Imbue Item ignoring prereqs y/n

[Raishoiken]

It describes only changes to the regular cast, by being passively triggered (and in some chases altered material component rules). It never explicitly calls out that it changes the cast into something else. It only tells you how some parts of the cast are altered. But they are still spell casting rules. Same can be said about SLAs, they call out all changes to the cast (e.g. Components: V,S,M,F). Crafting feats do the same. They make changes to the regular casting rules without any indicator that it wouldn't be any cast anymore. There is no explicit permission to do so.

Somehow i think you're just ignoring certain points by now. Not everything to do with spells is an "altered cast". The "casting a spell" rules are not a base template that is then tweaked a little bit, as you are suggesting There is literally no proof for it. The "primary source rule" shtick you keep trying does not work because it does not apply here. There are no rules contradictions, and also yes, the book LITERALLY says that you are doing something that is not casting. You seem to be confused, thinking that the book has to say the words "you are not casting this spell" in order for you not to be casting when it literally says in several places that the thing you are doing is not casting. The book doesn't say you are casting it, but in a different way, and it has to say that in order for you to be right. The rules have to tell you what you are doing, they don't expect you to do the mental gymnastics you are doing just to be right.

Another way to look at it is that you literally have to make a bunch of assumptions in order to reach your conclusion
you not only have to assume that trigger means casting
you ALSO have to assume that trigger means casting EVEN THOUGH the book literally tells you in plain words that you are, in fact, not casting.

Where as if you're simply reading the rules as they are presented, you have to make exactly 0 assumptions. You just read that the book says you trigger the spell by working on the item, and you need to pay attention closely and see that it tells you in plain words that you aren't casting the spell you're just expending a slot "as if" you were casting it


You have to make 0 assumptions to come to the conclusion that you are not casting the spell, and you have to make 2 assumptions at the very least to think that you are casting the spell. One of the assumptions you are making to reach your conclusion is completely ignoring rules text.

Your arguement is circular. You start with the "assumption" that any thing that uses spells is casting a spell some how and the rules never say this is the case. It's just the more common use for them. It isn't the "primary rule" for spells, the primary rules for how a spell works is in the spell description. The "casting a spell" section is the primary rule for when you cast a spell. The crafting section never ever says you cast the spell, nor does it have to call out that you aren't casting a spell (even though uh. it literally tells you that you dont)

Are you perhaps trolling for fun or do you still somehow believe this stance? Because using your stance i could counter spell anyone who is crafting a magic item and ruin the creation process, and counter spell scrolls and wands and staves when they produce their spell effects. Y'know, since it doesn't say that you can't

So once again, unless literally any other person can find a better way to explain your side or even to just agree with any point of your argument, you should probably stop pretending like you're using the "primary source" argument correctly.
In fact, we can make a whole separate thread asking this exact question just to continue to prove it. Because surely if you're right more people than not will agree with you, right? Since most people here have a pretty decent grasp of the english language they should be able to come just as easily to your conclusion as you do if you're correct. Does that sound like a bad way to determine which one of us is correct seeing as how apparently we are not ever going to agree? This way we can figure out which one of us is playing the game "wrong"