Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7349468" data-attributes="member: 6799649">'Cast a spell' has meanings outside the game. &quot;Her beauty and grace cast a spell on me and I fell in love with her&quot;. Does that mean that anyone who is loved cannot become invisible in the game on the grounds that when the rules tell you what 'cast a spell' is it forgets to tell us what 'cast a spell' is not, and so I can abuse 'natural language' and claim that anything I make up is 'what the rules say'.&nbsp; And they don't need to! They do not have that burden. The RAW tells us what the rules ARE, they don't need to tell us what the rules are NOT!Imagine if they worked that way. &quot;Okay DM, charm person tells us what the spell DOES, but it doesn't say anywhere that it also inflicts 10d100 damage, so it does!That is what is being tried here. &quot;The rules tell us what an 'attack' is, but they don't tell us what an 'attack' is NOT, therefore sneezing must be an 'attack' because nowhere in the rules does it say that 'sneezing' is NOT an 'attack'&quot;.The rules are prescriptive; it's only a rule if it says it's a rule.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Arial Black, post: 7349468, member: 6799649"] 'Cast a spell' has meanings outside the game. "Her beauty and grace [i]cast a spell on me[/i] and I fell in love with her". Does that mean that anyone who is loved cannot become invisible in the game on the grounds that when the rules tell you what 'cast a spell' [b]is[/b] it forgets to tell us what 'cast a spell' is [b]not[/b], and so I can abuse 'natural language' and claim that anything I make up is 'what the rules say'. And they don't need to! They do not have that burden. The RAW tells us what the rules ARE, they don't [i]need[/i] to tell us what the rules are NOT! Imagine if they worked that way. "Okay DM, [i]charm person[/i] tells us what the spell DOES, but it doesn't say anywhere that it also inflicts 10d100 damage, so it does! That is what is being tried here. "The rules tell us what an 'attack' is, but they don't tell us what an 'attack' is NOT, therefore sneezing must be an 'attack' because nowhere in the rules does it say that 'sneezing' is NOT an 'attack'". The rules are prescriptive; it's only a rule if it says it's a rule. [/QUOTE]

Verification