Besides the misunderstanding that the spell is separate from its effect, I think another thing that should be reiterated here is that a spell doesn't last for its duration if it ends early.
Let's look at the game for an example that shows both. We could just use contagion, but that is debated here already. Dominate Person is a good example of a spell that tells you that it can end before the duration expires (again, like contagion's actual text).
As for the other point, note also that it says that the spell ends, not just the effects of the spell. The Spells chapter tells us that "The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does...". Exactly what a spell does is its effects. Moreover, "Some spells and other effects require concentration..." That is to say that spells are described as effects (along with other game effects). A spell whose effects have ended is also ended.There is no evidence of effect-less spells continuing to linger in the material the game presents about spells. Do you tell your DM that you stop concentrating on Banishment when the creature makes its save and is unaffected?
Whenever the Poisoned target receives an effect that would end the Poisoned condition, the target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or the Poisoned condition doesn’t end on it.
so I don't know what you're saying about context.
Again you make the claim "If you succeed on the first save, you are never poisoned and none of the other effects occur." Where is this coming from? Conjecture? I don't see it anywhere in the spell's description.
The target must repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns until it gets three successes or failures. If the target succeeds on three of these saves, the spell ends on the target. If the target fails three of the saves, the spell lasts for 7 days on it.
This makes no mention of the saving throw or poisoned condition.
The spell explicitly states:
Your touch inflicts a magical contagion. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 11d8 Necrotic damage and have the Poisoned condition.
That establishes context. Every other effect is related to effects while Poisoned or ending the Poisoned condition. Everything in the spell description is telling you what happens on a failed save.
If you succeed on the initial save, you do not gain the Poisoned condition. If they succeeded on the save, you do not make them poisoned so the final paragraph referring to "the poisoned target" doesn't even make sense as applying to them. They are the "target". "Poisoned target" only describes the target who failed the initial save.
[spells]Thunderwave[/spells}
You unleash a wave of thunderous energy. Each creature in a 15-foot Cube originating from you makes a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, a creature takes 2d8 Thunder damage and is pushed 10 feet away from you. On a successful save, a creature takes half as much damage only.
Thunderwave has effects on a failed save and on a successful save.
Contagion doesn't have that text. I only tells you what happens on a failed save. Therefore, nothing happens on a successful save.
A spell with a save must tell you what happens to the target on a successful save in order for it to have an effect on a target that succeeds on the save.
Sure contagion is strangely worded, and I agree that RAI it might not work like I say, but I'm talking about RAW. I see no convincing evidence in that post that RAWcontagion ends on an initial successful save. You can make as many statements as you want, that isn't evidence.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
Besides the misunderstanding that the spell is separate from its effect, I think another thing that should be reiterated here is that a spell doesn't last for its duration if it ends early.
Let's look at the game for an example that shows both. We could just use contagion, but that is debated here already. Dominate Person is a good example of a spell that tells you that it can end before the duration expires (again, like contagion's actual text).
As for the other point, note also that it says that the spell ends, not just the effects of the spell. The Spells chapter tells us that "The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does...". Exactly what a spell does is its effects. Moreover, "Some spells and other effects require concentration..." That is to say that spells are described as effects (along with other game effects). A spell whose effects have ended is also ended.There is no evidence of effect-less spells continuing to linger in the material the game presents about spells. Do you tell your DM that you stop concentrating on Banishment when the creature makes its save and is unaffected?
The difference between contagion and dominate person is that contagion refers to the target in part of its description, while dominate person refers only to the "charmed target". There is no evidence that effect-less spells do not linger in the game. The reason I don't tell my DM that I stop concentrating on Banishment is the same reason I don't tell my DM every 5 seconds that I don't make an opportunity attack against my ally.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
I don't know what you are on about, but you're making distinctions without a difference. Dominate person uses both target and charmed target, So you either didn't say what you mean, didn't read the spell, or are trying to pull one over on readers here. Edit: unless you are actually trying to say that the target still accepts telepathic commands and tries to execute them regardless of whether or not they're charmed. Again, problematic.
By the way, there is plenty of evidence that effect-less spells end. Many spells tell you that they end when the effect is negated: a great example is when contagion says "If the target succeeds on three of these saves, the spell ends on the target." Other spells tell you that the effect ending ends the spells too.
