The U.S. Army: The best job in the world, working with some of the best people in the world, for one of the worst employers you could ever imagine.
Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!
Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.
The U.S. Army: The best job in the world, working with some of the best people in the world, for one of the worst employers you could ever imagine.
Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!
Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.
I am married so thank you. I am also incredibly loyal to my friends, and I think they all know this. If you do not acknowledge that the spellskite example is at least somewhat similar, then fine, we are simply seeing the game differently.
If you do not think LSV thinks the spellskite play is very legitimate from reading his article then fine, we simply had a different reading.
If you do not think that carrying on with a rules discussion is legitimate in a rules forum despite me trying to bring up relevant examples, well, you have a right to your opinion.
If you think its strange that I would want to know what the 'correct' ruling is considering I could one day want to be a judge, rather than being convinced by 'some would rule its ok, others not' then I personally would not want you as my judge, as if I were you would seemingly be telling me I can rule any way I want. I would rather have a judge who worked as hard as possible to make what they personally believed is the correct ruling.
If your best argument against me is a personal attack, rather than discussing your views on the recent points I have brought up, then if the point of this thread is a debate (its not) I would feel pretty good at that point.
If you want to explain to me how my interpretation of the rules and my examples dont apply like I think they do, I welcome you to it. There is a high probability that I am wrong and you are right.
But please, dont bring my wife intot this. Thanks!
I didn't. I was just saying that you continuously try to weasel out of things being cheating by either saying they aren't or that they are "grey areas". If my way of going about this offends you, well, too bad. I'm not sorry, and I'm not apologizing. And now you try to hide behind your wife to shield yourself from a very frank evaluation. I didn't even know you had a wife. And I honestly am not sure now if I believe you do. Because, y'know, telling the truth about that might be a grey area, you could be saying it as a bluff.
The U.S. Army: The best job in the world, working with some of the best people in the world, for one of the worst employers you could ever imagine.
Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!
Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.
But please, dont bring my wife intot this. Thanks!
I didn't. I was just saying that you continuously try to weasel out of things being cheating by either saying they aren't or that they are "grey areas". If my way of going about this offends you, well, too bad. I'm not sorry, and I'm not apologizing. And now you try to hide behind your wife to shield yourself from a very frank evaluation. I didn't even know you had a wife. And I honestly am not sure now if I believe you do. Because, y'know, telling the truth about that might be a grey area, you could be saying it as a bluff.
I am not saying its not cheating. It might be. I am not sure, so I am asking the people on these boards, who generally appear to be know quite a lot about the rules. Some of the people make arguments that dont coincide with how I interpret other rules, so I ask for clarification.
If me having a different interpretation of the rules personally offends you to the point where you find it necessary to launch a personal attack, I don't need your apology, but it doesn't seem to me the best way of going about things.
If you read through my posts, I over and over again concede that the people disagreeing with me may be correct. I am not saying "I am right they are wrong". If you think me unintelligent becuase I cannot fully understand or accept their arguments, well that reasonable I supose, maybe I am just slow.
If you read through my posts, I over and over again concede that the people disagreeing with me may be correct. I am not saying "I am right they are wrong".
No, what you are saying is that cheating may not be cheating if you have some kind of clever excuse. That is exactly what you have said boils down to. I'm showing you the distillate of your logic and reasoning. It's ugly, isn't it?
The U.S. Army: The best job in the world, working with some of the best people in the world, for one of the worst employers you could ever imagine.
Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!
Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.
The U.S. Army: The best job in the world, working with some of the best people in the world, for one of the worst employers you could ever imagine.
Here's a shout out for Scholars' Books & Games in Bridgewater, MA, and for Paladin's Place in Darmstadt, Hessen, Germany where I was stationed for two years. Support your FLGS!
Attacking the darkness since 1987, turning creatures sideways since 1994.
If you read through my posts, I over and over again concede that the people disagreeing with me may be correct. I am not saying "I am right they are wrong".
No, what you are saying is that cheating may not be cheating if you have some kind of clever excuse. That is exactly what you have said boils down to. I'm showing you the distillate of your logic and reasoning. It's ugly, isn't it?
Look, its clear you feel the play is cheating. You have been able to get that across from your posts.
What is less clear is how you feel about the spellskite kiki-jiki example, and whether you believe that play is illegal. In the quote I pulled from LSV, he says there is nothing wrong with the play, and even uses the phrase 'good intentions'. You can check the link to make sure I am not quoting out of context.
If you think LSV is wrong, maybe you also think he is a cheater. If you think LSV is correct and the spellskite bluff is legit, but not remotely similar to the chandra example, then you are probably just thinking in a different way than I am.
If you think they are similar but I am missing key differences, then sure, you might be right thats perfectly possible, which is why I am asking what those differences might be in this forum.
Edit: While I agree its probably a good idea to moderate out all the vulgarity considering this is not a private conversation, insulting the moderators seems... unwise and uneccesary. Also potentially ironic ; ). Also, as ORC has mentioned, as this is not a private conversation, lets try to keep things civil and on topic. If you have issues with me personally due to my posts, its probably best for you to bring that up in a private message.
