You know I got so wrapped up in defending why I think the spell works like I think it does, that I never bothered to ask the simple question that negates the whole reason for the argument.
"Why are you using this spell to hand someone a non cursed weapon, anyway?"
No matter how you may want to disguise this, it's still a weapon. Handing someone an acid flask with this spell and expecting them not to use it as a splash weapon on you is just as stupid as handing someone a non-cursed sword and not expecting them to slash at you with it.
Provided you don't actually read the spell, making your contention moot and irrelevant.
No boys, the spell don't compel anyone to use an item.
Yes, it does.
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Emphasis mine.
No, it doesn't.
On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
It consumes or "dons" (read: equips) the given object. No other action can be taken with it. Period. End of discussion.
|
No boys, the spell don't compel anyone to use an item.
Yes, it does.
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Emphasis mine.
After the druid dons the shield he uses it until the caster's turn comes up.
Provided you don't actually read the spell, making your contention moot and irrelevant.
Oh, make a personal attack on someone who said he wasn't going to post anymore after that. You're such a big man!
This is doubly stupid considering your own inability to read the entire spell text.
|
No boys, the spell don't compel anyone to use an item.
Yes, it does.
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Emphasis mine.
The whole text of the spell:
You offer an object to an adjacent creature, and entice it into using or consuming the proffered item. If the target fails its Will save, it immediately takes the offered object, dropping an already held object if necessary. On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question. For example, an apple would be eaten, a potion consumed, a ring put on a finger, and a sword wielded in a free hand. If the target is physically unable to accept the object, the spell fails. The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell's duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.
Step by step:
- You offer an object to an adjacent creature, and entice it into using or consuming the proffered item. generic description of the effect- If the target fails its Will save, it immediately takes the offered object, dropping an already held object if necessary. On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question. game mechanics, the actions the target should do if he fail the ST
- For example, an apple would be eaten, a potion consumed, a ring put on a finger, and a sword wielded in a free hand. example of the actions, all about equipping (great suggestion for the right term Cartigan) or consuming the item, nothing about using it
- If the target is physically unable to accept the object, the spell fails. game mechanic.
- The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell's duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of. again game mechanics, the subject is not forced to do anything with the object after the spell effect has ended. Note that after donning or equipping something you are using it, but you haven't activated it or tryed to hit someone with it like Bascaria pretend you should do.
Nowhere the spell say that you are forced to do anything more than don (equip) something or consume it.
The spell don't force you to attack someone with the equipped item
the spell don't force you to try to activate a wand;
the spell don't force you to try to cast a spell from a scroll
and so on for a million examples of what the spell don't force you to do.
What if force you to do is to equip a item or consume it. Full stop.
|
|
After the druid dons the shield he uses it until the caster's turn comes up.
No boys, the spell don't compel anyone to use an item.
Yes, it does.
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Emphasis mine.
If the druid was your problem, YES!, he has equipped the shield and lost his powers for 24 hour.
What he is not forced to do is accepting a sword and start hitting people around.
The whole text of the spell:
You offer an object to an adjacent creature, and entice it into using or consuming the proffered item. If the target fails its Will save, it immediately takes the offered object, dropping an already held object if necessary. On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question. For example, an apple would be eaten, a potion consumed, a ring put on a finger, and a sword wielded in a free hand. If the target is physically unable to accept the object, the spell fails. The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell's duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Step by step:
- You offer an object to an adjacent creature, and entice it into using or consuming the proffered item. generic description of the effect- If the target fails its Will save, it immediately takes the offered object, dropping an already held object if necessary. On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question. game mechanics, the actions the target should do if he fail the ST
- For example, an apple would be eaten, a potion consumed, a ring put on a finger, and a sword wielded in a free hand. example of the actions, all about equipping (great suggestion for the right term Cartigan) or consuming the item, nothing about using it
- If the target is physically unable to accept the object, the spell fails. game mechanic.
- The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell's duration has...
Point 1 has the word "use" right in it. Point 3 says "it never said use". You just contradicted yourself.
In a formalized proof, you suddenly ceased to exist.
What he is not forced to do is accepting a sword and start hitting people around.
This actually will be my last post, I promise.
You are quite correct. He is not compelled to hit someone with it. Which is the "rules" definition of use. When I (and I assume most others) say he has to use it, we mean it in the colloquial sense. You know, the same thing don or equip means.
He is forced to weild the sword for one round, but not to hit with it. I may have said "he'll throw the acid" a few times, but I meant "he'd have the choice to throw it, so of course he would."
I should point out that except for a few specific cases (weapons and wands come to mind) "doning or consuming" is the same thing as "using" for a good 90% of the objects in the game.
