Its the more sessions that are the issue, not the in game time. We don't get to actually sit down and play often enough to be that frivolous with our time. We can all get the same day free a little less than once every other week.Random encournters are fun. Make them do more per a day, plot advances the same....It might take more sessions.
Ok, sure, you don’t meet that often. But why does each session have to be a day? Just have the gaming day last more than one playing day so that there are 3-5 encounters per game day.
|
If you don't run more the spellcasters will pull even more ahead of the melee. How many do you typically have per day?Anywhere from 0 to 6, it's entirely dependant on what wont break suspension of disbelief in whatever situation the party is in. During overland travel its less than once per day. In a dungeon usually 2 or 3. In the middle of a base that belongs to intelligent Humanoids they are attacked until the defence breaks or the party flees which could be anywhere from 3 large to 7 smaller encounters worth.
You can have a single in-game day span more than one session, if you want more to happen outside combat in the game, dont skip as much time. Run very action-packed games.
Alternately, if you want to adjust the game for 1-2 encounters per day - as mentioned, the game is built assuming 4-5. Any time you see an x/day (from SLAs, to spells, to class features) cut the total number in half. You're having half the danger, and if you give them the standard amount of resources, you're basically making them twice as strong.
Alternately, buff the enemies. artificially inflate their saves, to cut the success rates of the spells in half, while leaving pretty much everything else the same. So if the spells succeed on a 10+, make them require a 15. If they succeed on a 15, make them require a 17.
If youre running only 1-2 encounters most of the time, you essentially are giving them twice the resources they should have. To counter that, make those resources go half as far, by increasing saves, and maybe hps (if the mages use hp spells).
Youre designing the encounters, and if necessary, you can pad the monsters numbers. Thats probably the easiest approach.
On days when youre using the normal number of encounters, dont pad the saves. That way its transparent to the players.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is sounding fishier and fishier.
Everyone has been giving the OP sound advice, from altering combats, talking to your players, to switching systems...
Yet all the OP does is lament his complaint-heavy players (and using censored sexist language, repeatedly) and bash the Pathfinder system and laud the D&D 4E system.
Here's what I recommend:
Stop complaining now that you've been given advice from all angles. If you do not want to up combat, and you feel talking to your players is pointless, and you're not happy with quitting the campaign/switching systems then try this:
Remove all social skills from the game. All players have to roleplay without skills. Run combats normally, and do not make them the only focus of your game. Instead, as recommended above, focus on your storyline and engage your players. Do not create an arms race. If they're amazing at combat at this level, that's fine. If your other players stink, let them stink and complain, and eventually they will adapt to keep up, die and make a new character, or quit the game. All positive outcomes.
Pathfinder is not steriley balanced like 4E tries to be. Real life isn's balanced. There are people that outshine others. Deal with it. Pathfinder is not a system that supports nearly free-form storytelling. There is a lot of crunch, and optimized choices are rewarded.
@ Frustrated, is one of those problem player hosting the game (meaning you play at his/her place)?
Seriously how do you people play this game with players of differing skill levels? If I just arbitrarily come down on these players I am just being a s+!&ty GM to them as much as letting it go unhindered is beign a s&%&ty GM to the others.
If you don't mind my asking, how is it much different from 3.5? I'll admit I mostly skipped from 2nd to Pathfinder, but all my 3.5 friends complained about 3.5 being broken and lauded Pathfinder for fixing a lot of the problems. How was 3.5 different for you that you enjoyed it and don't enjoy Pathfinder?
In my experience, Pathfinder awards GMs who are original. When I have problems with character balance, I just make sure to vary the story moments, times and locations. Make the enemies climb trees at night during strong winds to stay out of range and gain concealment and buffers and suddenly all the usual combat tactics change.
If I had to give advice along-side the dozens who already have, it would be build encounters and situations around your different character's strengths. Combat against enemies with monster pets, mounted enemies and a base at the bottom of the cliff housing the special chest. Suddenly the mounted guy shines, the casters blast enemies, the ranger fights up close, and the rogue sneaks down the cliff and takes the chest while everyone else is distracted. Make encounters so every character has something they do well being highlighted.
