Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 4345866" data-attributes="member: 71571">This brings up the final problem.That page 219 does use a plural -and- the singular to refer to the same quality.  Which implies it could be -either- singular or plural.  That is, the weapon damage dice quality could have 1 die, or more dice.I'm serious here.  Your interpretation is weak.Not to mention....At no point does Vorpal even -refer- to 'weapon damage dice' OR 'weapon damage die'.  So mention or use of the game term 'weapon damage die' or '...... dice' is sophistry.  The term used is 'damage dice' period.If you want to get -technical-, that is.And seeing as your argument is based on a technicality based on one (flawed) interpretation of the english language.... and not the only -possible- interpretation of that language, a technical argument also defeats you.You're absolutely convinced of this fact, without taking into account the fact that entire -philosophies- behind the game design -also- run counter to your claim.The game is designed around simplicity and elegance, with game mechanics designed efficiency, and with definate purpose.  Every aspect of the game design is designed to be simple and easily grokkable.And you're trying to tell me that in the midst of this elegant well tuned machine, that they'd decide to make a multi-die weapon damage a 'singular die' for all purposes of rerolls... for no apparent reason.... without actually spelling it out or explaining why in any of the books?That isn't -rational.-</blockquote>

Verification