Sage Advice's ruling on staves

[Hypersmurf]

The alternative would be to redefine "several" for the
purpose of counting spells on staffs, and my training (as a math guy) doesn't allow that.

Well, the Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary doesn't have a problem with it. Two is 'more than one or two', after all.

-Hyp.

 

[AntiStateQuixote]

"A wand is a thin baton that contains a single spell."
"A staff is a long shaft of wood that stores several spells."

I can't believe you all aren't as pissed as I am that we can't have staves made of crystal or ivory or any other long "shafty" material.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I can't believe you all aren't as pissed as I am that we can't have staves made of crystal or ivory or any other long "shafty" material.

Clearly imaginative staff construction got the, er, shaft?

 

[Mistwell]

Wouldn't those be considered cases where the specific instance overrides the general rule,
but leaves the general rule intact? The alternative would be to redefine "several" for the
purpose of counting spells on staffs, and my training (as a math guy) doesn't allow that.
(If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?)

(Or, the word "several" could be declared to be in error, and replaced with "two or more".)

Or how about it's an indication that "several" is meant to describe the high maximum ceiling number of spells it can contain, and not the floor minumum number of spells it must contain.

Again (since everyone is ignoring it, and Hyp specifically cut it from his reply), if I say my dice bag holds several dice, does that mean my dice bag MUST hold several dice in order to be considered a dice bag? Or is several meant to clarify that it can hold many, not that it MUST hold many? In my opinion, it's the later. And the same applies for the staff description. Staves can hold several spells, rather than must hold several spells. Several is not often used as a restriction on capacity. Rather, it is more often used as a means of conveying the flexibilty of capacity.

 

[Mistwell]

I'd call 'reasonable' a hell of a stretch there, myself



It's interesting browsing dictionaries for the word:

"being more than two but fewer than many in number or kind", Random House Unabridged Dictionary.

"Being of a number more than two or three but not many", American Heritage Dictionary.

"of an indefinite number more than 2 or 3 but not many", WordNet.

"more than one or two, but not a great many", Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary.

-Hyp.

My car holds several passengers. Is it still a car if only one person is in it?

 

[Sithobi1]

If a car is defined as a vehicle which holds several passengers, no.

 

[Rystil Arden]

My car holds several passengers. Is it still a car if only one person is in it?

Is a car still a car with zero passengers?

Is a staff still a staff (magic item definition here) with zero spells in it?

 

[Hypersmurf]

My car holds several passengers. Is it still a car if only one person is in it?

Again, 'hold' can refer to potential: "to contain or be capable of containing".

'Store' doesn't... and the hypothetical Staff of Fireball isn't capable of storing more than one spell.

A Staff of Fireball and Scorching Ray is capable of storing more than one spell, but it also stores more than one spell, so the potential vs actual debate doesn't come up. A Staff of Fireball neither stores nor can store more than one spell.

-Hyp.

 

[Mistwell]

If a car is defined as a vehicle which holds several passengers, no.

And if you cannot see how silly that is, then I am at a loss.

Just because you can use the word several to generally describe the capabilities of a specific object, doesn't mean that the object ceases to be that specific thing if it is not being used to those full capabilities.

 

[Hypersmurf]

And if you cannot see how silly that is, then I am at a loss.

Just because you can use the word several to generally describe the capabilities of a specific object, doesn't mean that the object ceases to be that specific thing if it is not being used to those full capabilities.

A gaming group contains one DM and several players.

Let's say we have a DM and three players - we've got ourselves a gaming group!

Now the three players move to different cities.

Is the DM, by himself, a gaming group?

-Hyp.