Is this a valid contingency trigger?

[Crake]

Ok, so me and my DM had a discussion about contingency and the like and he determined that the following contingency was invalid:

"If I am targetted by or within the area of a hostile 3rd level or lower spell or spell like ability, cast Lesser Globe of Invulnerability" with the intention that the contingent Lesser Globe of Invulnerability would stop the hostile spell from affecting me.

Now it's his game, and he seemed quite adamant on his position, so I'm not gonna try and change his mind, but I'd like to see what others think, was this contingency valid? Where can you draw the line with contingency? My DM also disagrees with the fact that it doesn't say anywhere in the spell that the trigger needs to be something affecting you, so would be then be fair to say "teleport home when my wife, on the other side of the planet, says 'dinner is ready!'"?

[Krobar]

I would let those work. Including the dinner time teleportation contingency.

One of my players has a bunch of stuff on contingency, that contingency being "when I want it to take effect."

[Devronq]

I'd actually say no just based on the lose definition of a "hostile" luv.3 spell. How is the contingency to know which spells are hostile and which are not? Also of there any ruling that states the contingency can take effect before the trigger does?

[Krobar]

You don't know what a hostile spell is? It's a spell that in some way could cause some sort of harm to you. Do you screw up your players' wishes every time they cast one too, because it's impossible to properly specify every condition and define every key term in one sentence?

[Sith_Happens]

I'd actually say no just based on the lose definition of a "hostile" luv.3 spell. How is the contingency to know which spells are hostile and which are not?

Presumably, by the spell in question not having the (harmless) tag.

[Crake]

I'd actually say no just based on the lose definition of a "hostile" luv.3 spell. How is the contingency to know which spells are hostile and which are not? Also of there any ruling that states the contingency can take effect before the trigger does?

Considering there are immediate action abilities that can be triggered once something has been declared, but before it completes, such as greater mirror image when being targeted by an attack or spell, I don't see why a contingency couldn't trigger on the declaration, but before the completion?

[holywhippet]

You would need to be an epic level caster to make the teleport home for dinner trick work since greater teleport is a level 7 spell.

For the lesser globe contingency it might be more reasonable to declare it will trigger when someone is casting a hostile spell that will affect you. Having it trigger after a spell has been cast is a bit suspect as you should be under the effects of the spell before your spell triggers so it should still work for that round.

The problem with contingency in the way you are suggesting is that it starts to do stuff that should only be possible using scrying and successful spellcraft checks. A level 3 spell has been cast on you, how do you know it is level 3 without a spellcraft check? How do you know you are the target without reading their thoughts?

Your wife has finished cooking dinner, how do you know this unless you are scrying on her? Maybe you are supposed to be protected someone/somewhere/something from a particular person. So why not cast contingency to teleport you to them if they approach within a certain distance? What happens if they are invisible and have taken steps to block detection spells?

For your first example, I'd consider changing it to have the spell trigger when you speak a short command work (swift or free action) and only speak that work when you notice a spell being cast and have used spellcraft to identify it.

[Stux]

Is it assumed then that the spell knows absolutely everything about the universe then? Because that seems a little far fetched. You could set up contingencies to find out any piece of information. Examples: contingency to cast a spell when someone lies in your presence, contingency to cast a spell when you walk near any trap, contingency to cast a spell when you point your finger in the direction of the BBEG.

It becomes the most powerful divination spell available!

I think I would not allow that interpretation because I would not expect the spell to know when a 3rd level spell is being cast, certainly without you knowing it's 3rd level. This obviously isn't an argument from RAW, just from common sense.

What I would do is use an obscure made up word to trigger the contingency and then say it when you want the spell to trigger.

[jedipotter]

"If I am targetted by or within the area of a hostile 3rd level or lower spell or spell like ability, cast Lesser Globe of Invulnerability" with the intention that the contingent Lesser Globe of Invulnerability would stop the hostile spell from affecting me.

