Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 1457721" data-attributes="member: 2629">If we follow standard English practical usage of the word 'condition', allowing alternative prerequisites is perfectly valid, as is multiple prerequisites. 'Condition' is a single word that refers to the sum of the individual prerequisites. For instance, in a will, it is perfectly valid (in the US, at least) to write: "I leave my 94' Honda to Timmy Sanders of 141 Mapplecrest Lane upon condition that he has finished college and has a job or, alternatively, is in college and has maintained a 3.0 or better GPA."The law considers this a clear statement.'Conditions' is also often used, but that is irrelevant. The question is not whether conditions may be used to describe multiple or alternative prerequisites, the question is whether the singular 'condition' can be used to describe multiple or alternative prerequisites. It can as demonstrated above. The fact that 'conditions' may also be used has no importance.The player should be allowed to set any subset of prerequisites he would like to place upon the spell. Then, the spell should trigger when those conditions are clearly met. If there is any question in the mind of the DM that the conditions have not been met, the spell should not trigger. For instance, if the player sets the contingency to operate if he is wounded, the DM should not have the spell operate if the PC takes negative energy damage that reduces hit poitns but leaves no wound.A few things to note:Players should not be allowed to use game mechanics in their conditions. PCs don't know about hit points. If you had never heard of D&D, would you turn to a friend (after witnessing a car wreck) and say, "Hey, I wonder how many hit points that guy lost when he went through the windshield ..."? Some game mechanics also have pracitcal uses as well, so the proper thing to do is to ask the question, "Would I ever use these words in real life to describe a situation?"Trigger words are problematic in 3.5. If you look under free actions, you'll note that you can speak at any time, even during the turn of another creature. This, coupled with contingency based upojn a command word, allows instantaneous spellcasting during the action of another creature. By the rules, this is valid as the contingency is activated instantaneously. I suggest, as a house rule that you instead adopt the rule that spells activated via contingency activated during another creature's turn via a command word do not take effect until the end of that creature's action. I also advise adopting the house rule that contingency spells count against the 1 quickened spell per round limit (or against the 1 quickened spell per round for the following round if the quickened spell for this round has already been used or is not available, as would be the case when the contingency is activated during another creature's turn.</blockquote>

Verification