely here to provide my humble service in addressing questions pertaining to the various etiquette pitfalls associated with day-to-day interactions with other adventurers.
Thank you for your time.
Respectfully,
-Sir Digimus
PS: “Odvious” You have topped even my own creative spelling techniques. Touché!
Published: Mar 11, 2004 10:44 am