Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ARandomGod" data-source="post: 1905837" data-attributes="member: 17296">If I were a betting man, I'd bet with you on this. I think that it's likely that this rule was not intended to allow you to chose a spell from another class' spell list.I'm not saying that... I'm saying instead that if it says that "you can do A" and doesn't say "with the following exceptions", then it means that you can do A without exceptions.I'll agree that the newer wording isn't as clear as I'd like it to be. And, I've agreed above that I think that it's meant to be as you're asserting it is. All I'm stating is that the way it's written does allow you to learn an extra spell, and does not limit where that spell can come from. That's it. It's only a house rule if the official rule states otherwise. I'm saying that, as written, it clearly does. OK, ok, for a given value of clear. Sure, there are indications that they meant to add in a restriction. And yes, I'll agree that it's a pretty big deal there, and yet still was left out. Accidentally? Sure, I'm willing to say that. Of course, to agree to that is stating a pretty grevous ommision on WoTC's part. Then again, I don't have a problem with the idea that they could have had just such an issue. But, the very fact taht it IS such a large ommision further strengthens the opinion that it was an intentional one.Anyhow, I somewhat enjoy the Devil's Advocate role. And, as written, it does indeed state "A is allowed" and does not list any restrictions on A, as you are stating that it pretty clearly needs to do.  Where it says that you can learn a spell you normally could not learn... That's ok, I like silly. Yes, the shield spell allows one to slay dragons, in that it does not specifically disallow the slaying of dragons. Hence, if someone were to attempt to slay one or more dragons with a shield spell on it, then I would allow the player to attempt this. Hell, I'd even allow the +4 shield AC bonus against that dragon, as that's not specifically disallowed either. Or, so to say, I'd allow it to do anything it says it does, with only the restrictions that it lists on what it says it does. For instance, I wouldn't allow that +4 bonus against a spell or effect that ignores force effects.  Hrm... rereading posts now....Ah, I see, where you say:- The PHB rules say you cannot learn spells from other classes lists.- The feat does not change those rules.I thought perhaps you were referring to the idea that a wizard knowing a clerical spell would have to have a high wisdom... Which was an interesting idea. However, if the feat states that it allows you to learn an additional spell, and then further stated that it would allow you to learn a spell that you couldn't ordinarily learn, that does seem to be the feat stating that it would negate, for this purpose only, anything that would otherwise make you unable to learn said spells. Of course, if you want to make the arguement that learning a spell and the ability to cast said spell are two different things, that's another tack that's completely true and would be a good loophole.**Remember, I'm playing devil's advocate lawyer type here. When I play him, I'll agree that the arcane trickster (per the SRD), while granting new spells per day and increased spellcasting level, does not actually gain any more spells known when he levels. Hence invalidating the class as an option for the sorc. Certainly not the intention, but the letter.</blockquote>

Verification