Just as I suspected, there is concensus of opinion - to a point. The problem of course is that the point is quite different for everyone. (Just read the preceeding views on this topic.) Anyone with half a brain can say you shouldn't be immune to everything or just about everything, that concensus is rather obvious. What I'm wondering is can a baseline consensus be reached that is quantifiable? I'm not looking for the typcial "does it pass the smell test?". The 1:1 ratio (character to item level) then is at least quantifiable to all, but as I pointed out it leaves some rather gaping holes (the kind you could steer an oil tanker through).

However to answer this seemingly elusive question you seem to be on the correct path. By stating what you don't find acceptable (provided others join in) may well provide a concensus on what IS acceptable (generally speaking). Of course we each will need to clearly state WHY we don't think something is acceptable. Since what I'm proposing is beyond the scope of this title's post I'll start another expressly for this purpose.

Well I hack my characters, but I don't make them strong, I just mod the races and weapons so they look unique on me, like I have an assasin who'se daggers are held backwards in his hands so it looks like he's got wrist blades [img]tongue.gif[/img] he isn't any stronger and a duel-dagger weilding theif though... + I never put him on Undermountain. For undermountain I have a level 18 arcane archer who carries a lonbow and twin katanas which match his outfit real nicele, all created in the player editor, and I only gave him one inate abilit to cast lightening and his swords have a blade-barrier after effect, but they are limited to only level 20 (as oposed to level 61) I also found it is possible to make legal level 20 gear that makes you immune to all magical spell schools if you put a total immunity tag on each article of clothing you wear, and that's probably the worst thing i've played on the undermontain project...