Asshat? To you sir? Most definitely, now. It was you who starting the direct insults with your 'epeening' comment. By the way I am not upset, I find your tap-dancing around providing any solid answers amusing at this point. You ignored, and continue to still ignore any of the points of my argument for 'immunity to all poisons' meaning immunity to all poisons. My humble attempt to be civil was my second post where I attempted to explain to you why your answer won't mean anything to my D&D group, but that I was still curious in your replies. IF somehow you really took that much offensive to the ending of my first post; 1) apologies - tone is hard to interpret in text. 2) grow some thicker skin.
But now, you are the one that continues to focus on this stupid word game, acting like an asshat yourself behind your twisting of my every word to make you look like you're the one under attack, which was never the case. I submit and stand by my assessment that you're just being argumentative for the sake of it at this point as I've not seen you present any valid responses to any of the points I brought up as reasons why a Druids immunity to poison means 'all' poison, and that you've reverted to insults and name calling... how old are you? From your previous post, even if I didn't agree with your argument, I would have thought you were at least old enough to be an adult.
Let's review the exchange,
You...
...but if you're the latter, all I can say is I'm glad I don't play at your table
Kind of a **deleted** comment isn't it? But of course the
let's you off the hook doesn't it? Here, let me try: I'd only post something like what you did if I was a **deleted**
. Emoticon means I get away scott free right?
But you're not done.
I'm out. No matter what else you say or think, in our group Druids are immune to all poisons once they have that ability and that's all that matters to us - I can't believe this thread is now 5 pages...
This is 100% an asinine comment. Are my feelings hurt? lol, not one iota. But the fact that you need to tell me nothing I'm going to say changes your opinion is something I expect from someone in junior high and it lets me know what kind of person I'm dealing with. In word or two: grow up.
My response to you:
So why are you asking me then?
That's it. That's all I said. No name calling no ass-hatery, no insinuation, nothing. Just a question. If nothing I says matters to you and your buddies, why are you even asking? I've ignored your third grad pot shot insults and simply want to know why you are even asking.
Rather than apologize for your jack ass comments that serves no purpose other than to be insulting...here's what you said:
lmao - I was simply saying that I've voiced my opinion and reasons for such here, for what's it's worth, and have no further need to debate it. My circle of D&D friends doesn't read it how you are, so we will continue to allow Druids to be immune to all poisons.
How is this relevant to my asking why you asked? It's not. Then you go on...
I see you refer to the 3.0 Druids having only natural poison immunity, well I say that is irrelevant. Should we compare the hitdie of the 3.0 ranger vs. the 3.5 ranger? or the difference in their class abilities? No, we shouldn't because it's pointless. 3.5 made changes that supersede 3.0, so by their decision to drop 'natural' from the Druids poison immunity description and add 'all', unless WotC chimes in on it, we can assume (and luckily my gaming group does) that 'all' indeed means all.
Wait a minute, I thought you said you had no need to debate this? Didn't you say you were out?
Let's continue with your response:
By your only quoting the very end of my post where I say "I'm out" (meaning of debating the issue) I'm going to take it that you are just being argumentative at this point.
So once again, rather than assuming any accountability, your response is to try and shift the blame: I'm being argumentative when I asked you, "Why are you asking me then?" But you've been the paragon of civil discussion haven't you?
t was you who starting the direct insults with your 'epeening' comment.
Try again.
You ignored, and continue to still ignore any of the points of my argument for 'immunity to all poisons' meaning immunity to all poisons.
So wait a minute, I thought you said you were "out"? I thought you said you weren't here to debate the topic? Yet now you're accusing me of ignoring the points of your argument...which means you're here to debate the topic.
My humble attempt to be civil was my second post where I attempted to explain to you why your answer won't mean anything to my D&D group, but that I was still curious in your replies.
Your "humble attempt"? You mean the one where you accused me of being argumentative when I merely asked why you were asking me? And that came after the thinly veiled insults and asshat need to point out that nothing I say "or think" (because god knows what I might think be an issue) is going to change your opinion or that of your friends.
If this is your attempt at being civil....well, I'm really in for it now aren't I?
IF somehow you really took that much offensive to the ending of my first post; 1) apologies - tone is hard to interpret in text. 2) grow some thicker skin.
So now ...you're apologizing. But you can't even do that without being a **deleted**. I tell you what, why don't you grow up and take ownership of your word choice instead of trying to tell others to get a thicker skin? You clearly can't disagree with someone in a debate without resorting to veiled insults. You want to apologize, then do it and shut up.
You can't hurt my feelings, trust me. But if you want to come at my like a punk then I'll throw back in your face.
