>On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Martin L. Shoemaker wrote: >> No, I'm sorry, but you're missing the point. The idea that "advances by >> class" means "humanoid" is simply a convenience to allow one to reach the >> conclusion one wishes to reach, or a prejudice based on answers one knows >> from reading the MM. > > No one is saying that "advances by character class" requires >human shape. However, if one is forced to come up with a shape for >the creature, it seems like a reasonable guess. Ryan's claim and your >claim seems to be that the idea of having two arms and two legs is >*SO* original that no one could possibly come up with it without >stealing from WotC. > > I don't buy it. If you are dead set on arguing this, >there is a simple test for this which I could try. I could write >out the mind flayer entry in plain English and giving it to people >who aren't D&D players and see what they come up with. > >- John
ooo! that'd be cool. i'd be really curious as to the results. (bonus points if, in addition to the D20SRD entry, you have handy the translated MM entry--i'm really curious to see if someone who isn't already familiar with mind flayers comes up with anything like a mind flayer using just the sparse MM entry. you could give them first the D20SRD entry, see what they say, then give them the added info of the MM entry with which to "correct'' their interpretation.) -- woodelf <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webpages.charter.net/woodelph/ If any religion is right, maybe they all have to be right. Maybe God doesn't care how you say your prayers, just as long as you say them. --Sinclair _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
