One would think however, that a fundemental class issue would be addressed before an "add-on" that wasn't there from the start.I'm not a CNF (rather high enough to matter), but this seems to be where the arguement stems from.

CNF was there from the beginning (and unfinished), ROP, AROP, Lairs, ect, were a pipe dream that was promised later on.

From an outside point of view, it looks to me like a crafting class that's been there since retail, simply wants to be finished, LONG after retail.

This hardly smacks of stepping in line, or crying for milk, or what have you, that's a poor comparision, and an immature way to approach an open discussion; why not start name callingand be done with it? If it's about who was in line first, well CNF was there long before ROP or lairs were even started......

Regardless, it's a moot point. Devs come up with a *plan, and that plan isadhered to in almost every case. Thus neither arguement on either side holds water, as regardless of it, the developers will do what they will do. Perhaps a wait and see approach would be best, now that what everyone wants is laid out on the table?[:|]