Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7110175" data-attributes="member: 6799649">In may not make sense to you, but since is does make sense to plenty of people then it is not true to say, as a general statement, that it does not make sense.If someone doesn't think that e = mc^2 makes sense then it may not make sense to them, but it doesn't follow that the equation itself doesn't make sense.It may be true that this is your position, but we've pointed out that the spell already does affect casters and martials the same way! Both casters and martials who make an attack roll are subject to the spell, and neither casters nor martials are affected by the spell if they are not making an attack roll.Not disputing your admission over not understanding the concept of the spell, but those who do understand it don't need a re-write.'Target' and 'aim' are different things, both in real life and in the 5E rules. In the game you 'target' a creature simply by mentally choosing that creature. No roll is required. It is 100% certain.Where you are going wrong (inadvertently or deliberately, it's hard to tell) is that you cannot or will not separate the two. You think that 'target' and 'aim at' are always synonyms.When a politician 'targets' a certain constituency, he's not looking down the scope of a sniper rifle! When a caster (or martial for that matter) 'targets' a creature in 5E, they are just mentally choosing which creature they want to affect. Nothing more is required. If an archer or a caster is facing 20 enemies, neither has to roll to see if they 'target' the creature they want! They automatically 'target' the chosen creature with 100% certainty, whether or not the caster/archer needs to physically 'aim' at his chosen target.We have provided rules quotes, arguments supporting our position, and explanations of the concept used by the 5E devs. Meanwhile, you've admitted that the 5E rules say what we said they did but since you have a different conceptualisation then any other conceptualisation must be 'wrong' and needs 'fixing' to match yours.</blockquote>

Verification