Test of Spite [3.5.3]

[TheMadLinguist]

Nah, it's actually pretty simple. Avoiding the more weasely bits of wording (If I were to ask you in your current state of truth parity, for example):


A future of class A is one in which I say the word banana in the next round and easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.
A future of class B is one in which I do not say the word banana in the next round and easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.
A future of class D is one in which I say the word banana in the next round and do not easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.
A future of class E is one in which I do not say the word banana in the next round and do not easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.

Ask if the class of the future is a vowel or not.

If it is a vowel, the future is either class A or E. Say "Banana", you win.
If it is not a vowel, the future is either class B or C. Don't say "banana", you win.

Well... either that or cause a universe-ending paradox. Which, coincidentally enough, would also destroy the cube along with the rest of the universe, covering all my bases.

[PhoenixRivers]

Nah, it's actually pretty simple. Avoiding the more weasely bits of wording (If I were to ask you in your current state of truth parity, for example):


A future of class A is one in which I say the word banana in the next round and easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.
A future of class B is one in which I do not say the word banana in the next round and easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.
A future of class D is one in which I say the word banana in the next round and do not easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.
A future of class E is one in which I do not say the word banana in the next round and do not easily succeed at everything I attempt forever.

Ask if the class of the future is a vowel or not.

If it is a vowel, the future is either class A or E. Say "Banana", you win.
If it is not a vowel, the future is either class B or C. Don't say "banana", you win.

Well... either that or cause a universe-ending paradox. Which, coincidentally enough, would also destroy the cube along with the rest of the universe, covering all my bases.

Or, the answer is "Not". As in "Not a vowel". (if the Deity is irritated at you. If not, "neither")

If your followup question cares to qualify, it is not a consonant either.

Alternately, "yes" for is it a vowel.

Future Class "U" - You say the word banana, and a rock falls on you and you die.

Just because you didn't list a possibility, does not mean the possibility doesn't exist.

[TheMadLinguist]

I listed all possible futures.

A + B
A + not B
not A +B
not A + not B

is a complete set. There is not possible future which does not fall into one of those categories.


The main issue is that Contact Other Plane is a purely in-game construct, and as such can be end-run around with metagame.

[PhoenixRivers]

I listed all possible futures.

A + B
A + not B
not A +B
not A + not B

is a complete set. There is not possible future which does not fall into one of those categories.

If saying that word were to render you dead, then you neither succeed nor fail.

There's always another option.

Further: Easily succeeding at everything you attempt does require you to attempt something.

If you gain that status, and then immediately become a grease spot by the hounds before you can attempt an action, well, that still doesn't mean you win.

[TheMadLinguist]

That would fall under "saying the word and not succeeding easily at everything I do".

[PhoenixRivers]

That would fall under "saying the word and not succeeding easily at everything I do".

Really? If you don't do anything, it also falls under "saying the word and succeeding easily at everything you do".

Everything being precisely nothing.

Or there could be a paradox, and your theory about D&D paradox resolution is flawed. Perhaps it only removes the paradox from existence. In other words, "Rocks Fall".

[Saph]

That, or the deity will just answer with "maybe" or "irrelevant", or answer randomly. Deities in the D&D world aren't omniscient.

I've never quite worked out why some people think Contact Other Plane is so powerful. It doesn't let you violate causality, it's just the equivalent of sticking your head through the god's bedroom window and saying "Hey, answer these questions."

[PhoenixRivers]

That, or the deity will just answer with "maybe" or "irrelevant", or answer randomly. Deities in the D&D world aren't omniscient.

I've never quite worked out why some people think Contact Other Plane is so powerful. It doesn't let you violate causality, it's just the equivalent of sticking your head through the god's bedroom window and saying "Hey, answer these questions."

The problem is, that the table defines all options wherein the deity doesn't know.

Thus, all remaining options are where the deity does know.

To a limited extent, it does allow you to set things in stone.

Play that card too hard, and the universe may respond accordingly. For example (as above), a caster with a very large done of silence happens to teleport in from somewhere else.

Ah random contrived chance, is there anything it cannot fix?

[JeminiZero]

The proposal I would put forth to that is:
When you gain an ability, you gain it at full use.

No you don't. This very basic premise is flawed so everything else that follows is wrong. Most use per day abilities require you to rest before you gain their use. This isn't like MMORPGs where you spawn with full health and mana.

