Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pinotage" data-source="post: 2406990" data-attributes="member: 15194">Yes, he can. In game, absolutely. I think you're looking at my two arguments are one rather than two separate points.The first, as I've stated many times, is that as written I agree with Scion and others that the RAW states _all_ spells, arcane or divine, are affected, and that a divine spellcaster is defined as somebody who casts divine spells, including Theurges and other casters. I don't agree that was the RAW states is the correct interpretation, as I believe the 'divine' bias of the item is enough indication that it should only apply to divine spells.My second must not be confused with the first. I wasn't talking gaming or game mechanics, I was talking language. A language reading of divine IMO means nothing other than divine, much like a red flower means nothing more than red. I think all the analogies confused the issue somewhat and I wasn't always clear. With this I was pointing out that if you separated game and language, you couldn't argue that divine meant anything else. I'm sure there are some who disagree, but I don't want to rehash old points.I'm not a big fan of discarding intent completely in favor of RAW. My second point was indicating that if you were going to use RAW, you needed a language approach, not a game mechanics approach.Hope that makes sense.Pinotage</blockquote>