Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does the term "a creature" include yourself?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 5444630" data-attributes="member: 71571"><p>Time to deconstruct this.</p><p></p><p>The different distinctions for targets are:</p><p></p><p>Creature, You, Enemy, Ally. You are a creature. if you were not a creature, nothing could ever target you. The definition of what creature means in targetting is pretty clear: "A creature of any sort." You certainly qualify.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You've already discounted the fact that you yourself are 'a creature of any sort' and therefore this cannot exclude you from the effect. Just because it goes on to say that it does not discriminate against ally/enemy status does not logically mean it must therefore exclude you.</p><p></p><p>General:</p><p> Creature means a creature of any sort.</p><p></p><p>For it not to include you, a specific exception must be presented. Otherwise there IS no exception, and therefore you are not excepted.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Irrelevant. All melee cares about is if the target is in range. Melee 2 does not exclude targets adjacent to you. You can target yourself with a melee attack because you are within the range of the power from the origin square. 0 <= 1, 2, touch, or weapon for all values of these things.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is true. If the power does not target allies explicitly, an ally cannot choose to ignore it.</p><p></p><p>[quite[Just 106 prevented the target for targeting itself as a creature because it is not defined.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>Wrong.</p><p></p><p>I can be targetted by my ally's powers that target creatures. Therefore I must be a creature of any sort. My powers that target creatures target creatures of any sort, therefore they must target me.</p><p></p><p>You've placed an artificial constraint on enemy and ally that a creature must be one of those two. The definition of creature in the context of targetting makes absolutely no distinction whatsoever. It says, verbatim: A creature of any sort.</p><p></p><p>You are a creature, ergo, you are a creature.</p><p></p><p>If creature did not target you, then you must not be a creature of any sort. Ergo other people's powers cannot target you. As they are also benefitting from this, you cannot target other people.</p><p></p><p>I strongly advise not using rules interpretations that cause the entire ruleset to break down and stop working completely.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>While I won't say flavor text is irrelevant, it is definately not constraining. Using flavor text as an excuse to contrain abilities is a bit farfetched... nor do the rules encourage you to do so.... they do encourage some 'outside the box' thinking.</p><p></p><p>Not to mention, every power's flavor text would be retarded levels of awful and long if they included every contigency. Oh god, imagine what an augmentable power would look like.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You do not need a specific exception because the general rules allow you to do this.</p><p></p><p>1) Melee can target yourself. You are in range, and <strong>nothing says you cannot.</strong></p><p>2) Creature includes yourself. Creature means a creature of any sort, and <strong>nothing says you are not.</strong></p><p></p><p>Both have the same logical structure... you have one thing saying that the situation in question would qualify, and it is followed by the complete absence of anything saying that it could not qualify.</p><p></p><p>To sum up why your argument is wrong: You have yet to present a single exception to the general rules I've noted above that excepts them and makes them not apply to yourself.</p><p></p><p>No specific means no specific beats general.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It is your game. But as a purist, you cannot be adding in inferring clauses the rules do not actually say.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="DracoSuave, post: 5444630, member: 71571"] Time to deconstruct this. The different distinctions for targets are: Creature, You, Enemy, Ally. You are a creature. if you were not a creature, nothing could ever target you. The definition of what creature means in targetting is pretty clear: "A creature of any sort." You certainly qualify. You've already discounted the fact that you yourself are 'a creature of any sort' and therefore this cannot exclude you from the effect. Just because it goes on to say that it does not discriminate against ally/enemy status does not logically mean it must therefore exclude you. General: Creature means a creature of any sort. For it not to include you, a specific exception must be presented. Otherwise there IS no exception, and therefore you are not excepted. Irrelevant. All melee cares about is if the target is in range. Melee 2 does not exclude targets adjacent to you. You can target yourself with a melee attack because you are within the range of the power from the origin square. 0 <= 1, 2, touch, or weapon for all values of these things. This is true. If the power does not target allies explicitly, an ally cannot choose to ignore it. [quite[Just 106 prevented the target for targeting itself as a creature because it is not defined.[/quote] Wrong. I can be targetted by my ally's powers that target creatures. Therefore I must be a creature of any sort. My powers that target creatures target creatures of any sort, therefore they must target me. You've placed an artificial constraint on enemy and ally that a creature must be one of those two. The definition of creature in the context of targetting makes absolutely no distinction whatsoever. It says, verbatim: A creature of any sort. You are a creature, ergo, you are a creature. If creature did not target you, then you must not be a creature of any sort. Ergo other people's powers cannot target you. As they are also benefitting from this, you cannot target other people. I strongly advise not using rules interpretations that cause the entire ruleset to break down and stop working completely. While I won't say flavor text is irrelevant, it is definately not constraining. Using flavor text as an excuse to contrain abilities is a bit farfetched... nor do the rules encourage you to do so.... they do encourage some 'outside the box' thinking. Not to mention, every power's flavor text would be retarded levels of awful and long if they included every contigency. Oh god, imagine what an augmentable power would look like. You do not need a specific exception because the general rules allow you to do this. 1) Melee can target yourself. You are in range, and [b]nothing says you cannot.[/b] 2) Creature includes yourself. Creature means a creature of any sort, and [b]nothing says you are not.[/b] Both have the same logical structure... you have one thing saying that the situation in question would qualify, and it is followed by the complete absence of anything saying that it could not qualify. To sum up why your argument is wrong: You have yet to present a single exception to the general rules I've noted above that excepts them and makes them not apply to yourself. No specific means no specific beats general. It is your game. But as a purist, you cannot be adding in inferring clauses the rules do not actually say. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Does the term "a creature" include yourself?
Top