You (and others, quite frankly) have gotten so caught up in wording, you haven't realised that there's no real disagreement.
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Sounds like people house rule this out of the spell.
Sounds like you are houseruling out the effect of the spell in order to pretend the aftereffect is what the spell does.
The spell causes the target to don or consume an object given. Period. They no longer have to keep doing so after the spell's duration but THAT is what they MUST do if they fail the Will save. No if's, and's, or purposeful misunderstanding of English document structure.
Stupid board won't let you PM someone. This is for nosig, and you're a meanie if you're not nosig and you look. ;)
and for Wombat
[i]"But the real reason it doesn't bother me that it might allow this, is that because knowing an item's type and nothing else about it is useless, the only reason any player would use the spell like this is if he was being an idiot."[i/]chalange accepted... guess I'll have to keep the spell on my bard. that way I can add "idiot player" on the table tent with "Cheating, Druid hating bigot".
Did you really think I was badmouthing you somehow? Or are you joking or what? There's no inflection on the internet, I really can't tell.
I would only think you're an idiot, if you tried to exploit a rule you asked me to give you as a DM to do something that is obviously unintended and served you no benefit. Because when someone deliberately tries to piss of their DM (which is what that would be), they are being an idiot.
If you actually did somehow make a personal insult from that, then I have no words.
Look away, nothing to see here.
Please read this above statement, Cartigan obviously doesn't want to read it.
No matter how many times you repeat it, it won't magically become what the spell does. Unless you are arguing the spell simply makes the target drop something it is holding.
Donning = equipping. Equipping != using. Just because you grab a weapon doesn't mean you are using it.
|
|
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.
This statement clearly states that the spell's target uses the item, not just dons it.
This spell should have been worded better though.
Seriously, Cartigan... Are you saying that I could "don/equip" a shield, strapping it to my arm, and carry it around all day, without getting the armor check penalty for it because I'm not "using" it?
|
(fort negates), or one that denies spellcasting and channel energy (will negates).
Actually this counts, if you give a cleric a helm of opposite alignment then they are no longer within one alignment step from their deity and since you have to be within one alignment step to be a cleric then you'll lose your cleric abilities becoming an ex-cleric. And yes, I'm 100% fine with this spells.
sorry Wombat, don't know how to hide the reply it... let me see if I do this right...
this is for Wombat
** spoiler omitted **
hope it worked!
;)
Perfectly done!
Cool enough. Coincidentally, I've never tried to make someone feel bad for trying something like this, I just tell them it won't fly. In this case, I think I'd let that fly even though it's not my intent. If only because you waste a level 1 spell doing something a knowledge skill you can make untrained would do better.
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.This statement clearly states that the spell's target uses the item, not just dons it.
No, it doesn't. Not in the face of what the spell says it makes the target do - consume or don an item. Period. That is what it says. It does NOT say that the target "uses" them as appropriate, presumably for the same exact absurd reasons people pointed out in this thread - people Beguiling Gifting artifacts and magic items and other such things to allies who would otherwise have no idea how the hell they work but can use them because the spell says they use them.
This spell should have been worded better though.
No, people should stop trying to read it in such a way as to nerf it.
Seriously, Cartigan... Are you saying that I could "don/equip" a shield, strapping it to my arm, and carry it around all day, without getting the armor check penalty for it because I'm not "using" it?
Are you under the false impression that simply being equipped (strapped to your arm) is not what causes the armor check penalty? Or is your next argument that you don't have to take the penalty from full plate because you aren't being attacked?
The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.
That is not what the spell does.
Cartigan, if you use this spell to give a metal shield to a druid, will they or won't they lose spellcasting abilities on their next turn after they fail the save and accept the item?
Yes or No?
Sorry, the thread's too long to read. I'm just trying to figure out which way you're arguing.
Yes, they will. And it is entirely unrelated to anything the spell does.
|
|
That is not what the spell does.The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.
Regardless of what's intended, that's what the spells says.
Regardless of what's intended, that's what the spells says.That is not what the spell does.The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.
Yes that IS what the spell says. But that is NOT what the spell does. By "not what the spell does" I mean, you are excluding the text of the spell that says what it does.
On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
THAT IS WHAT THE SPELL DOES. That is the action the spell causes to take place. You are quoting an aftereffect and pretending it is relevant to the action the spell causes to take place. It isn't and you are wrong.
I would have to say cute trick, on this one, and it would work as long as the enchantment remained in effect, banning the druid from his spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities, but the second the spell ended he could drop the shield and start using his magic again.This seems both reasonable AND in line for a 1st level spell.
I use Charm to convince the Druid to wield a shield. Should Charm be nerfed? I use Suggestion to cause a Druid to hold a shield. Should Suggestion be nerfed?