It would be invalid in my game too. One of my rule clarifications is: The Contingency spell never has more information then the caster or user. So the contingency spell won't know about a hostile spell, unless the target knows. So how does the spell, or anyone really, know if you have been ''targeted''. The only way to know is after you were hit by the spell. Unless your spellcasters have them red dot laser targeting sights.

You will note that contingency does not cast the spell on you as an immediate action. In other words, the effect has to happen to trigger the contingency. So you would get hit by a scorching ray and take damage and all....and then your globe would be triggered. And with things like stinking cloud, you would just 'trap' a bit of the cloud in your globe.

But Globe of Invulnerability is not a valid spell for Contingency anyway. Is GoI a spell that effects the person(range of personal or touch?). Nope....

And as I say Contingency only knows what you know, the ''other side of the world'' triggers won't work. So you can't do Contingencies like ''if my mom says the word ''help'' teleport me to her side'' and expect them to work world wide. You would need to stay within an earshot of her to hear what she said.

[Crake]

You would need to be an epic level caster to make the teleport home for dinner trick work since greater teleport is a level 7 spell.

You could use regular teleport (assuming the planet is small enough >.>), or just use a crafted contingent spell.

For the lesser globe contingency it might be more reasonable to declare it will trigger when someone is casting a hostile spell that will affect you. Having it trigger after a spell has been cast is a bit suspect as you should be under the effects of the spell before your spell triggers so it should still work for that round.


The problem with contingency in the way you are suggesting is that it starts to do stuff that should only be possible using scrying and successful spellcraft checks. A level 3 spell has been cast on you, how do you know it is level 3 without a spellcraft check? How do you know you are the target without reading their thoughts?

Take a look at this spell: http://dndtools.eu/spells/players-handbook-ii--80/stay-the-hand--2956/

Note that it says "You can cast this spell during an opponent's turn after the opponent announces its intention to attack you or target you with a spell." You don't even need to spellcraft to find out what the spell is, or read their thoughts. My contingency is simply replacing the effect of that spell with a globe of invulnerability.


Your wife has finished cooking dinner, how do you know this unless you are scrying on her? Maybe you are supposed to be protected someone/somewhere/something from a particular person. So why not cast contingency to teleport you to them if they approach within a certain distance? What happens if they are invisible and have taken steps to block detection spells?

In this case, it's simply replacing me speaking the command word with someone else completing the command word. As for an enemy approaching someone you're supposed to be protecting. It's worth noting that you cant specify a person as the destination of a teleport spell, so you could teleport "home" but if your wife is at the markets when the enemy is approaching her, then being home isn't going to help.

Obviously you need to draw a line somewhere when it comes to people's thoughts and intentions. Even I would find it dubious to have a contingency trigger on, for example, "A plot to murder the king begins development". But I think, people approaching a person or location, even if they're protected from divination (note that alarm, which does much the same thing, doesn't care how protected you are from divinations, since that kind of thing is an abjuration effect, not divination), should be a valid trigger. I would allow "anyone getting within 30ft of my wife" or "when John enters my house" or "when anyone but my wife enters the house" but not "someone with the intention to steal my stuff enters my house".

While at first that may seem contradictory with my first example or people firing hostile spells at me, the contingency isn't noting their hostile intentions, merely the fact that a spell that will affect me negatively either will be targeting me, or including me in it's area of effect.


It would be invalid in my game too. One of my rule clarifications is: The Contingency spell never has more information then the caster or user. So the contingency spell won't know about a hostile spell, unless the target knows. So how does the spell, or anyone really, know if you have been ''targeted''. The only way to know is after you were hit by the spell. Unless your spellcasters have them red dot laser targeting sights.

That's a fair call I suppose, but would it then trigger if you noticed the spell being cast, and successfully identified it as a 3rd level or lower spell?


You will note that contingency does not cast the spell on you as an immediate action. In other words, the effect has to happen to trigger the contingency. So you would get hit by a scorching ray and take damage and all....and then your globe would be triggered. And with things like stinking cloud, you would just 'trap' a bit of the cloud in your globe.

