HamishAlexander
New member
Multiplicity - Theory - Probability
I heartily agree - there are most likely multiple individuals and idealologies at work here. Also, just as in science, there are uses for multiple theories, none of which are consistant with all of the evidence.
As for directions of search, I would expect that the runewords consisting of rare runes would be more worth searching, as they would be more likely to be highly useful.
Good luck all!
WhiteHaven said:All:
As Zackardo was beginning to say, I'm not so certain that all of our runewords will come from one way to search. Think of it this way: if we assume that there's more than one Blizzard programmer making runewords, then there may not be a connection between ALL of the new runewords, but groups of the runewords COULD be connected. I, for one, might make runewords based on characters from my favorite books (most notably HONOR Harrington (google it)) or from other aspects of life. Or, as we've been trying find, my brother (works for NASA) might make mathematically patterned runewords.
What I'm trying to say is, just because one clue doesn't seem to fit the rest of the clues (which seems to happen often in this thread), that may not invalidate the overall pattern that holds some of the clues together.
I heartily agree - there are most likely multiple individuals and idealologies at work here. Also, just as in science, there are uses for multiple theories, none of which are consistant with all of the evidence.
As for directions of search, I would expect that the runewords consisting of rare runes would be more worth searching, as they would be more likely to be highly useful.
Good luck all!