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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5304593" data-attributes="member: 18280">Regardless of clarifications and objections that this is not what I am saying.....And yetThe only thing I can say here is, if you think I am in error in my response, it rather reflects what I am responding to.  You have told me, repeatedly, what I think.  You have ignored, repeatedly, every clarification.  And you are upset because I draw conclusions from your post? Sorry, but AFAICT and IMHO, expecting a certain level of sure information prior to making any decision which could be disasterous is a guarantee of safety.  Not absolute safety, sure.  But safety nonetheless.  A guarantee that one botched gamble will not instantly result in your character's death. Or, as I pointed out repeatedly, it is more accurate to say a guarantee that a plethora of botched gambles with less than perfect information will not result in your death prior to having at least two chances to react once information has become crystal-clear. And, yes, to me this is playing "in a padded game".  This is "playing safe". It is not "being unwilling to accept responsibility for the decisions made as a player" unless, as a player, you entered a game where you bear that responsibility.  Clearly, this is a game where you do not. And that's fine, if it is what you want.  You don't have to justify your preference to anyone -- until the point where you advocate removing something from the game that I value.  At that point, yes, I will examine the implications of that preference, and I will contest the removal of that thing.Sorry?  I am uncertain whether you done here, or did you want an answer?Assuming the second, obviously not.  "Meeting the gaze of" =/= "viewing the face of".I'm not at home right now, so I don't have the full text in front of me.  If, after reading the full text (as opposed to the SRD text), it turns out that "gaze attacks" really should have been called "face attacks", I will concede that you are correct......And count that as another strike against the 3e design team.  Until that point, however, I intend to give the design team the benefit of the doubt.RC</blockquote>

Verification