I added words because there are some people on the internet who don't understand how spells work.
While poisoned is a reference back to the sentence in the spell describing poisoning the target, just like "the chosen ability" refers back to the sentence where you choose an ability, and in other spells, the charmed creature refers back to creatures charmed by those spells.
I added words because there are some people on the internet who don't understand how spells work.
While poisoned is a reference back to the sentence in the spell describing poisoning the target, just like "the chosen ability" refers back to the sentence where you choose an ability, and in other spells, the charmed creature refers back to creatures charmed by those spells.
The rules use plain English. It is not stated to be a reference it isn't nonsensical for it to not be one, so it isn't one. The term "the charmed creature" is different because it is nonsensical for it to be referring to a random person who is charmed.
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?"
Why is "while the charmed creature" nonsensical to be treated as any charmed creature, but "while poisoned, the target" makes perfect sense to be treated as not referring to the poisoned target? That seems like cherrypicking.
They do work similarly, I'm glad we finally agree. They affect their targets with a condition (like charmed or poisoned), and while that condition applies, something else also applies. I'm glad we finally agree.
the "while" isn't in any spells that use charm, but plenty of charm spells do describe things about "the charmed creature".
Let's take a look at a similar spell: the new version of weird, which has a duration of 1 minute
You try to create illusory terrors in others’ minds. Each creature of your choice in a 30-foot-radius Sphere centered on a point within range makes a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, a target takes 10d10 Psychic damage and has the Frightened condition for the duration. On a successful save, a target takes half as much damage only.
A Frightened target makes a Wisdom saving throw at the end of each of its turns. On a failed save, it takes 5d10 Psychic damage. On a successful save, the spell ends on that target.
Are you devil's advocates seriously suggesting that if you succeed on the initial save, but get Frightened by another source before the 1 minute duration is up, you have to start making Wisdom saves again?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Toll the Dead tells you what happens on failed save. It doesn't mention what happens on a successful save so nothing happens.
Fireball tells you take damage on a failed save and half as much on successful one.
Outside of attack spells with saves for half damage, few spells affect the target on a successful save. If they do, all of them explicitly say so. None imply it the way you and Jurmondur claim.
And your point still only works if you don't look at the full text of the spell. The full text describes the effect and requirements, not just the first paragraph.
Please tell me where in the full text the spell says "on a successful save" or "regardless of success or failure".
Toll the Dead tells you what happens on failed save. It doesn't mention what happens on a successful save so nothing happens.
Fireball tells you take damage on a failed save and half as much on successful one.
Outside of attack spells with saves for half damage, few spells affect the target on a successful save. If they do, all of them explicitly say so. None imply it the way you and Jurmondur claim.
And your point still only works if you don't look at the full text of the spell. The full text describes the effect and requirements, not just the first paragraph.
Please tell me where in the full text the spell says "on a successful save" or "regardless of success or failure".
Please tell me where the text says "on a failed save" in the second paragraph.
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?"
Toll the Dead tells you what happens on failed save. It doesn't mention what happens on a successful save so nothing happens.
Fireball tells you take damage on a failed save and half as much on successful one.
Outside of attack spells with saves for half damage, few spells affect the target on a successful save. If they do, all of them explicitly say so. None imply it the way you and Jurmondur claim.
And your point still only works if you don't look at the full text of the spell. The full text describes the effect and requirements, not just the first paragraph.
Please tell me where in the full text the spell says "on a successful save" or "regardless of success or failure".
Please tell me where the text says "on a failed save" in the second paragraph.
It already established that the target must fail a save. That doesn't stop because a sentence or paragraphed ended. You have to actually establish that the context changed.
Toll the Dead tells you what happens on failed save. It doesn't mention what happens on a successful save so nothing happens.
Fireball tells you take damage on a failed save and half as much on successful one.
Outside of attack spells with saves for half damage, few spells affect the target on a successful save. If they do, all of them explicitly say so. None imply it the way you and Jurmondur claim.
And your point still only works if you don't look at the full text of the spell. The full text describes the effect and requirements, not just the first paragraph.
Please tell me where in the full text the spell says "on a successful save" or "regardless of success or failure".
Please tell me where the text says "on a failed save" in the second paragraph.
It already established that the target must fail a save. That doesn't stop because a sentence or paragraphed ended. You have to actually establish that the context changed.
Consider the sentences, "You have to hurry, or you will be late. Also, my name is Joe." Is the person's name dependent on the person hurrying? Of course not: that's not how english works.
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 your point still only works if you don't look at the full text of the spell. The full text describes the effect and requirements, not just the first paragraph.
Please tell me where in the full text the spell says "on a successful save" or "regardless of success or failure".
Please tell me where the text says "on a failed save" in the second paragraph.
It already established that the target must fail a save. That doesn't stop because a sentence or paragraphed ended. You have to actually establish that the context changed.
