Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8201144" data-attributes="member: 71699">I like that line of argument. It sounds reasonable to me.So to my mind, the remaining part that is contested is if a DM can simply decide there is some factor introducing difficulty, whatever that might be (which can therefore include distance). I don't presently see a way to reach agreement on that because one side says that &quot;Examples include&quot; introduces a categorically definitive set of four cases such that any further examples implied by such wording cannot add anything&nbsp; - resulting in a quite peculiar use of language - while the other side says that further examples are not only implied, but to be meaningfully implied they must be able to add something. Perhaps pointing to the additional case in Special Types of Movement, which everyone seems to accept as adding to the cases. I feel confident both RAW and RAI put it in the hands of the DM, but the point is contested.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8201144, member: 71699"] I like that line of argument. It sounds reasonable to me. So to my mind, the remaining part that is contested is if a DM can simply decide there is some factor introducing difficulty, whatever that might be (which can therefore include distance). I don't presently see a way to reach agreement on that because one side says that "[I]Examples include[/I]" introduces a categorically definitive set of four cases such that any further examples implied by such wording cannot add anything - resulting in a quite peculiar use of language - while the other side says that further examples are not only implied, but to be meaningfully implied they must be able to add something. Perhaps pointing to the additional case in Special Types of Movement, which everyone seems to accept as adding to the cases. I feel confident both RAW and RAI put it in the hands of the DM, but the point is contested. [/QUOTE]

Verification