Quick questions: javelins with dueling style and natural weapon proficiency

[Segev]

Is that a straight unequivocal "no" answer?

Answer the question. What kind of action is throwing a weapon?

Here, I'll simplify the question so it doesn't need such a fiddly definition of "action": Is throwing a weapon with an intent to do damage to a target an attack? Yes or no, please. You may, however, feel free to add any caveats to expand upon the yes or no answer you like.

[ThorOdinson]

Answer the question. What kind of action is throwing a weapon?

Here, I'll simplify the question so it doesn't need such a fiddly definition of "action": Is throwing a weapon with an intent to do damage to a target an attack? Yes or no, please. You may, however, feel free to add any caveats to expand upon the yes or no answer you like.

We havent agreed on what "throw" means.

When a character throws a weapon does the weapon remain in hand?

My answer is a straight unequivocal "no".

You answered with lots of equivocation. Can you explain your equivocation?

We need to agree on terms.

[Segev]

We havent agreed on what "throw" means.

When a character throws a weapon does the weapon remain in hand?

My answer is a straight unequivocal "no".

You answered with lots of equivocation. Can you explain your equivocation?

We need to agree on terms.

Are you asking whether the character, in the fiction layer, has thrown the weapon, or whether the player, in the mechanical layer, has declared the start of an action which will involve, in the fiction layer, throwing the weapon?

[ThorOdinson]

Are you asking whether the character, in the fiction layer, has thrown the weapon, or whether the player, in the mechanical layer, has declared the start of an action which will involve, in the fiction layer, throwing the weapon?

Your response is more equivocation.

We need to agree on what "throw" means.

When a person throws an object does that object remain in hand?

[JNAProductions]

Your entire post history in this thread has been equivocation, TO.

You've consistently refused to answer questions and address points that have been made in response to your words.

[Segev]

Your response is more equivocation.

We need to agree on what "throw" means.

When a person throws an object does that object remain in hand?

Your entire post history in this thread has been equivocation, TO.

You've consistently refused to answer questions and address points that have been made in response to your words.

You have yet to make your point, ThorOdinson. You keep trying to "define words" to avoid it. I am tired of defining words. Define "throw" however you like. Spell it out for me. Then answer the question based on that definition.

If I do not agree with your definition, I will provide an alternate one, and we can discuss it. But answer the question: What kind of action is it to throw a weapon with the intent to hit a target? You may spell out the precise definition of "throw" you wish to use when answering it.

[OzDragon]

I am suspicious that we do not agree on a meaning of "throw".

If you ask me a question with the word "throw" in it I cannot provide an answer until I know how you define "throw".

I am not asking for anything except a straight answer to the question.

When a character throws a weapon does the weapon remain in hand?



Is that a straight unequivocal "no" answer?

When a character throws a weapon it is in hand, after they throw it it is no longer in hand.

Now that does not mean that you can come back and say "well its not in hand anymore so dueling does not apply"
The action of throwing (the attack action) is the only part that matters.

[ThorOdinson]

You have yet to make your point, ThorOdinson. You keep trying to "define words" to avoid it. I am tired of defining words. Define "throw" however you like. Spell it out for me. Then answer the question based on that definition.

If I do not agree with your definition, I will provide an alternate one, and we can discuss it. But answer the question: What kind of action is it to throw a weapon with the intent to hit a target? You may spell out the precise definition of "throw" you wish to use when answering it.

To be precise, a throw is not a throw unless the object being thrown is released from the hand.

If a quarterback goes through the motion of throwing a football but does not release the football then he has faked throwing it. And the precise reason the throw is considered fake is because the quarterback did not let the ball leave his hand and travel from him.

Are we in agreement on this truth statement?

[Segev]

To be precise, a throw is not a throw unless the object being thrown is released from the hand.

If a quarterback goes through the motion of throwing a football but does not release the football then he has faked throwing it. And the precise reason the throw is considered fake is because the quarterback did not let the ball leave his hand and travel from him.

Are we in agreement on this truth statement?

Sure. Now, please, answer the question: What kind of action is throwing a weapon with an intent to do damage to a target?

[OzDragon]

Sure. Now, please, answer the question: What kind of action is throwing a weapon with an intent to do damage to a target?

Oh before you go off topic again, They mean in terms of game mechanics. Action( Attack, Full Defense,Withdraw,Ready...), Bonus Action, Move Action, and Reaction.

[Aett_Thorn]

At this point, I think it's clear that TO will continue to not answer any questions, while making you guys have to define the word "is". It might be best to just let it go at this point. He's clearly not arguing in good faith.