Consider the sentences, "You have to hurry, or you will be late. Also, my name is Joe." Is the person's name dependent on the person hurrying? Of course not: that's not how english works.
When the rules already tell you that spells tell you what happens on a success or failure of a saving throw and this spell does not tell you what happens on a successful saving throw, that is how RAW works, a subset of the language that the rules are written in (in this case English) with more restrictive rules.
While English allows for poorly constructed phrases like your example, D&D rules, and by extension spells, do not. Spells generally do one thing even if that thing can change per casting. Everything a spell does will generally follow a set, narrow theme (such as poisoning a creature that fails its save). A spell may have multiple options, but each casting will generate one of those options. Two completely disjointed effects like you propose would be two spells.
Time Check
Divination Cantrip Casting Time: Action Range: 30 feet Components: V, M (a small sundial) Duration: Instantaneous
The target creature knows the time remaining for a task or objective.
You state your name and all creatures know that you are to be called by that name.
That would be your "Hurry or you'll be late" and also, "my name is Joe".
I have provided multiple examples of spells following the rule of describing the effects of a failed save and the effects on successful save when targeting a creature with a save.
In response, you have provided Heat Metal which doesn't target a creature and doesn't allow a save for the target and Athanar90 provide Hex which also doesn't allow a save. You have provided no actual examples of spells to support your assertions.
69 examples. A spell that allows a save to determine the effect on the target(s) specifies if there is an effect on a target that succeeds on the saving throw, per the rule on Spellcasting Saving Throws.
Consider the sentences, "You have to hurry, or you will be late. Also, my name is Joe." Is the person's name dependent on the person hurrying? Of course not: that's not how english works.
When the rules already tell you that spells tell you what happens on a success or failure of a saving throw and this spell does not tell you what happens on a successful saving throw, that is how RAW works, a subset of the language that the rules are written in (in this case English) with more restrictive rules.
While English allows for poorly constructed phrases like your example, D&D rules, and by extension spells, do not. Spells generally do one thing even if that thing can change per casting. Everything a spell does will generally follow a set, narrow theme (such as poisoning a creature that fails its save). A spell may have multiple options, but each casting will generate one of those options. Two completely disjointed effects like you propose would be two spells.
Time Check
Divination Cantrip Casting Time: Action Range: 30 feet Components: V, M (a small sundial) Duration: Instantaneous
The target creature knows the time remaining for a task or objective.
You state your name and all creatures know that you are to be called by that name.
That would be your "Hurry or you'll be late" and also, "my name is Joe".
I have provided multiple examples of spells following the rule of describing the effects of a failed save and the effects on successful save when targeting a creature with a save.
In response, you have provided Heat Metal which doesn't target a creature and doesn't allow a save for the target and Athanar90 provide Hex which also doesn't allow a save. You have provided no actual examples of spells to support your assertions.
69 examples. A spell that allows a save to determine the effect on the target(s) specifies if there is an effect on a target that succeeds on the saving throw, per the rule on Spellcasting Saving Throws.
Edit: Fixed typos.
Not targeting a creature means nothing. To clarify my point, heat metal forces you to make a con save or drop the object if you can. If you didn't drop the object, you have disadvantage on ability checks and attack rolls. Is your claim that, if you succeed on the save, you don't have the disadvantage?
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 was brought up, but you are using a straw man when you discuss heat metal exactly because it doesn't target a creature: there is no analogy to one that does, like the spell in question.
But beyond that, we are saying that a spell tells you what it does when it asks for a save. On a success, what is written happens, and on a failure, what the spell tells you happens happens. If the spell doesn't tell you what happens on a success, it is because nothing happens on a success. All a success on the save in heat metal does is gives you the opportunity to keep ahold of the object. A failure means the creature drops the item if it is able, and if it does, it avoids disadvantage.
But again, you are making a straw man argument out of heat metal because the disadvantage isn't tied directly to the save, it is tied to being in contact with the item that caused the creature damage. The success or failure isn't what determines whether you have disadvantage, it is whether you are still in contact with the object.
This isn't the case forcontagion, because that save is to determine whether or not you are affected in the first place. You aren't poisoned if you succeed the first save of contagion, and the rest of the spell is literally directly tied to being poisoned ("While poisoned,..."). Again, there is no analogy between the two. Maybe there is analogy between the two: nothing happens on a save, failure carries the consequences.
But again, you are making a straw man argument out of heat metal because the disadvantage isn't tied directly to the save, it is tied to being in contact with the item that caused the creature damage. The success or failure isn't what determines whether you have disadvantage, it is whether you are still in contact with the object.
