So then that means one creature cannot gain the benefit of eating two as two separate actions during the 24 hours that the effect lasts? Because I think that is the crux of the problem that Lostwhilefishing seems to be bringing up.
Lyxen, I have to say that my perception of the arguments you make is that they're being made in bad faith. You continue to make logical fallacies with circular reasoning & outcome bias. You have a preconception of what a spell's "effect" is, and you seek premises to justify your conclusion. When your premises are shown to be invalid, you manipulate the premise to try shoehorning it back in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Lyxen, I have to say that my perception of the arguments you make is that they're being made in bad faith. You continue to make logical fallacies with circular reasoning & outcome bias. You have a preconception of what a spell's "effect" is, and you seek premises to justify your conclusion. When your premises are shown to be invalid, you manipulate the premise to try shoehorning it back in.
Their prelims is not invalid.
Casting a Spell
When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description in Chapter 11 begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.
Combining Magical Effects
The effects of different spells add together while the durations of those spells overlap. The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect — such as the highest bonus — from those castings applies while their durations overlap, or the most recent effect applies if the castings are equally potent and their durations overlap.
For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell's benefit only once; he or she doesn't get to roll two bonus dice.
I am quoting RAW from chapter 10 of the PHB. The “effects of a spell” is clearly defined, and the fact that two castings of the same spell don’t stack is clearly stated. That’s as clear cut RAW as it gets.
A spell is a discrete magical effect, a single shaping of the magical energies that suffuse the multiverse into a specific, limited expression. In casting a spell, a character carefully plucks at the invisible strands of raw magic suffusing the world, pins them in place in a particular pattern, sets them vibrating in a specific way, and then releases them to unleash the desired effect--in most cases, all in the span of seconds.
The sentence in the "Casting a Spell" section refers specifically to this.
A spell is a discrete magical effect, a single shaping of the magical energies that suffuse the multiverse into a specific, limited expression. In casting a spell, a character carefully plucks at the invisible strands of raw magic suffusing the world, pins them in place in a particular pattern, sets them vibrating in a specific way, and then releases them to unleash the desired effect--in most cases, all in the span of seconds.
The sentence in the "Casting a Spell" section refers specifically to this.
Maybe I’m just slow today, but what does that have to do with “The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.”?!?
Not only are the premises absolutely correct, as confirmed most recently by IamSposta and WolfOfTheBees, so this is not a preconception at all. The fact that it hurts your own preconception does not change the fact that as far as I can see, everything in RAW supports my view.
[sic]
There is nothing whatsoever circular, preconceived, no fallacy in there, it's straight from the RAW.
If what you are talking about when you are using "effect" is not what is described in the definition that I posted above, you aren't describing the effect of the spell, so you must be using the word with a different meaning.
Anyway, no one has sufficiently answered whether you can eat two goodberries within 24 hours (either from one or multiple castings). Remember that the effect tells you that it lasts for 24 hours; that is RAW. Also, if you want to be selective about rule reading, the sentence says "Instead, the most potent effect--such as the highest bonus--from those castings applies while their durations overlap, or the most recent effect applies if the castings are equally potent and their durations overlap." Obviously the sentence is about effects, its subject is effects. Obviously, then, the sentence is talking about the duration of the effect. It is completely irrelevant to point to a sentence about different spells when we're talking about one spell being cast multiple times.
Or we can pick another example. I know Lyxen thinks their explanation of chill touch conveyed their meaning, but I still don't get what they would rule happens when the wizard and then the sorcerer casts the spell on the same target? Can both hands occupy the same space? Then what prevents the spirits from spirit guardians from occupying the same area? I would like a clear answer: how many times does the target take damage? how many times does the rider apply? How do you know?
Great. So if I'm in an old SG and I walk into a newer one while remaining in the first, I take damage twice? Because if not then your ruling for CT just doesn't add up.
I mean I disagree with other parts, but I know I won't change any opinions on those.
Great. So if I'm in an old SG and I walk into a newer one while remaining in the first, I take damage twice? Because if not then your ruling for CT just doesn't add up.
