Author Topic: Fuck You to casters.  (Read 60856 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #240 on: March 10, 2011, 10:42:28 PM »
PHB 180 conflict with conclusion

open discussion?

Must you?  Fine, put forth an argument for a type that you think they are.  Try not to have a rules conflict with more than 5 total books, and no rules conflict with absolutely all of the core books (Hint: if you claim they're not Ex, Sp, or Su you're going to have to conflict with every single core book, as well as quite a few others).  I've yet to see a single possibility that was a better fit than Ex (especially considering the bit where there's creatures that explicitly have the ability to cast spells like a class as an Ex ability).

Sunic:  Sure looked like he admitted he was right there.

JaronK
Well, I don't really care whether they are Ex or aren't. I noticed this point in a thread on another board, and I thought it was interesting. That's pretty much all. For that reason, I'm not going to get into a "I'm right, You're Wrong" discussion on this particular topic. I really only brought it up to point out, that as usual, the designers of 3.5 weren't very consistent.

PHB 180 directly contradicts the MM in that it lists Na as a subheading under Special Abilities. This obviously implies that Na can also be special abilities, despite the MM's assertion that Special Abilities can only be Ex, Su, or Sp. It also contains the catch-all that un-designated abilities fall into the Na category. Since Spells is not designated a type, it would fall into the catch-all category based on the PHB ruling on the subject.

Of course, then you get into "which is the primary source," and this is going to be subjective (unless somebody can convince me otherwise, which I welcome). One could argue that since Polymorph is changing you into a monster, the MM is the primary source since its main topic is monsters. One could also argue that since we are talking about the the actions and abilities performed by and gained (respectively) by a player character, the PHB is the primary source.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I just thought it was an interesting point.

I do know that some creatures were explicitly given Spells as (Ex), but I searched and searched and couldn't find it. If I could get a source and page number, that'd be SPLENDID! I welcome it.

Thoughts?
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #241 on: March 10, 2011, 11:22:29 PM »
PHB 180 directly contradicts the MM in that it lists Na as a subheading under Special Abilities. This obviously implies that Na can also be special abilities, despite the MM's assertion that Special Abilities can only be Ex, Su, or Sp. It also contains the catch-all that un-designated abilities fall into the Na category. Since Spells is not designated a type, it would fall into the catch-all category based on the PHB ruling on the subject.

Note that the PHB ALSO says that all Special Abilities are Ex, Sp, or Su.  It's on page 142, where it lists only those possibilities.  The DMG also says it.  This confusion is clarified by the SRD's placement of Natural Abilities as well as the Rules of the Game article (All About Polymorph 1), which both clarify that Natural Abilities are a catch all for abilities in general, and are only placed under Special Abilities to give an out for abilities which are not special.  It's poorly written in the PHB but the clarifications in so many other books help a great deal.

Quote
Of course, then you get into "which is the primary source," and this is going to be subjective (unless somebody can convince me otherwise, which I welcome). One could argue that since Polymorph is changing you into a monster, the MM is the primary source since its main topic is monsters. One could also argue that since we are talking about the the actions and abilities performed by and gained (respectively) by a player character, the PHB is the primary source.

The primary source for ability types (specifically, Special Abilities, namely Ex, Sp, or Su abilities) is the Monster Manual, which is far more relevant.  Though note that even the PHB references class abilities as being Special Abilities (again, check out 142 and the examples therein).  Also, no book ever lists natural abilities as being anything other than abilities (not special abilities, just abilities) which are inherent to the physical form of the creature.  Flight from wings, claw attacks from claws, movement speed from legs, etc.

Quote
I'm not saying you're wrong, I just thought it was an interesting point.

It is a point to consider.  Weight of evidence does point in a very specific direction, though.

Quote
I do know that some creatures were explicitly given Spells as (Ex), but I searched and searched and couldn't find it. If I could get a source and page number, that'd be SPLENDID! I welcome it.

