TheFinish: the problem is if we don't get an answer/clarification here and now, and then it turns out it's also open to interpretation in the Playtest.
I agree, but I can't summon Mr. Seifter, so in the words of the preacher from Blazing Saddles:
Son, you're on your own!
TheFinish wrote:Shinigami02 wrote:
Shame we can't get a FAQ on the Playtest Blogs.I'm actually somewhat surprised not a single dev has explained what that line actually means yet. It's clearly open to misinterpretation, since obviously we can't both be correct.mrianmerry wrote:as intuited clearly by nearly all readers.Given the split seems if not even at least pretty close to it, I'm not sure "nearly all" is quite accurate.
Yeah, I can see it going either way. Of course, it'd be best for the monk if mrianmerry is correct, but my gut says that's not how it goes, and the phrasing doesn't help.
Hopefully Mr. Seifter or someone else can chime in, else we shall have to wait for the full wording in the Playtest.
I think that mrianmerry is right. So far we have seen nothing that requires a "quadratic" failure.I am not a native English speaker, but even defining the concept in a clear way is difficult:
"If you benefit from an effect that worsens the target save by one level and the target would have critically failed the save without that effect, instead of the normal effect of a critical save, you 'enhanced effect stun'"
More than 3 row to say that. I doubt that is what the blog means.
I'm not a Native English speaker either, but you don't need to be that verbose:
"This effect only triggers when the target fails it's save by 10 or more after the Monk critically hits."
Boom, done. Clear, and concise.
I'd still like it to be the other way though.