Your argument is fundamentally flawed by the assumption that Beguiling Gift is (a) responsible for the Druid's spell loss and (b) does something other first to second level spells don't do.
|
|
I tried to stay out of this thread, but I read people saying "it's just first level spell!" "you can just save it - should be really easy!"
Not so, why?
Heighten Spell.
Minor quibble. The more effective tactic is Spell Hex.
This bumps the DC to your maximum possible DC (10 + 1/2 witch Level + Int bonus), lets you do it multiple times a day and (most importantly) removes the attack of opportunity risk from it.|
|
Regardless of what's intended, that's what the spells says.That is not what the spell does.The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.Yes that IS what the spell says. But that is NOT what the spell does. By "not what the spell does" I mean, you are excluding the text of the spell that says what it does.
On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
THAT IS WHAT THE SPELL DOES. That is the action the spell causes to take place. You are quoting an aftereffect and pretending it is relevant to the action the spell causes to take place. It isn't and you are wrong.
You're ignoring half of the spell. What you're saying it does is the first part of the spell. It uses the item in question after donning it.
The second part of the spell, where the druid uses the prohibited item, is where the druid loses it's abilities.
Cartigan, if you use this spell to give a metal shield to a druid, will they or won't they lose spellcasting abilities on their next turn after they fail the save and accept the item?
Yes or No?
Sorry, the thread's too long to read. I'm just trying to figure out which way you're arguing.
Yes. They lose their spells for the day.
You're ignoring half of the spell. What you're saying it does is the first part of the spell. It uses the item in question after donning it.Regardless of what's intended, that's what the spells says.That is not what the spell does.The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.Yes that IS what the spell says. But that is NOT what the spell does. By "not what the spell does" I mean, you are excluding the text of the spell that says what it does.
On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
THAT IS WHAT THE SPELL DOES. That is the action the spell causes to take place. You are quoting an aftereffect and pretending it is relevant to the action the spell causes to take place. It isn't and you are wrong.
It does NOTHING after donning the item because the spell ends. The spell lasts exactly one round. The target uses that round to take the standard action to equip or consume the item. Then the spell ends. What you are quoting is the clarification that what you are arguing the spell does doesn't happen. I don't even remotely see how you could possibly use such a inherently contradictory argument. "Look, see this part of the spell says that after the 1 round spell ends, the target doesn't have to keep using the item. That proves that the spell causes the target to use the item after spending the 1 round to equip the item."
The spell ends on the caster's next turn, meaning that the druid has some time to use the shield before the spell expires.
OK. It uses a move action to equip the shield. The shield is equipped. There is no way to use it unless you intend to bash with it.
Sure, if given a weapon, the target can attack you with it because the spell doesn't make the opponent amenable to you. But it must continue to hold the weapon/shield/whatever until the end of the spell. This does not mean it will attack you with a splash weapon. You do not wield splash weapons.
Using the item given is unrelated to the spell outside equipping or consuming it.
|
|
The spell ends on the caster's next turn, meaning that the druid has some time to use the shield before the spell expires.OK. It uses a move action to equip the shield. The shield is equipped. There is no way to use it unless you intend to bash with it.
Besides bashing, the druid could use it to defend himself from attacks that could affect him before the spell expires.
Besides bashing, the druid could use it to defend himself from attacks that could affect him before the spell expires.The spell ends on the caster's next turn, meaning that the druid has some time to use the shield before the spell expires.OK. It uses a move action to equip the shield. The shield is equipped. There is no way to use it unless you intend to bash with it.
Yes, if you subscribe to the school of thought that you have to actively defend yourself with a shield instead of writing +2 shield bonus on your sheet.
|
|
Regardless of what's intended, that's what the spells says.That is not what the spell does.The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.Yes that IS what the spell says. But that is NOT what the spell does. By "not what the spell does" I mean, you are excluding the text of the spell that says what it does.
On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
THAT IS WHAT THE SPELL DOES. That is the action the spell causes to take place. You are quoting an aftereffect and pretending it is relevant to the action the spell causes to take place. It isn't and you are wrong.
You're ignoring half of the spell. What you're saying it does is the first part of the spell. It uses the item in question after donning it.
The second part of the spell, where the druid uses the prohibited item, is where the druid loses it's abilities.
If it worked the way you are trying to force it to it would be the most desired spell every fighter would want cast on them.
Have the witch/bard stand behind the fighter in melee casting this spell and handing them another greatsword every round after they full attack.
They get their full attack and then this is cast on them, they drop their sword and do ANOTHER attack because of this spell?
