Incense of Meditation

[IcyCool]

I see -- I just don't agree.

So all that talk about leaving slots open would be silly in your campaign? I guess I'm confused, are you saying that if a wizard prepares his spells in the morning, and leaves 2 first level slots open, he needs more than the 15 minutes to fill those slots at a later time that day?

 

[Ovinomancer]

... I guess Scion let's the incense work with wizards, too, but spellcasters who don't prepare spells (like sorcerers and bards) don't get any love from the incense.

Nope, he wouldn't. He has already stated that he has houseruled it so it only applies to divine casters. As have I. The rule, however, does not prevent wizards from benifitting as long as they possess at least one level of a divine casting class.

Hype... Thanks for the great clarification!

 

[Scion]

Nope, he wouldn't. He has already stated that he has houseruled it so it only applies to divine casters. As have I. The rule, however, does not prevent wizards from benifitting as long as they possess at least one level of a divine casting class.

Actually it is currently sitting in the item bins 'do not use' section, along with things like thought bottle.

Until I can figure out a way to make me feel that it is balanced (perhaps I'll cut down the price and make it work only for healing/inflict spells that are prepared ahead of time, that might work).

 

[Infiniti2000]

So all that talk about leaving slots open would be silly in your campaign? I guess I'm confused, are you saying that if a wizard prepares his spells in the morning, and leaves 2 first level slots open, he needs more than the 15 minutes to fill those slots at a later time that day?

I'm saying that IMC, houserule or not, he needs only the 15 minutes of prep time (or longer for more spells, etc.). I'm saying I think it's a houserule, and that you need an hour of rest (not necessarily sleep) prior to those 15 minutes, but I don't care enough to argue that point since I don't follow that rule. So, tell me I'm playing RAW on this point and we're happy. Yes, this means Jhulae had a good rebuttal.

Actually it is currently sitting in the item bins 'do not use' section, along with things like thought bottle.

So, if you don't use it and don't plan to even allow it, why so vehemently argue the interpretation you know is broken? Was the huge amount of effort you put in this thread just for the hell of it?

Nope, he wouldn't. He has already stated that he has houseruled it so it only applies to divine casters.

No, allowing it only for divine spells is NOT a houserule IMO. I had a separate point about wizards that we'll just drop.

But, since everyone only allows it for divine spells (RAW or houserule), or doesn't use the item, I guess there's nothing more to debate in this thread, right?

 

[Scion]

So, if you don't use it and don't plan to even allow it, why so vehemently argue the interpretation you know is broken? Was the huge amount of effort you put in this thread just for the hell of it?

If you will be so kind as to read my posts I have already explained before.

It is about awareness of an issue so that the powers that be may fix it or so that people will know that there is an issue and so can plan ahead for it. No one likes a game that is disrupted because one person feels it works in X way while another feels it works in Y way.

For an item like this it could definately cause issues.

It isnt about how we would choose to use them in our games. We could rule that saps do d100 damage and cause infernals to spawn and that would be our own little thing. It is about knowing exactly what the rules do, what the implications are, and being able to make good choices.

Knowing that this item works for all prepared spells allows the dm to plan for it or shift it for his game, before it becomes an issue.

Fixing things 'before' they are issues is a big deal to me. It might even be a big deal to others here, given the nature of the forum.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Fixing things 'before' they are issues is a big deal to me. It might even be a big deal to others here, given the nature of the forum.

See, I like to point out potential problems, too, but you spent 40+ posts and 8 days defending a RAW interpretation that you not only would not use, but you don't even allow the item. When I defend a point of view, to the death so to speak (which is really what you're doing), it's because I actually care about my point of view and think it's the right one and should be played that way (in my game obviously - please don't think I'm that arrogant). I don't defend an interpretation that I know to be broken or otherwise ridiculous, particularly if I have no interest in the item itself. That's disingenuous in my opinion.

 

[Scion]

You are claiming that something written in plain english means something other than what it says.

I find that rather unfortunate and am trying to get you to realize that the english is fine, you are just reading too much into it. More than is actually there in fact.

Just because you have houseruled it a certain way does not mean that it suddenly makes the raw say something different.

This is the rules forum, I dont care if the rules make some crazy, insane thing happen, I'll fix it in my game. But I want to know what crazy, insane things that will happen if I do not change something.

A player picking this thing up is perfectly justified to think that his cleric X/wizard Y/Mystic theurge Z has just gotten a nice little boost in power whenever he needs it. If the dm then steps in and tells him that it does something else in his games, fine. If the dm instead steps in and tells the player that they are cheating that is a completely different matter. Not being able to read the english is not an excuse for such a dm.

Why does it matter one way or the other what I will do in my own game with relation to this bit of raw? Just because I am not going to use it that way does not mean that isnt what the rule says.

Like I said, informed decissions are important.

 

[Pinotage]

You are claiming that something written in plain english means something other than what it says.

I've been following this thread with interest, and wanted clarification on something.

Are you suggesting that a Mystic Theurge is a divine spellcaster? If you want to get into the semantics of the english language, then I'd say he isn't. A Mystic Theurge is a divine and arcane spellcaster. A divine spellcaster in my book in one that can only cast divine spells.

Other than that, I think your reading is correct if you take your definition of divine spellcaster to include spellcasters who are divine and arcane spellcasters. I think there's a difference, though.

Pinotage

 

[Scion]

So you are telling me that if someone asks the mystic theurge if they are a divine caster they should say no because they are a divine caster and an arcane caster?

I am afraid that I dont see that as being true. They are a divine caster, they are an arcane caster.

if you have a portal that only divine casters may enter then can the theurge enter?
if you have a portal that lets everyone through but arcane casters may not pass may the theurge enter?

The theurge is both divine caster and arcane caster.

If someone is a divine caster and has levels in anything else (assuming the anything else does not remove the divine casting abilities) then they are still a divine caster.

Sure, they may not be as strong of a divine caster as other divine casters, but having other talents does not make them 'not' a divine caster.


If I have a special dart gun that only shoots ballons that are yellow and there is a balloon that is both yellow and red it will pop it. Why? All that the gun asks is 'is the balloon yellow'. The red part of the balloon is still popped.

If the item here had said 'divine only spells' then there wouldnt be an issue, but it doesnt, it says 'all of his spells', his refers to needing to be a divine caster.



If you wish to say that divine casters are casters who can only cast divine spells then that is your call of course, but it seems like a very strange limiting condition to me. Does that mean that if they ever pick up some sort of use activated item which says something like, 'this item allows you to cast spell X Y number of times per day' that they would no longer qualify as a divine caster if the spell in question is arcane?

 

[Scion]

I dont know if my post above was clear enough, it certainly wasnt very brief

I'd just like to know why you feel that someone who is both X and Y does not count as being X or Y when something asks if they are whatever it is asking for.

As an example that is used easily in the game, if someone is lawful good then they are both lawful and good. If something effects lawful people then it will effect them, even though they are 'lawful good' and not just 'lawful'.