Fiendish Codex 1, there's a critter whose name starts with L (that should be enough for you to find it) and it gets Cleric casting except Charisma based... this is explicitly Ex.  Monster Manual V also has IIRC two monsters with Arcane Talent (Ex) which is just Sorcerer or Wizard casting (I forget which), and I believe one was a Hobgoblin.

JaronK

BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #242 on: March 10, 2011, 11:33:48 PM »
I think it's somewhat debatable whether the MM would be the primary source in this case, but I do agree that the preponderance of evidence points toward it being Ex. Is there anything in the DMG that would make this appear to be so?

I'm not so sure Arcane Talent and Mock Divinity quite fit the bill as a definitive when we're talking about "Spells," but whatever, it's just fucking stupid writing.
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #243 on: March 10, 2011, 11:59:40 PM »
I think it's somewhat debatable whether the MM would be the primary source in this case, but I do agree that the preponderance of evidence points toward it being Ex. Is there anything in the DMG that would make this appear to be so?

Page 289.  It says the same thing as MM, and uses class abilities as the examples of the various special abilities.  Fiend Folio also says it, for what that's worth.  And of course SRD.

Quote
I'm not so sure Arcane Talent and Mock Divinity quite fit the bill as a definitive when we're talking about "Spells," but whatever, it's just fucking stupid writing.

It's the closest thing there is, so I guess it'll have to do.  It does deal with the whole "Ex abilities can't be interrupted" issue because it's an Ex ability that clearly works just like spells (since it is, you know, the ability to cast spells).  All in all the "can't be interrupted" line is REALLY weird, because lots of Ex abilities can (a Barbarian being tripped while running is an obvious example, or a Rogue being interrupted while dealing with a trap).

JaronK

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #244 on: March 11, 2011, 01:19:11 PM »
Stuff saying JaronK is wrong.

His rebuttal
Oh god, it's you Aelrynth?  No wonder. 

No wonder of all the people posting here I say you're an idiot.


***

PHB 180 conflict with conclusion

open discussion?

Must you?  Fine, put forth an argument for a type that you think they are.  Try not to have a rules conflict with more than 5 total books, and no rules conflict with absolutely all of the core books (Hint: if you claim they're not Ex, Sp, or Su you're going to have to conflict with every single core book, as well as quite a few others).  I've yet to see a single possibility that was a better fit than Ex (especially considering the bit where there's creatures that explicitly have the ability to cast spells like a class as an Ex ability).
Who said Class Features are always a Special Ability? Quote please.
That's what? 5th time asking for one?

***

It's the closest thing there is, so I guess it'll have to do.  It does deal with the whole "Ex abilities can't be interrupted" issue because it's an Ex ability that clearly works just like spells (since it is, you know, the ability to cast spells).  All in all the "can't be interrupted" line is REALLY weird, because lots of Ex abilities can (a Barbarian being tripped while running is an obvious example, or a Rogue being interrupted while dealing with a trap).
Fast Movement grants +10 to land speed, it is not interrupted by the choice to move less nor is it interrupted by being tripped or sleeping. You're land speed remains the same and more impotently Fast Movement is never removed from the mathematic formal that decides your land speed.

If we want to go with name calling. I'd say you really need to read a tome of wisdom. Not that an additional +5 would put you near the average score, but it would help.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #245 on: March 11, 2011, 05:04:54 PM »
Who said Class Features are always a Special Ability? Quote please.
That's what? 5th time asking for one?

Nobody said that.  Some (you included, IIRC) claimed they weren't, and thus that since Spells on classes were class features, they weren't Special Abilities.  It was sufficient then simply to show that the two categories were not mutually exclusive.  Since both the DMG and PHB only use class features in their examples of special abilities, clearly class features can be special abilities.  The reason nobody's been paying attention to you on that point is that you were fighting a strawman.

