Reading Scrolls in armour

[coyote6]

Yeppers- but it doesnt hurt to ask again..or pester.

Wait -- does pester have a somatic component? Do you have to gesture to pester?

 

[Caliban]

I checked... this comment is in V5 and V6.

Yes, that's what I said.

Version 6 is the one where the Masters of the Wild stuff was added, version 5 is the one where the scroll question was added.

My point was that it hasn't been in the FAQ for "5 revisions without being changed". It's a very recent addition to the FAQ.

 

[Ristamar]

Wait -- does pester have a somatic component? Do you have to gesture to pester?

Nah. Pester only requires a verbal component. Any added gestures are simply for flair.

On second thought, I suppose it could go the other way, as well...

 

[KarinsDad]

Hey KD... I posted the quote on the 1st page of this thread.

Well, there you go.

The answer is obvious.

The FAQ on armor states that, but not the FAQ on magic items.

Obviously it is in error.

Problem solved.


Oh, that doesn't fly with you all?

Oh well.

In any case, I think that if the intent was for verbal and somatic components to not apply for spell completion items, they should have not used virtually the exact same text as for casting a normal spell.

Editor!!!

 

[mikebr99]

Yes, that's what I said.

Version 6 is the one where the Masters of the Wild stuff was added, version 5 is the one where the scroll question was added.

My point was that it hasn't been in the FAQ for "5 revisions without being changed". It's a very recent addition to the FAQ.

you're right... in this thing anyway... but not the other.

 

[Sigma]

Yes, that's what I said.

Version 6 is the one where the Masters of the Wild stuff was added, version 5 is the one where the scroll question was added.

My point was that it hasn't been in the FAQ for "5 revisions without being changed". It's a very recent addition to the FAQ.

Doesn't Living Greyhawk follow the most current rulings, and they're playing it like the FAQ too? So even if it's only been in the FAQ for a little while, that's the way it's being "officially" played.

IMO, the DMG evidence (particularly the scroll shield) is pretty convincing. All in all, it looks like they either had not made up their minds on the issue of scrolls and arcane failure when the DMG was written, or changed their mind after it was written.

So, we know the "official" response, we know the textual response, and we know that there's a better chance of peace in Middle East than everyone agreeing on the issue.

 

[Caliban]

Doesn't Living Greyhawk follow the most current rulings, and they're playing it like the FAQ too? So even if it's only been in the FAQ for a little while, that's the way it's being "officially" played.

Yes, that's why my character in Living Greyhawk is taking full advantage of this ruling. He's now a 6/1 Fighter/Wizard. I don't plan on taking any more wizard levels, because I no longer need the Still Spell feat.

My experiences with my own character are why I think this ruling is unbalanced, because the price I paid for the benefits was minimal. I think 3 levels and the Still Spell feat are what it should cost to do what my character is doing with a single level of wizard.

IMO, the DMG evidence (particularly the scroll shield) is pretty convincing. All in all, it looks like they either had not made up their minds on the issue of scrolls and arcane failure when the DMG was written, or changed their mind after it was written.

So, we know the "official" response, we know the textual response, and we know that there's a better chance of peace in Middle East than everyone agreeing on the issue.

I agree with you there.

 

[Sigma]

Yes, that's why my character in Living Greyhawk is taking full advantage of this ruling. He's now a 6/1 Fighter/Wizard. I don't plan on taking any more wizard levels, because I no longer need the Still Spell feat.

My experiences with my own character are why I think this ruling is unbalanced, because the price I paid for the benefits was minimal. I think 3 levels and the Still Spell feat are what it should cost to do what my character is doing with a single level of wizard.

Sorry, that was meant to be a rhetorical question.

I think you're a master min-maxer (and I salute you for that), and could find another loophole to exploit if this one were closed (using wands for example).

 

[Metalsmith]

My experiences with my own character are why I think this ruling is unbalanced, because the price I paid for the benefits was minimal. I think 3 levels and the Still Spell feat are what it should cost to do what my character is doing with a single level of wizard.

So now that you think the ruleing is wrong are you going to stop playing your character this way?

Metalsmith
(I'm not too bright, see?)

 

[mikebr99]

So now that you think the ruleing is wrong are you going to stop playing your character this way?

Metalsmith
(I'm not too bright, see?)

Probably... but he is also saying that the use of scrolls aren't subject to an arcane spell failure check!!! Which he is going to house rule outa here.