It would seem that the shortest and most direct answer to that question is "no". I could elaborate and ask what you mean by "reasonable information", but I honestly don't care.FoamBats4All wrote:Could you provide more serious and reasonable information?
So I didn't name the NPC "Emissary"? And despite knowing what "relevant thread" you are referring to, I think I know where this is all coming from. I could very likely have referred to the Emissary as an "avatar", without meaning it's the Avatar in the sense that Zelknolf (and you) are referring to. But for arguments sake, let's say it was the actual Avatar of whatever god it was that I was using at the time. Still wouldn't have changed anything, nor would it change my reply to Zelknolfs question. If I want to as a DM, I'll call down a whole pantheon if I feel that it's the right thing to do. You might not think so, but then that will be reflected in the way you DM, wont it?FoamBats4All wrote:Anyone with access to the relevant threads knows you are lying, and I would rather you be honest and forthcoming.
The only thing you are doing now is trying to break apart my replies to score some easy points on semantics and if that is all you can/want to contribute to this, go right ahead and watch me ignore the rest of your comments.