As for the other point, note also that it says that the spell ends, not just the effects of the spell. The Spells chapter tells us that "The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does...". Exactly what a spell does is its effects. Moreover, "Some spells and other effects require concentration..." That is to say that spells are described as effects (along with other game effects). A spell whose effects have ended is also ended.There is no evidence of effect-less spells continuing to linger in the material the game presents about spells.
The effect of a spell is exactly what a spell does. That means a spell doesn't do anything else. Which means, if there isn't effect, then there isn't spell.
As for the other point, note also that it says that the spell ends, not just the effects of the spell. The Spells chapter tells us that "The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does...". Exactly what a spell does is its effects. Moreover, "Some spells and other effects require concentration..." That is to say that spells are described as effects (along with other game effects). A spell whose effects have ended is also ended.There is no evidence of effect-less spells continuing to linger in the material the game presents about spells.
The effect of a spell is exactly what a spell does. That means a spell doesn't do anything else. Which means, if there isn't effect, then there isn't spell.
I concede this point. There is an effect to contagion even if the target succeeds the initial saving throw however. "While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability." This doesn't say 'while poisoned by this spell', just while poisoned.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
I don't know what you are on about, but you're making distinctions without a difference. Dominate person uses both target and charmed target, So you either didn't say what you mean, didn't read the spell, or are trying to pull one over on readers here. Edit: unless you are actually trying to say that the target still accepts telepathic commands and tries to execute them regardless of whether or not they're charmed. Again, problematic.
By the way, there is plenty of evidence that effect-less spells end. Many spells tell you that they end when the effect is negated: a great example is when contagion says "If the target succeeds on three of these saves, the spell ends on the target." Other spells tell you that the effect ending ends the spells too.
Though I didn't fully read the spell, did you? The ability to give commands to the target is contingent on having the telepathic link with them. The link is only applied to "the charmed target". As for you're next point, are you trying to support me? "Many spells tell you that they end when the effect is negated..." That's right: why are you assuming the spell ends if it doesn't say it when even the same spell explicitly says it ends from a different cause later in the description.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
And all the enchantment spells say charmed, but they're not talking about any charmed.
They use different language. Enchantment spells refer to "the Charmed target", a vague term, (Example) while contagion just says, "While poisoned, the target..." That wording seems pretty clear to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
Sure contagion is strangely worded, and I agree that RAI it might not work like I say, but I'm talking about RAW. I see no convincing evidence in that post that RAWcontagion ends on an initial successful save. You can make as many statements as you want, that isn't evidence.
RAW, contagion never starts if the first save is successful.
And all the enchantment spells say charmed, but they're not talking about any charmed.
They use different language. Enchantment spells refer to "the Charmed target", a vague term, (Example) while contagion just says, "While poisoned, the target..." That wording seems pretty clear to me.
Enchantment spells use the same language. "While charmed, the target..."
If I cast Hypnotic Pattern and the target succeeds on the saving throw, does the spell last for a minute?
You create a twisting pattern of colors in a 30-foot Cube within range. The pattern appears for a moment and vanishes. Each creature in the area who can see the pattern must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or have the Charmed condition for the duration. While Charmed, the creature has the Incapacitated condition and a Speed of 0.
If someone else (both spells have concentration requirements) casts Friends on the same creature, does the target become incapacitated with a speed of 0 while charmed with from the Hypnotic Pattern? Can other casters spam the Friends Cantrip to make the Hypnotic Pattern save irrelevant? No, of course not.
If a spell has a save and it does not tell you that an effect explicitly happens on a successful save, it does not happen on a successful save.
Sure contagion is strangely worded, and I agree that RAI it might not work like I say, but I'm talking about RAW. I see no convincing evidence in that post that RAWcontagion ends on an initial successful save. You can make as many statements as you want, that isn't evidence.
RAW, contagion never starts if the first save is successful.
And all the enchantment spells say charmed, but they're not talking about any charmed.
They use different language. Enchantment spells refer to "the Charmed target", a vague term, (Example) while contagion just says, "While poisoned, the target..." That wording seems pretty clear to me.
Enchantment spells use the same language. "While charmed, the target..."
If I cast Hypnotic Pattern and the target succeeds on the saving throw, does the spell last for a minute?
