proindrakenzol, my argument there is that your interpretation doesn't align with the common meanings of words or with the overwhelming body of examples we have for Shielding spells. You've got in your favor what, a part of one sentence that you're taking out of context? Even the very next words in that sentence carry on talking about protection from supernatural attacks. If you're going to respond, do so with something more meaningful than rhetoric.
Dude just say you're house ruling it to be how you want. You aren't tracking with the mainstream interpretation of the rules here. You want a sufficiently smart and educated mage Macgyver to be able to produce any Forces or Matter outcome with two Arcanum dots, a rubber band, and a physics textbook, then cool. But it's not what the devs created.
"I protect the subject from the fundamental forces of nature holding his body together, thus causing him to disintegrate unless he fully Withstands. See, my knowledge of physics and 'creative' Humpty Dumpty mangling of word meanings let's me do Unmaking with only two dots! So smart!"
It's rules lawyering - using a 'clever' interpretation of the game rules to undermine the broad intent and spirit of the game.
Dude just say you're house ruling it to be how you want. You aren't tracking with the mainstream interpretation of the rules here. You want a sufficiently smart and educated mage Macgyver to be able to produce any Forces or Matter outcome with two Arcanum dots, a rubber band, and a physics textbook, then cool. But it's not what the devs created.
"I protect the subject from the fundamental forces of nature holding his body together, thus causing him to disintegrate unless he fully Withstands. See, my knowledge of physics and 'creative' Humpty Dumpty mangling of word meanings let's me do Unmaking with only two dots! So smart!"
It's rules lawyering - using a 'clever' interpretation of the game rules to undermine the broad intent and spirit of the game.
Comment