Or put another way if a wizard woke up in the morning and then put on a band of intellect, would he suddenly gain extra spell slots from that higher int?Most DMs rule no. He would need to have had that higher Int throughout his 8 hours of rest, in order to benefit from it (spell slot wise).

When it ends, I gain the casting of a 13th level sorceror. Bam. I just regained every spell slot I possess. (if I'm a prepared caster, I just lost every prepared spell as well)

The text states that you assume a new form "in place of your own". That means that when you shift back, you regain what your original form had, not some brand new clean slate. You do not "gain the casting of a 13th level sorceror" when you shift back. You gain your casting, or whatever was left of it.

Now, if we use the "I truly lose the ability" interpretation, do you see the potential for abuse?

If we use a "lose access to" interpretation, I still have the abilities, but I just can't use them.

Not necessarily. Even if you "lose your abilities" entirely, that doesn't mean that they cease to be defined.

[PhoenixRivers]

No you don't. This very basic premise is flawed so everything else that follows is wrong. Most use per day abilities require you to rest before you gain their use. This isn't like MMORPGs where you spawn with full health and mana.

Or put another way if a wizard woke up in the morning and then put on a band of intellect, would he suddenly gain extra spell slots from that higher int?Most DMs rule no. He would need to have had that higher Int throughout his 8 hours of rest, in order to benefit from it (spell slot wise).

You put on a periapt of health. Would he suddenly gain extra HP from that higher con?

Oh wait. Yeah. In any case, the above examples aren't gaining ABILITIES. They're gaining modifiers which apply to pre-existing abilities.

What about when you gain the ability to apply double your caster level in bonuses to skill checks, with no more than your caster level per check? Do you have to rest there?

No. You don't. Because you just cast a level 2 bard spell, and gained an ability.

If you Use Ur Priest and steal a spell like ability, must you wait a day to use it?

No, you don't. Because abilities are ready to go, lock and load, when they are gained... That is, unless explicit rules text states otherwise.

The text states that you assume a new form "in place of your own". That means that when you shift back, you regain what your original form had, not some brand new clean slate. You do not "gain the casting of a 13th level sorceror" when you shift back. You gain your casting, or whatever was left of it.

The spell makes no record of retaining memory of your abilities.

Not necessarily. Even if you "lose your abilities" entirely, that doesn't mean that they cease to be defined.

When you gain your abilities back, does it state that they are not ready to go?

Then they are. Why? Because RAW, that's how gaining abilities works.

[Saph]

The problem is, that the table defines all options wherein the deity doesn't know.

Thus, all remaining options are where the deity does know.

To a limited extent, it does allow you to set things in stone.

If you look at the footnote for "True Answer" it says "You get a true, one-word answer. Questions that cannot be answered in this way are answered randomly."

So I'd say that any attempt to ask about future events is likely to get you a "maybe" or a random answer.

Rules-lawyering about this and trying to insist that you can set the future just seems idiotic to me. It doesn't even make sense by the rules as written.

[PhoenixRivers]

If you look at the footnote for "True Answer" it says "You get a true, one-word answer. Questions that cannot be answered in this way are answered randomly."

So I'd say that any attempt to ask about future events is likely to get you a "maybe" or a random answer.

Rules-lawyering about this and trying to insist that you can set the future just seems idiotic to me. It doesn't even make sense by the rules as written.

The issue with that is? The question CAN be answered with a true, one word answer. That cannot apply.

The DM's tool to balance it is fiat. Otherwise, it's not balanced. Fiat here is the hounds.

In a game? Fiat is the deity who would have to back up your whims after answering this.

[JeminiZero]

You put on a periapt of health. Would he suddenly gain extra HP from that higher con?

HP is hardly what I would consider a "special ability".

What about when you gain the ability to apply double your caster level in bonuses to skill checks, with no more than your caster level per check? Do you have to rest there?

No. You don't. Because you just cast a level 2 bard spell, and gained an ability.

You are trying to mix up limited use class features with spell effects. Spell explicitly state that they provide their benefit immediately (well those that provide an immediate benefit anyway).

Let me try a better example. Lets say you are a commoner who levels up and take your next level in Sorcerer. You now gain the ability to cast arcane spells.

