|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 6:37PM
#231
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2009
|
I liked it because he went into more detail about the situation then previous posters have
Lies.
Don't be a tool bro'. He like how the question was asked, becasue of the detail, why say shat like that.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 6:41PM
#232
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2009
|
No, I don't agree. I think the way this works is rather obvious - the concept of being able to use an Action Point and yet be denied your gained action because you are dazed is ... bizarre.
If it were so obvious then there would not be threads abouit it over and over and over...it IS obvious that it is NOT clear. And they SHOULD clarify it so that there is no chance of misreading.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 7:33PM
#233
|
Date Joined:
Nov 11, 2009
|
I liked it because he went into more detail about the situation then previous posters have
Lies.
Don't be a tool bro'. He like how the question was asked, because of the detail, why say shat like that.
Sure didn't mean to be a tool, sorry if I came off as one. I thought my question to CS was plenty clear and detailed enough, so I felt his statement was not true. I meant my comment to be irreverent though, not douchebaggish. 
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 8:00PM
#234
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2009
|
I liked it because he went into more detail about the situation then previous posters have
Lies.
Don't be a tool bro'. He like how the question was asked, because of the detail, why say shat like that.
Sure didn't mean to be a tool, sorry if I came off as one. I thought my question to CS was plenty clear and detailed enough, so I felt his statement was not true. I meant my comment to be irreverent though, not douchebaggish.
Then apologies on my part also.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 8:33PM
#235
|
|
|
To be honest, to me the longer questions seems nothing more then an attempt to get an agreement by wording it such away to get someone to agree, by saying, "Well if that's how you see it, yeah, I agree."
How? By saying things like, "Daze restricts you". Well it doesn't. The word restrict isn't used in book when. It doesn't say only, restrict, can't take more then.
It simply reduces the number of actions from 3 to 1, and an action point gives you an extra action on your turn. So 3 - 2 +1 = 2.
If you have to add words like restrict, limited and so on, you are trying to change the actual rules to an interpretation of the rules.
The original question asked the basic issue here. If you are dazed, and spend an action point as a free action, can you use that extra action and the answer is yes.
I'm sure they know what the daze condition is, and trying to over explain a view isn't going to change that.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 9:17PM
#236
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2009
|
Ummm Daze is restrictive D....it restricts you from using ALL your actions...so saying that Daze restricts is not misleading. Reducing your number of actions is restricting the number of actions you can take....
Just becasue the second is wordier does not mean it was leading.
I NEVER think they know exactly what you are talking about. Being clear is not a problem...
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 08, 2010 - 12:09AM
#237
|
|
|
After 20+pages, you guys aren't really arguing about the question that lead to the answer(s) that ended the actual debate are you? I mean that would be...hmm...I'm actually at loss as to what that would be.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 08, 2010 - 2:57AM
#238
|
Date Joined:
May 12, 2009
|
Ok Dazed doesnt use this wording. But If Dazed would not restrict you, you would take more that what it dictate you can take from the rest of your Actions.
What's the difference between ...
You can't take actions
You can take either a Standard, a Move or a Minor
Both dictate the ammount of actions you can normally take while being affected by such Condition.
From 0 to 1 right ?
If extra actions are allowed to be taken despite what your Condition dictate, then it could result in Dominated or even Uncouncious character taking extra actions. Not only for this debate but as a general idea, extra actions from an AP should always be gained regardless if you can take them or not. Make Dazed an exception i have no problem. Don't tell me AP's are exceptions to all situations though.
I also have asked if they could forward a request on behalf of the Community to the team to update the PHB FAQ question on Dazed and AP to write that you can take the extra action gained.
This could kill the next 20+ page debate on the question yet to be started. This would clears everything up for people that consult the FAQ's but doesn't hang on the Boards.
Yan
Montréal, Canada
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 08, 2010 - 3:03AM
#239
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2009
|
After 20+pages, you guys aren't really arguing about the question that lead to the answer(s) that ended the actual debate are you? I mean that would be...hmm...I'm actually at loss as to what that would be.
Hello noob...this is the WotC 4e forums...no debate is ever really over, just current incarnations end...
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 08, 2010 - 4:00AM
#240
|
|
|
After 20+pages, you guys aren't really arguing about the question that lead to the answer(s) that ended the actual debate are you? I mean that would be...hmm...I'm actually at loss as to what that would be.
Hello noob...this is the WotC 4e forums...no debate is ever really over, just current incarnations end...
Ugh, this kind of attitude is what makes these forums so sucky. There's no way to tell if you are trying to be funny or what.
You didn't really need to toss this kind of thing into the thread.
|
|
|