With that said, since class features are not inherent to the physical form of the creature (definitions of Na abilites, RotG:AAP and PHB) they don't fit the definition of Natural with the possible exception of increases to already inherent stuff (saves, BAB, etc).  Since they are abilities, that does leave all class features that aren't just those basic numerical increases as Ex, Sp, or Su (mostly Ex).  The fact that every time a class is listed in a stat block (where Special Abilities are clearly labeled) all class features that give any new ability are always listed as Special Abilities also points to them being Special.  So it is likely that all class features that actually give any new ability (such as sneak attack, or spells, or whatever) are special abilities (by the definition of special abilities as Ex, Sp, or Su abilities), but that's not critical to prove... all that must be shown is that they can be, and that spells are.

Quote
Fast Movement grants +10 to land speed, it is not interrupted by the choice to move less nor is it interrupted by being tripped or sleeping. You're land speed remains the same and more impotently Fast Movement is never removed from the mathematic formal that decides your land speed.

Ah, so the action of movement granted by the Ex ability fast movement can be interrupted by being tripped, but the ability is not interrupted?  Interesting.  It's almost like THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT I WAS MAKING.   When you interrupt a spell, the action of the spell is interrupted, but the ability is not.  But now that it's your idea, perhaps you can accept it.  I mean, you quoted it yourself:

"If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell (range, area, or the like) cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted."

Now, if you try to run with fast movement in conditions where you can't (you're underwater, you're tripped), the running fails.  But the ability is still there.  Just like you just said.  Same thing with spells. 

Quote
If we want to go with name calling. I'd say you really need to read a tome of wisdom. Not that an additional +5 would put you near the average score, but it would help.

Hey, it looked like you were saying that's who you were.  And frankly, this discussion was reminding me of when Aelrynth spent quite a few posts telling me that flails and clubs were wielded in the same way... the complete ignoring of all facts that disagree, for example.

Look, SorO, I get that you want to be taken seriously, but the fact that absolutely no one is agreeing with you at all should tell you something.  Plus, your position contradicts every single core book, designer commentary on the topic, and a number of other sources as well.  So I'll tell you what, convince one other person that you're right and I'll debate you again.   Until then, consider yourself ignored due to complete lack of rationality.  I'd suggest using actual rules quotes to make your case, taken in context, instead of more nonsense about fruit and failures to read what you're quoting.

JaronK

The_Laughing_Man

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 212
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #246 on: March 11, 2011, 05:57:07 PM »
Driving by.. :) I was just wondering the following:

Quote from: 3.5 PHB p.21

Quote from: 3.5 PHB p.51

Quote from: 3.5 PHB p.308, p.312
fighter (Ftr): A class made up of characters who have exceptional combat capability and unequalled skill with weapons.
...
rogue (Rog): A class made up of characters who primarily rely on stealth rather than brute force or magical ability.
sorcerer (Sor): A class made up of characters who have inborn magical ability.

What kind of inborn magical ability do sorcerers have? class feature: spells? spellcasting?

Littha

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2155
    • Email
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #247 on: March 11, 2011, 07:30:45 PM »
Quote from: 3.5 PHB p.51
Sorcerers create magic the way a poet creates poems, with inborn talent honed by practice.


AleksanderTheGreat

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 290
  • Dumbass. o_o
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #248 on: March 11, 2011, 07:35:46 PM »
Simple put, Wizard learns how to tap "the universe" for magic, but a Sorc has it in him. Or at least that's how I see it.
Quote from: Sephirothsword117
Quote from: Solo
Optimizing is the antithesis of roleplaying because it takes focus away from the important parts of the game.
I'm inclined to disagree. People work hard on there characters, there personality, back ground, appearance, so forth. No one wants there character that they have invested time, energy, thought, and probably emotion in to be killed because they didn't take strong enough feats or skills or spells or what have you.

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #249 on: March 11, 2011, 08:08:44 PM »
What kind of inborn magical ability do sorcerers have? class feature: spells? spellcasting?

