<div class="quoteheader"><div class="topslice_quote"><a href="https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=61457.msg2860506#msg2860506">Quote from: Artema on 21-03-2010, 09:39:26</a></div></div><blockquote class="bbc_standard_quote">Woo hoo, I have a personal message from WyzardWhately which I feel I should quote in order to properly apologize (sorry, Wyzard).<br/><br/>1) To his latest OOC post numer one hundred fourty one, feeling that we are going off-topic, I PMed him:<br/><br/>"Not at all, WyzardWhately,<br/>you people are fun."<br/><br/>2) and his reply was:<br/><br/>"<em>Frankly, you have been unreasonable and insulting.  Do not message me further for any reason until you have apologized publicly in the OOC thread for your behavior.  The tone you took was completely out of bounds, and I offered no provocation other than a discussion of the rules the game was stated to be played by.  The fact that you decided those rules shouldn't apply to your character was the problem, not any "nitpicking" on my part.<br/><br/>If you do message me for any reason prior to that apology, I will report it to the moderation staff as harassment. </em>"<br/><br/>3) to which I feel adequate offering a public apology, back in OOC thread again:<br/><br/>Dear Wyzard,<br/>a) I have nowhere said that rules do not apply to me,<br/>b) but I sincerely apologise if I was clumsy enough to make you belive so.<br/>to make things more clear,<br/>c) I told you that your OSRIC interpretation was wrong,<br/>d) and later proved it with another AD&amp;D 1 source,<br/>e) never saying that rules shouldn't apply to me,<br/>f) but asserting that we use GM rules here, not pure AD&amp;D, and that GM decisions have precedence over OSRIC,<br/>g) and that GM-approved profile takes precedence over AD&amp;D rules, being made a part of his world building effort.<br/><br/>I hope that now, Wyzard, I made things sufficiently clear, and again, offer you a public apology for any misunderstanding arising from my participation in this game. Here, it isn't hard for me to apologise.  O:)<br/><br/>Really, Wyzard, when Ruby invited me for some roleplay and I used wind walk, you haven't even looked at my character sheet (as you yourself admitted in one of your OOC messages) before showing OSRIC at me. Sloppy. In the relative absence of GM I thought it adequate to defend that role-play and the character involved within, but now that TGT is, can we say, back, I hope we're going to finilize the subject with this public apology of mine.<br/></blockquote><div class="quotefooter"><div class="botslice_quote"></div></div><br/>Classy.<br/><br/>I really don't know how you got to this point.  Did you actually tell the GM that you wanted your PC to be able to do things not allowed by the game as written?  Or did you just try to slip it past him and<em>then</em>claim the grandfather clause?  It's becoming increasingly obvious that you went the latter route, and I have no respect for that.  I'm not going to read people's backgrounds and try to figure out how whatever freeform narrative they've constructed means that their spells don't work as stated in the text.  It's unreasonable to expect me (or anyone in a system game) to do that.<br/><br/>You haven't proven a thing, because we're using OSRIC, not AD&D.  You can't use AD&D to try and override something completely non-ambiguous like, for example, "Target: Caster."  Radical epistemological relativism is the last refuge of people with no sound argument.  How exactly do you get from "Target: Caster" to "this is ambiguous and requires another text for interpretation?"