Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Anubis" data-source="post: 924666" data-attributes="member: 2358">Instantaneous is not technically a "duration".The PH is worded the same, but to say a variation of a famous line by Inigo Montoya, "I do not think those words mean what you think they mean."I guess you just aren't as good at understanding the words as I am.  Sounds pretty darn clear to me.  It sounds like it's saying that you're allowed to leave spells that take effect after Time Stop ends, but any spells that aren't don't work at all on other people.  That would mean the spell would have to be able to be delayed in the first place or have a duration longer than instantaneous.There's that too.  ELH kinda made things worse by allowing a loose interpretation rather than simply making errata that made the wording more precise.  Clear it is to an understanding mind, precise it is not.No, that's what happens when the wizard casts Wish to get his spells back.  It's called a "sudden surge of magical energy" hahaha!Technically, if you cast Time Stop within Time Stop, you would only be kinda extending the duration.  Both durations would overlap and you'd go to the end of the longest Time Stop.  This would not, however, allow you a ton of more turns in a Time Stop inside another Time Stop.There IS a rule that states this.  See the rule that states that effects of the same nature NEVER stack.  It's basically the same principal behind stacking bonuses.WAY beyond.  If my player tried that, he's take 1d6 points of damage per spell level he was "restoring".  Or maybe 1 point of Constitution damage per spell level.  Something like that.  Dude would be dead any which way.Again, you are reading it ENTIRELY wrong.  It says you can leave spells that will take effect after the duration, not that it will extend durations to last past the spell.Wrong.  This is not how it is written nor is it how the spell was ever intended.  Sometimes, when the word of the rule isn't clear enough for ya', look to the spirit of the rule instead if you must.  I see no need, but I'm guessing you do if you actually think the letter of the rule allows this.Your version of Time Stop would be FAR more powerful than all other 9th-Level Wizard spells in the game.  This is so powerful even an EPIC spell couldn't likely do it.  You're talking DEIFIC abilities now.You could also change Fireball into a 0-Level Wizard spell that does 1d100 damage per level using "Rule Zero", but that doesn't mean that's how it was intended nor worded.  You are reading it all wrong.No it doesn't.  It says you can opt to cast spells that can take effect later (i.e. Delayed Blast Fireball).Actually, they would show up now and work as normal because they would join every other combatant in the freeze.Not exactly.  The durations would overlap.True, but why would you want to?This is also the CORRECT interpretation.Damn skippy.True, true, and mostly true.</blockquote>

Verification