NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 1448977" data-attributes="member: 2629">Read the words of the prophet, Hypersmurf. He has been blessed by the most wonderful of blessings: intelligence and the ability to read.Yu hinted at the reason you couldn't use it in those instances: it is listed as a standard action. The table CLEARLY indicates that it is a standard action. Nothing in the description opposes that view. Calling it an attack in the description is entirely different than refering to it as an attack replacement. The invisibility spell references offensive spells as attacks ... can we suddenly use those in our iterative attacks? The Sage's distinction is pulled out of a place where the sun doesn't shine. He picks the rule he wishes were in place and then uses ridiculously poor arguments to support his pet position.Just for a second: Forget balance. Forget whether the rule fits in your game. Focus on the Sage. His job is to add clarity to the game. He provides answers for frequently asked questions. The problem is that his a significant number of his answers provide more problems than answers. Is this issue now clarified? No. Why? Because his answer is based upon faulty logic and poor research. People will still argue against his ruling because it is based upon an argument with holes big enough to drive a dragon through.A couple days ago, allegedly, he did not even know that the DMG errata had been released during the sage advice Q&A. It had been out for many days, and the WotC rules expert was oblivious. That would be like a DA walking into a court and not knowing that the law regarding unavailable witnesses didn't change drastically a few weeks ago. This is one example. Do a search on the various message boards for the combination of the words Sage and (idiot, fool, incompetent, bad ruling, etc ...) You'll find that a lot of examples of this type of error exist.Is this a life or death issue? No. Of course not. This is just a game, to us. But to the people working directly or indirectly for WotC, this is a job. Their profession. They need to act professionally. A failure to do so is inexcusable. I'm not demanding perfection. I'm not demanding excellence. I'm just demanding adequacy. And friends, failure to do research, failure to provide sound reasoning and failure to use logic isn't a sign of adequacy.</blockquote>

Verification