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="mvincent" data-source="post: 2953478" data-attributes="member: 27034">Ditto. I like the FAQ. If something can be viewed as open to interpretation, then it is good to have an answer. If there was no question about it (or if you have no question about it), then you don't need to consult the FAQ in the first place. Blatantly contradictory stuff is typically pointed out and corrected anyways (the gauntlet thing will most likely be fixed in the next edition). Also, different wording on some answers could've possibly be used to make them less debated (but many of us can figure out the writer's intent, even if unfortunate wording was used). Examples:1) The Two-handed vs. one-handed thing was simply used to illustrate that you don't get 1 1/2 strength damage when using a two-handed weapon in one hand (which seems reasonable). Everyone already knew that it wasn't meant to imply that the weapon's HP changed.2) The mithral answer was simply meant to settle the long debated issue of proficiency.However, one answer that contradicts RAW (and will not likely be corrected) is from the 3.0 FAQ (and is still used):"You can’t make time stop persistent. (Its duration is effectively instantaneous for purposes of the Persistent Spell feat.)"Now, although I completely agree with the ruling, it does technically alter RAW (i.e. RAW lists a duration for time stop, and that duration is not instantaneous, and so it would not be treated as instantaneous for things like dispel magic and such).</blockquote>

Verification