You create a twisting pattern of colors in a 30-foot Cube within range. The pattern appears for a moment and vanishes. Each creature in the area who can see the pattern must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or have the Charmed condition for the duration. While Charmed, the creature has the Incapacitated condition and a Speed of 0.
If someone else (both spells have concentration requirements) casts Friends on the same creature, does the target become incapacitated with a speed of 0 while charmed with from the Hypnotic Pattern? Can other casters spam the Friends Cantrip to make the Hypnotic Pattern save irrelevant? No, of course not.
If a spell has a save and it does not tell you that an effect explicitly happens on a successful save, it does not happen on a successful save.
Edit: fixed spell tool tip.
Maybe it does. To play the devil's advocate, modify memory uses the phrase, "while charmed in this way", so it isn't as if this wording is always used. There is no reason why hypnotic pattern could not work this way. As a side note, "the creature" is a vague term that might be referring to only creatures who have failed the save.
Please don't answer this with, "RAW, hypnotic pattern never starts if the first save is successful."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
I think this whole line of thought in this thread, and especially playing devil's advocate, falls outside of "Rules Rely on Good-Faith Interpretation." It is not because modify memory has the words "while charmed in this way" that its effect is limited to its own charm effect, and it is not the case that all the other spells that don't have this language work differently. Again, the effect of hypnotic pattern does not extend to creatures charmed by other means.
What we've determined with all of the examples is that Contagion does not use particularly novel or complicated language. Yes, you can find examples that use more precise language, but there are plenty that are written like contagion. That means that whatever you rule for it applies to all the other spells with similar language. Again, interpreting those in good faith means also interpreting contagion the same way: that spells that apply conditions and rely on those conditions rely on their own versions of them.
By the way it is true that if the spell ends (all creatures save), then it ends, so a hypnotic pattern that no creatures are affected by is over.
Totally unrelated but I'm totally shocked that the most warlocky spell in warlock town isn't on their list, next you will tell me warlocks don't get bestow curse.
Maybe it does. To play the devil's advocate, modify memory uses the phrase, "while charmed in this way", so it isn't as if this wording is always used. There is no reason why hypnotic pattern could not work this way. As a side note, "the creature" is a vague term that might be referring to only creatures who have failed the save.
Please don't answer this with, "RAW, hypnotic pattern never starts if the first save is successful."
What letter does "Hypnotic Pattern" start with. Please don't answer "H".
Modify memory does not establish a pattern. The rules say that spells describe what happens on a successful or failed save. Nearly every damaging spell with a save, for example, say that a target takes XDY damage on failed save and half that amount on a successful save. This is the pattern that is established in spell descriptions; if some component of the spell still affects the target on a successful save, the spell says "on a successful save [stuff happens]".
Hypnotic Pattern affects a potentially large number of creatures (theoretically, I think up to 216 for a 30 ft square cube or is it more because the cube can overlap squares/cubes?). For each creatures that views the initial illusion, they get a save or suffer an effect for the duration. Any creatures that make their save are not affected by the spell. Any other creatures that failed their save are affected. But there is no Enchantment on the creatures that passed their Charisma saving throw.
Your touch inflicts a magical contagion. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 11d8 Necrotic damage and have the Poisoned condition. Also, choose one ability when you cast the spell. While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability.
-Forces a Con save -Failure causes damage and Poisoned condition -Success or failure, target has Disadvantage on saving throws with chosen ability if poisoned (doesn't care about source of poison)
The "Also, ..." line reads the same as Hex. That it's worded basically identical except for what roll is affected is enough to establish a pattern because that's the closest we've got to this.
The target must repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns until it gets three successes or failures. If the target succeeds on three of these saves, the spell ends on the target. If the target fails three of the saves, the spell lasts for 7 days on it.
Here's where we learn how to break the spell: 3 successes. The spell does not end until this happens. Which means this spell is forcing 5 rolls, no matter the first result. However, passing the first makes things simpler for the target.
Whenever the Poisoned target receives an effect that would end the Poisoned condition, the target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or the Poisoned condition doesn’t end on it.
Does what it says. Note that any Poisoned condition term that would end on its own (such as Ray of Sickness) will still end because that's not an effect ending it, it's just expiring.
It's official: Contagion isn't stopped by a single success.
