Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 8127216" data-attributes="member: 6677017">You're right that that's how they bill it--right up until they answer specific questions. At that point the designer himself is full intricate technical examination of what the published words mean.I think the point is really that they tried to keep things plain language when they could, and they intentionally avoided clarifying everything so as to allow for individual interpretation. But when it comes to the actual rules interactions (including things like keywords--which are not called out as such but absolutely exist in the edition, with "attack" being one if the prime examples; fireball and magic missile are not attacks, for instance, because if the way it is formally defined, which has important implications for how they interact with things) they have a set of definite rules elements that  interact in specifically defined mechanical ways.I think what trips people up is that the statements of simplicity and DM empowerment can imply more of a lack of such specificity than they actually created. What they actually set it up to do is:-Limit the quantity of complicated rules interactions-Limit the scope of areas of the game where such rules interactions come into play-Limit the pressure for DMs to follow those rules strictly</blockquote>