Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 6550545" data-attributes="member: 97077">"Success at a Cost," DMG, page 242. I'm not sure what you mean by taking ownership. "I" was a shorthand in what you quoted in response to that particular poster. A more accurate response on my part might have been "I didn't make up or change a rule. The DM in the example applied a resolution method from the DMG. I could have written a better example." This is not an example that is in my game or planned to be in my game as previously stated.No, I use "math nerds" as a term of endearment. They possess a skill I do not have and I respect them for it. I'm just a nerd in other ways. <a href="http://community.wizards.com/forum/product-and-general-dd-discussions/threads/4191101" target="_blank">Some math nerds on WotC disagree</a> with what other math nerds on enworld say about the tradeoff.I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying your assertions are based on assumptions that are not actually a part of the example. I also said to be sure you mention your assumptions in the original post if you're going to make assertions based on them.The "agenda" to which I was referring were playstyle agendas - a GNS distinction.Given your last, I think we're at a point where you're reading into things about what I'm saying. Perhaps its best we leave off, at least you and me.</blockquote>