[ThorOdinson]

Sure. Now, please, answer the question: What kind of action is throwing a weapon with an intent to do damage to a target?

Ok.

We can add attack into the mix now that we firmed up what throw means.

We can extend our prior truth statement we agreed upon.

A throw of an object is not a throw unless the object leaves the hand and travels a distance away from the hand. If the object does not leave the hand and travel a distance from the hand the throw is a fake throw.

Similarly, if a person goes through the motions of a making a throwing attack with a weapon at a distance from a target but does not indeed release the weapon from his hand then not only has the throw not occured but the attack has not occured. The person has faked the throw and he has faked the attack.

Do you agree with this truth statement?

[JNAProductions]

TO, are you planning on actually answering at any point?

You can add all the qualifiers, caveats, and clarifications you want. But you can answer the questions. And should.

[OzDragon]

Ok.

We can add attack into the mix now that we firmed up what throw means.

We can extend our prior truth statement we agreed upon.

A throw of an object is not a throw unless the object leaves the hand and travels a distance away from the hand. If the object does not leave the hand and travel a distance from the hand the throw is a fake throw.

Similarly, if a person goes through the motions of a making a throwing attack with a weapon at a distance from a target but does not indeed release the weapon from his hand then not only has the thrown not occured but the attack has not occured. The person has faked the throw and he has faked the attack.

Do you agree with this truth statement?

Sure. Now, please, answer the question: What kind of action is throwing a weapon with an intent to do damage to a target?

Oh before you go off topic again, They mean in terms of game mechanics. Action( Attack, Full Defense,Withdraw,Ready...), Bonus Action, Move Action, and Reaction.

Emphasis mine.

You did not answer the question. The question is.. What type of action (mechanically) is the throwing a weapon?

[ThorOdinson]

TO, are you planning on actually answering at any point?

You can add all the qualifiers, caveats, and clarifications you want. But you can answer the questions. And should.

Indeed.

I am waiting for Segev to accept the truth statement.

[Segev]

Indeed.

I am waiting for Segev to accept the truth statement.

I am accepting no statements until you answer the question.

[JNAProductions]

Indeed.

I am waiting for Segev to accept the truth statement.

Why wait? We were able to answer without having to define every term. We did so as best we could.

You owe us the same courtesy.

[OzDragon]

Indeed.

I am waiting for Segev to accept the truth statement.

How about you answer our questions first?

[ThorOdinson]

I am accepting no statements until you answer the question.

Ok. Looks like you see that you are in checkmate at this point.

Shall I continue in my argument assuming that you agree to the truth statement? You don't really have a choice but to accept my truth statement as true.

Or you could point out how my truth statement isn't true.

[Segev]

Ok. Looks like you see that you are in checkmate at this point.

Shall I continue in my argument assuming that you agree to the truth statement? You don't really have a choice but to accept my truth statement as true.

Or you could point out how my truth statement isn't true.

I'm just waiting for you to actually answer the question. Please do continue.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'm amazed that this thread has made 18 pages. And no progress has been made convincing anyone of anything, except that maybe this thread is pointless (I'm convinced, to be sure). But I guess that someone is wrong on the internet, so it will never stop until 50 pages.

[Segev]

I'm amazed that this thread has made 18 pages. And no progress has been made convincing anyone of anything, except that maybe this thread is pointless (I'm convinced, to be sure). But I guess that someone is wrong on the internet, so it will never stop until 50 pages.

We all know that somebody being wrong on the internet is a thing that is both inevitable, and must never be allowed! This paradox powers the rituals that keep the internet functioning.

[OzDragon]

Ok. Looks like you see that you are in checkmate at this point.

Shall I continue in my argument assuming that you agree to the truth statement? You don't really have a choice but to accept my truth statement as true.

Or you could point out how my truth statement isn't true.

So, you refuse to answer questions made to you but you expect answers to your questions.

Also you assume that if your questions aren't answered that you are in the right somehow.

It's laughable.

[ThorOdinson]

I'm just waiting for you to actually answer the question. Please do continue.

Ok. So you have agreed to accept the following statements as true, correct?

A throw of an object is not a throw unless the object leaves the hand and travels a distance away from the hand. If the object does not leave the hand and travel a distance from the hand the throw is a fake throw.

Similarly, if a person goes through the motions of a making a throwing attack with a weapon at a distance from a target but does not indeed release the weapon from his hand then not only has the throw not occured but the attack has not occured. The person has faked the throw and he has faked the attack.

