I've trawled through a number of posts on CE and various effects, but
this one I can't quite get my head around.
Minion A is acting and in combat. Minion B is on the receiving end of
their attentions but happens to have a handy flash grenade about their
person.
Some pre range is thrown down, range is set to long, minion A plays
Canine Horde at superior.
*pause*
One of 2 things happens:
1. Minion B pulls the pin on his grenade. It goes off, ending combat,
and the dogs never eat the grenade because that strike doesn't
resolve. Poodles stagger around blindly.
(which is what I suspect happens)
2. Minion B reaches for his grenade, but finds it gummed with dog
drool - its been destroyed by schnauser slobber. Minion B waves from
distance, and prays that combat ends after the press step.
(which might happen because its striking with a weapon, but probably
won't since the strike is *combat ends*)
tbz_...@hotmail.com wrote:
> I've trawled through a number of posts on CE and various effects, but
> this one I can't quite get my head around.
>
> Minion A is acting and in combat. Minion B is on the receiving end of
> their attentions but happens to have a handy flash grenade about their
> person.
Bad form to use the same pronoun to refer to different things preceding both
instances of the pronoun, BTW. The culprit in this case is the first "their",
I'd say, since it has to reach over the most recent plausible antecedent (minion
B) to get to its intended antecedent (minion A). (Without getting into the issue
of the confusion I first had reading the initial "their" as referring to "A and
B", since it is a plural pronoun and the plural antecedent was available.)
Anyway, "A's attentions" is shorter and clearer than "their attentions", so I
would suggest using that next time. And you can drop the "about their person"
entirely to improve clarity (and brevity) as well.
</grammar prattle>
> Some pre range is thrown down, range is set to long, minion A plays
> Canine Horde at superior.
>
> *pause*
>
> One of 2 things happens:
>
> 1. Minion B pulls the pin on his grenade. It goes off, ending combat,
> and the dogs never eat the grenade because that strike doesn't
> resolve. Poodles stagger around blindly.
>
> (which is what I suspect happens)
Correct.
On 9 Sep, 14:34, LSJ <vtes...@white-wolf.com> wrote:
> tbz_be...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > I've trawled through a number of posts on CE and various effects, but
> > this one I can't quite get my head around.
>
> > Minion A is acting and in combat. Minion B is on the receiving end of
> > their attentions but happens to have a handy flash grenade about their
> > person.
>
> Bad form to use the same pronoun to refer to different things preceding both
> instances of the pronoun, BTW. The culprit in this case is the first "their",
> I'd say, since it has to reach over the most recent plausible antecedent (minion
> B) to get to its intended antecedent (minion A). (Without getting into the issue
> of the confusion I first had reading the initial "their" as referring to "A and
> B", since it is a plural pronoun and the plural antecedent was available.)
>
> Anyway, "A's attentions" is shorter and clearer than "their attentions", so I
> would suggest using that next time. And you can drop the "about their person"
> entirely to improve clarity (and brevity) as well.
>
> </grammar prattle>
Uh, I guess the appropriate respose would be:
Correct.
*hopefully sets the light hearted tone, continues*
If I was going to re-write it, I probably would go for:
Minion A is acting and in combat with Minion B. Minion B has a flash
grenade.
Simpler, punchier, fewer characters, less likely to be misconstrued
and less florid. Less in the mode of the rest of the post, certainly
(not that the theme of the post was incomprehensibility, but you take
my meaning :-D ).
If I *had* wanted the second their to refer to both minions A and B I
would have said "about their persons".
I don't think I'd ever use "A's attentions", if only because I'd be
concerned that the reader might misread it and think I was referring
to "attentions" as the subject (as in "an attention to detail") and
had mistyped, but that's personal preference. I might have used
"Minion A's attentions", which whilst longer, is less likely to be
misinterpreted.
</more grammar guff>
Thanks for the confirmation, I guess I'll have to pack some Anarch
Troublemakers, or immgraps just in case.
[ quoted text not captured ]> Troublemakers, or immgraps just in case.- Piilota siteerattu teksti -
>
> - Näytä siteerattu teksti -
If you are reacting then just dodging the grenade works just fine
too. :)