Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scion" data-source="post: 1488305" data-attributes="member: 5777">A bit more on the circular logic argument, it is simply not true. Merely stating a fact and then reversing it so as to provide a logical condition.IF stat changing immediately changes your number of prepared spells THEN it will be stated 'somewhere'.this is true, otherwise how would you even know it was a rule? Guessing?The reversal is also true.IF it is not stated anywhere THEN stat changing does not immediately change your number of prepared spells.It is the same statement, not a circular logic chain.as for the cat, if you define your cat to be anything that has four legs, whiskers, two eyes of a certain type, and is black and you see something that meets every criteria but is red then it isnt a cat. Very true, you will either have to expand your definition or create a new one for that creature. Strangely that is how it works in the real world anyway, it is very difficult to tell some creatures apart, and many of the lines are incredibly arbitrary. In everyday useage we tend to be much more allowing, but when it comes time to be technical then it may very well be that the definition of cat is incredibly exact and 99% of the creatures out there the rest of us would call 'cats' simply dont fall into that category for whatever purpose it is. It is all about how you define the terms.In this case however, If it is a rule then it will be somewhere, otherwise it isnt a rule. Are some rules unwritten? not by the definition of rule that I am useing. The raw is very much 'written', hence the name. So if no where it is stated that stat damage makes you lose those spells then you simply dont, why would you even think otherwise?</blockquote>

Verification