Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Legildur" data-source="post: 3810114" data-attributes="member: 1258">I won't deny that I do favour one position. But it is unfair of you to attribute my selection as biased.&nbsp; I only picked the threads based on size/length, figuring that they would be the most comprehensive in covering all the debate (it is a debate that has been had many times already and nothing new emerges each time).&nbsp; It's hardly my fault they don't support your position.&nbsp; Feel free to search for other threads.BTW did you even read Skip's comments in that thread I highlighted? It was hardly robust reasoning.Anyway, the argument is very easy to distill. The text on Sunder is potentially ambiguous (at the least, it is insufficiently explicit). If you favour substituting Sunder for any melee attack, then you claim that the table/text are in conflict and invoke the 'text trumps table' clause. If you favour Sunder as a Standard Action, then there is no conflict between text and table.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Legildur, post: 3810114, member: 1258"] I won't deny that I do favour one position. But it is unfair of you to attribute my selection as biased. I only picked the threads based on size/length, figuring that they would be the most comprehensive in covering all the debate (it is a debate that has been had many times already and nothing new emerges each time). It's hardly my fault they don't support your position. Feel free to search for other threads. BTW did you even read Skip's comments in that thread I highlighted? It was hardly robust reasoning. Anyway, the argument is very easy to distill. The text on Sunder is potentially ambiguous (at the least, it is insufficiently explicit). If you favour substituting Sunder for any melee attack, then you claim that the table/text are in conflict and invoke the 'text trumps table' clause. If you favour Sunder as a Standard Action, then there is no conflict between text and table. [/QUOTE]

Verification