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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6395619" data-attributes="member: 2525">You're calling me a liar without asking what I meant? That's pretty rude.  The term "AD&D" can mean either 1e or 2e. When I said AD&D, I meant AD&D 1e, which has guidelines in the DMG.  I thought that was obvious, but perhaps not.  Of course, you asking me would have been the way an adult would have dealt with that issue, rather than accusing me of lying. The 1e DMG says things like, "It is quite usual for players to use wishes to increase their ability scores in desired areas, whatever the areas might be.  It is strongly suggested that you place no restrictions upon such use of wishes. " And then gives rules for slowing the increase by 1/10th after X ability score.  That DMG has all sorts of rules for wishes, how they can be used to craft magic items, etc..  Raising ability scores is assumed to be one of the basic accepted uses for wishes in that game.As for loophole, <a href="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/loophole" target="_blank">what I mean is</a> "A way of escaping a difficulty, especially an omission or ambiguity in the wording of a contract or law that provides a means of evading compliance."In this case the "difficulty" is playing an ordinary character that must overcome challenges with powers and abilities at roughly the intended balance level the game designers obviously intended.  The law is the game rules.  The escape used is obvious abuses using omissions and ambiguities in the rules to evade having to conform to such relatively standard levels of powers and abilities.  I gave several examples, and I don't know why you wouldn't want to include Pun Pun in those examples but he's a perfectly valid example of a loophole type abuse.Hence the bag of rats is typically banned.  So is Pun Pun.  So is the infinite wishes.  I understand you used different ways to deal with those things, but the fact you understood they needed to be dealt with is what I am referring to - you closed loopholes, even though you were not calling them loopholes.  Right now, I am not seeing this debate going anywhere good.  You've already sunk to calling me names without any justification, and typically that just gets worse over time.  So unless you have something that is more than a long way of saying "I don't do it that way in my games", I think it's probably best to end this portion of the debate. If you are comfortable thinking there are no loopholes in the D&D game, fair enough.  Others disagree with your view in that.</blockquote>

Verification