[DL] Re: deadlands-digest.20001106

[Dan Conley <yosemite@cfanet.com>]

        Well, being a "newby" to the list, I didn't realize that there had been an official vote on this topic. Guess I missed it.
        Clogging up the list?!? Wow, another newby mistake, I guess. I had the impression that the list was for discussion of all things Deadlands. *Sigh*  Perhaps someone should post a list of topics that are "dead" and no longer appropriate for discussion.
        Trying hard not be a big smartypants (and failing miserably)...

                                                                                                    Dan


> Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 11:02:47 EST
> From: PEGShane@aol.com
> Subject: Re: [DL] Adventures in supplements
>
> --part1_ee.ca32bd7.27383027_boundary
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> In a message dated 11/4/2000 9:37:38 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> marshalron@hotmail.com writes:
>
> > I think the first instance of this was because the adventures in HOE were
> > not that good.  They were basicly run around for a while then fight big
> > harrowed version of whatever the book was about.  Some of the deadlands
> > ones
> > were quite good but they couldn't be expected to keep up that kind of
> >
>
> Actually, I don't think there's been a single harrowed anything in Hell on
> Earth (adventure-wise).
>
> No, we decided to stop putting adventures in sourcebooks because you guys
> told us not to. Don't bother clogging up the list with your opinion, btw.
> It's been hashed, rehashed, voted on, and decided.
>
> Love ya all,
>
> Shane
>
>