Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="sledged" data-source="post: 1694398" data-attributes="member: 17045">No, by checking the rules pertaining to SLAs, which explicitly states when to and when not to go by the spell discription.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Eh.&nbsp; I suppose I was never really any good at it to begin with.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The debate is reason enough.&nbsp; The D&amp;D rules forum exists so that people discuss the rules of D&amp;D, and I generally enjoy such discussions.&nbsp; This is simply an entertaining diversion for me.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Neither.&nbsp; I'm refuting Hong's claim that &quot;ability description&quot; implies &quot;spell description.&quot;&nbsp; I admit that I may pulled this thread off topic by debating the issue with him to such an extent.&nbsp; If that bothers anyone, I appologize for it, and if it's the consensus that I pursue issue no further, then I'll stop.&nbsp;&nbsp; I never said anything contrary to it.&nbsp; However, despite the majority, there are still those that, for whatever reasons, choose not to buy one or more of the three core rule books, and they rely partly, if not entirely, on the SRDs.&nbsp; In addition, there are those who do have all three core rule books, but in addtion use the SRD to clearify things.&nbsp; Everyone that has the core books doesn't always consider them to be the final answer when they run into conflicting official sources.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Ok, I admit, it was a bad attempt at a joke.&nbsp; Tough crowd.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="sledged, post: 1694398, member: 17045"] No, by checking the rules pertaining to SLAs, which explicitly states when to and when not to go by the spell discription. Eh. I suppose I was never really any good at it to begin with. The debate is reason enough. The D&D rules forum exists so that people discuss the rules of D&D, and I generally enjoy such discussions. This is simply an entertaining diversion for me. Neither. I'm refuting Hong's claim that "ability description" implies "spell description." I admit that I may pulled this thread off topic by debating the issue with him to such an extent. If that bothers anyone, I appologize for it, and if it's the consensus that I pursue issue no further, then I'll stop. I never said anything contrary to it. However, despite the majority, there are still those that, for whatever reasons, choose not to buy one or more of the three core rule books, and they rely partly, if not entirely, on the SRDs. In addition, there are those who do have all three core rule books, but in addtion use the SRD to clearify things. Everyone that has the core books doesn't always consider them to be the final answer when they run into conflicting official sources. Ok, I admit, it was a bad attempt at a joke. Tough crowd. [/QUOTE]

Verification