I actually work in medicine, where precision is key. Fortunately, my peers and I have developed numerous short hands and contextual clues which allow us to impart information to each other efficiently which only has one possible interpretation. It saddens me that you would resort to personal attacks like this, because up to now, you were being respectful, if superior. I don't understand why "clinging" onto when the crit was rolled is irrelevant to the conversation, seeing as it is the entire point of the conversation. One possibility is that you think my e-mail should have been written to the layman, someone with no knowledge of the rules of the game? This is really the only way that I can think you believe my e-mail was ambiguous. Unfortunately, as in my career, I write everything towards my peers, who I of course assume a complete knowledge of the subject we are discussing. If they ask for clarification due to a gap in knowledge, I am happy to provide it. In this example, the lead developer didn't need any help there. Thankfully, Sam read my e-mail the only way someone with a complete knowledge of edge of the empire can, which is really all I needed. If we all had to write to ignorance in every missive we sent, we'd spend a lot more time at our keyboards.

I disagree with your views on language, since if we all operated under your ideals, it would be a horribly slow and overbearing process. I also dislike your sinking to personal attacks, which I explicitly wished not to be used in the first post. As I'm sure you know, it is poor debate form to fall back on that when one can't prove their argument. Feel free to respond, but I'm placing you on ignore. Good games to you sir.

Here's an interesting way of looking at it, can you use the Durable talent without first rolling for a critical hit?

If you are going to roll a critical hit would this not always yield a critical hit result?

If you are trying to demonstrate the use of the Durable talent and its effect on a critical hit roll, how can this be done without stating a critical hit result, especially when demonstrating a possible incremental use of the ranks of the Durable talent?

None of this presumes that you have made a critical hit roll, only that you will make a critical hit roll and that it will generate a critical hit result before the effects of the talent can be applied.

The timing of the declaration of the invocation of the Durable talent cannot be assumed by any of the above and would thus need to be stated to ensure an imperical and unequivocal statement of fact to ensure no misunderstanding or ambiguity for the reader about when the invocation occurs.

The problem lies in the writers incorrect assumption that the reader will always reconcile the implied timing of the invocation of the Durable talent in the original question as posed to Mr Sam Stewart, with an explicit understanding of the dual natured way in which the talent could be used and could in no way assume that because there will always be a critical hit roll made before the effects of the talent can be brought to fruition that the nature of the question could place the invocation of the talent either before or after the roll, which obviously some readers did and this necessitated further clarification from Mr Stewart that he was more than happy to furnish on the masses of enraptured players.

Just having a bit of fun with y'all.

Indeed. Yes. That was also something I was sort of getting at Although we got stuck on anyone not interpreting as AK being illogical and stupid... due to some notion of time-lines and moving forward and ... meh ... its all there. Ah well. It's been clarified and he has put me on ignore for responding in kind.

Just having a bit of fun with y'all.

Sadly, it seems the "fun" part gets lost really easy in the bickering of how to interpret the language used to describe various bits of games text, with the Pierce argument being a stellar example of such a train wreck.

lupex, I feel the matter is closed to my satisfaction, so I don't want to continue debating it, but your post is very well written and respectful, so I wanted to respect the time you put into making it with a response.

To your second statement, rolling a 1d100 is the only way I know in this game to achieve a critical hit result. No one in the thread has put forth any alternate solution.

To your third statement, the way that question would be asked coming from a perspective of Durable being used before a critical roll would be to use a variable, most commonly X. X in this instance stands for whatever results from the 1d100 roll. After the roll, X no longer applies, you are now dealing with a discreet number.

Had I intended my question to ask if Durable is used before the crit roll, it would have gone much like this:

"How do multiple ranks of the talent Durable work? I notice the talent says may, so I assume you can use it as a choice, and choose not to use it. If I have 3 ranks of Durable, and am critted with a result of X, what happens?

A: Durable isn't an option and I suffer the crit result of a roll of X-30.

B: Durable is an option and I may suffer the crit result of a roll of X or X-30.

C: Durable is an option, and each rank may be activated or not discreetly, and I may suffer a crit result of X, X-10, X-20, or X-30.

Thank you very much for your time. I've been enjoying playing this game you have worked so hard to create."

Notice that I don't explicitly state the timing of the crit roll in this e-mail either, yet it is implicit that it is before the crit roll.

In my original e-mail, I used the discreet number 90, so by definition everything going forward in that e-mail is after a crit roll.

In this modified e-mail, I used the variable X, so by definition everything going forward in the e-mail is before a crit roll.

It is illogical to assume from the original e-mail that it is before a dice roll, since it deals with a discreet number. It is illogical to assume from the altered e-mail that it is after a dice roll, since it deals with a variable number. That is the only way it can work. Clearly, in this very thread, we can see that people are able to interpret it different ways. I mean no disrespect, I just believe these people are wrong. If one reads the e-mail with a full knowledge of the eote rules (therefore knowing that crit rolls are the only way to get a crit result) and knowledge of 90 being a discreet number instead of a variable, and therefore after a causal act (in this case the crit roll), there is only one way to interpret the e-mail. I'm not making value judgements on people who can interpret this differently, I'm sure they are excellent people. All I'm saying is that I can't reconcile their interpretations with the facts of the matter, and therefore see them as illogical and invalid. They are of course fully entitled to their opinion, as I am. I just can't concern myself with writing to a thought process that doesn't make logical sense to me.

Good games, the matter may be resolved, but everyone can play the game however they like. Cheers!

Nuff said!