Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4321363" data-attributes="member: 2011">Reasonable math except for one thing.The text explicitly defines it as an &quot;n-square by n-square&quot; representation, not &quot;an n-x-n square&quot;.This is the thing that Ziana keeps tripping over. He either does not understand this, or he is purposely being obtuse on the point. But, the text is in the PHB.English 101.&quot;3-square by 3-square&quot; is not the same as &quot;3 by 3 square&quot; no matter how much people want this to be the case.If one asks Ziana or any of the people on the non-RAW side of this discussion to show a single rule in the PHB which states that the area of a blast must be a square shape, they cannot. They have not been able to do so for 13 pages of discussion.They handwave it away and keep claiming it must be square. They handwave away the fact that there are no &quot;the area must follow the orthogonal axes&quot; rules and say it must.There are no such rules. They have no support for their POV from a RAW perspective. They just keep shouting that they are right without any rules to support their POV. Might as well be watching WWE wrestling for the amount of rules being used by the anti-RAW side in this discussion.&lt;shrug&gt;So to the original OP, 13 pages and counting. By RAW, your shape is valid. By RAI, it is not.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 4321363, member: 2011"] Reasonable math except for one thing. The text explicitly defines it as an "n-square by n-square" representation, not "an n-x-n square". This is the thing that Ziana keeps tripping over. He either does not understand this, or he is purposely being obtuse on the point. But, the text is in the PHB. English 101. "3-square by 3-square" is not the same as "3 by 3 square" no matter how much people want this to be the case. If one asks Ziana or any of the people on the non-RAW side of this discussion to show a single rule in the PHB which states that the area of a blast must be a square shape, they cannot. They have not been able to do so for 13 pages of discussion. They handwave it away and keep claiming it must be square. They handwave away the fact that there are no "the area must follow the orthogonal axes" rules and say it must. There are no such rules. They have no support for their POV from a RAW perspective. They just keep shouting that they are right without any rules to support their POV. Might as well be watching WWE wrestling for the amount of rules being used by the anti-RAW side in this discussion. <shrug> So to the original OP, 13 pages and counting. By RAW, your shape is valid. By RAI, it is not. [/QUOTE]

Verification