But the trigger isn't you being affected by the spell, instead the trigger is you being targetted by the spell.


But Globe of Invulnerability is not a valid spell for Contingency anyway. Is GoI a spell that effects the person(range of personal or touch?). Nope....

That is also a good point, I thought that globe of invulnerability was a personal spell that emnated, but looking at the spell, it's just an emnation, with no target, so you are correct, not a valid option for the spell.

[Slipperychicken]

Presumably, by the spell in question not having the (harmless) tag.

Yeah, Contingency requires that the trigger be clear. I don't think "a hostile spell" is clear enough. Perhaps "I am targeted by a [spell/SlA/etc] with hostile or malicious intent toward me" would be better.


"teleport home when my wife, on the other side of the planet, says 'dinner is ready!'"?

Although I don't see any RAW against this, I would only let it work if the contingency's trigger was nearby and noticeable. Also, there are problems with that sort of trigger: The caster's wife might end up teleporting him home while he's taking a poo, or doing something similarly compromising or important.

Or she might explain to the kids "Daddy's only coming back when dinner is ready", which would also trigger it long before it was intended. You might be safer with a trigger phrase like "[caster's name], come home right this instant!"'

Also hope that the Teleport doesn't mishap and land you in someone else's similar-looking home. Especially not while you were doing something compromising :smallbiggrin:

[Randomocity132]

Or she might explain to the kids "Daddy's only coming back when dinner is ready", which would also trigger it long before it was intended. You might be safer with a trigger phrase like "[caster's name], come home right this instant!"

Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice!

[Crake]

Yeah, Contingency requires that the trigger be clear. I don't think "a hostile spell" is clear enough. Perhaps "I am targeted by a [spell/SlA/etc] with hostile or malicious intent toward me" would be better.



Although I don't see any RAW against this, I would only let it work if the contingency's trigger was nearby and noticeable. Also, there are problems with that sort of trigger: The caster's wife might end up teleporting him home while he's taking a poo, or doing something similarly compromising or important.

Or she might explain to the kids "Daddy's only coming back when dinner is ready", which would also trigger it long before it was intended. You might be safer with a trigger phrase like "[caster's name], come home right this instant!"'

Also hope that the Teleport doesn't mishap and land you in someone else's similar-looking home. Especially not while you were doing something compromising :smallbiggrin:

Haha, yeah, I know it was quite a dangerous (in the non-fatal sense) trigger, it was more for the example.

Using Jedipotter's contingency clarification, that the contingency never has more information than the caster, that sort of thing wouldn't be do-able though, which I guess if you used that ruling, then that's fine. I've always envisioned contingency as being a bit more powerful than that though.

[Pickford]

Ok, so me and my DM had a discussion about contingency and the like and he determined that the following contingency was invalid:

"If I am targetted by or within the area of a hostile 3rd level or lower spell or spell like ability, cast Lesser Globe of Invulnerability" with the intention that the contingent Lesser Globe of Invulnerability would stop the hostile spell from affecting me.

Now it's his game, and he seemed quite adamant on his position, so I'm not gonna try and change his mind, but I'd like to see what others think, was this contingency valid? Where can you draw the line with contingency? My DM also disagrees with the fact that it doesn't say anywhere in the spell that the trigger needs to be something affecting you, so would be then be fair to say "teleport home when my wife, on the other side of the planet, says 'dinner is ready!'"?

I'd say no. Per Contingency the spell must trigger in response to some condition. Targeting is a mental activity of your opponent, so it's not a condition affecting you per se.

[jedipotter]

That's a fair call I suppose, but would it then trigger if you noticed the spell being cast, and successfully identified it as a 3rd level or lower spell?

You could use spellcraft to determine the spell being cast, sure. But you would not know if you were a target.




But the trigger isn't you being affected by the spell, instead the trigger is you being targetted by the spell.