Err, I absolutely play heat metal that you avoid the disadvantage if you succeed on the CON save, for exactly the same reasons that you avoid the effects of contagion (and all other similar spells) if you succeed on the save. The spells are written in basically the same way (A/B added for clarity)
The target must A) succeed on a Constitution saving throw or B) 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.
If a creature is holding or wearing the object and takes the damage from it, the creature must A) succeed on a Constitution saving throw or B) drop the object if it can. If it doesn’t drop the object, it has Disadvantage on attack rolls and ability checks until the start of your next turn.
The second sentence in both cases is conditional on failing the save
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Maybe that's the case that the next sentence only refers to not dropping the item from a failed save and excludes holding on due to a success, and that reading probably makes more sense. But it is still very far off topic and I still don't think it is a good comparison, even when it provides support of my view of contagion.
They are two separate sentences, in a single paragraph in a single spell's description, and with a reference from the second one back to the first one. You don't think they're related? You never write more than one sentence on a topic at once? Are we to take "Its two separate sentences." completely out of context and ignore all surrounding text?
Not targeting a creature means nothing. To clarify my point, heat metal forces you to make a con save or drop the object if you can. If you didn't drop the object, you have disadvantage on ability checks and attack rolls. Is your claim that, if you succeed on the save, you don't have the disadvantage?
Heat metal provides an automatic effect. The metal is hot. There is no save against the metal being hot. Contagion is not an automatic effect. The comparison is not valid.
[REDACTED]
Your argument is an incorrect interpretation of both the rules and English because it relies on ignoring the context.
Contagion inflicts a magical contagion. You must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take damage and become poisoned. While poisoned, you have disadvantage on saving throws with a chosen ability. The target must succeed three times on a Constitution saving throw on each of its turns to end the spell. If they fail three times, the spell lasts for 7 days instead. An effect that removes the poisoned condition requires that the target succeed on a saving throw or it doesn't work.
It is a spell that deals damage, causes the poisoned condition and makes the condition hard to remove. It is not an automatic debuff. If the initial save succeeds, the spell has no effect.
RAW, once the target fails the initial save, they only need to fail twice more (for a total of three saves) to trigger the 7 day duration, but I am not sure if that is RAI. Either way, pick Constitution for the saving throw penalty and it will be difficult to shake off. (Dispel Magic might be the best option).
Not targeting a creature means nothing. To clarify my point, heat metal forces you to make a con save or drop the object if you can. If you didn't drop the object, you have disadvantage on ability checks and attack rolls. Is your claim that, if you succeed on the save, you don't have the disadvantage?
Heat metal provides an automatic effect. The metal is hot. There is no save against the metal being hot. Contagion is not an automatic effect. The comparison is not valid.
I fail to see the relevance of whether the initial target is the pc, or something else. The point of contention in contagion is very similar to part of heat metal and, unless changing the effect of this part of the spell, the rest of heat metal is irrelevant.
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?"
If that's how the effect works, why do you need to add words? Explain to me how "while poisoned" means "while poisoned by this spell" RAW.
Extended signature
I added words because there are some people on the internet who don't understand how spells work.
While poisoned is a reference back to the sentence in the spell describing poisoning the target, just like "the chosen ability" refers back to the sentence where you choose an ability, and in other spells, the charmed creature refers back to creatures charmed by those spells.
I think you guys are at an agree to disagree moment, unless you want to keep going in circles.
The rules use plain English. It is not stated to be a reference it isn't nonsensical for it to not be one, so it isn't one. The term "the charmed creature" is different because it is nonsensical for it to be referring to a random person who is charmed.
Extended signature
Why is "while the charmed creature" nonsensical to be treated as any charmed creature, but "while poisoned, the target" makes perfect sense to be treated as not referring to the poisoned target? That seems like cherrypicking.
What spell uses the wording "while the charmed creature"? I was referring to dominate person; hypnotic pattern works similarly to contagion.
Extended signature
They do work similarly, I'm glad we finally agree. They affect their targets with a condition (like charmed or poisoned), and while that condition applies, something else also applies. I'm glad we finally agree.
the "while" isn't in any spells that use charm, but plenty of charm spells do describe things about "the charmed creature".
Let's take a look at a similar spell: the new version of weird, which has a duration of 1 minute
Are you devil's advocates seriously suggesting that if you succeed on the initial save, but get Frightened by another source before the 1 minute duration is up, you have to start making Wisdom saves again?
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Does Heat Metal target a creature? No. It targets an object.
Does the spell allow a save to affect the target? No. The object is affected without a save even if it worn, carried, or otherwise "attended".
Once the target object is affected, there is a secondary mechanic for creatures holding the object.
Heat Metal is not a "spell that affects the target on a successful save."
Please tell me where in the full text the spell says "on a successful save" or "regardless of success or failure".
How to add Tooltips.
Please tell me where the text says "on a failed save" in the second paragraph.
