Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="epithet" data-source="post: 7368196" data-attributes="member: 6796566">While I wish Jeremy Crawford would have written his Sage Advice differently, in a way which was closer to your interpretation, he did not. What you're doing with that sentence is in essence the same thing that Max is doing with the text of the disintegrate spell: you're being too literal and ignoring the intent of the writer. Jeremy's intent is made clear by the fact that his very next sentence describes a different outcome (the one for which you argue) based on the intent (RAI) from the one in his previous sentence (characterised as RAW.)Basically, his sage advice on this issue may be paraphrased as &quot;If you get really technical with a literal reading of the rule here, it does say the disintegration is triggered when the beast form reaches 0 hit points. That's not what we intended, and I'm specifically pointing out that it isn't what we intended.&quot;It is rare for JC to say &quot;yeah, the rule says this, but it isn't what we want you to do with it.&quot; I'm at a loss as to why he wouldn't errata the rule to match the design intent, but then there's a lot of things I don't understand, and I'm getting used to it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="epithet, post: 7368196, member: 6796566"] While I wish Jeremy Crawford would have written his Sage Advice differently, in a way which was closer to your interpretation, he did not. What you're doing with that sentence is in essence the same thing that Max is doing with the text of the disintegrate spell: you're being too literal and ignoring the intent of the writer. Jeremy's intent is made clear by the fact that his very next sentence describes a different outcome (the one for which you argue) based on the intent (RAI) from the one in his previous sentence (characterised as RAW.) Basically, his sage advice on this issue may be paraphrased as "If you get really technical with a literal reading of the rule here, it does say the disintegration is triggered when the beast form reaches 0 hit points. That's not what we intended, and I'm specifically pointing out that it isn't what we intended." It is rare for JC to say "yeah, the rule says this, but it isn't what we want you to do with it." I'm at a loss as to why he wouldn't errata the rule to match the design intent, but then there's a lot of things I don't understand, and I'm getting used to it. [/QUOTE]

Verification