However, while you know your spells, at the immediate point of level up, your spell slots are empty. You have to rest first to replenish them.

If you Use Ur Priest and steal a spell like ability, must you wait a day to use it?

No, you don't. Because abilities are ready to go, lock and load, when they are gained... That is, unless explicit rules text states otherwise.

Again, while Ur Priest steal SLA is a limited use class feature, the SLA that is stolen is not. A better example would be that if the Ur Priest levelled up just after killing something, does he suddenly gain the to steal spells, or does he need to rest up before he use it?

The spell makes no record of retaining memory of your abilities.

The wording is sufficiently vague that it might. It says "your own". How far does that extend to? Just the spells known you picked? Your spell slots? What has been cast?

When you gain your abilities back, does it state that they are not ready to go?

Then they are. Why? Because RAW, that's how gaining abilities works.

Is it now. I would like a reference for this. One that specifically applies to limited use class features. Like Spell slots.

[Saph]

The issue with that is? The question CAN be answered with a true, one word answer.

Yes, and that answer is "maybe". Not all statements are true or false - "undefined" is a valid status. A question about a future event can't be answered truthfully with "yes" or "no", because it hasn't happened yet.

Note also that Contact Other Plane gives you a "true answer". Nothing in the spell states that it has to be a helpful answer. Here are some possible one-word answers to be used in response to logical-paradox style questions such as the one above:

"Maybe."
"Mu."
"Irrelevant."
"Okay."
"Boring."
"Contradictory."
"RTFM."
"Whatever."
"Noob."
"Null."
"Idiot."
"Lothanotrix."*

*This is a word in Draconic which translates approximately as "You are an unimportant lesser being who is wasting my infinitely valuable time. Please go away immediately." Dragons in fact have several words for the same concept with slightly different implications, as it's something they find themselves saying quite often.

[PhoenixRivers]

HP is hardly what I would consider a "special ability".

I could say the same over a spell slot. Show me any listing of a special ability which includes a single spell slot, and that's it.

Let me try a better example. Lets say you are a commoner who levels up and take your next level in Sorcerer. You now gain the ability to cast arcane spells.

However, while you know your spells, at the immediate point of level up, your spell slots are empty. You have to rest first to replenish them.

Via the mechanic exclusively laid out for spells, yes. That mechanic does not extend to other abilities.

Again, while Ur Priest steal SLA is a limited use class feature, the SLA that is stolen is not. A better example would be that if the Ur Priest levelled up just after killing something, does he suddenly gain the to steal spells, or does he need to rest up before he use it?

Yes. He does. Why? Because the rules say he gets the ability, and no rest requirement is given. In most cases, when an ability is gained, it is ready for use, and must only deal with a delay to recover if used.

In fact, he doesn't need to ever rest to use it. He can stay awake 24/7, playing chess, and he'll still recover most abilities.

The wording is sufficiently vague that it might. It says "your own". How far does that extend to? Just the spells known you picked? Your spell slots? What has been cast?

Does it say you regain your own class features when it ends? No. It says you take all of your own stats, and replace them with a troll's.
It makes no reference to what you replace those troll stats with when the spell ends. It could be, were you wanting to write in about a paragraph of text, to return the exact class abilities you had previous to this ability.

It could also mean, with no addition, that you become a troll... and when it ends, you become a 13th level caster.

Is it now. I would like a reference for this. One that specifically applies to limited use class features. Like Spell slots.

Reference that when you gain an ability that is usable a limited number of times per day, that if you have not used it at all that day, that you cannot use it.

If you get, say... Haste 3/day, this means:
You may use the SLA Haste, three times per day.
This means, if you haven't used it yet (such as when you first gain it), you may use it three times that day.

Now, cite your source stating that there's an initial cooldown on gained abilities, in general. Please. Show me the rule that doesn't exist.

Yes, and that answer is "maybe". Not all statements are true or false - "undefined" is a valid status. A question about a future event can't be answered truthfully with "yes" or "no", because it hasn't happened yet.

When a deity knows about anything pertaining to its portfolio 14 weeks before it happens?

Yes, future events can be determined even if they haven't happened yet.

And for the rest? "Responding" and "answering" are different.

[theterran]

Wow...all this spam about fluffy, when he's an Exhibition only guy anyway...

[PhoenixRivers]

Wow...all this spam about fluffy, when he's an Exhibition only guy anyway...

