Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
First of all, I didn't say anyone specified sentinel, least of all you. I commented on the fact that my example would not be accounting for various tanking abilities that could counteract the mummy's ability (with Sentinel being an example of one such ability), and would simply assume that the mummy succeeds for the sake of simplicity.
You didn't directly state that, no. But you snidely responded with the incorrect assertion that you repeated here with the clear implication that I was overlooking the fact that (supposedly) Sentinel would counteract the mummy lord's ability to pick targets. But sentinel doesn't do that, as I demonstrated and you refused to acknowledge.

Finally, I have taken time out of my day to attempt to answer the questions you raised, in the interest of trying to be helpful to you, and am now being insulted and called "snide" for it. I would be appreciative if we could have a respectful conversation with each other. Thank you.
If you want to have a respectful conversation, you'll need to stop with snide, derisive comments, accusing me of making strawman arguments when I refute things that you've said, and making strawman arguments like claiming I hold a position that I have explicitly and clearly stated I do not hold. As far as I can tell, you did not attempt to answer any question I actually raised, but instead came up with a position that I don't agree with, and continue to insist that it's my position even when I've explicitly and clearly stated that I don't agree with it.

My argument stipulated only that the Mummy Lord uses their teleport ability to successfully bypass the tank. No other steps are required for the point to be made (e.g. that the optimal target is not necessarily the one with the lowest AC, and that a character with a higher AC does not need to actually force an enemy's choice in order to be targeted).
Here we go again: At no point did I assert that 'the optimal target is necessarily the one with the lowest AC' or that 'a character with a higher AC needs to actually force an enemy's choice in order to be targeted'. I pointed out in the last post that I asserted neither of these things, but you keep acting like I did. I didn't. Simply didn't.

Perhaps this will make my position clearer to you:
In that quote it appears that you completely agree with my point, which makes your weird and factually incorrect arguments against me all the harder to make sense of.