Does that sound right to you?
|
|
Regardless of what's intended, that's what the spells says.That is not what the spell does.The subject is under no obligation to continue consuming or using the item once the spell’s duration has expired, although it may find a cursed item difficult to be rid of.Nowhere in this statement is the word don or any form of it.
The word using does appear.Yes that IS what the spell says. But that is NOT what the spell does. By "not what the spell does" I mean, you are excluding the text of the spell that says what it does.
On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
THAT IS WHAT THE SPELL DOES. That is the action the spell causes to take place. You are quoting an aftereffect and pretending it is relevant to the action the spell causes to take place. It isn't and you are wrong.
You're ignoring half of the spell. What you're saying it does is the first part of the spell. It uses the item in question after donning it.
The second part of the spell, where the druid uses the prohibited item, is where the druid loses it's abilities.
If it worked the way you are trying to force it to it would be the most desired spell every fighter would want cast on them.
Have the witch/bard stand behind the fighter in melee casting this spell and handing them another greatsword every round after they full attack.
They get their full attack and then this is cast on them, they drop their sword and do ANOTHER attack because of this spell?Does that sound right to you?
Only thing is for the attacks, that takes either a standard action for a single attack and full round for full attack, meaning that has to be done on his turn, which would be after the spell expires.
The fighter wouldn't be able to do the full attack on the turn he first wields the weapon unless he has quick draw.
Defending an attack is resolved when the attack occurs.
Let me ask a set of leading questions:
Why does the fist sentence in the spell include the word "use"?
My spell-paraphrase offering: The victim suddenly is enchanted with an irresistible compulsion to equip, consume, or use the item, as if it were a valued gift. The victim interacts with the item to the best of their knowledge or ability.
Sounds a lot like we're in "DM's Call" area.What exactly is the GM call? Whether or not "dons the object" really means "dons the object"? It even gives the example of putting on a ring or wielding a sword, and explicitly states that they'll even drop other items they're carrying if need be.
No, we're not in "DM's call" area at all.
This isn't Warhammer 40K, folks. Pretty much everything in Pathfinder is the DM's call. You can whine about it all you want, and run it how you want at your own table, but anything is ultimately the DM's call when you're at his table.
|
|
"Have the witch/bard stand behind the fighter in melee casting this spell and handing them another greatsword every round after they full attack.
They get their full attack and then this is cast on them, they drop their sword and do ANOTHER attack because of this spell?"Well, actually it would go something like this.
Init: 10 Fighter takes full attack
Init: 10- (bard was on delay)bard casts BG and offers great sword. Fighter misses his will save.
NEXT TURN
Init:10 Fighter drops his great sword (free action) and excepts new greatsword from bard (move action) (didn't your mom teach you to say thank you?) takes action to take one attack (no full round as he did a move to get an item.) School 1 Judge says "you picked up a sword when you got it from the Bard so I get an AOO"
Init: 10- Bard scratches head and says "you sure you want me to do this again?"That's the way the spell works... right?
yep
Well, actually it would go something like this.Init: 10 Fighter takes full attack
Init: 10- (bard was on delay)bard casts BG and offers great sword. Fighter misses his will save.
NEXT TURN
Init:10 Fighter drops his great sword (free action) and excepts new greatsword from bard (move action) (didn't your mom teach you to say thank you?) takes action to take one attack (no full round as he did a move to get an item.) School 1 Judge says "you picked up a sword when you got it from the Bard so I get an AOO"
Init: 10- Bard scratches head and says "you sure you want me to do this again?"That's the way the spell works... right?
Actually, not to nitpick, but I would say that the Bard handed the greatsword to the fighter in Round 1.
You offer an object to an adjacent creature, and entice it into using or consuming the proffered item. If the target fails its Will save, it immediately takes the offered object, dropping an already held object if necessary. On its next turn, it consumes or dons the object, as appropriate for the item in question.
Fighter does not drop his original greatsword, because it's possible to hold one in each hand... but he would be no longer "wielding" a weapon, and thus not threatening any squares with a greatsword.
On Round 2 (init: 10), Fighter would then have to either drop or sheath his first greatsword, in order to finish meeting the spell requirements of "wielding" the bard's greatsword. Fighter can choose to attack with his wielded weapon (bard's greatsword), if he so chooses.
On Round 2 (init: 10-), the spells duration expires, and the Fighter realizes just how silly it was to accept what turns out to be a Cursed Backbiting GreatSword of Fighter Slaying. Bard gets his actions, and can choose to run away, if he wants to risk an AoO from the greatsword he just gifted to the Fighter.
This is an odd corner case, when speaking of two two-handed weapons, but the action of handing the item to the item to the victim occurs as part of the standard action of casting the spell.