Search results

Zorku it could be worded that way for a few reasons. It indicates why you are able to able to fit a full action spell in a reaction (most of the fiddly bits are done). It explains why concentration is required (difficult to pause casting in the middle). Also indicates that the spell slot is...

Zorku I was referring to to readying a spell using different rules/steps. I lost track of the reason for the component timing discussions a few pages ago. Ovinomancer i believe you misspoke in your last post. Reading a spell does not use the cat a spell action. General musings: I'm not...

As pointed out in the past readied action is an exception that adds steps where there normally aren't. Ready action doesn't just say you cast a spell as normal it says "you cast a spell as normal but...". It's akin to having a sandwich with an eating time of one action or you can ready action...

I could have worded that more carefully. The second part of that quote was an observation about general situation and not specifically in reference to the previous sentence. To rephrase. If spellcasting did not include all of the parts (including effects, etc) then spells that take an...

In addition to ovinomancer's points above I also disagree. To say "spellcasting is over by the time the first beam is shot" is generally untrue. When the cast a spell action/bonus/reaction is used then casting a spell in 5e includes the preamble, finger waggling, components, targeting, effects...

hrm the only dispel tweet I've seen similar to petrification was in regards to flesh to stone. However that's a spell so I don't know if that was what you are thinking of or not. I agree the first and second sentence don't really jive with regards to magical effects targeting. As I've said I...

I misspoke on darkness it can target a point or an object you are holding. So if you wanted to dispel the object hopefully you would just have seen what it was cast on. Not sure if the darkness itself can always be dispelled directly or if just when not on an object? While globe of...

Dispel works on globe of invulnerability (didn't think it relevant for my last post) www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/22/dispel-magic-vs-globe-of-invulnerability/ I think magical effects was meant to mean things like globe, illusions, wall of fire, etc. Spells that persist in the world after the cast...

In reference to the later point. Dispel magic has been confirmed to not be intended to work on non spell but yet magical effects. The difference seems to be whether they are cast/replicate an existing spell or not. the twitter examples of can/can't be dispelled Arcane ward and magical items...

If its like our campaign you send them to the afterlife because some very impatient wizard refused to wait for the reinforcements to show up and help...

None of those spells have listed interactions with water in any way so by Raw the answer is no. However, it's obviously up to your DM. Do note that create water puts the water on the ground or in containers so you'd need a second house rule for create water targeting as well as a very lenient...

If you have a quote unequivocally stating anything like "Unless specifically stated otherwise, a spell's damage will always be magical." please do present it so I and others can stop opening this thread to no where. Preferably implying just how specific that language needs to be. Right now we...

Zorku Happy birthday. May your DM rule eldritch blasts as being cumulatively repelling or not, sequential or not, and dispelable or not as is advantageous to you at the time :D

I am no more "adding meaning to the words to validate the claim" to the phrase 'attack's normal effects' than you are to 'delivered' from the errata. Can the use of 'normal effects' be intended that non magical/magical property of the weapon is meant to be considered for weapon damage? sure its...

Noctem just a brief reply as i don't have a ton of time atm. For hail of thorns I didn't claim anything contrary to your points so I'll assume your comments were just meant as a general observation. For swift quiver the errata came out last month so the spell was written first. We continue to...

Going through the book to try and find some clues in other spells that do slashing/bludgeoning/piercing I've come across the following. Alter self- grow natural weapons. Mentions they become magical Animate objects - specifies the objects must be non magical doesn't mention a change to...

Can't say I disagree with most of this. 6 was my anti Pandora's box reasoning (as you address in your second paragraph) also it goes more directly against the RaI tweet. 7 was my acknowledgement that this thread is very very long and the argument started on a forum that is gone now but, ya...

Just playing devil's advocate here but if instant only means less than a turn and ready actions can go between the spell's beams/rays then the dispel can hit within that less than one turn instant. Honestly though nothing posted here since the tweet clarification is new. There are a myriad of...

spectacle it needs to mean less than an action if you want to use that reasoning. That doesn't really help though if you use Crawfords attacks are valid ready triggers ruling. Arial Black I fixed the question in my last post. The trigger was incorrect originally.

The hex/smite/hunters mark discussion was a secondary point brought up recently. I find it pretty clear but I think Noctem is unsure there won't be conflict with 'things' maybe? SCAG was published first.