Correct?

[Segev]

Ok. So you have agreed to accept the following statements as true, correct?

A throw of an object is not a throw unless the object leaves the hand and travels a distance away from the hand. If the object does not leave the hand and travel a distance from the hand the throw is a fake throw.

Similarly, if a person goes through the motions of a making a throwing attack with a weapon at a distance from a target but does not indeed release the weapon from his hand then not only has the throw not occured but the attack has not occured. The person has faked the throw and he has faked the attack.

Correct?

I am still waiting for you to answer the question. Complete your thought, point, or argument, please. I am assuming you will answer the question as part of it.

[ThorOdinson]

I am still waiting for you to answer the question. Complete your thought, point, or argument, please. I am assuming you will answer the question as part of it.

So you accept both statements above as true?

As you know if we cannot agree to what terms mean then the first order of business is to establish what terms mean.

Do you agree that throwing a weapon requires the weapon to leave the hand and travel a distance?

Do you agree that a throw is not a throw unless the thrown object has left the hand and traveled a distance, and we assert this by definition?

We really need to be in agreement here on semantics and logic as they etablish "the game state".

Our next step is to revisit the "can do X to do Y" rule statement in the PHB.

[OzDragon]

So you accept both statements above as true?

As you know if we cannot agree to what terms mean then the first order of business is to establish what terms mean.

Do you agree that throwing a weapon requires the weapon to leave the hand and travel a distance?

Do you agree that a throw is not a throw unless the thrown object has left the hand and traveled a distance, and we assert this by definition?

We really need to be in agreement here on semantics and logic as they etablish "the game state".

Our next step is to revisit the "can do X to do Y" rule statement in the PHB.

The only thing that needs to be done is for you to answer this question.

What action is throwing a weapon?

Or are you afraid that if you answer this question it will invalidate all the idiocy you have posted in this thread?

[ThorOdinson]

The only thing that needs to be done is for you to answer this question.

What action is throwing a weapon?

Or are you afraid that if you answer this question it will invalidate all the idiocy you have posted in this thread?

We can't progress in an discussion unless we agree on what terms mean and what they logically require. If I think "throw" means 'to cast an object from my hand so that it travels a distance' and you think "throw" means 'a cocktail drink' then we cannot have a discussion about "throw" without profound confusion.

[Segev]

We can't progress in an discussion unless we agree on what terms mean and what they logically require. If I think "throw" means 'to cast an object from my hand so that it travels a distance' and you think "throw" means 'a cocktail drink' then we cannot have a discussion about "throw" without profound confusion.

Nobody has posited that "throw" means "a cocktail drink." I have told you that you may use whatever definition you care to as long as you specify it when you answer the question. I do not see how the definition of "throw" matters in answering the question, "What kind of game action is it to throw a weapon with the intent to do damage to a creature?" but if you must define it before you answer the question, feel free to do so.

You may, if you need me to advise you on the form of it, use this form: "Using a defintion of 'throw' that means ___________, throwing a weapon with the intent to do damage is [insert kind of game action here]." I assume you are able to formulate such things, yourself, and only include this to hasten us along if you find yourself needing to insist on agreeing that "throw" does not mean "a cocktail drink" in order to answer the question.

[ThorOdinson]

Nobody has posited that "throw" means "a cocktail drink." I have told you that you may use whatever definition you care to as long as you specify it when you answer the question. I do not see how the definition of "throw" matters in answering the question, "What kind of game action is it to throw a weapon with the intent to do damage to a creature?" but if you must define it before you answer the question, feel free to do so.

You may, if you need me to advise you on the form of it, use this form: "Using a defintion of 'throw' that means ___________, throwing a weapon with the intent to do damage is [insert kind of game action here]." I assume you are able to formulate such things, yourself, and only include this to hasten us along if you find yourself needing to insist on agreeing that "throw" does not mean "a cocktail drink" in order to answer the question.

So let's turn to a critical rule in the PHB.

Thrown: If a weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon to make a ranged Attack.

The key part of the rule is "you can throw the weapon to make a ranged Attack."

The "can" provides permission you do not already have so we must satisfy the rule.

Segev, do you think the rule permits this meaning?

"you [the character] can [fake the] throw [of] the weapon [by keeping the weapon in hand] to make a ranged Attack."

Or can we obviously assert by definition that by "throw" the rules mean an actual legitimate throw that involves the weapon leaving the hand and traveling a distance?