Some people love to try to rain on parades? Even when the parade ended last month, I suppose.

[JeminiZero]

I could say the same over a spell slot. Show me any listing of a special ability which includes a single spell slot, and that's it.

Just one? Solars have 20 cleric levels worth of spell slots listed under special attacks. Its one of the reasons they are so widely abused by Shapechange.

Via the mechanic exclusively laid out for spells, yes. That mechanic does not extend to other abilities.

Which also means that when Fluffy shifts back, he either has none of his spells (if you ignore memory of previously gained/used abilities), or retains all his uncast spells (if you include memory).

Which one you would you prefer?

Does it say you regain your own class features when it ends? No. It says you take all of your own stats, and replace them with a troll's.

Which is another point in my favor. It says replace, not "include spellcasting, just that you can't access it". Spellcasting isn't in the troll stats.

It makes no reference to what you replace those troll stats with when the spell ends. It could be, were you wanting to write in about a paragraph of text, to return the exact class abilities you had previous to this ability.

It could also mean, with no addition, that you become a troll... and when it ends, you become a 13th level caster.

Or it could also be intepreted that you lose ALL your abilities permanently, since it never states that you regain them.

Really, if you put it that way, we arguing over some rather vaguely worded rules. I can accept that the ToS DMs may not agree with my point of view. Let us just agree to disagree and move on.

Some people love to try to rain on parades? Even when the parade ended last month, I suppose.

I apologize if it seems that way to you. I am not trying to rain on anyones parade. Really, Trollform was one of the prospective candidates for inclusion in the Alita series, so it just so happens I was familiar with how it worked. Although apparently my intepretation doesn't agree with ToS.

[theterran]

Just for some clarification.

When you Anticipatory Strike, you cannot take a Swift action during that round as the Immediate Anticipatory Strike already used it up, right?

[PhoenixRivers]

Just one? Solars have 20 cleric levels worth of spell slots listed under special attacks. Its one of the reasons they are so widely abused by Shapechange.

Solars, in that ability, also gain the ability to CAST those spells, a spell list to draw them from, rules on what abilities govern those... That seems like more than a spell slot. That's like saying that an alchemist's fire is the same as a fireball spell.

Which also means that when Fluffy shifts back, he either has none of his spells (if you ignore memory of previously gained/used abilities), or retains all his uncast spells (if you include memory).

Which one you would you prefer?

The former, to be honest. It's more abusable. The incarnation of fluffy before trollform was much worse, and relied on SLA's. Easily a Flat tier 0.

Really, if you put it that way, we arguing over some rather vaguely worded rules. I can accept that the ToS DMs may not agree with my point of view. Let us just agree to disagree and move on.

Considering you're the one disagreeing? It's always been in your power to move on.

I apologize if it seems that way to you. I am not trying to rain on anyones parade. Really, Trollform was one of the prospective candidates for inclusion in the Alita series, so it just so happens I was familiar with how it worked. Although apparently my intepretation doesn't agree with ToS.

Apparently.

Just for some clarification.

When you Anticipatory Strike, you cannot take a Swift action during that round as the Immediate Anticipatory Strike already used it up, right?

Correct. After that round ends, you're welcome to use an Immediate, however.

[JeminiZero]

Solars, in that ability, also gain the ability to CAST those spells, a spell list to draw them from, rules on what abilities govern those...

You asked for spell slots as special abilities, there they are. The fact they come with other stuff does not detract from the point that they can be considered special abilities.

The former, to be honest. It's more abusable. The incarnation of fluffy before trollform was much worse, and relied on SLA's. Easily a Flat tier 0.

What? I merely asked would you prefer him to have spells or not. I did not say that limited use SLAs are reset with memory loss.

[PhoenixRivers]

You asked for spell slots as special abilities, there they are. The fact they come with other stuff does not detract from the point that they can be considered special abilities.

That is not what I asked. I said, "Show me any listing of a special ability which includes a single spell slot, and that's it."

A spell slot is not an ability, even if a spell slot is contained within an ability.

Your argument has as much logic as saying, "2 Cups of Flour is a cake."
It's not. You need other ingredients, along with proper directions with how those ingredients are to be used.

What? I merely asked would you prefer him to have spells or not. I did not say that limited use SLAs are reset with memory loss.