I mean I disagree with other parts, but I know I won't change any opinions on those.
1) If you start in AoE #1, and make the save for damage, then move into AoE #2 while still in AoE#1, do you avoid the damage from AoE #2? what if AoE #2 was more recently cast or created by a higher level version of the spell?
If #1 is either more potent or more recently cast, then the target would have to move out of #1’s AoE before they would be effected by #2 because where they overlap, #1 suppresses #2.
If #2 is either more potent or more recently cast, then where they overlap #2 suppresses #1, so the creature would have to roll another save as soon as it enters#2’s AoE.
(seeing that it's a cantrip, I don't see any reason to think that one will be more potent than the other)
One cast by an 11th level character would most certainly be “more potent” than one cast by a 1st level character, 2d8 (or 200%) more potent to be exact.
Yeah, I certainly think it is just way easier to use "mechanical effect" rather than "spell effect" in that sentence on overlapping spells than jumping through all those tracking hoops to keep that sort of nuance straight, especially because the rule is there to limit what you have to track during the game. The rules certainly use both of those meanings. I argue that one can pick in the combining spell effects rule.
But I still don't really think that I understand the position you guys are arguing for. You keep saying that you think each spell has one effect and also continue to quote "The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect." Looking back to chill touch, if the damage is described in the rest of the text of the spell, then it is part of the spell effect. Arguing that the damage isn't overwritten constitutes a logical discontinuity. It is in the rest of the text, therefore it is in the effect that would be overwritten by a more recent casting.
I'll rather just keep it to my fun reading. Bonus: you don't have to ruin the fun of two players who both happen to choose one of the best third level damage spells they could.
Arguing that the damage isn't overwritten constitutes a logical discontinuity. It is in the rest of the text, therefore it is in the effect that would be overwritten by a more recent casting.
I am not sure what you mean by "overwritten". Assuming equal potency, the most recent applies, so the new casting "overwrites" the previous one, so you indeed take the damage for the second time, but you only suffer one debuff.
This is the logical discontinuity. The damage is in the effect. The effect can only apply once while two casting's durations overlap. The damage can only apply once while the durations overlap (under the "spell text = single effect" reading). Reasoning any other way is tantamount to reasoning differently for spirit guardians and chill touch.
So if the effect applies then the damage applies? But the converse is not true? If the effect no longer applies (because a newer one does) the damage still applies? It still sounds to me like you are separating the damage out of that effect. Why?
You know what, as long as we both agree to allow each other's interpretation, then fine. I'm a bit over this conversation. Neither of us seems to be able to convince the other, and as far as I'm concerned either reading could work from the point of view that "effects" is used ambiguously in the rules. I simply see this rule as an extensionof what the DMG's rule says that is targeted at players, rather than a rewriteof a rule that wouldn't have had to mention spells at all if spells were covered by a completely different rule.
I have cited the RAW enough and convinced enough people that I think it rests my case. The fact that the only defence that you seem to have left is whether the "fluff", assuming that there is any (as I think that I have demonstrated well enough for you that there is not one bit of fluff in the description of goodberry), is part of the effect, is another proof of this.
First of all, no, you are making a strawman. Secondly, if it is so clear, why can't you answer those simple questions I asked?
The duration of goodberrymight say instantaneous but that would only apply to the casting or eating time. The berries themselves last 24 hours, and their nourishment lasts for 1 day. Does the effect of the spell last 24 hours, 1 day, or 23 hours, 59 minutes plus a day?
**interesting side-note: does everybody have 24 hour days in their game?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Whoa, did this turn into a Goodberry thread while I wasn't looking???
The duration of a spell is not always the same as the duration of the independent magical effects it creates. See Goodberry, Heroe's Feast, Mighty Fortress, etc... It may feel linguistically/logically unsatisfying to split that hair, but yes, Goodberry-the-spell only lasts for an instant, but the magical berries it creates separately last for 24 hours in a way that is entirely independent from the duration of the spell. Dispel Magic won't touch them (it can target their magical effect, but all the spell does is end spells), but Antimagic Field will wink them out of existence (as magically created objects).
