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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thanee" data-source="post: 3237600" data-attributes="member: 478">Why is it, that (almost) everyone who thinks they are written to be used spontaneously, ignores the part in the text, that says, that they confer the ability to use the given feat. I mean, sure, I can see how inconvenient that part is in combination with that view, since it quite clearly implies, that it can't work that way... whether that is intended or not... but it's there, really! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Of course, it does not confer the feat, otherwise you could use it as a prerequisite.And of course, it holds the essence of a metamagic feat, since that's exactly what you get... to be able to use it, not just something similar to it, the feat with all the baggage that comes along with it.Rules As Written. As explained above (not counting the FAQ-errata, though, but I said so earlier, already).Sure, the part is redundant and pointless (and makes no sense, as explained above, since it takes a completely different approach to work for two different classes (not just working different to cover the different aspects of the classes; it's like wizards get all the work done for them from the rod, while sorcerers do all the work themselves and only get the basics to actually do so)).The FAQ even states, that the part should be seen as an example for all spontaneous casters, but why stop there? It can also be seen as an example for all casters, that they still have to abide to the rules for metamagic feats (just like sorcerers, who have to spend a full-round action). That could also be a viable possibility. But as I said, as written, the part makes no sense at all, it's a rather silly and totally random rule.BTW, it's really no argument to say, that the part is in there, so it cannot be redundant. I can show you myriads of sentances in the book that are completely redundant (like the casting still incurs an AoO in the metamagic rod description, which is also completely redundant, because there is absolutely nothing in the item description, that might even let you think otherwise... it's not like the rod is casting the spell or something).ByeThanee</blockquote>

Verification