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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9530301" data-attributes="member: 71699">That doesn't correctly follow my argument (see my <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/not-a-fan-of-the-new-eldritch-knight.707157/post-9529579" target="_blank">#380</a>). In a nutshell I'm saying that the reason some features that let you cast spells specify "your" and others do not, is that some features grant you spells (Spellcasting is an example) and others apply to spells granted to you by other features (Agonizing Blast and War Magic are both examples.)The word "your" is used consistently in the latter type of feature, to say - this will let you do something regarding spells you have in virtue of some other feature but it won't grant you any spells. It's reasonable text to include.Whether or not the rules ought to specify that you must own a potion in order to drink it, they do specify that"Before you can cast a spell, you must have the spell prepared in your mind..." One reason the designers may have been motivated to expressly state that is that where using objects if close to ordinary experience, casting spells is not. But whatever their motivation, they included text specifying that when it comes to spells, you have to know them before you can use them. The text goes on to read"Your features specify which spells you have access to, if any..." Reinforcing the point that characters expressly gain spells by virtue of some features, while other features let them use those spells in different ways but do not grant them. To say "your Wizard spells" places War Magic in the second category, and further narrows it to only spells gained from the Wizard list just in case a character has access to multiple lists.In summary, my <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/not-a-fan-of-the-new-eldritch-knight.707157/post-9529483" target="_blank">#378</a> showed what the text would look like without "your". It would look like (or at least be ambiguous and potentially mistaken for) a feature that granted the ability to cast wizard cantrips rather than one that did something with the ability to cast wizard cantrips granted by some other feature. Even were an EK to somehow lack Spellcasting, War Magic would continue to function so long as they had some other "Wizard cantrips" such as from an Elven Lineage.</blockquote>

Verification