No but seriously. Hex doesn't have an initial save. They aren't the same. That is a straw man. In one, the effect just happens, in the other there is a save and the text does not say there is any effect on a success. Let me repeat the important part: in contagion, there is no text in the description saying that anything happens on a successful initial save.
Your touch inflicts a magical contagion. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 11d8 Necrotic damage and have the Poisoned condition. Also, choose one ability when you cast the spell. While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability.
-Forces a Con save -Failure causes damage and Poisoned condition -Success or failure, target has Disadvantage on saving throws with chosen ability if poisoned (doesn't care about source of poison)
The "Also, ..." line reads the same as Hex. That it's worded basically identical except for what roll is affected is enough to establish a pattern because that's the closest we've got to this.
Does Contagion say any of this happens on a successful saving throw? No. Then it doesn't happen.
Does Hex allow a saving throw? No. Then it is not a like-to-like comparison.
Your touch inflicts a magical contagion. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 11d8 Necrotic damage and have the Poisoned condition. Also, choose one ability when you cast the spell. While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability.
Forces a Con save.
While casting the spell (before the saving throw is made), you choose an ability.
Applies an additional effect to the original save.
If there is an effect that happens regardless of success or failure, it will follow the pattern of Thunderwave
You unleash a wave of thunderous energy. Each creature in a 15-foot Cube originating from you makes a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, a creature takes 2d8 Thunder damage and is pushed 10 feet away from you. On a successful save, a creature takes half as much damage only.
Maybe it does. To play the devil's advocate, modify memory uses the phrase, "while charmed in this way", so it isn't as if this wording is always used. There is no reason why hypnotic pattern could not work this way. As a side note, "the creature" is a vague term that might be referring to only creatures who have failed the save.
Please don't answer this with, "RAW, hypnotic pattern never starts if the first save is successful."
What letter does "Hypnotic Pattern" start with. Please don't answer "H".
Modify memory does not establish a pattern. The rules say that spells describe what happens on a successful or failed save. Nearly every damaging spell with a save, for example, say that a target takes XDY damage on failed save and half that amount on a successful save. This is the pattern that is established in spell descriptions; if some component of the spell still affects the target on a successful save, the spell says "on a successful save [stuff happens]".
Hypnotic Pattern affects a potentially large number of creatures (theoretically, I think up to 216 for a 30 ft square cube or is it more because the cube can overlap squares/cubes?). For each creatures that views the initial illusion, they get a save or suffer an effect for the duration. Any creatures that make their save are not affected by the spell. Any other creatures that failed their save are affected. But there is no Enchantment on the creatures that passed their Charisma saving throw.
Fine. RAW, contagion doesn't end if the first save is successful.
"If there can be no arrangement, then we are at an impasse." "I fear so -- I cannot compete with you physically, and you are no match for my brains."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are to fast: I would catch it."
"I cannot comment on an ongoing investigation."
"Well of course I know that. What else is there? A kitten?"
"You'd like to think that, Wouldn't you?"
"A duck."
"What do you mean? An African or European swallow?"
No but seriously. Hex doesn't have an initial save. They aren't the same. That is a straw man. In one, the effect just happens, in the other there is a save and the text does not say there is any effect on a success. Let me repeat the important part: in contagion, there is no text in the description saying that anything happens on a successful initial save.
Your touch inflicts a magical contagion. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 11d8 Necrotic damage and have the Poisoned condition. Also, choose one ability when you cast the spell. While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability.
-Forces a Con save -Failure causes damage and Poisoned condition -Success or failure, target has Disadvantage on saving throws with chosen ability if poisoned (doesn't care about source of poison)
The "Also, ..." line reads the same as Hex. That it's worded basically identical except for what roll is affected is enough to establish a pattern because that's the closest we've got to this.
Does Contagion say any of this happens on a successful saving throw? No. Then it doesn't happen.
Does Hex allow a saving throw? No. Then it is not a like-to-like comparison.
Your touch inflicts a magical contagion. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take 11d8 Necrotic damage and have the Poisoned condition. Also, choose one ability when you cast the spell. While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability.
Forces a Con save.
While casting the spell (before the saving throw is made), you choose an ability.
Applies an additional effect to the original save.
