NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7623693" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Ok, so just a couple things since it's obvious no headway is possible.Yes, you have multiple graphs where they go over many different elements of a variety of monk traits and almost all of them have dome wiggle vlsuse in them. One in the middle - not set spart) failed up to include a specific wiggle room bit *while it foes* use a rather unspecified term like "take their work serioudly" which is fairly amorphous. So, yeah, many people would read that as a case of using a vague quslity and read in the same "some do" in all the surrounding sentences have instead of assuming they stuck an isolated commandment into the middle of a bunch of wiggly bits. Its " hostile reading" to assume the intent was to add a hard condition, hide it in the middle of the wiggly bits and also give nothing more than "seriously" as a scsle.So, obviously, it's your refusal whrn convenient yo acknowledge context at all that is telling. As for Paladin, when they put a block of "when an oath breaks" guidelines, it seems pretty clear they are meaning these tenets can be broken and how it can be dealt with. So, a devotion paladin **can** lie and still be a devotion paladin... but they may be on the hook for some of those hooks. This concept - again taking in the context- I have not seen be a problem in play. Simply put, no rulebook ever written will survive a read thst intends to find and misconstrue its meaning. 5e is no exception.</blockquote>

Verification