What kept them apart was just a fabrication.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

The Difference between “Less” and “Fewer”
Fewer means “not as many.” We use fewer with countable nouns like cookies.

Cookie Monster was told to eat fewer cookies.

Less means “not as much.”

We use less with uncountable nouns like milk.

Could you give Cookie Monster less milk next time?

One of the best and most frustrating things about English is that it is constantly evolving.

Sometimes, as with the differentiation between "fewer" and "less", established norms fall by the wayside. Common usage frequently prevails over grammarians and usage panels. "less" actually has a much broader meaning and grammatical function than "fewer", to the extent that in some dictionaries one if its meanings is, in fact, "fewer".

On the flip-side, attempts at establishing new norms and rules also frequently fizzle and fail to take hold.

For example, teachers of a certain generation routinely taught that beginning sentences with a coordinating conjunction or ending a sentence with a preposition were both wrong. Neither of those grammatical structures were wrong, and they never had been. One generation tried, and ultimately failed, to change centuries of well-documented usages of the English language.

They failed on many of us, anyway. But those lessons sure did stick with some of the people they were given to... ;)

Diablo 3

"

Lucas_am wrote:

Diablo 3

Breakin' 2: Electric Boogaloo?

This will legit be my 2nd build now, I want it!

edit: wait missed the last line, RIP was nice knowing you

"

鬼殺し wrote:

"

aggromagnet wrote:

"

鬼殺し wrote:

The Difference between “Less” and “Fewer”
Fewer means “not as many.” We use fewer with countable nouns like cookies.

Cookie Monster was told to eat fewer cookies.

Less means “not as much.”

We use less with uncountable nouns like milk.

Could you give Cookie Monster less milk next time?

One of the best and most frustrating things about English is that it is constantly evolving.

Sometimes, as with the differentiation between "fewer" and "less", established norms fall by the wayside. Common usage frequently prevails over grammarians and usage panels. "less" actually has a much broader meaning and grammatical function than "fewer", to the extent that in some dictionaries one if its meanings is, in fact, "fewer".

On the flip-side, attempts at establishing new norms and rules also frequently fizzle and fail to take hold.

For example, teachers of a certain generation routinely taught that beginning sentences with a coordinating conjunction or ending a sentence with a preposition were both wrong. Neither of those grammatical structures were wrong, and they never had been. One generation tried, and ultimately failed, to change centuries of well-documented usages of the English language.

They failed on many of us, anyway. But those lessons sure did stick with some of the people they were given to... ;)

True enough, but until it's more accepted outside of your admittedly swaying argumentation here, that 'less' is wrong and defending it is wrong and burning your daughter as part of a ritual sacrifice is also wrong but good on you for being all avant-garde and shit. Screen-name checks out. As usual.

I bet the Chinese version doesn't make this mistake.

What? It's already widely practiced and accepted in common usage, and it's usage that's increasing over time. Heck, go look in an online dictionary at the usages section for "less". By traditional rules yep, the way people often use "less" nowadays is incorrect. There really isn't much to debate on that part. Yet despite that, it's one of those things that's falling by the wayside.

And I don't know what rationale there could possibly be in comparing the misuse of the word less with burning one's daughter. Not really necessary to make some kind of personal jabs over it either.

*EDIT: "usage: Many usage guides say that fewer should be used before plural nouns specifying individuals or distinguishable units: fewer words; no fewer than 31 of the 50 states. less, the guides maintain, should modify only singular mass nouns (less sugar; less money) and singular abstract nouns (less doubt; less power). It should modify plural nouns only when they suggest combination into a unit, group, or aggregation: less than $50 (a sum of money); less than three miles (a unit of distance). Standard English practice does not consistently reflect these distinctions. The use of less or less than where usage guides recommend fewer (than) is common in most varieties of English: less than eight million people; no less than 31 of the 50 states; We did more work with less people. Though these uses are often criticized, they appear to be increasing in frequency." - Webster's College Dictionary

I think main problem is lack of true single target shield attack.

There are ton of Kinetic Blast wanders, yet most use Barrage as boss-killing skill. SST is just like KB, great in pack clearing, even on 4 link, yet single target is bad even with 6 link. Add some hard hitting shield slam for single target, which can scale with new slow oriented supports and i'll love to play it again. Last time i tried it with Champion it was just lacking dmg on map bosses and tough rares, even with Lioneye's shield, one of the two highest base dmg uniques.

(speaking as a long-time favourite prot warrior in unspecified mmorpg)

I'm interested in the skill because it's strange and low tier, but I can't seem to make it work.

This shield isn't bad for it, right?


Neither is this


And a 6-link (Tabula).

And

And the damage I get is barely Blood Aqueduct level...

Interesting , but this skill needs some serious succubus love.

how many projectiles is 75% less, 3? its 13 base right and they round down..

Lab enchant adds 5 so you'd have 4.5 which i'm gonna assume will be rounded to 4.

I'm not convinced that is enough coverage :/ it really shoulda been 50% less even if they had to take a chain off it.