But there is no way in the rules to determine the target of a spell, other then you observe who the spell effects. What does ''targeting'' someone with a spell mean? There is no magical targeting ''lock on'', where the hostile spell will ''ride the beam'' to it's target. Unless you can read your targets mind, you can't know what they are targeting with a spell before it is cast.

[Osiris]

I'd re-word it so it's like "Trigger Lesser Globe of Invulnerability whenever a spell or power of 3rd level or lower is cast on me, and it does either hit point damage, or applies a debuff in the form of attribute damage, a harmful condition, etc"

[Rebel7284]

Well hostile IS a thing. Otherwise Detect Hostile Intent or Invisibility wouldn't know what thoughts/actions are hostile.

I have read on a board somewhere using the following trigger for contingency:

"If a creature within N feet performs an action toward me that, if that creature would have been affected by an invisibility spell would end that invisibility spell, then ~trigger~"

Does the contingency have foresight like that? It's never defined in the rules.

[Crake]

You could use spellcraft to determine the spell being cast, sure. But you would not know if you were a target.




But there is no way in the rules to determine the target of a spell, other then you observe who the spell effects. What does ''targeting'' someone with a spell mean? There is no magical targeting ''lock on'', where the hostile spell will ''ride the beam'' to it's target. Unless you can read your targets mind, you can't know what they are targeting with a spell before it is cast.

That's clearly not the case since as I've said before, there are spells that can be specifically cast upon the enemy declaring you as the target of their spell, but before the spell comes into effect, meaning there is an indication, at least to the target, as to the fact that they are the target of the spell being cast.

[jedipotter]

That's clearly not the case since as I've said before, there are spells that can be specifically cast upon the enemy declaring you as the target of their spell, but before the spell comes into effect, meaning there is an indication, at least to the target, as to the fact that they are the target of the spell being cast.

What spells? You want to point out a poorly worded spell somewhere?

Can you point out a definition for ''targeted'' in the core rules? Can you point out a way for a character to know they are the target of a spell, before the spell is cast on them?

To ''target'' someone is just a mental action, your picking where the spell will go. There is no red beam with a little beep, beep, beep. So how would you know you are a target...until you got hit?


Though the lawyer in me would have fun with 'hostile' too. What is a 'hostile' spell? Is sleep hostile? A charm? Solid Fog?

[Crake]

What spells? You want to point out a poorly worded spell somewhere?

Can you point out a definition for ''targeted'' in the core rules? Can you point out a way for a character to know they are the target of a spell, before the spell is cast on them?

To ''target'' someone is just a mental action, your picking where the spell will go. There is no red beam with a little beep, beep, beep. So how would you know you are a target...until you got hit?


Though the lawyer in me would have fun with 'hostile' too. What is a 'hostile' spell? Is sleep hostile? A charm? Solid Fog?

I linked it already, its a spell called stay the hand. As for "what is a hostile spell" how about "anything that would remove invisibility".

[Stux]

To throw another one out there, are you a target if you are within the area of an AoE spell? Would a Fireball trigger the contingency? What if it was 'targeted' at a patch of grass next to you, you just happened to be in the blast?

[Sam K]

But how does the contingency "know" that a spell or activity would remove invisibility? The contingency doesn't have intelligence or ranks in spellcraft, knowledge (arcana) or anything else that might reveal this.

A character could specify which spells would trigger a contingency ("if I am affected by any of the following spells: <list of spells>, trigger Minor Globe"), but I cant see how the contingency in itself would be aware if a spell is "hostile" or "level 3 or lower". If something requires judgement or skill ranks, it should probably be beyond the scope of a contingency.

Besides, poorly worded contingencies are FUN! Just look at Tarquins expresseion (you may have to use some imagination, but trust me, it's there!) when Miron teleports away from the order. You can't say that's not hillarious!

Now, if you want to be clever, I suppose you could reserach a divination spell that predicts when you are going to become targeted by a non-harmless spell of 3rd level or lower, and creates some minor but noticable effect when that happens, and set the contingency to trigger on that effect. Convulted as hell (the arcane equivilent of a long IF ELSE THEN block of code), but you could do it. Noone said magic should be EASY!

