Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ARandomGod" data-source="post: 1931828" data-attributes="member: 17296">Point taken. ^_^I discussed this with some non-gamer (therefore theoretically semi-impartial) friends who're imaginative enough to get into such a discussion. It was quite interesting. I started out stating that I wanted to know how they would interpret the following, and then read the rule. Then they discussed it among themselves a bit. One person couldn't really follow, so as it was explained to her (yes, they were girls... where else am I to get non gamers who *could* game intellectually?) it was clear that they had already misinterpreted the rule the way I originally did. (I didn't do anything other than read the rule as written, so as to avoid tainting any opinions). After listening to this for a minute I stopped the discussion and stated that I didn't want the rule restated in simpler terms, because I'm looking for an interpretation based on this rule as it is written. So I reread it out....In the end everyone got (once again no coaching from me) that it wasn't a chain, but a radius type effect, although they thought it was a rather inferior one (as a real radius would be easier and more flexible). And they all came to the additional conclusion that it was clearly MEANT to mean the first way, as a chain where no pair of targets in the chain could be more than 30 feet apart, and it was poorly written so that now NO target in the group can be more than 30 feet from any other target. And then it moved on to a discussion about rules they're more familiar with (real world, no less!) and problems with legislation and the way things are worded.  I found the whole process quite informative and very interesting. It's neat to have a pool of minds capable of looking at something like that with no actual feeling about the subject matter itself. I especially liked their discussion of why they felt the rule was meant to be the chain effect, and how the wording likely was overlooked, etc. "That's just poorly written""Yea, it clearly wasn't meant to have that effect or they would have..."Etc.</blockquote>

Verification