KarinsDad said:
...However, let me ask you a question. At what ratio would it have had to been in order for you to think that you are "out to lunch"?
In other words, did you post the poll to self-vindicate yourself? If the ratio was really skewed (i.e. the 96% of you and Danny versus the world as opposed to the current 81%), would you have changed your interpretation of the rules that all successful attack rolls, even opposed attack rolls, are hits?
I really can't say what ratio would have told me I was "out-to-lunch," and, no, I did not post this survey to "self-vindicate" myself.
Drawing any kind of real conclusion from any of these polls is ultimate silliness. It is mostly amusement, because, after all, who really cares anyway? The real answer lies with how each DM chooses to run his/her own game.
These polls and arguments just give ammunition for influencing your DM or for the DM to justify a decision.
Other than that and having a little fun, there is little true value in splitting hairs to decide what the RAW says in any particular case.
From my perspective, what we do here is present both sides of a debate and let DM's and players then duke it our for themselves in their own games. It has some value, certainly, and is fun, but attaching any great value to it would be foolhardy.
I liken what we do to the old clubs where intellectuals would gather and debate matters of no real value other than to satisfy their own intellects. Somewhat like thw "Black Widower's Club" of Issac Asimov's imagination.
All of this is why I often say there is more than one right answer, and the key is to understand both sides of the debate and make you own decisions for your own games, and not to try and be a slave to RAW when RAW is not entirely clear unless one gets really picky and assume the RAW was written with extreme precision, which is simply not the case.
