Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spells dealing cold damage. effects?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dozen" data-source="post: 6169056" data-attributes="member: 6698275"><p>ONE KIND. I said ONE KIND of magic is. What I gave you was an EXAMPLE. Why is saying so once not enough? How many times do I have to write one thing down to make it register for you?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I said it twice in the same line! What else do you want from me? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Tome of Magic is apparently not a thing then.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I do go out of my way to say this was a flawless argument. <em>To counter a point I never made. </em>See above.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Look, what you want to convince me of is that what I present as physics in my games are not - which is painfully false, and not only for the fact that <strong>I am the DM of my own games. </strong>Now, those rules are derived from a number of presumtions that are <strong>not </strong>based on physics. Not only I agree with that, I'd be f*cking embarrassed have I ever fooled myself into thinking the basics didn't stem from random bits of pop culture and mythology somebody mashed together in their basement. That doesn't make the rules based on them illogical or contradictory in any way. And especially can't be explained away with "It's magic" for my kind of players. This I've also explained numerous times, and not just to you - Pemerton asked me the same question, and imagine, he <strong>read </strong>my posts, <strong>understood </strong>my answer, and didn't make <strong>any </strong>infuriating, baseless bullsh*t up about what my reasons must be. So <em>maybe </em>I'm not the one at fault here. </p><p></p><p>In the end, your arguments are obviously well thought out, but routinely ignore what I'm actually saying. Whether that's because I'm hard to understand, or you can't be bothered is a question for the ag-.... you know, I'm not even going to pretend that's a possibility anymore. Thing is, the depth of your analysis proves you're smart enough to get me despite my odd speech patterns, if they even surfaced in that particular part of the post. You don't <strong>miss </strong>what I'm telling you. You're simply being a d*ck. </p><p></p><p>So if you'd please put more effort into your replies, I'd be glad. You may even be right, but you'll never get anywhere with convincing me if you piss on my face in every corner.</p><p></p><p>To make clear this once and never again: My goal is to integrate physics save for the most basic parts of each sort of magic that simply has to be handwaved for it to qualify as magic. That may or may not work as intended, or shouldn't be called what I want to call it, and I'm willing to discuss the matter in a respectful manner. What I'm not willing to listen to anymore is whether that's what I want to do or not, and why do we, in your opinion, agree while our arguments have close to zero f*cks to do with each other thanks to you ignoring the point when you feel like it! You do any of those again, and I'm done talking to you! Clear?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dozen, post: 6169056, member: 6698275"] ONE KIND. I said ONE KIND of magic is. What I gave you was an EXAMPLE. Why is saying so once not enough? How many times do I have to write one thing down to make it register for you? I said it twice in the same line! What else do you want from me? Tome of Magic is apparently not a thing then. I do go out of my way to say this was a flawless argument. [I]To counter a point I never made. [/I]See above. Look, what you want to convince me of is that what I present as physics in my games are not - which is painfully false, and not only for the fact that [B]I am the DM of my own games. [/B]Now, those rules are derived from a number of presumtions that are [B]not [/B]based on physics. Not only I agree with that, I'd be f*cking embarrassed have I ever fooled myself into thinking the basics didn't stem from random bits of pop culture and mythology somebody mashed together in their basement. That doesn't make the rules based on them illogical or contradictory in any way. And especially can't be explained away with "It's magic" for my kind of players. This I've also explained numerous times, and not just to you - Pemerton asked me the same question, and imagine, he [B]read [/B]my posts, [B]understood [/B]my answer, and didn't make [B]any [/B]infuriating, baseless bullsh*t up about what my reasons must be. So [I]maybe [/I]I'm not the one at fault here. In the end, your arguments are obviously well thought out, but routinely ignore what I'm actually saying. Whether that's because I'm hard to understand, or you can't be bothered is a question for the ag-.... you know, I'm not even going to pretend that's a possibility anymore. Thing is, the depth of your analysis proves you're smart enough to get me despite my odd speech patterns, if they even surfaced in that particular part of the post. You don't [B]miss [/B]what I'm telling you. You're simply being a d*ck. So if you'd please put more effort into your replies, I'd be glad. You may even be right, but you'll never get anywhere with convincing me if you piss on my face in every corner. To make clear this once and never again: My goal is to integrate physics save for the most basic parts of each sort of magic that simply has to be handwaved for it to qualify as magic. That may or may not work as intended, or shouldn't be called what I want to call it, and I'm willing to discuss the matter in a respectful manner. What I'm not willing to listen to anymore is whether that's what I want to do or not, and why do we, in your opinion, agree while our arguments have close to zero f*cks to do with each other thanks to you ignoring the point when you feel like it! You do any of those again, and I'm done talking to you! Clear? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Spells dealing cold damage. effects?
Top