Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Caliban" data-source="post: 1078511" data-attributes="member: 284">The Uncanny Dodge rule was pretty clear by any normal use of the english language. You succeeded in making it less clear by overanalyzing it. It wasn't a poorly written rule.&nbsp;&nbsp; I certainly have no problem understanding it.&nbsp; And I do reject overly complex arguements because they generally have no place in the 3e ruleset. The rules were written with the intent of being simple and streamlined.&nbsp; &nbsp;If your arguement relies on complex grammer analysis, then it's most likely incorrect, because that's now how the rules were written.&nbsp;&nbsp; So yes, it's pointless. Some rules really are poorly written and vague.&nbsp; Recognize them and move on.&nbsp;&nbsp; Either ask for clarification or make up your own mind.If the rule seems to have an obvious meaning, then that is most likely the correct one.&nbsp;&nbsp; If you can interpret it to be something completely different by changing emphasis on certain words and doing a multi-paragraph grammer analysis, then that's probably not the correct interpretation. You may not like the fact that the rules really aren't very complex when you examine their basic elements, but that's the way it is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Caliban, post: 1078511, member: 284"] The Uncanny Dodge rule was pretty clear by any normal use of the english language. You succeeded in making it less clear by overanalyzing it. It wasn't a poorly written rule. I certainly have no problem understanding it. And I do reject overly complex arguements because they generally have no place in the 3e ruleset. The rules were written with the intent of being simple and streamlined. If your arguement relies on complex grammer analysis, then it's most likely incorrect, because that's now how the rules were written. So yes, it's pointless. Some rules really are poorly written and vague. Recognize them and move on. Either ask for clarification or make up your own mind. If the rule seems to have an obvious meaning, then that is most likely the correct one. If you can interpret it to be something completely different by changing emphasis on certain words and doing a multi-paragraph grammer analysis, then that's probably not the correct interpretation. You may not like the fact that the rules really aren't very complex when you examine their basic elements, but that's the way it is. [/QUOTE]

Verification