Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6418591" data-attributes="member: 2525">We really don't.&nbsp; I've asked you twice for where you get that rule, and you have not responded to that request.&nbsp; I gave up asking where the rule is at that says you add height, and just height, to a jump.&nbsp; If you have a rule that supports that assertion, I'd love to see it.&nbsp; There is nothing I know of, anywhere, that says you add your height to what you can attack above you with a jump, unless you use the jump rules.&nbsp; And the jump rules are quite specific - it's not just height, it's height multiplied by 1.5.&nbsp; There is no rule anywhere that I know of that let's you add you height and Reach, but not height times 1.5, to attack something above you during a jump.&nbsp; Quote me that rule, please.&nbsp; Or don't, and just keep ignoring the request.As for the rest of your post, you disagree with my interpretation, but then claim it's not a reasonable interpretation because you disagree with it.&nbsp; To me, that's unreasonable.&nbsp; And it was particularly unreasonable when you said it was not just an interpretation, and not just a house rule, but &quot;beyond&quot; a house rule and &quot;making stuff up&quot;.&nbsp; At the point where I am arguing with a guy whose point seems to be &quot;agree with me or I dismiss you&quot;, I don't see why it's productive to go on with this debate.&nbsp; I've explained how I view the rule, you've explained how you view the rule, our views differ, let's just leave it at that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 6418591, member: 2525"] We really don't. I've asked you twice for where you get that rule, and you have not responded to that request. I gave up asking where the rule is at that says you add height, and just height, to a jump. If you have a rule that supports that assertion, I'd love to see it. There is nothing I know of, anywhere, that says you add your height to what you can attack above you with a jump, unless you use the jump rules. And the jump rules are quite specific - it's not just height, it's height multiplied by 1.5. There is no rule anywhere that I know of that let's you add you height and Reach, but not height times 1.5, to attack something above you during a jump. Quote me that rule, please. Or don't, and just keep ignoring the request. As for the rest of your post, you disagree with my interpretation, but then claim it's not a reasonable interpretation because you disagree with it. To me, that's unreasonable. And it was particularly unreasonable when you said it was not just an interpretation, and not just a house rule, but "beyond" a house rule and "making stuff up". At the point where I am arguing with a guy whose point seems to be "agree with me or I dismiss you", I don't see why it's productive to go on with this debate. I've explained how I view the rule, you've explained how you view the rule, our views differ, let's just leave it at that. [/QUOTE]

Verification