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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 5757802" data-attributes="member: 10479">The difference between saying it does or doesn't burn the papers isn't DM empowerment (and I suspect you know this), since if the rules say the paper burns the DM can say otherwise anyway and has Rule 0 to cite.  The difference is that to arrive at a logical situation (where papers caught in a fire burn), the DM needs to make an adjudication that actually goes against what the rules say.Some would say that this is player empowerment because it gives the player the rule to cite that the papers wouldn't burn unless the DM says they would.  Sometimes players use rules as a cudgel, particularly in tournament play where there is additional pressure on DMs to *not* make any adjudications beyond the letter of the rules.  You can have two groups playing in a tournament where a found map can be important to moving forward quickly and if one DM adjudicates that in such circumstances a map burns, because it makes logical sense, but the rules require him to make the additional ruling, and another DM allows the RAW to stand (and so the map doesn't burn despite being engulfed in flame), where it significantly affects the outcome of the tourney.I can't believe you think anyone believes that you're arguing in favor of DM empowerment.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I've used a couple of posts to cut to the chase on this argument because the last few dozen posts looks like a lot of doublespeak from both sides where no one is quite getting to the heart of the issue.  It boils down to this -And this -</blockquote>

Verification