Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7421037" data-attributes="member: 6919838">&quot;It seemed a sort of gamist-type response - as if the game you're playing is &quot;defend the ruling&quot;.&quot;To this in specific - i have said more times than i care to count in this thread that i think house ruling the feat to be knockdown first is a fine house rule for those who want it.I recently posted to be clear that i do not hold house rules as second class to RAW.If you choose to see that and ignore it to support your impression of what is going on in my mind when it suits you - not a thing i can do about that.But the simple fact is - none of use can change RAW or change the JC rulings and their status as something semi-official... so what is left is house rule or &quot;psudo-house-rule thru &quot;imaginative re-reading&quot;&nbsp; -which IMO and IMX is a fool's gambit. At a tabel where you control house rules, the house rule is easier. At a table where you dont trying to shoehorn in &quot;delcare an attack action&quot; is the same as &quot;take an attack action&quot; and &quot;neither means actually taking an attack&quot; will be more likely to get the GM evil-eye for its obvious twists and turns to get something in that is not explicitly there or even close to meeting the common language use or common sense use tests.This feat IMO is not worth blowing up a lot of things by allowing &quot;effects&quot; to go before &quot;causes&quot; as a general unstated principle that has magnificent scope. If you dont like the feat, change the feat only - not a score of other things which will follow from thet effect=pre=cause conjuration when it gets applied elsewhere.The &quot;can i twist RAW instead of house rule&quot; is a trap, not a solution.At least, in my experience it is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7421037, member: 6919838"] "It seemed a sort of gamist-type response - as if the game you're playing is "defend the ruling"." To this in specific - i have said more times than i care to count in this thread that i think house ruling the feat to be knockdown first is a fine house rule for those who want it. I recently posted to be clear that i do not hold house rules as second class to RAW. If you choose to see that and ignore it to support your impression of what is going on in my mind when it suits you - not a thing i can do about that. But the simple fact is - none of use can change RAW or change the JC rulings and their status as something semi-official... so what is left is house rule or "psudo-house-rule thru "imaginative re-reading" -which IMO and IMX is a fool's gambit. At a tabel where you control house rules, the house rule is easier. At a table where you dont trying to shoehorn in "delcare an attack action" is the same as "take an attack action" and "neither means actually taking an attack" will be more likely to get the GM evil-eye for its obvious twists and turns to get something in that is not explicitly there or even close to meeting the common language use or common sense use tests. This feat IMO is not worth blowing up a lot of things by allowing "effects" to go before "causes" as a general unstated principle that has magnificent scope. If you dont like the feat, change the feat only - not a score of other things which will follow from thet effect=pre=cause conjuration when it gets applied elsewhere. The "can i twist RAW instead of house rule" is a trap, not a solution. At least, in my experience it is. [/QUOTE]

Verification