Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ancoulainn" data-source="post: 9869364" data-attributes="member: 7056539">That is reasonably foreseeable.No, just no. If it's RAW and the DM wants to divert from RAW, it's on him, not the player who wants to play by the rules as they are. RAW is the default, not the exception. And RAW is what they say, not what you read into them.Ultimately, it's hilarious when people call these interaction exploitations when they are just straightforward applications of RAW. And people have been doing them since 5e came out. If they were unintended, WotC would have changed the spells, but they didn't. Just because you don't like it or didn't think of it first doesn't change that's it's RAW. And if you want to divert from that, then the ball is in your court.Yes, unforeseeable things may happen. So, communication should never stop. And it's a two-way street.Sounds also like the most boring interpretation.Yeah, it meant that you can't trust that person. Exactly my point. Who trusts a DM who can't establish ground rules and then just ruins the fun as he goes along?</blockquote>