Wyvern76's page

It doesn't matter what was offensive, just acknowledging that something you said may have offended them is way better than what you're doing.

That *was* what I was trying to do when I wrote this:

I'm not sure how I rubbed you the wrong way so badly. I wasn't trying to *argue* with you. ... I genuinely, sincerely, am not trying to pick a fight or offend anyone.

But clearly it didn't work. I guess that's because I didn't explicitly admit fault? It's not that I'm too proud to do that, I just like to know what fault I'm admitting to. Because in my mind, saying you're sorry when you don't know what you're supposed to be sorry *for* is just empty words.

Nevertheless, if you think it'll help: Captain Zoom, I'm sorry if I offended you. That was not my intention at all. (I just wish I knew exactly *what* I said that offended you, so that I might try to avoid the same mistake in the future. But at this point, I'd just as soon put it behind me.)

I knew it was unlikely that I'd get a direct response from one of the game designers, but I was hoping at least that they might have already answered my questions somewhere else, and that someone could point me to it. Failing that, *is* there some other channel I'm not aware for submitting rules questions directly to Paizo?

They said they had no opinion on RAW, and explained how they would GM it. You then replied in a defensive and disagreeing fashion and stated what you thought, which coincidentally is in line with how they said would GM it.

You last post is even worse. You didn't even apologize, you are just being defensive for no reason. If you actually sincerely apologized rather than just trying to explain away your post by being "new here", it would go over much better.

I'd gladly apologize if I could understand how I've wronged him, but if I apologized *without* understanding that, it *wouldn't* be sincere. I've reread my reply over and over again and I still can't figure out exactly what I said that offended him so. I could dissect it line by line and talk about each part that *might* have been perceived as argumentative, and explain why it wasn't intended to be. But that would just make me seem even *more* defensive, and wouldn't get me any closer to an answer to my original questions. So I'll just sum it up like this:

I posted a couple of questions. He posted a reply that was well-reasoned but not the "official" response I was hoping for, and didn't really answer my main question (which was whether the rules actually *state* which effects are permanent). So I said as much, as politely as I knew how, and got my head bit off. If there's a better way of saying "that's not really what I was asking," please tell me what it is, so that I can avoid ruffling feathers in the future.

Also, why are you so frustrated over a Cantrip that's not supposed to have any mechanical effects? It's literally just a spell for flavor, both figuratively and literally. 90% of the time I see players use it to have their pompous PCs clean sewer water or mud off their clothes.

The only thing I'm frustrated about (besides not being able to figure out what I said wrong) is that the spell description says that it's told you something which it hasn't told you, as far as I can see. That doesn't mean I'm losing sleep over it. I know it's a trivial spell, and that I'm free to interpret it however I wish. But I'd still like to know what the designers were thinking when they wrote that, and I assumed that this would be the best place to find out.