Well, cept WotC, I guess...

[Zancloufer]

I would think that if the Trigger was something like "A spell without the (Harmless) tag that is' 3rd level or lower is being cast at me" isn't bad.

However there is a good point about contingency and that is should only trigger if the situation is obvious OR known by the caster. In that case for this specific one I would let it fly, but it would make sense that it would only work with a successful spell-craft check.

Also the teleport one should only work if you have some way of hearing the works at the time, either by a message spell, scrying etc.


Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice!

That's kind of how I imagine the Truenamer capstone works. There's a NPC Truenamer in my current game that sometimes appears when people say his name three times (depends if he has the time and/or cares).

[CombatOwl]

Ok, so me and my DM had a discussion about contingency and the like and he determined that the following contingency was invalid:

"If I am targetted by or within the area of a hostile 3rd level or lower spell or spell like ability,

Contingencies don't have or clauses. They are strictly if/than, no loops. This is actually important--poorly considered contingencies are one of the reasons the spell isn't inherently problematic for DMs.


cast Lesser Globe of Invulnerability" with the intention that the contingent Lesser Globe of Invulnerability would stop the hostile spell from affecting me.

It wouldn't block the first spell, though it would block subsequent spells.


Now it's his game, and he seemed quite adamant on his position, so I'm not gonna try and change his mind, but I'd like to see what others think, was this contingency valid? Where can you draw the line with contingency?

Personally, I have issues with contingency being triggered off the intent of other things. Having an effect go off once you're hit by something seems fine, but I don't really grasp how the contingency would know if other casters are targeting you until the spell actually hits you. It's not like contingencies read the minds of anyone who might theoretically be targeting you with a spell (otherwise mind blank and nondetection would both cause problems for contingencies), or divine the future (it would be a divination spell).


My DM also disagrees with the fact that it doesn't say anywhere in the spell that the trigger needs to be something affecting you, so would be then be fair to say "teleport home when my wife, on the other side of the planet, says 'dinner is ready!'"?

Personally, I'd let you cast it, but I wouldn't let it go off until you actually get hit by the spell. It would be a case of the caster misjudging the limits of the spell.

I mean, if you want to get into strict (and, quite frankly, silly) rules lawyering, contingency doesn't actually say it can be triggered on anything other than conditions. Therefore "cast Teleport when I gain the Shaken condition" would be valid while "cast Dimension Door when I am attacked," would not be. No one does it that way because logic suggests the more obvious interpretation of the spell. But that same logic also suggests that contingencies can't know the intent of others in advance, and so can't go off when merely targeted by something.

[Crake]

To throw another one out there, are you a target if you are within the area of an AoE spell? Would a Fireball trigger the contingency? What if it was 'targeted' at a patch of grass next to you, you just happened to be in the blast?

Thats why the additional "or within the area of a hostile spell".


I mean, if you want to get into strict (and, quite frankly, silly) rules lawyering, contingency doesn't actually say it can be triggered on anything other than conditions. Therefore "cast Teleport when I gain the Shaken condition" would be valid while "cast Dimension Door when I am attacked," would not be. No one does it that way because logic suggests the more obvious interpretation of the spell. But that same logic also suggests that contingencies can't know the intent of others in advance, and so can't go off when merely targeted by something.

Except that the spell never says anything about you being affected by a condition, it says that it comes into effect under some condition that you specify. Your rules lawyering there is based on very poor use of the english language.

[Zweisteine]

Make the contingency trigger on when you say a certain string of keywords in another language (that you know). You could go for "Keyword: activate contingent [spell name]," but a string of semi-nonsense is better, unless your DM insists on it having to be written down.

Remember, talking is a free action, and you can do it on anyone's turn!

(And "when I say xxxxxx" is not a complex trigger; at least not to the point the contingency would be illegal.

[jedipotter]

Thats why the additional "or within the area of a hostile spell".

Of course, to be in the area of effect of a spell, you'd need to be effected by the spell first.....



