Get pedantic on Feeblemind

[Artoomis]

Wheras you would rather assume that the text is in error.

So are you saying that if I can show that both Mass Heal and Panacea can work while the list in Feeblemind remains accurate and complete you will throw your hat in with me?

Because if that's the case I will be off for a while composing that post.

I am saying with what you have presented so far that it is not possible to add in Mass Heal and Panacea, as you have taken a view that the list is fully complete EXACTLY AS IS with NO EXCEPTIONS possible.

I say that is simply not true.

Now after that, it is simply a matter of to what extent you wish to allow flexibility in adding to that list.

Personally, I just say it's easiest to just assume a little human error and allow Break Enchantment to work. It really seems to be the most reasonable thing to do.

On that, of course, reasonable minds may disagree.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Actually, you DID make a novice logic mistake.

If X then Y does NOT lead to :

If no Y then no X

Gah! For the love of... Bloody...

*bangs head against wall until the hurting stops*

 

[Fieari]

Here's an interesting interpretation to examine:

Consider that the list of things that can fix a feeblemind is part of the effect of the spell.

Now consider that Break Enchanment removes the effects of the spell.

Thus, part of Break Enchantment removes the limitation as to what can heal the condition.

 

[Felix]

I was reading through from the beginning of the thread. I didn't get to the part where someone corrected it.

I think it was near the top of page 4 that several posters, Pielorinho and myself among them, pointed out his error; Artoomis was contrite.

 

[Artoomis]

Gah! For the love of... Bloody...

*bangs head against wall until the hurting stops*

Let it go. I've admitted my error and we've moved on from there anwyay.

I'm going to edit that stuff so it no longer comes up.

 

[Felix]

I am saying with what you have presented so far that it is not possible to add in Mass Heal and Panacea, as you have taken a view that the list is fully complete EXACTLY AS IS with NO EXCEPTIONS possible.

I say that is simply not true.

Now after that, it is simply a matter of to what extent you wish to allow flexibility in adding to that list.

Personally, I just say it's easiest to just assume a little human error and allow Break Enchantment to work. It really seems to be the most reasonable thing to do.

On that, of course, reasonable minds may disagree.

Again, if I can show that the Feeblemind list can be both accurate and complete, while at the same time allow Mass Heal and Panacea to work, will you agree with me?

If it's impossible, then it's impossible; simply say, "Yes, Felix, if you can show me the impossible I'll believe it's acutally possible and agree with you." You don't have to expect me to produce a convincing argument, merely allow the possibility that you could be persuaded. Or else what's the point of this thread if you refuse even that possibility?

 

[Artoomis]

Again, if I can show that the Feeblemind list can be both accurate and complete, while at the same time allow Mass Heal and Panacea to work, will you agree with me?

If it's impossible, then it's impossible; simply say, "Yes, Felix, if you can show me the impossible I'll believe it's acutally possible and agree with you." You don't have to expect me to produce a convincing argument, merely allow the possibility that you could be persuaded.

If you can do that AND ALSO address:

Here's an interesting interpretation to examine:

Consider that the list of things that can fix a feeblemind is part of the effect of the spell.

Now consider that Break Enchanment removes the effects of the spell.

Thus, part of Break Enchantment removes the limitation as to what can heal the condition.

Fieari neatly made a point I've have danced around in several posts:

Break enchantment can reverse even an instantaneous effect

Note it does not "remove" the effect, it does not "cure" it - it actually reverses the instantaneous effect. In other words, it reverses the fact that Feeblemind was done.

So maybe Break Enchantment does not need to be on the list at all. It kind of goes without saying that "the subject remain in this state until .... or something happens to make it as if the subject have never been subject to this spell in the first place."

Or something like that.

In other words, Break Enchantment sets up a new condition that does not so much cure or end the Feebleminded state as reverse the instantaneous effect that put in in place it so that it needs no cure. Not really the same thing, I guess.

 

[Artoomis]

BTW: Looking for guidance, I searched the SRD for any other uses of the word "reverse" and found nothing even remotely similar.

Too bad, I thought maybe there would be something that could be used for or against my argument.

 

[Deset Gled]

ROFL Good luck with that approach:

Can you please explain how this post serves any purpose than to try and belittle me?

 

[Fieari]

Can you please explain how this post serves any purpose than to try and belittle me?

It probably was overly mean, but I think what he's getting at is that the primary source rule only give precidence between different books. The problem here is precidence within a single book, and thus isn't covered.