Extended signature
It already established that the target must fail a save. That doesn't stop because a sentence or paragraphed ended. You have to actually establish that the context changed.
How to add Tooltips.
Consider the sentences, "You have to hurry, or you will be late. Also, my name is Joe." Is the person's name dependent on the person hurrying? Of course not: that's not how english works.
Extended signature
When the rules already tell you that spells tell you what happens on a success or failure of a saving throw and this spell does not tell you what happens on a successful saving throw, that is how RAW works, a subset of the language that the rules are written in (in this case English) with more restrictive rules.
While English allows for poorly constructed phrases like your example, D&D rules, and by extension spells, do not. Spells generally do one thing even if that thing can change per casting. Everything a spell does will generally follow a set, narrow theme (such as poisoning a creature that fails its save). A spell may have multiple options, but each casting will generate one of those options. Two completely disjointed effects like you propose would be two spells.
That would be your "Hurry or you'll be late" and also, "my name is Joe".
I have provided multiple examples of spells following the rule of describing the effects of a failed save and the effects on successful save when targeting a creature with a save.
In response, you have provided Heat Metal which doesn't target a creature and doesn't allow a save for the target and Athanar90 provide Hex which also doesn't allow a save. You have provided no actual examples of spells to support your assertions.
69 examples. A spell that allows a save to determine the effect on the target(s) specifies if there is an effect on a target that succeeds on the saving throw, per the rule on Spellcasting Saving Throws.
Edit: Fixed typos.
How to add Tooltips.
Not targeting a creature means nothing. To clarify my point, heat metal forces you to make a con save or drop the object if you can. If you didn't drop the object, you have disadvantage on ability checks and attack rolls. Is your claim that, if you succeed on the save, you don't have the disadvantage?
Extended signature
I think this was brought up, but you are using a straw man when you discuss heat metal exactly because it doesn't target a creature: there is no analogy to one that does, like the spell in question.
But beyond that, we are saying that a spell tells you what it does when it asks for a save. On a success, what is written happens, and on a failure, what the spell tells you happens happens. If the spell doesn't tell you what happens on a success, it is because nothing happens on a success.
All a success on the save in heat metal does is gives you the opportunity to keep ahold of the object. A failure means the creature drops the item if it is able, and if it does, it avoids disadvantage.But again, you are making a straw man argument out of heat metal because the disadvantage isn't tied directly to the save, it is tied to being in contact with the item that caused the creature damage. The success or failure isn't what determines whether you have disadvantage, it is whether you are still in contact with the object.This isn't the case forcontagion, because that save is to determine whether or not you are affected in the first place. You aren't poisoned if you succeed the first save of contagion, and the rest of the spell is literally directly tied to being poisoned ("While poisoned,...").Again, there is no analogy between the two.Maybe there is analogy between the two: nothing happens on a save, failure carries the consequences.Err, I absolutely play heat metal that you avoid the disadvantage if you succeed on the CON save, for exactly the same reasons that you avoid the effects of contagion (and all other similar spells) if you succeed on the save. The spells are written in basically the same way (A/B added for clarity)
The second sentence in both cases is conditional on failing the save
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Maybe that's the case that the next sentence only refers to not dropping the item from a failed save and excludes holding on due to a success, and that reading probably makes more sense. But it is still very far off topic and I still don't think it is a good comparison, even when it provides support of my view of contagion.
They are two separate sentences, in a single paragraph in a single spell's description, and with a reference from the second one back to the first one. You don't think they're related? You never write more than one sentence on a topic at once? Are we to take "Its two separate sentences." completely out of context and ignore all surrounding text?
Heat metal provides an automatic effect. The metal is hot. There is no save against the metal being hot. Contagion is not an automatic effect. The comparison is not valid.
[REDACTED]
Your argument is an incorrect interpretation of both the rules and English because it relies on ignoring the context.
Contagion inflicts a magical contagion. You must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or take damage and become poisoned. While poisoned, you have disadvantage on saving throws with a chosen ability. The target must succeed three times on a Constitution saving throw on each of its turns to end the spell. If they fail three times, the spell lasts for 7 days instead. An effect that removes the poisoned condition requires that the target succeed on a saving throw or it doesn't work.
It is a spell that deals damage, causes the poisoned condition and makes the condition hard to remove. It is not an automatic debuff. If the initial save succeeds, the spell has no effect.
RAW, once the target fails the initial save, they only need to fail twice more (for a total of three saves) to trigger the 7 day duration, but I am not sure if that is RAI. Either way, pick Constitution for the saving throw penalty and it will be difficult to shake off. (Dispel Magic might be the best option).
How to add Tooltips.
I fail to see the relevance of whether the initial target is the pc, or something else. The point of contention in contagion is very similar to part of heat metal and, unless changing the effect of this part of the spell, the rest of heat metal is irrelevant.
Extended signature