Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="phloog" data-source="post: 4558322" data-attributes="member: 59219">I think the 'making a castle move' example IS a bit silly...and MAYBE the 'using it on some creature that doesn't move' is extending it too far...but maybe not, and it's part of the oddness.&nbsp;I have heard people supporting the CAGI thing say that ONE way of interpreting it is that opponents weren't really where they were originally depicted on the grid.&nbsp; I think I remember someone saying 'No, the superwise wizard didn't get fooled, but he was already too close, SEE? (moves figure)'&nbsp;In this instance, there is an argument for CAGI affecting ALL targets, because the PC is influencing the narrative as some have said - essentially rewriting the situation in terms of where enemies were placed (in the case of unmoving creatures, changing where they ALWAYS were retroactively).&nbsp;This isn't me saying anything pro or anti-4e, just pointing out that I THINK that based on some of the arguments made here, CAGI could absolutely be used on creatures that can't move, leading to a bit of oddness, but a bit of oddness that MANY (just not me and a few others) have no problem with.&nbsp; To each their own.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="phloog, post: 4558322, member: 59219"] I think the 'making a castle move' example IS a bit silly...and MAYBE the 'using it on some creature that doesn't move' is extending it too far...but maybe not, and it's part of the oddness. I have heard people supporting the CAGI thing say that ONE way of interpreting it is that opponents weren't really where they were originally depicted on the grid. I think I remember someone saying 'No, the superwise wizard didn't get fooled, but he was already too close, SEE? (moves figure)' In this instance, there is an argument for CAGI affecting ALL targets, because the PC is influencing the narrative as some have said - essentially rewriting the situation in terms of where enemies were placed (in the case of unmoving creatures, changing where they ALWAYS were retroactively). This isn't me saying anything pro or anti-4e, just pointing out that I THINK that based on some of the arguments made here, CAGI could absolutely be used on creatures that can't move, leading to a bit of oddness, but a bit of oddness that MANY (just not me and a few others) have no problem with. To each their own. [/QUOTE]

Verification