Except that the spell never says anything about you being affected by a condition, it says that it comes into effect under some condition that you specify. Your rules lawyering there is based on very poor use of the english language.

As a DM I would say the condition must be a clear, stated physical act that happens to you or within your immediate area. So you could not say thing like ''if someone thinks unhappy thoughts about me'' as that is not physical.

I would also note that the general idea of blocking a single 1-3 level 'hostile' attack spell is just not a good idea. Even if it did work, you'd block a whole spell....wow. And then everyone would just cast 4th+ level spells. And blocking a random spell is bad. Someone at the market casts charm person on you and zap there goes your spell. Then later when your hit with a lightning bolt....no protection.

You'd be far better of with something like ''If I take X damage teleport me to X''.

[ryu]

Of course, to be in the area of effect of a spell, you'd need to be effected by the spell first.....



As a DM I would say the condition must be a clear, stated physical act that happens to you or within your immediate area. So you could not say thing like ''if someone thinks unhappy thoughts about me'' as that is not physical.

I would also note that the general idea of blocking a single 1-3 level 'hostile' attack spell is just not a good idea. Even if it did work, you'd block a whole spell....wow. And then everyone would just cast 4th+ level spells. And blocking a random spell is bad. Someone at the market casts charm person on you and zap there goes your spell. Then later when your hit with a lightning bolt....no protection.

You'd be far better of with something like ''If I take X damage teleport me to X''.

In mid combat the spell is a buff with a duration and is still limiting enemy options or forcing them to dispell it. Out of combat activation from a stealthy enemy? The enemy just wasted either their first turn or their surprise round. You have tools to win initiative too. Port out on your turn.

[Stux]

Thats why the additional "or within the area of a hostile spell".

Ah fair, missed that. However I think that is on even shakier ground than the targeting issue. I do not believe there to be a time between the caster deciding the area of a fireball and the fireball hitting, and even if a DM ruled that there was then I don't think your current wording covers it. I read it as when a fireball effects you then the contingency triggers, which is obviously too late.

Additionally I'm very firmly in the 'the spell only knows as much as the caster' camp on this though. There are too many potential abuses otherwise.

[geekintheground]

i like the trigger: "if a creature i identify as an enemy casts a spell or SLA which gets within X feet" to avoid spells. if they use a fireball centered on your square the pea sized ball will trigger it. if they center it away from you, but youll be hit, the area will trigger it (unless the entire ball of fire just APPEARS instead of spreading out from the center)

[CombatOwl]

Except that the spell never says anything about you being affected by a condition, it says that it comes into effect under some condition that you specify.

Right, and conditions are defined in the glossary. Under a strict reading, that's all you can base contingencies on.

Like I said, it's a silly way to play it, but you were also trying to rely on an intentionally overly-broad reading of the contingency rules that's every bit as silly (in that contingency spells know the future all the time).

For example, under your original reading, you could set a contingency to trigger "on the day that I will die," or "the day that the price of a bushel of wheat passes 3 gold per bushel." Because those are conditions in the most general sense. Assuming it can read the intent of a spell or determine when someone is targeting the caster before the spell is cast is an equally silly reading of the rules as the "can only trigger on Conditions" reading.


Your rules lawyering there is based on very poor use of the english language.

Conditions are defined in D&D, and the spell quite specifically uses the word, not a synonym. It's a valid reading, albeit not the intended one. Of course, I don't think Contingencies were intended to let you read other people's intents either.

[ryu]

First off that list quite explicitly doesn't list all conditions. Second the phrase condition is never actually defined in D&D. All we know is that everything called out in that glossary counts. In absence of the rules directly defining the turn rather than making lists which don't contain all conditions? We default to English. This is why iron heart surge is such a silly ability by the way.

[zlefin]

It doesn't seem valid to me; but converting to something else should work.
Like the other guy said; if someone you consider hostile casts a 3rd level or less spell (as you identify with a spellcraft check) then put up the globe. Maybe add a clause "that you think is targeting you"; or a clause "that could plausibly target me" (which would exclude buff spells he wouldn't be casting on you, or spells that are too far away to hit you).

