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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6199155" data-attributes="member: 22779">Well, considering that the game has zero mechanics to govern this, isn't that kinda like saying we should assume Chess supports Snakes and Ladders?The complete lack of mechanics to support a particular action is a pretty big clue that the game isn't meant to do that thing.  Whereas there are numerous mechanics in 3e which perfectly well support exactly the kind of thing that we are talking about.  Just not outside of certain levels.I want you to remember this the next time we talk about DM's acting in bad faith.  This, right here, is exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about DM's choosing the most penalizing interpretation in order to protect their precious game.  The huge strawman legalese argument trying to cheese weasel out of the definition of "helpful" pretty much proves my point.Why did you ignore the next line though.  The part you made extra big refers to a standard skill check.  No one disagrees with that.  But, a perfectly valid reading of the rules says that ANY skill check can be foreshortened to a single action with a -10 penalty.  That's how English works.  If the limitation applied to all checks, then the limitation would be listed AFTER the exception, not before.But, again, this is exactly what I'm talking about.  Rules are always interpreted in the least advantageous manner for the players and the most advantageous for the DM in a DM Force game.</blockquote>

Verification