Hold Person and Polymorph

[Iku Rex]

Unless you meant something completely different than what you wrote then my questions act directly on your post..

I asked Hypersmurt two questions. (The first a direct one, the second implied, yet clearly identified as a question - to me, anyway - from the context and with a question mark.)

Since I never claimed to "mean" anything, your post once again makes no sense.

Let's look at your earlier nonsense posts:

self evident

Which is so blatantly self evident that it would seem silly to not rule it as no longer functioning? and how would it not fall under the same category as, 'target: one nonmagical staff' when it then becomes magical, no longer a valid target.

"Which" what? "Self evident" (the only quoted text) is so blatantly self evident that it would seem silly to not rule it as no longer functioning? Nonsense. :\

How would what fall under the same category as...? It's not like I have stated any opinion on the question at hand...

I'm sorry, but I don't speak nonsense.

So naturally I ask you to clarify, and get...

What spells fall under your 'self evident' category for being no longer valid and why/how are they different than the shillelagh spell?

Inference: I have some sort of " 'self evident' category for spells being no longer valid". WTF. Where did that come from? <sigh>

Nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense.

 

[Scion]

I was responding to your question, as it was nonsensical.

Or, in more general terms: "The rules must always explicitly state that something is an exception, no matter how self evident it is from the context" ?

So, your question implies that there is some state of self evidency, which I then asked you what qualified. (just to be clear, that is the nonsensical part, that somehow two things that are exactly the same somehow have a 'self evident' difference to make them have different outcomes).

However, I still havent gotten any sensible response from you. It seems you said something that made no sense and then when asked about it you have no idea what you said, although you claim to know what you said ::shrugs::

At this point I have wasted too much time asking you a simple question about something you said that didnt make any sense. So, at this point I choose to not care anymore as obviously you dont know what you meant or said so it isnt important to seek clarification, there isnt any to be had.

Hey!

Let's sum up.

The problem is:does a spell need a valid target only when it's cast, or do the spell need a valid target along its duration?

Does a Wiz with Greater Invisibility return visible if he dies?

Does Shilleagh stops its duration, cause its target is no longer non-magical?

Can we free a Hold-Human Polimorphing him into a Giant?

There we are. Why would two things, which are effectively exactly the same, somehow be different in that in one the condition suddenly goes away whereas in the other it does not.

 

[Iku Rex]

Can someone not currently under the influence of mind-altering drugs please try to explain what Scion is talking about?

(Provided that's even possible...)

 

[Egres]

I was responding to your question, as it was nonsensical.



So, your question implies that there is some state of self evidency, which I then asked you what qualified. (just to be clear, that is the nonsensical part, that somehow two things that are exactly the same somehow have a 'self evident' difference to make them have different outcomes).

However, I still havent gotten any sensible response from you. It seems you said something that made no sense and then when asked about it you have no idea what you said, although you claim to know what you said ::shrugs::

At this point I have wasted too much time asking you a simple question about something you said that didnt make any sense. So, at this point I choose to not care anymore as obviously you dont know what you meant or said so it isnt important to seek clarification, there isnt any to be had.



There we are. Why would two things, which are effectively exactly the same, somehow be different in that in one the condition suddenly goes away whereas in the other it does not.

Hey!

The last quote is mine!

 

[Egres]

Can someone not currently under the influence of mind-altering drugs please try to explain what Scion is talking about?

(Provided that's even possible...)

Pardon me Iku Rex.

You and Scion have shown many times in the past that you are very good Rules-lawyers and posters.

I just can't see no reasons to continue your little flame.

Can we try to continue this interesting debate?

Or you could just try to e-mail each other.

Thank you to both of you.

 

[Scion]

Hey!

The last quote is mine!

Sorry about that it is fixed now.

And no worries, I have given up trying to make rex make any sense for this topic ;/

Anyone have any reason why two nearly identical things (the only difference is the type of original target) should be viewed in completely seperate manners?

 

[Iku Rex]

Egres: Do you understand what Scion is talking about? Can you please try to explain it to me?

Really! I'm getting awfully curious here.

 

[Egres]

Egres: Do you understand what Scion is talking about? Can you please try to explain it to me?

Really! I'm getting awfully curious here.

It seems that you have to be a communityt supporter in order to send PMs here, but i'm going to ask you to leave this problem behin nonetheless.

You and Scion didn't understand each other.

It happens from time to time.

Let's continue this debate now.

I'm expecting good stuff from you Iku, as well from Scion.

Help me to avoid an e-mail to Andy Collins!

 

[Egres]

Just another note:

Let's take a look at the Polimorph spell:if the rule "change of type of target, the spell ends" would exists, why did they write this:

From the SRD:

If slain, the subject reverts to its original form, though it remains dead.

The dead subject, the Polymorphed one, is now an object, a corpse.

By my DM's logic, it would no longer be eligible for the spell, just like the Hold-Polymorphed human.

But, then, why did they specify that the subject regains his original form?
That should be automatic, cause the spell should end.

Example 1
Hold Person:target--->Humanoid

Polymorph into a Giant--->Hold stops.

Example 2
Polymorph:target:a creature

Creature dies--->becomes an objectolymorph should become no longer eligible, and the spell should end.

But then, why did they specify it?

 

[Iku Rex]

But, then, why did they specify that the subject regains his original form?

Why does righteous might spell out that a size change modifies your attack bonus and AC? Does that suggest that a size change doesn't normally modify your attack bonus and AC? Basic rules are frequently repeated in spell descriptions (and elsewhere).