Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jaelis" data-source="post: 7349267" data-attributes="member: 60210">So basically your reasoning is that you feel using natural definitions is intrinsically better, so you prefer to use them when possible? BTW, I have not claimed that &quot;it is only considered an attack if you roll an attack roll.&quot; Several actions are called out as attacks that don't involve attack rolls. To me the line I quoted simply means that &quot;attack&quot; should be interpreted as a special game term like AC or saving throw, not as a natural term like &quot;hidden.&quot; The game uses lots of specific terminology, and I'm sure you are fine with that. I doubt you would let a level 5 fighter make one attack and then use the help action because helping is an attack and they have Extra Attack. Both you and I know how to interpret some terms naturally and some terms mechanically. From my point of view you are refusing to acknowledge the game's advice to treat &quot;attack&quot; as a mechanical term. Can you say why you feel that way about &quot;attack&quot; and not about other terms? Does it bother you that the ability to use an item on your turn (outside of your action) doesn't let you use a magic item? That doesn't make much sense in terms of natural language. Would you interpret &quot;casting a spell&quot; narrowly in terms of actually casting an actual spell, or more naturally in terms of activating any kind of magical ability?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jaelis, post: 7349267, member: 60210"] So basically your reasoning is that you feel using natural definitions is intrinsically better, so you prefer to use them when possible? BTW, I have not claimed that "it is only considered an attack if you roll an attack roll." Several actions are called out as attacks that don't involve attack rolls. To me the line I quoted simply means that "attack" should be interpreted as a special game term like AC or saving throw, not as a natural term like "hidden." The game uses lots of specific terminology, and I'm sure you are fine with that. I doubt you would let a level 5 fighter make one attack and then use the help action because helping is an attack and they have Extra Attack. Both you and I know how to interpret some terms naturally and some terms mechanically. From my point of view you are refusing to acknowledge the game's advice to treat "attack" as a mechanical term. Can you say why you feel that way about "attack" and not about other terms? Does it bother you that the ability to use an item on your turn (outside of your action) doesn't let you use a magic item? That doesn't make much sense in terms of natural language. Would you interpret "casting a spell" narrowly in terms of actually casting an actual spell, or more naturally in terms of activating any kind of magical ability? [/QUOTE]

Verification