If there is an effect that happens regardless of success or failure, it will follow the pattern of Thunderwave
You unleash a wave of thunderous energy. Each creature in a 15-foot Cube originating from you makes a Constitution saving throw. On a failed save, a creature takes 2d8 Thunder damage and is pushed 10 feet away from you. On a successful save, a creature takes half as much damage only.
No matter what else is in the spell, it has exactly one spot where it defines where successes or failures end it, and that's paragraph two. That's all that's truly important here. It continues until 3 successes or failures are rolled on it.
That doesn’t make any sense. The second paragraph asks you to repeat a save: that must mean that previously, a save was mentioned. It turns out that the first paragraph does indeed ask for a save too. And reading the text around that, it absolutely defines what a failed initial save does. It also lets you know that nothing happens on a success, by not writing what happens on a success. Just like all the other spells with saves that don’t do anything on a successful save.
Besides the misunderstanding that the spell is separate from its effect, I think another thing that should be reiterated here is that a spell doesn't last for its duration if it ends early.
Let's look at the game for an example that shows both. We could just use contagion, but that is debated here already. Dominate Person is a good example of a spell that tells you that it can end before the duration expires (again, like contagion's actual text).
As for the other point, note also that it says that the spell ends, not just the effects of the spell. The Spells chapter tells us that "The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does...". Exactly what a spell does is its effects. Moreover, "Some spells and other effects require concentration..." That is to say that spells are described as effects (along with other game effects). A spell whose effects have ended is also ended.There is no evidence of effect-less spells continuing to linger in the material the game presents about spells. Do you tell your DM that you stop concentrating on Banishment when the creature makes its save and is unaffected?
Sure contagion is strangely worded, and I agree that RAI it might not work like I say, but I'm talking about RAW. I see no convincing evidence in that post that RAW contagion ends on an initial successful save. You can make as many statements as you want, that isn't evidence.
Extended signature
The difference between contagion and dominate person is that contagion refers to the target in part of its description, while dominate person refers only to the "charmed target". There is no evidence that effect-less spells do not linger in the game. The reason I don't tell my DM that I stop concentrating on Banishment is the same reason I don't tell my DM every 5 seconds that I don't make an opportunity attack against my ally.
Extended signature
I don't know what you are on about, but you're making distinctions without a difference. Dominate person uses both target and charmed target, So you either didn't say what you mean, didn't read the spell, or are trying to pull one over on readers here. Edit: unless you are actually trying to say that the target still accepts telepathic commands and tries to execute them regardless of whether or not they're charmed. Again, problematic.
By the way, there is plenty of evidence that effect-less spells end. Many spells tell you that they end when the effect is negated: a great example is when contagion says "If the target succeeds on three of these saves, the spell ends on the target." Other spells tell you that the effect ending ends the spells too.
And there is evidence that effect-less spells aren't a thing:
The effect of a spell is exactly what a spell does. That means a spell doesn't do anything else. Which means, if there isn't effect, then there isn't spell.
I concede this point. There is an effect to contagion even if the target succeeds the initial saving throw however. "While Poisoned, the target has Disadvantage on saving throws made with the chosen ability." This doesn't say 'while poisoned by this spell', just while poisoned.
Extended signature
And all the enchantment spells say charmed, but they're not talking about any charmed.
Though I didn't fully read the spell, did you? The ability to give commands to the target is contingent on having the telepathic link with them. The link is only applied to "the charmed target". As for you're next point, are you trying to support me? "Many spells tell you that they end when the effect is negated..." That's right: why are you assuming the spell ends if it doesn't say it when even the same spell explicitly says it ends from a different cause later in the description.
Extended signature
They use different language. Enchantment spells refer to "the Charmed target", a vague term, (Example) while contagion just says, "While poisoned, the target..." That wording seems pretty clear to me.
Extended signature
RAW, contagion never starts if the first save is successful.
Enchantment spells use the same language. "While charmed, the target..."
If I cast Hypnotic Pattern and the target succeeds on the saving throw, does the spell last for a minute?
If someone else (both spells have concentration requirements) casts Friends on the same creature, does the target become incapacitated with a speed of 0 while charmed with from the Hypnotic Pattern? Can other casters spam the Friends Cantrip to make the Hypnotic Pattern save irrelevant? No, of course not.
If a spell has a save and it does not tell you that an effect explicitly happens on a successful save, it does not happen on a successful save.
