Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="El Mahdi" data-source="post: 5890656" data-attributes="member: 59506">Frankly, I don't understand why that last step would be "so nasty".  Just because someone provides their reasoning for why they would want it, and why it's more believable to them, doesn't mean they are being nasty, wrong, or any other negative connotation.  Nor does anyone have the right to criticize them for their reasoning.  Also, from what I've read in this thread, those that do want a different model of falling damage, have stated so because of the questions in the OP, have given their reasons why they want that (their opinions and reasoning for their wanting it, not an argument as to why everyone should want it), and also answered the OP's question of whether they felt the current model is a feature or a bug. Near as I can tell, there's nothing wrong with any of that, nor any grounds for having their opinions or reasoning criticized as illogical.  However, most of the responses they've recieved from those that don't agree with them, have basically taken the line that they are being ridiculous or illogical to choose that aspect to be bothered by, when there are so many other things in the game that also don't make sense...and also that their ideas, if included in the next D&D iteration, will "gum up their game"...<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> Now that last part...That's Illogical.  Talking of WotC's D&D as if it's one's own personal game, as if that person has a form of ownership over it, and has the right to decide what should not be included in it or what form it should not take...<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm    :-S" data-shortname=":-S" /> I'm not saying you specifically, Crazy Jerome, have responded this way or not (though I don't think you have, and haven't re-read your posts to see if that's the case or not, and really don't care anyways<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />), but there have been a vocal minority in this thread doing just that. And I honestly don't understand why...</blockquote>

Verification