Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N8Ball" data-source="post: 4917887" data-attributes="member: 63757">Draco, if you would like to put MY argument in logical form, then you must assume the things I assume (that the requirements and definition of a thing are distinct parts of the rules).  What you described is not what I'm saying, so proving it wrong doesn't really say anything.Your analogy doesn't really describe the relationship I'm suggesting.  A Critical hit is not a PART of a hit, nor is it something normally included IN a hit, like your steering wheel.   I'm saying that it's a special TYPE of hit, so my analogy of a BMW 323i as a TYPE of car is much closer to what I'm suggesting.  You are free to suggest that a critical hit is just a BMW and not necessarily a car (they make motorcycles as well).Also, my argument for a crit being a hit referenced several places and examples, the hit section being just one of those places where crits are described.  I also used the High Crit section, an example in the text and section on critical hits, but if that were not enough, here's another example that provides some context as to what the authors intended.The idea that a crit = hit is founded in several places, and building an argument that uses this idea to prove someing else is not circular.  A <a href="http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/circular_argument" target="_blank">circular argument</a> is when you use an asusmption to prove that very thing you're assuming.My assumption is based in examples from the PHB and is used to intrepret a power in Divine power.  There's no circle there, just a constructed argument with multiple parts.This standard is not applied like you suggest in interpreting other powers.  Take this for example:Now, it doesn't say that the attack that provokes must be a ranged attack, so do we assume that since the general rules were not specifically overridden?  No, we just do what the power allows in generic form.  When the target attacks (in any way) we get an opportunity attack, and what's more, even though we're ignoring normal requirements of the opportunity attack, we must still reference what the definition of an opportunity attack IS (a basic melee attack).Now don't get all "Dracosuave" on me here.  Most of the exchanges so far have been civil enough to leave out statements like these, as much as we both might feel like saying them.</blockquote>

Verification