phylactery abjurations (spoilers)

[Crazeemeel]

Supposedly with so many abjuration spells cast on it, don't you think there would have been one that doesn't allow other casters to cast spells on the phylactery?

Therefore, putting explosive runes on it shouldn't have worked.

[Shadowcaller]

Supposedly with so many abjuration spells cast on it, don't you think there would have been one that doesn't allow other casters to cast spells on the phylactery?

Therefore, putting explosive runes on it shouldn't have worked.

...

Well, since clearly V didn't prepare explosive runes (when did we see that?) he could not have casted it.

[/sarcasm]

[SPoD]

Supposedly with so many abjuration spells cast on it, don't you think there would have been one that doesn't allow other casters to cast spells on the phylactery?

There is no such spell in D&D. Any spell that would prevent another caster from casting a spell on it would ALSO prevent any other abjuration from working.

And yes, Rich bends the rules of D&D all the time, but he bends them to work in his favor, not arbitrarily against his own plot and/or jokes.


Therefore, putting explosive runes on it shouldn't have worked.

..OK, seriously, what is the point of statements like this? Do you really think that pointing them out is going to earn you some sort of Nerd Cred because you enlightened us all about how Rich is a bad writer or something? What possible purpose does it serve to try and tell us all what "should" have happened? It has no meaning! It DIDN'T happen that way, so your "should" is worthless noise...especially since unlike some of the other people around here, you couldn't even back it up with a rules interpretation. You just wanted to jump on the "I can prove that Rich messed up!" bandwagon, is that it?

[Firewind]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfFunny

[penbed400]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfFunny

*claps* darn text requirements

[Mando Knight]

You just wanted to jump on the "I can prove that Rich messed up!" bandwagon, is that it?

That's a bandwagon? Guess I know why I'm a loner, now. :smallamused:

[Nerd-o-rama]

Supposedly with so many abjuration spells cast on it, don't you think there would have been one that doesn't allow other casters to cast spells on the phylactery?

Therefore, putting explosive runes on it shouldn't have worked.That would have been sensible, but there's no spell that would do that in D&D without preventing any magic from working on it. And Rich clearly wasn't going to make one up just to write himself into a corner.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Supposedly with so many abjuration spells cast on it, don't you think there would have been one that doesn't allow other casters to cast spells on the phylactery?

No.

Not too hard to refute, eh?

[archon_huskie]

That might interfear with Redcloak using the holy symbol/phylactery as a focus for his divine spells. Cross magic mojo and all. Also it would prevent Redclaok from casting his own protection spells on it as well.

[Crazeemeel]

..OK, seriously, what is the point of statements like this? Do you really think that pointing them out is going to earn you some sort of Nerd Cred because you enlightened us all about how Rich is a bad writer or something? What possible purpose does it serve to try and tell us all what "should" have happened? It has no meaning! It DIDN'T happen that way, so your "should" is worthless noise...especially since unlike some of the other people around here, you couldn't even back it up with a rules interpretation. You just wanted to jump on the "I can prove that Rich messed up!" bandwagon, is that it?

no need to be mean about it dude. I'm just giving my opinion. Maybe you disagree

[Haven]

Shouldn't there be an abjuration that stops people from putting graffiti on the holy symbol? Everyone knows delinquent centuryeenage elvish punks specifically enchant their implements to be difficult to wash off, now Redcloak's gonna have to do a separate load for the holy symbol alone next time he does his laundry! :smalleek:

vvv You don't seem to be clear on the idea of a forum. If you're not interested in someone's opinion, you don't tell them not to say it; you ignore, or dissent, or contribute something to the topic at hand.

[GoC]

{Scrubbed}

[Dork Lord]

{Scrubbed}

Yet he still has every right to voice it on these boards. Sheesh, a little anonymity online and folks can get downright nasty.

[GoC]

Yet he still has every right to voice it on these boards. Sheesh, a little anonymity online and folks can get downright nasty.

Perhaps it was a bit uncalled for but after a while you get tired of the continuous "There's an error in the latest comic!".

[Roland St. Jude]

...If you're not interested in someone's opinion, you don't tell them not to say it; you ignore, or dissent, or contribute something to the topic at hand.

Wise words.

[FoE]

Supposedly with so many abjuration spells cast on it, don't you think there would have been one that doesn't allow other casters to cast spells on the phylactery?

Therefore, putting explosive runes on it shouldn't have worked.

OK ... so what abjuration would Xykon have cast to prevent other spellcasters from using magic on the phylactery? Can you provide an example?

[Assassin89]

OK ... so what abjuration would Xykon have cast to prevent other spellcasters from using magic on the phylactery? Can you provide an example?

Antimagic field might work, but that would have prevented any spells from being used in the first place, including Xykon's and we all know that he would never restrict his own magic.

[Crazeemeel]

I think the consensus is that there wasn't a spell that could have been cast to prevent V's explosive runes on the phylactery. In the moment though it seemed like something that it (the phylactery) would be protected against.

[Morgan Wick]

vvv You don't seem to be clear on the idea of a forum. If you're not interested in someone's opinion, you don't tell them not to say it; you ignore, or dissent, or contribute something to the topic at hand.

You don't seem to be clear on the idea of a forum. If you're not interested in someone's opinion, you tell them "waah, you shouldn't have said that!" instead of just ignoring or writing a sane, reasoned dissent or a constructive contribution to the topic at hand. :smallwink:

[Kyouhen]

Remember kids, hindsight's 20/20 vision. There's nothing saying Xykon couldn't have researched a spell to prevent any writing from being put on the phylactery. He could have, should have, but didn't. And now he's about to get an explosive runes to the face.