They have an ability called "Spells."  This ability is a Special Ability and a Class Feature/Class Ability.  It's not racial (since it comes from your class) even though it's described in a way that sounds kind of like it is.

JaronK

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #250 on: March 11, 2011, 09:14:59 PM »
Who said Class Features are always a Special Ability? Quote please.
That's what? 5th time asking for one?

Nobody said that.  Some (you included, IIRC) claimed they weren't, and thus that since Spells on classes were class features, they weren't Special Abilities.
Let it be known you have conceded that class features are not by default special abilities. This is what you keep skipping over.

Spellcasting is defined in the PHB, likewise as the errata states if any discrepancies between the PHB & MM then the MM is ignored, the PHB is primary source. Secondary source states spellcasting is a special ability, primary source does not.

If you appect only primary sources (which varies by post, see quoting FF1/MMV to back your point) then spellcasting is not a special ability.
If you use additional sources, such as anything published after the DMGII, the updates which provide rule clarification also state spellcasting is not a special ability.

Those are my points, again.


Quote
Fast Movement grants +10 to land speed, it is not interrupted by the choice to move less nor is it interrupted by being tripped or sleeping. You're land speed remains the same and more impotently Fast Movement is never removed from the mathematic formal that decides your land speed.
It's almost like THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT I WAS MAKING.
Not even close.

RAW: Charm Humanoid on an undead creature causes the spellcasting to fail.
RAW: Solid Fog limits you to a movement rate 5ft per round.
RAW: Solid Fog does not set your land speed to anything.
RAW: Solid Fog does not prevent Fast Movement from adding 10 to your base land speed.
Made up BS: I Haz think I can haz not move there be my larnd sped haz changed.

Let me ask you this.
1. The Stunned condition prevents you from taking actions.
2. When your initiative count comes up it is your turn and you may take actions.
Does stunning change your initiative modifier? Because that is what you are implying

Look, SorO, I get that you want to be taken seriously, but the fact that absolutely no one is agreeing with you at all should tell you something.  Plus, your position contradicts every single core book, designer commentary on the topic, and a number of other sources as well.
Read any book past the DMGII. Poof, your statement about my contradicting every rule book is a lie. those books were of course made by a designer, provides commentary on the topic, and is a huge number of the other sources. Do not say all if all you have is the MM & ignore updates vs PHB.

Now listen closely. As you pointed out for me. Class Features are not special abilities. As in simply being a class feature does not state it is a special ability whereas many specific class features do note they are. Only grounds for saying spellcasting is a special ability is the MM1's glossary statement (later rules revoke). Further you still remain shoving a special ability tag on a by raw unclassified term (which is a house rule) and hey look. You are still making crap up to say Ex is the official classification to what spellcasting should be marked as.

Every damn thing I've said so far I've stuck to, and of every damn thing, your drifting closer to them. Not even a page ago you were claiming all class features are special abilities. I guess my comment of yelling things enough times does work. Well I'm bored, let's keep going.

Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

Bauglir

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2346
  • TriOptimum
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #251 on: March 11, 2011, 11:11:48 PM »
Spellcasting is defined in the PHB, likewise as the errata states if any discrepancies between the PHB & MM then the MM is ignored, the PHB is primary source. Secondary source states spellcasting is a special ability, primary source does not.

If you appect only primary sources (which varies by post, see quoting FF1/MMV to back your point) then spellcasting is not a special ability.
If you use additional sources, such as anything published after the DMGII, the updates which provide rule clarification also state spellcasting is not a special ability.

I don't care enough about the rest, but you completely misunderstand how primary vs secondary works. Primary overrides secondary when there's a conflict. There's no conflict here; one fails to mention that spells are special abilities, but that's not equivalent to actually saying that they aren't special abilities. Failure to assert a positive does not equate to asserting the negative.
So you end up stuck in an endless loop, unable to act, forever.

In retrospect, much like Keanu Reeves.

BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #252 on: March 11, 2011, 11:15:45 PM »
moar snacks!!
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #253 on: March 12, 2011, 01:17:45 AM »
Who said Class Features are always a Special Ability? Quote please.
That's what? 5th time asking for one?

Nobody said that.  Some (you included, IIRC) claimed they weren't, and thus that since Spells on classes were class features, they weren't Special Abilities.
Let it be known you have conceded that class features are not by default special abilities. This is what you keep skipping over.

No, I said they likely ARE Special Abilities (except for BAB, saves, hp, and other things of that nature), but that that fact is irrelevant to the point, as all that matters is that class abilities can be Special Abilities.  There's a difference.  In every situation where the question of "are they special abilities" comes up they are always listed as such.  This includes every single example of a creature with class abilities being listed in an old stat block (where Special Abilities are always shown as such), where the class abilities are always listed as Special Attacks or Special Qualities.  This also follows from the DMG and PHB definitions of Special Abilities, which use Class Abilities as their examples.  Not only that, but the 3.5 FAQ on page 38 outright says that every Class Feature that "you can use to hurt or hinder a foe" is a Special Attack.  Out of curiosity, do you believe spells can, or cannot, be used to hurt or hinder a foe?

Can you name a single counter example?  Surely if what I'm saying is wrong there'd be one.

Quote
Spellcasting is defined in the PHB, likewise as the errata states if any discrepancies between the PHB & MM then the MM is ignored, the PHB is primary source. Secondary source states spellcasting is a special ability, primary source does not.

The PHB does not state that Spellcasting is not a Special Ability.  It says nothing on the topic whatsoever.  Monster Manual does say it's a Special Ability.  There is no conflict there.  You're not using the Primary Source rules correctly at all.  For what you're saying to apply, the PHB would have to specifically state that spellcasting was not a Special Ability.

Furthermore, the primary source for Special Abilities is in fact the Monster Manual, not the PHB.  Since the question is "is the Spells ability a Special Ability?" the Monster Manual is in fact the primary source.  If the question was "is the Spells ability a Class Feature?" the PHB would be the primary source (and the answer would be yes, for classes).  

Quote
If you appect only primary sources (which varies by post, see quoting FF1/MMV to back your point) then spellcasting is not a special ability.

No primary source states this.  Once again, you're just making stuff up.

Quote
If you use additional sources, such as anything published after the DMGII, the updates which provide rule clarification also state spellcasting is not a special ability.

No book after DMGII says that either.  You're making this up too.  In fact, two books printed after that point (FC 1 and MMV) list the ability to cast spells as Ex, though it's only a similar (not quite identical) ability.

Seriously, try to find one quote, and try to remember that simply not saying something isn't the same as saying something isn't true.  I mean heck, if a rule says "A dagger is a light weapon" would you quote that as a source saying daggers aren't throwing weapons?

Quote
Those are my points, again.

To summarize, your points are that you think not directly saying spells are special abilities in a random given section is the same as saying they're not special abilities, you think that the Player's Handbook is the primary source on the topic of ability types despite the fact that the Monster Manual is, and you claim that a ton of books say Spells aren't Special Abilities despite having not one single quote to back that up (and a number of quotes which are counter to that).  You have absolutely not one single quote to back up any of your points.

You also have to ignore the SRD and every book printed with the older stat block summary, including the primary source for Special Ability types (MM).

Yeah, any wonder no one's buying it?

Quote
Quote
Fast Movement grants +10 to land speed, it is not interrupted by the choice to move less nor is it interrupted by being tripped or sleeping. You're land speed remains the same and more impotently Fast Movement is never removed from the mathematic formal that decides your land speed.
It's almost like THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT I WAS MAKING.
Not even close.

RAW: Charm Humanoid on an undead creature causes the spellcasting to fail.

It causes the casting of the spell to fail, but has no effect on the ability to cast spells.  You don't suddenly lack the ability to cast spells if you do that... you could still cast a Swift Action spell that round, for example.  So... same thing.

