Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jairami" data-source="post: 119047" data-attributes="member: 1148">You didn't ask for a viable character, or even a legal one, you asked for the highest AC possible.&nbsp; When the post was made he very clearly stated that all 18's immediately disqualifies the &quot;character&quot; from any actual play.&nbsp; It was merely an exercise in doing exactly what the thread's title is.&nbsp; Seeing what the highest possible AC is that can be achieved.&nbsp; I don't know why the arbitrary ban on psionics is up there, but at least the post gives you a starting point and a lot of ideas.You might consider a different thread if you are looking for a character with super ac that you can play.One of your comments though is aggravating to me however.&nbsp; Please do not dismiss the Sultans of Smack thread with such scorn.&nbsp; If you do not like it, that is your prerogative and you are welcome to it.&nbsp; The number of errors present in it have all been corrected in the original posts from which the smacks came as every smack needs refinement.&nbsp; I apologize that I could not incorporate all these changes in my transcription, but I felt that was too much effort.&nbsp; But I assure you, every error you find does have a correction, and if you can see it for you to bother you, you can probably see and make the adjustment for yourself as you go.In any case, a lot of people, myself included put a LOT of hard work and creativity into those posts.It is very easy to take shots at someone else's work, especially the first drafts of it when they are delving into new territory.&nbsp; Please, when you set out to do something similar, do not deride the first attempts so.Sorry for taking up your time or being off topic here.&nbsp; Just trying to do Smackdown Productions credit.NOTE &amp; CLARIFICATION: Understanding the ease at which textual messages can be misinterpreted do to the lack of tone, inflection, and body language that would normally be associated with such communication, I would like to emphasize that this post is in no way meant to be disparaging or insulting.&nbsp; If this post is a result of my own misinterpretation of meaning, then I humbly ask you accept my apologies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jairami, post: 119047, member: 1148"] You didn't ask for a viable character, or even a legal one, you asked for the highest AC possible. When the post was made he very clearly stated that all 18's immediately disqualifies the "character" from any actual play. It was merely an exercise in doing exactly what the thread's title is. Seeing what the highest possible AC is that can be achieved. I don't know why the arbitrary ban on psionics is up there, but at least the post gives you a starting point and a lot of ideas. You might consider a different thread if you are looking for a character with super ac that you can play. One of your comments though is aggravating to me however. Please do not dismiss the Sultans of Smack thread with such scorn. If you do not like it, that is your prerogative and you are welcome to it. The number of errors present in it have all been corrected in the original posts from which the smacks came as every smack needs refinement. I apologize that I could not incorporate all these changes in my transcription, but I felt that was too much effort. But I assure you, every error you find does have a correction, and if you can see it for you to bother you, you can probably see and make the adjustment for yourself as you go. In any case, a lot of people, myself included put a LOT of hard work and creativity into those posts. It is very easy to take shots at someone else's work, especially the first drafts of it when they are delving into new territory. Please, when you set out to do something similar, do not deride the first attempts so. Sorry for taking up your time or being off topic here. Just trying to do Smackdown Productions credit. [i][SIZE=1]NOTE & CLARIFICATION: Understanding the ease at which textual messages can be misinterpreted do to the lack of tone, inflection, and body language that would normally be associated with such communication, I would like to emphasize that this post is in no way meant to be disparaging or insulting. If this post is a result of my own misinterpretation of meaning, then I humbly ask you accept my apologies.[/SIZE][/i] [/QUOTE]

Verification