Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Artoomis" data-source="post: 3163470" data-attributes="member: 111">That's assuming the "specific" is actually truly specific.  In fact, the list is not complete.Wish and Limited Wish are both listed, implying that EVERY spell needs to be listed, even if redundant, as everything Limited Wish can do Wish can also do (plus more, of course), so only Limited Wish needed to be listed.Therefore, if the list is to be complete. Mass Heal shoiuld have been listed.Now there is a very fine argument on why Mass Heal should work.  However, the fact remains that it was not on the list.There is a very fine argument why Break Enchament should work, too.But it's not on the list.  Yes, I know the counter argument, how "Mass Heal" is really just Heal plus more, but here one is just deciding the degree to which the list may be expanded beyond the actual text.Finally, on this topic directly, an "unti" a Break Enchament spell is used" clause could be viewed as innaccurate - a Break Enchament spell is not an automatic success (well, except under a generous reading) - a Caster Level check is still required.  If it has been on the list, I could see folks arguing how that is evidence that Break Enchantment needs to Caster Level check vs. Feeblemind.   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":eek:" title="Eek!    :eek:"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":eek:" /> More importantly, there is an excellent argument why break Enchament DOES work, and does not even need to be on the list.  That's because Break Enchantment does something UNIQUE in the PHB.  It reverses certain intantaneous effects.   "Reverses" them.It does not "cure" them, it does not "remove" the effect, it actually "reverses " the instantaneous effect.So, it seems, everything hinges on what "reverse" means.  At least everything for this one argument."Reverse" in this context means whatever the spell's effects are they no longer exist because (somehow) the pre-spell state of the character is restored.  In some sense, it is as if the instantaneous effect never really happened.   How this is possible is not explained, but what else can "reverse" really mean?This trumps the "unless" clause in the same way the M's Disjunction trumps spells that cannot be dispelled, or spells that have a defined list of how to end them.  The magic is somehow "undone" - not dispelled, not cured, etc.  No spell can avoid M's Disjunction - certainly not unless it specifically stated so on the affiramtive, not by simply listing an apparently "exclusive" list of remedies.In the same way no instantaneous  effect ( if a 5th level or lower enchantment, transmuatation or curse) can avoid Break Enchantment unless it specifically says so.That really seems to be the way it works.Of course those on the other side of the argument will have a different explanation, that is to be expected.A matter of interpretation, really, I suppose.Bottom line - yes, there CAN be more than one RIGHT answer.  That's what happens when humans right the rules.  Rule as you wish in your games, I am more than satisfied that, as written, Break Enhcantment trumps Feeblemind (provided, of course, you have the minute to spend casting it AND you successfully make the caster Level check).</blockquote>

Verification