Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="atom crash" data-source="post: 2120004" data-attributes="member: 22162">You're confusing the rules again. This is a generalization that doesn't hold true. We -- even you have pointed out a few -- have shown cases where you can make a melee attack without threatening. Melee attack and threaten are NOT interchangeable, BECAUSE of the noted exceptions. The exceptions negate the rule you're trying to establish. Take a look at this statement, which uses the same logic:&quot;All puppies are brown, with the noted exceptions.&quot; See how ludicrous that statement is? If you can find one puppy which is NOT brown you've invalidated the first part of the statement, and the second part is completely superfluous and makes the whole thing nonsensical.I'm with you, assuming the other conditions are also met.Why do you continue to cling to this? It's a generalization that is just plain wrong. And it's the source of a lot fo confusion.&nbsp;It's not rare to the character build that uses a whip. Or a non-improved unarmed strike with a gauntlet. Just because you've not seen it used in a game doesn't establish a statistical fact.This shorthand generalization you're using is wrong, and it's just going to confuse players later on. It is much more beneficial to tell them what the rules actually say. There's a lot of inconsistencies in your posts, and I think it's because you're confusing making a melee attack and threatening.Edit: I get what you're trying to say, and I agree that in some cases it holds true. But it does not hold true in all cases -- as in the examples used previously -- so you can't claim it establishes a rule that you have to threaten in order to flank.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="atom crash, post: 2120004, member: 22162"] You're confusing the rules again. This is a generalization that doesn't hold true. We -- even you have pointed out a few -- have shown cases where you can make a melee attack without threatening. Melee attack and threaten are NOT interchangeable, BECAUSE of the noted exceptions. The exceptions negate the rule you're trying to establish. Take a look at this statement, which uses the same logic: "All puppies are brown, with the noted exceptions." See how ludicrous that statement is? If you can find one puppy which is NOT brown you've invalidated the first part of the statement, and the second part is completely superfluous and makes the whole thing nonsensical. I'm with you, assuming the other conditions are also met. Why do you continue to cling to this? It's a generalization that is just plain wrong. And it's the source of a lot fo confusion. It's not rare to the character build that uses a whip. Or a non-improved unarmed strike with a gauntlet. Just because you've not seen it used in a game doesn't establish a statistical fact. This shorthand generalization you're using is wrong, and it's just going to confuse players later on. It is much more beneficial to tell them what the rules actually say. There's a lot of inconsistencies in your posts, and I think it's because you're confusing making a melee attack and threatening. Edit: I get what you're trying to say, and I agree that in some cases it holds true. But it does not hold true in all cases -- as in the examples used previously -- so you can't claim it establishes a rule that you have to threaten in order to flank. [/QUOTE]

Verification