Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Feather Fall hanger on
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7315772" data-attributes="member: 6919838"><p>Actually, he stated how he thought i read into it... i simply responded with that what i read was , quoted the exact reaction text and remarked on the absences of a limitation to what they mean by falls. Falls is the broader term in normal use and can usually include within CONTEXT both the start of a fall and the general case of falling.</p><p></p><p>One can normally determine which by context.. you know - reading the stuff around it.</p><p></p><p>Like say that part *in* the spell where it refers to targeting "falling creatures."</p><p></p><p>To believe that FALLS in the reaction summary is intended to specifically exclude "falls" as in "falls past" and only applies to the first say 1' of a fall when it initial starts, then one has to assume that seeing a creature falling past is not going to allow a FF cast to save it because seeing someone already falling does not trigger the spell's reaction. </p><p></p><p>Not only does that not make sense, not only does it ignore the context of the spell as a whole but it really does show a rather marked difference between how this spell is read as "intended" over the various years it has been in effect.</p><p></p><p>let me ask you a simple example.</p><p></p><p>Fight on a rope bridge.</p><p></p><p>Across the bridge on a ledge there is a fight where a darkness prevents you from seeing it.</p><p></p><p>But you spot a character falling out of the darkness. You could not see the "falls" as defined by "starts to fall" but you do see the character already falling leaving the darkness.</p><p></p><p>Are you saying that by your reading of feather fall and its "falls" trigger meaning "starst to fall" you would rule there is no trigger to the reaction and feather fall cannot be used by your character to stop that fall?</p><p></p><p>Now, maybe your answer is yes and you think thats fine.</p><p>Now, maybe your answer is NO and you really do think falling is what the trigger means.</p><p>Now, maybe you think well its a little of both and decide "falls" doesn't include falling but really means "when you first see the triggering event which is somebody falling" but at that point you are drastically adding in a lot of stuff well beyond the decision to limit FALLS to "starts to fall" by cutting out its "falling" definition too.</p><p></p><p>But i am curious if in the games you run and the games you have played if the falls out of darkness kind of situations would be resolved as "nope, no feather fall for you." or not?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7315772, member: 6919838"] Actually, he stated how he thought i read into it... i simply responded with that what i read was , quoted the exact reaction text and remarked on the absences of a limitation to what they mean by falls. Falls is the broader term in normal use and can usually include within CONTEXT both the start of a fall and the general case of falling. One can normally determine which by context.. you know - reading the stuff around it. Like say that part *in* the spell where it refers to targeting "falling creatures." To believe that FALLS in the reaction summary is intended to specifically exclude "falls" as in "falls past" and only applies to the first say 1' of a fall when it initial starts, then one has to assume that seeing a creature falling past is not going to allow a FF cast to save it because seeing someone already falling does not trigger the spell's reaction. Not only does that not make sense, not only does it ignore the context of the spell as a whole but it really does show a rather marked difference between how this spell is read as "intended" over the various years it has been in effect. let me ask you a simple example. Fight on a rope bridge. Across the bridge on a ledge there is a fight where a darkness prevents you from seeing it. But you spot a character falling out of the darkness. You could not see the "falls" as defined by "starts to fall" but you do see the character already falling leaving the darkness. Are you saying that by your reading of feather fall and its "falls" trigger meaning "starst to fall" you would rule there is no trigger to the reaction and feather fall cannot be used by your character to stop that fall? Now, maybe your answer is yes and you think thats fine. Now, maybe your answer is NO and you really do think falling is what the trigger means. Now, maybe you think well its a little of both and decide "falls" doesn't include falling but really means "when you first see the triggering event which is somebody falling" but at that point you are drastically adding in a lot of stuff well beyond the decision to limit FALLS to "starts to fall" by cutting out its "falling" definition too. But i am curious if in the games you run and the games you have played if the falls out of darkness kind of situations would be resolved as "nope, no feather fall for you." or not? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Feather Fall hanger on
Top