Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arch-Fiend" data-source="post: 7841061" data-attributes="member: 7016641">1. i dont have the right, i know that, ill still pose what i think you should do in order to argue against my entire point instead of just peaces of it.2. i have not ignored any rebuttal to my statements, but my rebuttals to those rebuttals can be ignored or forgotten at times, like the one bring up below3. if you dont want put the effort of finding someone else's arguments against me, then dont claim they exist, i did say you could just argue them yourself but i expressed that i was willing to simply respond again to what has already been argued because you claim it should be enough.theres a problem with the dmg telling us there are no rules for damage types, its lying. a harsh statement i know however if the dmg is being touted here as if its undisputed and infallible words of the truth then thats the only interpretation that can be made, we know damage types have rules, you say as much yourself, you can not both say that damage types have no rules then site rules that involve damage types, those resistances, immunities, and vulnerabilities were just as much a part of my argument as the damage types themselves BECAUSE my point was about how both of them reflect a narrative behind how damage works in the game. if you want to tell me that my claim about how damage types are important in determining the best interpretation of damage as a whole mechanic, then your going to have to argue that with context to the rest of my point, not just isolate it from my thesis like it was never connected to anything.yeah i dont disagree that hitpoints are abstract, but being abstract means that what they can be is anything you want them to be, what they do have to be though is some element that involves constitution, which i still agree can reflect many different narratives as to what hitpoints are in relation to what losing them represents. ive also never argued against the idea that hitpoints can be whatever the gm wants them to be, ive only ever argued that if the GAME wants to say that they ONLY mean one thing then thats where ive made my argument and i think thats where my argument actually matters, outside that i have absolutely no idea why you keep arguing with me like i mean more than ive said.</blockquote>

Verification