What applicability this has to whatever you guys are arguing about escapes me, I don't see any trail to get from Goodberry to Spirit Guardians.
Whoa, did this turn into a Goodberry thread while I wasn't looking???
The duration of a spell is not always the same as the duration of the independent magical effects it creates. See Goodberry, Heroe's Feast, Mighty Fortress, etc... It may feel linguistically/logically unsatisfying to split that hair, but yes, Goodberry-the-spell only lasts for an instant, but the magical berries it creates separately last for 24 hours in a way that is entirely independent from the duration of the spell. Dispel Magic won't touch them (it can target their magical effect, but all the spell does is end spells), but Antimagic Field will wink them out of existence (as magically created objects).
What applicability this has to whatever you guys are arguing about escapes me, I don't see any trail to get from Goodberry to Spirit Guardians.
It had something to do with the duration of overlapping effects. In trying to make a metaphor about Spirit Guardians, somebody asked about eating more than one Goodberry in a given day. Someone said something about the duration of Goodberry being 24 hours, and asked how someone else would handle that "overlapping duration" (which it isn't, since Goodberry says nothing about eating more than 1 in a day...).
Goodberry is a fascinating spell with some big implications for how we "should" read durations, interpret the language about "instantaneous" spells not having lingering effects, the nature of ongoing vs. one-time spell effects, the distinctions between "objects" and enchanted objects and "magic items," Use an Object vs Activate an Item rules, the definition of "healing spell," etc. etc.... it's probably the spell with the single-most significance to how we understand magic and related systems to work in the entire PHB!
But page 13 of a thread about Spirit Guardians probably isn't the best place to start it, so I'll zip my lips for now and leave it at that :)
So then that means one creature cannot gain the benefit of eating two as two separate actions during the 24 hours that the effect lasts? Because I think that is the crux of the problem that Lostwhilefishing seems to be bringing up.
Lyxen, I have to say that my perception of the arguments you make is that they're being made in bad faith. You continue to make logical fallacies with circular reasoning & outcome bias. You have a preconception of what a spell's "effect" is, and you seek premises to justify your conclusion. When your premises are shown to be invalid, you manipulate the premise to try shoehorning it back in.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Their prelims is not invalid.
I am quoting RAW from chapter 10 of the PHB. The “effects of a spell” is clearly defined, and the fact that two castings of the same spell don’t stack is clearly stated. That’s as clear cut RAW as it gets.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The sentence in the "Casting a Spell" section refers specifically to this.
Maybe I’m just slow today, but what does that have to do with “The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.”?!?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
And DevanAvalon in Post # 189, and Jaysburn in Post # 127.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If what you are talking about when you are using "effect" is not what is described in the definition that I posted above, you aren't describing the effect of the spell, so you must be using the word with a different meaning.
Anyway, no one has sufficiently answered whether you can eat two goodberries within 24 hours (either from one or multiple castings). Remember that the effect tells you that it lasts for 24 hours; that is RAW. Also, if you want to be selective about rule reading, the sentence says "Instead, the most potent effect--such as the highest bonus--from those castings applies while their durations overlap, or the most recent effect applies if the castings are equally potent and their durations overlap." Obviously the sentence is about effects, its subject is effects. Obviously, then, the sentence is talking about the duration of the effect. It is completely irrelevant to point to a sentence about different spells when we're talking about one spell being cast multiple times.
Or we can pick another example. I know Lyxen thinks their explanation of chill touch conveyed their meaning, but I still don't get what they would rule happens when the wizard and then the sorcerer casts the spell on the same target? Can both hands occupy the same space? Then what prevents the spirits from spirit guardians from occupying the same area? I would like a clear answer: how many times does the target take damage? how many times does the rider apply? How do you know?
Great. So if I'm in an old SG and I walk into a newer one while remaining in the first, I take damage twice? Because if not then your ruling for CT just doesn't add up.
