Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mkletch" data-source="post: 490285" data-attributes="member: 3396">I would feel that quickened wands, scrolls and staves would be unbalancing, regardless of the costs for the higher level spell slot.&nbsp; It is a 'spell completion item' or a 'use activated item', not a 'cast the whole friggin spell from scratch' item.This falls into the &quot;not a clarification but an official erratum&quot; category that I find very annoying with the FAQ.&nbsp; Some people use the FAQ as gospel, others pick and choose (mostly along the lines of clarifications and things that go too far to be mere clarifications), and others ignore it entirely.&nbsp; Why bother with separate files for errata and clarifications if you cannot trust the intent behind the content of either file?And a friend had actually convinced me that I might play a conjurer.&nbsp; Not now... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :("&nbsp; data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> ... assuming that we use this change, which we probably won't.&nbsp; This type of crap ruling (with no basis in the actual rules, but changing them entirely) really hurts The Sage's credibility AFAIC.Edit: The SRD reflects all of the original wordings, and the FAQ is not OGL.&nbsp; So that means posterity will remember the original wording, not The Sage's musings.&nbsp; And from what I've seen on these boards, zillions of gamers don't even know the FAQ or errata even exist...&nbsp; -Fletch!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mkletch, post: 490285, member: 3396"] I would feel that quickened wands, scrolls and staves would be unbalancing, regardless of the costs for the higher level spell slot. It is a 'spell completion item' or a 'use activated item', not a 'cast the whole friggin spell from scratch' item. This falls into the "not a clarification but an official erratum" category that I find very annoying with the FAQ. Some people use the FAQ as gospel, others pick and choose (mostly along the lines of clarifications and things that go too far to be mere clarifications), and others ignore it entirely. Why bother with separate files for errata and clarifications if you cannot trust the intent behind the content of either file? And a friend had actually convinced me that I might play a conjurer. Not now... :( ... assuming that we use this change, which we probably won't. This type of crap ruling (with no basis in the actual rules, but changing them entirely) really hurts The Sage's credibility AFAIC. Edit: The SRD reflects all of the original wordings, and the FAQ is not OGL. So that means posterity will remember the original wording, not The Sage's musings. And from what I've seen on these boards, zillions of gamers don't even know the FAQ or errata even exist... -Fletch! [/QUOTE]

Verification