Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fifth Element" data-source="post: 3815857" data-attributes="member: 48135">Indeed, I cannot refute Hyp's argument. That is to say, I cannot argue that it is not a reasonable interpretation of the rules. I have never suggested it isn't.What I am suggesting is that there is another reasonable interpretation of the same rules, one that agrees with the FAQ's suggestion, that does not produce a contradiction in the rules.I'd even go so far as to say Hyp's interpretation is the more obvious one, and perhaps even the more likely, given how the rules were written.All I'm saying is that there is another interpretation of the rules possible, without contradicting either written text or published table. I'm not really arguing about the rules in one sense, I'm arguing against the assertion that Skip Williams is a moron and the FAQ makes absolutely no sense in this ruling.I'm not even saying I'd necessarily use my interpretation of the rules in my own games (I don't think anyone's ever tried to sunder on an AoO or full attack, so it hasn't come up). All I'm saying is that there is another interpretation possible. The consistent denial that such a possibility even exists is baffling. I'm not arguing that my interpretation is right or that the other is wrong, or even which is more likely to be right or wrong, just that another interpretation exists.</blockquote>