• Skua@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 小时前

    Ironically here, Crawford actually thinks that the text of disintegrate does in fact permit you to target a wall of force that you can’t see. I don’t quite understand how he thinks it says that, but it does at least confirm the intention

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      18 小时前

      Rulings like this annoy me. Like, if he had said “the spell is poorly written, because our intention is that a wall of force can be targeted by disintegrate, but you’re right that that’s not what the spell descriptions say”, then I’d be able to respect that a lot more than what you describe him saying.

      Words are a slippery beast, and there will always be a gap between Rules as Intended and Rules as Written. Good game design can reduce that gap, but not if the designers aren’t willing to acknowledge the chasm they have created

      • jounniy@ttrpg.networkOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 小时前

        I know that this may be a bit of a gap, but it’s a general problem of our society nowadays: Admitting a mistake is unpopular and can be used by others to say “See: even you acknowledged that you were wrong there.”, so people only rarely do it. (Especially politicians, stars and corporations/corporate representatives.)