Edit: fixed spell tool tip.
How to add Tooltips.
Maybe it does. To play the devil's advocate, modify memory uses the phrase, "while charmed in this way", so it isn't as if this wording is always used. There is no reason why hypnotic pattern could not work this way. As a side note, "the creature" is a vague term that might be referring to only creatures who have failed the save.
Please don't answer this with, "RAW, hypnotic pattern never starts if the first save is successful."
Extended signature
I think this whole line of thought in this thread, and especially playing devil's advocate, falls outside of "Rules Rely on Good-Faith Interpretation." It is not because modify memory has the words "while charmed in this way" that its effect is limited to its own charm effect, and it is not the case that all the other spells that don't have this language work differently. Again, the effect of hypnotic pattern does not extend to creatures charmed by other means.
What we've determined with all of the examples is that Contagion does not use particularly novel or complicated language. Yes, you can find examples that use more precise language, but there are plenty that are written like contagion. That means that whatever you rule for it applies to all the other spells with similar language. Again, interpreting those in good faith means also interpreting contagion the same way: that spells that apply conditions and rely on those conditions rely on their own versions of them.
By the way it is true that if the spell ends (all creatures save), then it ends, so a hypnotic pattern that no creatures are affected by is over.
Totally unrelated but I'm totally shocked that the most warlocky spell in warlock town isn't on their list, next you will tell me warlocks don't get bestow curse.
What letter does "Hypnotic Pattern" start with. Please don't answer "H".
Modify memory does not establish a pattern. The rules say that spells describe what happens on a successful or failed save. Nearly every damaging spell with a save, for example, say that a target takes XDY damage on failed save and half that amount on a successful save. This is the pattern that is established in spell descriptions; if some component of the spell still affects the target on a successful save, the spell says "on a successful save [stuff happens]".
Hypnotic Pattern affects a potentially large number of creatures (theoretically, I think up to 216 for a 30 ft square cube or is it more because the cube can overlap squares/cubes?). For each creatures that views the initial illusion, they get a save or suffer an effect for the duration. Any creatures that make their save are not affected by the spell. Any other creatures that failed their save are affected. But there is no Enchantment on the creatures that passed their Charisma saving throw.
How to add Tooltips.
-Forces a Con save
-Failure causes damage and Poisoned condition
-Success or failure, target has Disadvantage on saving throws with chosen ability if poisoned (doesn't care about source of poison)
The "Also, ..." line reads the same as Hex. That it's worded basically identical except for what roll is affected is enough to establish a pattern because that's the closest we've got to this.
Here's where we learn how to break the spell: 3 successes. The spell does not end until this happens. Which means this spell is forcing 5 rolls, no matter the first result. However, passing the first makes things simpler for the target.
Does what it says. Note that any Poisoned condition term that would end on its own (such as Ray of Sickness) will still end because that's not an effect ending it, it's just expiring.
It's official: Contagion isn't stopped by a single success.
It's official, Athanar declared it.
No but seriously. Hex doesn't have an initial save. They aren't the same. That is a straw man. In one, the effect just happens, in the other there is a save and the text does not say there is any effect on a success. Let me repeat the important part: in contagion, there is no text in the description saying that anything happens on a successful initial save.
Does Contagion say any of this happens on a successful saving throw? No. Then it doesn't happen.
Does Hex allow a saving throw? No. Then it is not a like-to-like comparison.
If there is an effect that happens regardless of success or failure, it will follow the pattern of Thunderwave
How to add Tooltips.
Fine. RAW, contagion doesn't end if the first save is successful.
"If there can be no arrangement, then we are at an impasse." "I fear so -- I cannot compete with you physically, and you are no match for my brains."
Extended signature
No matter what else is in the spell, it has exactly one spot where it defines where successes or failures end it, and that's paragraph two. That's all that's truly important here. It continues until 3 successes or failures are rolled on it.
That doesn’t make any sense. The second paragraph asks you to repeat a save: that must mean that previously, a save was mentioned. It turns out that the first paragraph does indeed ask for a save too. And reading the text around that, it absolutely defines what a failed initial save does. It also lets you know that nothing happens on a success, by not writing what happens on a success. Just like all the other spells with saves that don’t do anything on a successful save.