[Icewraith]

Right, and conditions are defined in the glossary. Under a strict reading, that's all you can base contingencies on.

Like I said, it's a silly way to play it, but you were also trying to rely on an intentionally overly-broad reading of the contingency rules that's every bit as silly (in that contingency spells know the future all the time).

For example, under your original reading, you could set a contingency to trigger "on the day that I will die," or "the day that the price of a bushel of wheat passes 3 gold per bushel." Because those are conditions in the most general sense. Assuming it can read the intent of a spell or determine when someone is targeting the caster before the spell is cast is an equally silly reading of the rules as the "can only trigger on Conditions" reading.



Conditions are defined in D&D, and the spell quite specifically uses the word, not a synonym. It's a valid reading, albeit not the intended one. Of course, I don't think Contingencies were intended to let you read other people's intents either.


You can place another spell upon your person so that it comes into effect under some condition you dictate when casting contingency. The contingency spell and the companion spell are cast at the same time. The 10-minute casting time is the minimum total for both castings; if the companion spell has a casting time longer than 10 minutes, use that instead.

The spell to be brought into effect by the contingency must be one that affects your person and be of a spell level no higher than one-third your caster level (rounded down, maximum 6th level).

The conditions needed to bring the spell into effect must be clear, although they can be general. In all cases, the contingency immediately brings into effect the companion spell, the latter being “cast” instantaneously when the prescribed circumstances occur. If complicated or convoluted conditions are prescribed, the whole spell combination (contingency and the companion magic) may fail when called on. The companion spell occurs based solely on the stated conditions, regardless of whether you want it to.



The use of "condition" here is different than the list of conditions in the glossary. If it were restricted to that list of conditions then it would need to explicitly say so, i.e. "the spell immediately comes into effect when the character is affected by a condition specified from the list starting on page X". Instead, there's the line in there that the conditions can be general, which is a slightly awkward turn of phrase, but the opposite of what you would expect to be there if you were supposed to be limited to the ones in the table.

"Cast spell X when I say "burblesquatch"" is a sufficiently clear condition for the spell to operate for most purposes.

"Cast spell X when I or [names of other party members] say "burblesquatch" or make the drow sign language gesture for "gooseberry table plague orangutan" in that order"

is slightly more complex but should be specific enough to get the spell off even if you get silenced.

[Togo]

I wouldn't let it work.

You're using contingency as a divination spell, getting it to detect intent, the effect of a spell before it is cast, and the level and technical details of the spell.

You're trying to invoke time-travel/prediction of the future, by putting the effects of the spell once it is cast into the trigger condition, but have the triggered effect occuring before the spell is cast.

Stay the hand isn't a good comparison because it relies on the wizard noticing an attacker about to make an attack, and casting a counter at the attacker before they can do so. The attack being made is explicitly not countered, and the attacker can simply attack someone else instead.

Your interpretation involves inserting your effect between the attacker committing to an action and the action occuring. You want your sheild to spring up after they cast the spell but before the spell takes effect. These are not separate in D&D, and trying to separate them breaks the action system. No effect of this kind should ever be allowed.

[Invader]

It wouldn't fly with me.

Contingency - teleport me home if I fall below 50 hps - perfectly fine

Contingency - Teleport me home if I would fall below 50 points if something might happen - not so much. Contingency doesn't predict the future, if you allow it to work this way it easily becomes one of top 5 or so powers in the game.

[Grek]

By RAW, it totally works. Contingency has no limiting clauses on what conditions it can detect, so any condition that is simple enough for a Contingency to be based on is a condition that a Contingency can detect.

I personally play Contingency, glyphs and all other spells that involve the spell detecting a condition and then doing something if that condition is met as constantly taking 10 on Spot and Listen checks with a skill bonus equal to the caster level of the spell. If such a skill check would detect the condition in question, then the spell can detect it. If not, the spell can't.