Quote
RAW: Solid Fog limits you to a movement rate 5ft per round.
RAW: Solid Fog does not set your land speed to anything.
RAW: Solid Fog does not prevent Fast Movement from adding 10 to your base land speed.

Right, just like casting Charm Person (it's not called Charm Humanoid, do you even read the books?) on an undead creature does not change your ability to cast spells, Solid Fog doesn't remove your +10' Fast Movement ability.  It's just that the spell you cast failed to work, and the ability to move in the fog fails too.

Quote
Made up BS: I Haz think I can haz not move there be my larnd sped haz changed.

Erm, no.  That's just you playing at strawmen again.  The point I've been saying all along is that the ability to do something is not the same as the action that occurs.  The action of running fast can be interrupted or stopped, but the ability to run faster is always there.

Quote
Let me ask you this.
1. The Stunned condition prevents you from taking actions.
2. When your initiative count comes up it is your turn and you may take actions.
Does stunning change your initiative modifier? Because that is what you are implying

I'm not implying that.  Nobody's implying that.  The stunned condition simply stops you from taking actions... why would it change your initiative?  I've never said anything like what you're claiming.

Quote
Read any book past the DMGII. Poof, your statement about my contradicting every rule book is a lie. those books were of course made by a designer, provides commentary on the topic, and is a huge number of the other sources. Do not say all if all you have is the MM & ignore updates vs PHB.

Quote ONE book past (or before) the DMGII that says Spells aren't a Special Ability.  One.  Come on, you can do it.

Quote
Now listen closely. As you pointed out for me. Class Features are not special abilities. As in simply being a class feature does not state it is a special ability whereas many specific class features do note they are. Only grounds for saying spellcasting is a special ability is the MM1's glossary statement (later rules revoke).

FAIL.  The following are grounds for saying the ability to cast spells is a Special Ability:  MM1, SRD, Rules of the Game, Fiend Folio, MMII, MMIII, the official 3.5 FAQ, and every single other book with the older stat block (the new block doesn't say one way or the other, despite your false claims otherwise).  Also Monster Manual V due to Arcane Talent being listed as an Ex ability.

And newer still doesn't trump older.  Primary Source (The Monster Manual is the primary source on ability types) always trumps.

Quote
Further you still remain shoving a special ability tag on a by raw unclassified term

If it's by RAW unclassified, then you can show a quote of RAW saying it's unclassified.  Produce the quote.

Quote
Every damn thing I've said so far I've stuck to,

Yes, but the rules don't stick to what you're saying so who cares?

Quote
and of every damn thing, your drifting closer to them. Not even a page ago you were claiming all class features are special abilities.

I said it seemed like that in this very post and the post before it.  But where did I ever say it before that (a page ago)?  Show the quote, or is this you just making stuff up again.

Okay, you've failed to produce any evidence, summarized your points as all being wrong, and proved you don't know the primary source rules.

So here's what we'll do.  You're going to be ignored until you can demonstrate you know the following:

1)  The primary source rules.
2)  At least 5 sources which list Spells as a Special Ability (or the subheadeding Special Attack or Special Quality)
3)  The difference between "evidence of a lack" and "absence of evidence"

For the first two, you must prove you know it using nothing but rules quotes.  For the third, consider the fact that the PHB (the primary source on feats) does not state what ability type feats are.  But other books (BoED 39, for example, as well as the 3.5 FAQ) make it clear that all feats are Ex.  What ability type, then, are feats?

Next, you have to try to use rules quotes (actual quotes, not just random claims) to back up the following false statements you've made in this post alone:

1)  Any book after DMGII states that Spells are not a Special Ability
2)  Newer rules supercede older rules when they conflict

Failure to use rules quotes (including book and page number) which actually substantiate your claim will be treated as conceding that you were wrong.  Since these points are the core of your argument, failure to substantiate both these claims would invalidate everything you've been saying.

