Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="auburn2" data-source="post: 8221934" data-attributes="member: 6855259">It is defining what a damage type is.&nbsp; It is not saying where a damage type appears.&nbsp; Following is the definition of appears, the section you quoted does not speak to appearance at all:Appear: Come into sight; become visible or noticeable.Now when those words &quot;slashing damage&quot; are in a spell description they do in fact &quot;appear&quot; there.&nbsp; They are visible there.It is not powerful, that is the whole point.&nbsp; If it was OP there would be a reason to limit it like you say, but even doing it the way I am it is LESS powerful than several other wizard schools.At SECOND LEVEL level I can pick up absorb elements and cast magic missile and instead of force damage I can do 1d4+1 lighting damage (or fire damage, or acid damage ...) .There is nothing at all powerful about that!&nbsp; Especially since those other damages are resisted more than force damage.&nbsp; It is almost entirely flavor.Same thing with using stoneskin for a fireball - yes that might be helpful against devils or red dragons, but lots of other damage types would too and in terms of metagaming it is not any better than other spells that could be used.Finally, because the replacement spell has to be in your book and has to be the same level as the slot, this is not something that another caster could take a 2-level dip to use.&nbsp; The fact that it is NOT very powerful is why it is one main reason it is difficult for me to believe they would limit it like you want to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="auburn2, post: 8221934, member: 6855259"] It is defining what a damage type is. It is not saying where a damage type appears. Following is the definition of appears, the section you quoted does not speak to appearance at all: [I]Appear: Come into sight; become visible or noticeable.[/I] Now when those words "slashing damage" are in a spell description they do in fact "appear" there. They are visible there. It is not powerful, that is the whole point. If it was OP there would be a reason to limit it like you say, but even doing it the way I am it is LESS powerful than several other wizard schools. At [B][U]SECOND LEVEL[/U][/B] level I can pick up absorb elements and cast magic missile and instead of force damage I can do 1d4+1 lighting damage (or fire damage, or acid damage ...) . There is nothing at all powerful about that! Especially since those other damages are resisted more than force damage. It is almost entirely flavor. Same thing with using stoneskin for a fireball - yes that might be helpful against devils or red dragons, but lots of other damage types would too and in terms of metagaming it is not any better than other spells that could be used. Finally, because the replacement spell has to be in your book and has to be the same level as the slot, this is not something that another caster could take a 2-level dip to use. The fact that it is NOT very powerful is why it is one main reason it is difficult for me to believe they would limit it like you want to. [/QUOTE]

Verification