Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Seeten" data-source="post: 2154789" data-attributes="member: 27186">I'd like to add here that I agree fully with Rystil. Which seems to be quite common. I reserve value judgements and touchy feely until after I have the logic sorted. I am a humanities geek AND a math geek, by virtue of having majored in philosophy, and logic. I apply the logic test on the rule, any and all supporting rules or contradictory rules, determine how the rule applies across the board, and THEN and only then, do I make a decision based on any feelings.Anything that isnt important, I handwave anyway, in the interest of the story, but anything important that cant be handwaved, we see what the rules say and mean, and then, if we think they are wrong, or obtuse, or nonsensical, we house rule straight away.  Reading into the rules, one rule at a time, whats common sense and ruling the RAW = Your conclusion is a bad idea, or as Hypersmurf states, "Dangerous, that."Illegal target = spell disappears? Check Shillelagh. I think this is a good idea. It shows how it works in a case that clearly shows the target becoming illegal doesnt end the spell.  Now you may disagree and house rule illegal targets = spell is dispelled, but then you have all the rules ramifications that come from that. Polymorph as dispel, stone to flesh flesh to stone as dispel, etc. If the rules, through multiple applications, show themselves to support something, changing it creates a house of cards effect, where you then have to rebuild the house with new pillars, and new rules. Its a lot of work.I agree that the spirit of the rules is important, but what Hypersmurf does is less "Counting adjectives" as finding all the cases in the rules where X applies, and seeing what they show the actual rule to be. To need this, the original statement of the ruling needs to be unclear as to the final result, of course, or doing a case study is unnecessary. Law students do this a lot also. Want to see what the law is on X? Check the rulings. Do a case study. Johanneson v Brahms shows that X. State vs Alexander Shows X. Therefore, the law states, X.If you believe X is wrong, then you draft legislation to change it.</blockquote>

Verification