JaronK
« Last Edit: March 12, 2011, 09:57:05 AM by JaronK »

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #254 on: March 12, 2011, 02:34:28 AM »
Just fucking stop.

Handy Links

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #255 on: March 12, 2011, 09:38:18 AM »
Just fucking stop.

Fail. Fucking go is more entertaining than fucking stop.
Smiting Imbeciles since 1985.

If you hear this music, run.

And don't forget:


There is no greater contribution than Hi Welcome.

Huge amounts of people are fuckwits. That doesn't mean that fuckwit is a valid lifestyle.

IP proofing and avoiding being CAPed OR - how to make characters relevant in the long term.

Friends don't let friends be Short Bus Hobos.

[spoiler]
Sunic may be more abrasive than sandpaper coated in chainsaws (not that its a bad thing, he really does know what he's talking about), but just posting in this thread without warning and telling him he's an asshole which, if you knew his past experiences on WotC and Paizo is flat-out uncalled for. Never mind the insults (which are clearly 4Chan-level childish). You say people like Sunic are the bane of the internet? Try looking at your own post and telling me you are better than him.

Here's a fun fact: You aren't. By a few leagues.
[/spoiler]

Tshern

  • Clown Prince of Crime
  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 5726
  • Aistii valoa auttavasti
    • Email
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #256 on: March 12, 2011, 01:42:13 PM »
Just fucking stop.

Fail. Fucking go is more entertaining than fucking stop.
Even with all the entertainment this thread has given me I think it is time to stop this travesty. I think most of us got the point already and those who didn't are not going to change their minds.

Handy Links

BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #257 on: March 12, 2011, 01:43:04 PM »
I still have plenty of popcorn.
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #258 on: March 12, 2011, 01:54:33 PM »
Just fucking stop.

Fail. Fucking go is more entertaining than fucking stop.
Even with all the entertainment this thread has given me I think it is time to stop this travesty. I think most of us got the point already and those who didn't are not going to change their minds.

Fail again. You are not fucking go, you are completely missing the point.
Smiting Imbeciles since 1985.

If you hear this music, run.

And don't forget:


There is no greater contribution than Hi Welcome.

Huge amounts of people are fuckwits. That doesn't mean that fuckwit is a valid lifestyle.

IP proofing and avoiding being CAPed OR - how to make characters relevant in the long term.

Friends don't let friends be Short Bus Hobos.

[spoiler]
Sunic may be more abrasive than sandpaper coated in chainsaws (not that its a bad thing, he really does know what he's talking about), but just posting in this thread without warning and telling him he's an asshole which, if you knew his past experiences on WotC and Paizo is flat-out uncalled for. Never mind the insults (which are clearly 4Chan-level childish). You say people like Sunic are the bane of the internet? Try looking at your own post and telling me you are better than him.

Here's a fun fact: You aren't. By a few leagues.
[/spoiler]

Hazren

  • Domesticated Capuchin Monkey
  • **
  • Posts: 114
Re: Fuck You to casters.
« Reply #259 on: March 12, 2011, 04:02:34 PM »
Although some of the above was entertaining my brain kinda glazed over about half way through the he said she said part. :twitch Give me a RAW quote (which some parts did) and I'll take you seriouly, otherwise it's just opinion(some of it very interesting).

The title of the thread caught my eye because I love watching the DM cry when I eventualy pimp out his BBESC after we encounter them. :D

Take for instance my sig, incantrix with metamagic school focus made it possible (result is -2 to spell level increasefrom metamagic to minimum of +1) so the DM had no trouble with it till said encounter. That encounter by RAW left the other caster with -16 to attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, ability checks and ECL. Lastly he lost a total of 16 spells/spell slots starting from his highest "availible" level.

That ladies and gentelment was a "Fuck you" to a caster. :smirk
"My solution way too often is to press the red button and see the world burn, which brings us back to the fiery pits of Hell..."
Tshern