All About Grappling (Part Four)

[Hypersmurf]

The vast majority of people might make that very inferance...

Not if they refer to part 1, as he directs them, which clearly notes 'ranged attacks'.

-Hyp.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Not if they refer to part 1, as he directs them, which clearly notes 'ranged attacks'.

You have much more faith in the willingness of people to click/scroll than I do.

Whenever I write instructions I assume everyone reading them is lazy and easily confused. But, then, I'm used to working with people who are lazy and easily confused...

 

[Egres]

It can imply that, but it doesn't have to. He is not discussing any other cases; he's only discussing "this case".

If you choose to make inferences about the cases he isn't discussing, and those inferences turn out to be wrong, that's your mistake.

-Hyp.

?!?

I'll quote it again;

"If multiple opponents are involved in the grapple, you pick one to make the opposed grapple check against. In this case, you don't have to randomly determine which foe your grab attack strikes (see Part One)."

The situation is joining a grapple. There is no case where this would cause you to randomly determine which foe you grab. The second sentence implies there is such a case.

If it had said "you don't have to determine which foe your attack strikes", I could agree with you. It specifies "grab attack", though. So the other cases must be cases of grab attacks randomly picking a target. Of which there are no cases.

 

[Tatsukun]

My question to you: In this case, do you have to randomly determine which foe your grab attack strikes?

If your answer is 'No', then Skip's statement is accurate.

-Hyp.

Right, so if Hyp ever asks me what my wife's name is, I will say, "On Mondays and Fridays, her name is Yoshimi".

It's correct, but misleading. If I saw that on one of my students' papers, I would correct it.

-Tatsu

 

[Hypersmurf]

Right, so if Hyp ever asks me what my wife's name is, I will say, "On Mondays and Fridays, her name is Yoshimi".

It's correct, but misleading.

So perhaps it would lead me to ask "What's her name the rest of the time?", and you'd answer 'Yoshimi'.

If Skip's answer causes someone to wonder about what might happen in other situations, perhaps it would lead them to ask a question too... for which he's directed them to the place they can find the answer - Part One.

And when they read Part One, they'll discover that it's ranged attacks the random determination applies to.

I still don't see a problem!

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus]

So perhaps it would lead me to ask "What's her name the rest of the time?", and you'd answer 'Yoshimi'.

If Skip's answer causes someone to wonder about what might happen in other situations, perhaps it would lead them to ask a question too... for which he's directed them to the place they can find the answer - Part One.

And when they read Part One, they'll discover that it's ranged attacks the random determination applies to.

I still don't see a problem!

-Hyp.

The only "problem" I see is that when someone questions it, it is a couple extra unnecesary steps.

 

[Egres]

If Skip's answer causes someone to wonder about what might happen in other situations, perhaps it would lead them to ask a question too... for which he's directed them to the place they can find the answer - Part One.

And when they read Part One, they'll discover that it's ranged attacks the random determination applies to.

?!?

You can't join a Grapple with a ranged attack.

Where are the other cases implied by Skip words?

 

[azmodean]

I think this is a case of two sides arguing different points:
Hyp is saying that technically the passage in question is correct (which I agree with)
others are saying that the passage in question is unclear in an article whose purpose is to clarify the issue (which I also agree with)

It may be technically correct, but it fails in its purpose to make the rules clear and easy to understand.