The ruling underlying that being, "Is memory retained, or does it reset".

I think I'm about done with you. I've had enough of people playing dumb. I really have pretty much zero interest in foolish internet argument style, so until you want to bring something that doesn't ignore the basic principles of the argument for semantic rubbish? Find someone else to discuss your views with you.

That bit of nonsense just lowered my desire to discuss our differences to somewhere between "watching my dog while it pees" and "having to get out of bed to ask my neighbor to turn down his techno".

[theterran]

That bit of nonsense just lowered my desire to discuss our differences to somewhere between "watching my dog while it pees" and "having to get out of bed to ask my neighbor to turn down his techno".

Sorry, but I'm gonna have to quote that...

[JeminiZero]

I think I'm about done with you. I've had enough of people playing dumb. I really have pretty much zero interest in foolish internet argument style, so until you want to bring something that doesn't ignore the basic principles of the argument for semantic rubbish? Find someone else to discuss your views with you.

That bit of nonsense just lowered my desire to discuss our differences to somewhere between "watching my dog while it pees" and "having to get out of bed to ask my neighbor to turn down his techno".

I'm hurt. And here I was trying to maintain my good humour.

In case you couldn't tell, I was NOT trying to argue. The spell as written is sufficiently vague that your intepretation is as good as mine, and neither can convince otherwise.

[Arakune]

I'm hurt. And here I was trying to maintain my good humour.

In case you couldn't tell, I was NOT trying to argue. The spell as written is sufficiently vague that your intepretation is as good as mine, and neither can convince otherwise.

Now it's like that? It sounded that your version was "correct" and wanted to know why in the name of Baator they went with the "incorrect" one. You never implyed that both readings where reasonable (as much as a poorly worded rule can be).

[JeminiZero]

Now it's like that? It sounded that your version was "correct" and wanted to know why in the name of Baator they went with the "incorrect" one.

Truly. I am apparently not as good at semantics as some here would believe.

I was indeed trying to figure out why they went with one I disagree with. What I should have said 2 posts above was that I was not trying to argue about trollform anymore.

You never implyed that both readings where reasonable (as much as a poorly worded rule can be).

If by "reasonable", you mean "sane", then no, I still don't agree.

If by "reasonable", you mean "rules as written can possibly be intepretated that way" then I *tried* to say that right here:

Or it could also be intepreted that you lose ALL your abilities permanently, since it never states that you regain them.

Really, if you put it that way, we arguing over some rather vaguely worded rules. I can accept that the ToS DMs may not agree with my point of view. Let us just agree to disagree and move on.

[Doc Roc]

There's one other thing Fluffy hates... Well, two, technically.

Three, but I'm keeping the third as my secret.

Before this spirals, I'm stepping in. Effectively, I will answer contact other plane questions. The interpretation we use is very simple:

If it can be answered in one word, in any canon language, it will be answered. The answer will be true, but only as helpful as I want it to be. Unless this falls into the pre-fight option, which is a serious commitment on the part of both sides, I will gun for maximum audience amusement.

To articulate this further, we use the model that the universe of D&D is a fully deterministic one, with a complex but relatively elegant way of handling causality. I've spent... probably forty hours on the problem, and I can comfortably say that you are not able to generate a viable predicate-logic mechanism which would allow contact other plane to _engender_ futures. It merely allows you to read ahead, if you will.


Regarding abilities and their loss:
There is no language in schism which suggests that it is anything other than a completely separate entity from the standpoint of the game engine. I will accept proof to the contrary, however, we do assume that things are generally impermanent unless stated otherwise. What this means is that if you lose an ability due to an effect, the duration of the loss is equal to the duration of the effect's potency.

[theterran]

And the Doc lays down the law

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Thank you for that, Doc.

In other words, I am needing a bit of assistance in... refining... a build of mine. Specifically, I'm looking for ways to bypass SR and Immunity to Mind-Affecting, if possible. Also setting up a combo so that, while he takes damage, isn't necessarily going to die from it.

[imperialspectre]

For the taking-damage-but-not-dying bit, Share Pain and similar effects can often be useful.

The only way to bypass SR that I know of that doesn't involve a) reducing the SR or b) boosting your CL checks is the Beguiler ability that lets you ignore SR if your target is flat-footed. I think that's the level 20 ability, though, so probably not helpful.