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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9754715" data-attributes="member: 6790260">You keep presuming it is a form of being used. You have not actually established that. That's what I'm asking you to establish.How is this using someone?How is this NOT the same as calling on your deity's power to heal someone else? You haven't established either of these things!...I mean, other than that you're literally going to call down divine wrath on someone solely for a thing YOU think is somehow among the most offensive acts a cleric can commit (apparently!), meaning, you are very literally creating extreme, serious, harmful consequences because you presumed every player would always know exactly what YOU think is offensive.That--that right there--is literally creating gameplay consequences because of an unstated presumption that all players always agree with you about a bunch of things. It is, in fact, a demonstration of the social contract being used to punish someone who could literally have no idea that they're doing anything wrong.Because, as stated, I would not know. I would be caught unaware by that. You would be punishing me for doing something you consider horrendous, and which I consider so innocent I cannot conceive of how you would turn that into <you are now 100% obviously worthy of divine vengeance>.This isn't some hypothetical. This isn't a position I'm ascribing to anyone else, it isn't me divining what someone else thinks, it isn't me distilling stuff said by others. It's my actual, real-world situation. I would have no idea that this is somehow enormously offensive to you.Edit:Further, you claim that "they build irritation at being used that way into the spell", but they don't. The spell doesn't mention--at all--that you are contacting any deity. Both versions of augury merely refer to "an otherworldly entity", so the player would have no reason to presume they are specifically asking their god. Perhaps they're asking some other functionary in the divine hierarchy. Furthermore, the 5.5e version specifically removed the "random reading" part--you just have a cumulative 25% chance per previous casting that day to get no answer at all, and after four casts (successful or otherwise) you'll just hear nothing.No irritation. No penalty. No reference to deities--which is wise, since druids and wizards can also cast it! None of the things you claim are present to back up your explanation are even remotely present.</blockquote>

Verification