Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oryan77" data-source="post: 6684134" data-attributes="member: 18701">Ok, please stop insinuating that I am doing this or that. Frankly, you seem to be arguing with me for the sake of arguing. In fact, if you pay attention to what I'm saying rather than being quick to tell me I'm wrong, you will see that we actually agree with each other, except you want to let a metagamer cheat and I don't.I have quoted the rules word for word, that's it. I haven't done any of the nonsense that you are accusing me of doing. I find your accusations and assumptions for my DMing ability to be laughable.Go back, read (all) of my posts, and give some real thought about what I'm saying. I think if you pay attention rather than wishing so hard to prove me wrong, you'll see how much we agree.Any heavy handedness I am referring to is due to players metagaming. I have no patience for metagaming and I stated in this very thread how I would handle a player metagaming a feint attack.I said I would ask the group if they think he's withdrawing because he was going to anyway, or if he is metagaming. If they say let him withdraw because he may have anyway without metagaming, then I'll let him withdraw. Otherwise, if they agree that he is metagaming to screw another player out of his action, then I don't feel bad at all telling him, "Sorry, no, you've stayed in melee combat until you realized he was feint attacking. Let's not metagame here."My argument is in defense of the actual rules. If you think using the RAW in order to eliminate any metagaming is a form of "rules lawyering", then call me a rules lawyer! I won't defend cheating, and metagaming is cheating. Sometimes it can't be helped and I understand that. When it can be helped though, then no way, I won't tolerate it. I really don't care how anyone feels about that because I'd rather take the side of the player using the feint and not cheating than take the side of the metagamer screwing him over.*editI had to respond to this part cause it's baffling. Quoting out of context? The Sense Motive rule is like 2 sentences long. It's as direct and to the point as it can be. How on earth is looking at the Feint rules, seeing that you need to make an opposed Sense Motive check, and referencing how the Sense Motive skill works considered "quoting out of context"? I quoted the one and only sentence that could possibly be in regards to the Feint rule. None of the other text in the skill is associated with Feinting. My gawd man, are you just joking around here? <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></blockquote>

Verification