Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8178568" data-attributes="member: 71699">On balance of the information now to hand, I believe you are right to have inferred a general rule (although it is by no means unambiguous). Factors that I find persuasive are -<ol>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">There is reasonable agreement between how DCs are arrived at for magical items and how they are arrived at for spellcasters.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">DMG 141 complements PHB 205 in a way that sheds more light than reading 205 alone: it is in DMG 141 that a creature producing a spell from an item uses its proficiency bonus, and not that of the original caster. That is, 141 implies who &quot;your&quot; will be, when it comes to casting spells out of items.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">If one bootstraps from the inferred rule, the wording in SSI about using artificer's ability modifier becomes necessitated. Issues with the argument notwithstanding (it begs the question).</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ol">If true, &quot;produces&quot; and &quot;casts&quot; likely need to be taken as synonyms in RAW... which isn't great. &quot;Object&quot; and &quot;item&quot; also must be, but a &quot;magic item&quot; is separated out (possibly unnecessarily).</li>
</ol>This could still turn out to be mistaken. If JC responds and his answers chime with it, then I feel like that might sustain the inference pretty well.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8178568, member: 71699"] On balance of the information now to hand, I believe you are right to have inferred a general rule (although it is by no means unambiguous). Factors that I find persuasive are - [LIST=1] [*]There is reasonable agreement between how DCs are arrived at for magical items and how they are arrived at for spellcasters. [*][B]DMG 141[/B] complements [B]PHB 205[/B] in a way that sheds more light than reading 205 alone: it is in DMG 141 that a creature producing a spell from an item uses its proficiency bonus, and not that of the original caster. That is, 141 implies who "[I]your[/I]" will be, when it comes to casting spells out of items. [*]If one bootstraps from the inferred rule, the wording in SSI about using artificer's ability modifier becomes necessitated. Issues with the argument notwithstanding (it begs the question). [*]If true, "[I]produces[/I]" and "[I]casts[/I]" likely need to be taken as synonyms in RAW... which isn't great. "[I]Object[/I]" and "[I]item[/I]" also must be, but a "[I]magic item[/I]" is separated out (possibly unnecessarily). [/LIST] This could still turn out to be mistaken. If JC responds and his answers chime with it, then I feel like that might sustain the inference pretty well. [/QUOTE]

Verification