I mean I disagree with other parts, but I know I won't change any opinions on those.
That was my ruling.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
One cast by an 11th level character would most certainly be “more potent” than one cast by a 1st level character, 2d8 (or 200%) more potent to be exact.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, I certainly think it is just way easier to use "mechanical effect" rather than "spell effect" in that sentence on overlapping spells than jumping through all those tracking hoops to keep that sort of nuance straight, especially because the rule is there to limit what you have to track during the game. The rules certainly use both of those meanings. I argue that one can pick in the combining spell effects rule.
But I still don't really think that I understand the position you guys are arguing for. You keep saying that you think each spell has one effect and also continue to quote "The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect." Looking back to chill touch, if the damage is described in the rest of the text of the spell, then it is part of the spell effect. Arguing that the damage isn't overwritten constitutes a logical discontinuity. It is in the rest of the text, therefore it is in the effect that would be overwritten by a more recent casting.
I'll rather just keep it to my fun reading. Bonus: you don't have to ruin the fun of two players who both happen to choose one of the best third level damage spells they could.
This is the logical discontinuity. The damage is in the effect. The effect can only apply once while two casting's durations overlap. The damage can only apply once while the durations overlap (under the "spell text = single effect" reading). Reasoning any other way is tantamount to reasoning differently for spirit guardians and chill touch.
So if the effect applies then the damage applies? But the converse is not true? If the effect no longer applies (because a newer one does) the damage still applies? It still sounds to me like you are separating the damage out of that effect. Why?
You know what, as long as we both agree to allow each other's interpretation, then fine. I'm a bit over this conversation. Neither of us seems to be able to convince the other, and as far as I'm concerned either reading could work from the point of view that "effects" is used ambiguously in the rules. I simply see this rule as an extension of what the DMG's rule says that is targeted at players, rather than a rewrite of a rule that wouldn't have had to mention spells at all if spells were covered by a completely different rule.
First of all, no, you are making a strawman. Secondly, if it is so clear, why can't you answer those simple questions I asked?
The duration of goodberrymight say instantaneous but that would only apply to the casting or eating time. The berries themselves last 24 hours, and their nourishment lasts for 1 day. Does the effect of the spell last 24 hours, 1 day, or 23 hours, 59 minutes plus a day?
**interesting side-note: does everybody have 24 hour days in their game?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I'm just gonna leave this here...
https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/logic_in_argumentative_writing/fallacies.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Whoa, did this turn into a Goodberry thread while I wasn't looking???
The duration of a spell is not always the same as the duration of the independent magical effects it creates. See Goodberry, Heroe's Feast, Mighty Fortress, etc... It may feel linguistically/logically unsatisfying to split that hair, but yes, Goodberry-the-spell only lasts for an instant, but the magical berries it creates separately last for 24 hours in a way that is entirely independent from the duration of the spell. Dispel Magic won't touch them (it can target their magical effect, but all the spell does is end spells), but Antimagic Field will wink them out of existence (as magically created objects).
What applicability this has to whatever you guys are arguing about escapes me, I don't see any trail to get from Goodberry to Spirit Guardians.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It had something to do with the duration of overlapping effects. In trying to make a metaphor about Spirit Guardians, somebody asked about eating more than one Goodberry in a given day. Someone said something about the duration of Goodberry being 24 hours, and asked how someone else would handle that "overlapping duration" (which it isn't, since Goodberry says nothing about eating more than 1 in a day...).
Goodberry is a fascinating spell with some big implications for how we "should" read durations, interpret the language about "instantaneous" spells not having lingering effects, the nature of ongoing vs. one-time spell effects, the distinctions between "objects" and enchanted objects and "magic items," Use an Object vs Activate an Item rules, the definition of "healing spell," etc. etc.... it's probably the spell with the single-most significance to how we understand magic and related systems to work in the entire PHB!
But page 13 of a thread about Spirit Guardians probably isn't the best place to start it, so I'll zip my lips for now and leave it at that :)
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.