Seriously, I once knew a guy who took Knowledge: bigots as a joke, so the GM put in famous bigots just so he could roll it. Why not do the same with every character's unique abilities? And if someone has nothing unique, just throw in his old childhood rival to make it personal.
I should note that the Wizard has been spending a lot of his money on scrolls, he may only have so many spells per day but his spells known list is pretty damn large, he knows 12 level 3 spells already (partially my fault for having them fight a wizard, he decoded the spell books and almost doubled his list in one go).
You should probably get more familiar with the Magic section of the Core Rule Book. The wizard probably shouldn't have as many spells as does.
It takes 1 hour per spell level to scribe the spell. It also takes 1 hour to learn it. 12 level 3 spells would require 48 hours. That may sound like it's not much (it's only 2 days), but when you are adventuring, needing 4 hours per spell is quite a bit.
It also takes money to scribe the spells into his spell book. Those 3rd level spells each cost 90 gold to scribe. So at level 5, he should have 2 free 3rd level spells. the other 10 spells should have cost him 900 gold to scribe plus the cost of the scrolls.
Next time you put a spell book in there, make sure that it has several spells that are already on his spell list. Some spells are going to be rather universal.
I should note that the Wizard has been spending a lot of his money on scrolls, he may only have so many spells per day but his spells known list is pretty damn large, he knows 12 level 3 spells already (partially my fault for having them fight a wizard, he decoded the spell books and almost doubled his list in one go).
You should probably get more familiar with the Magic section of the Core Rule Book. The wizard probably shouldn't have as many spells as does.
It takes 1 hour per spell level to scribe the spell. It also takes 1 hour to learn it. 12 level 3 spells would require 48 hours. That may sound like it's not much (it's only 2 days), but when you are adventuring, needing 4 hours per spell is quite a bit.
It also takes money to scribe the spells into his spell book. Those 3rd level spells each cost 90 gold to scribe. So at level 5, he should have 2 free 3rd level spells. the other 10 spells should have cost him 900 gold to scribe plus the cost of the scrolls.
Next time you put a spell book in there, make sure that it has several spells that are already on his spell list. Some spells are going to be rather universal.
I should note that the Wizard has been spending a lot of his money on scrolls, he may only have so many spells per day but his spells known list is pretty damn large, he knows 12 level 3 spells already (partially my fault for having them fight a wizard, he decoded the spell books and almost doubled his list in one go).You should probably get more familiar with the Magic section of the Core Rule Book. The wizard probably shouldn't have as many spells as does.
It takes 1 hour per spell level to scribe the spell. It also takes 1 hour to learn it. 12 level 3 spells would require 48 hours. That may sound like it's not much (it's only 2 days), but when you are adventuring, needing 4 hours per spell is quite a bit.
It also takes money to scribe the spells into his spell book. Those 3rd level spells each cost 90 gold to scribe. So at level 5, he should have 2 free 3rd level spells. the other 10 spells should have cost him 900 gold to scribe plus the cost of the scrolls.
Next time you put a spell book in there, make sure that it has several spells that are already on his spell list. Some spells are going to be rather universal.
You know that the wizard can just keep the enemies spellbook and prepare the spells from there right?
Since you can buy spell books and prepare spells from them without doing the fancy copy activity fun then I would think that keeping a found one would work just the same.
|
|
Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks
A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell he already knows and has recorded in his own spellbook, but preparation success is not assured. First, the wizard must decipher the writing in the book (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Once a spell from another spellcaster's book is deciphered, the reader must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell's level) to prepare the spell. If the check succeeds, the wizard can prepare the spell.
So you can only do this if you've already scribed the spell into your own spellbook.
Read magic is a cantrip. Preparation is spellcraft DC15+level.
Assuming 5 level and intelligence of 20. He's got a 13 to start assuming no outside additions, DC to memorize a level 3 spell is 18. He's got a rather low chance of failure 1/4. That is assuming the minimum.
Read magic is a cantrip. Preparation is spellcraft DC15+level.
Assuming 5 level and intelligence of 20. He's got a 13 to start assuming no outside additions, DC to memorize a level 3 spell is 18. He's got a rather low chance of failure 1/4. That is assuming the minimum.
Don't forget take 10.
But it seems i was wrong you can only do that IF you have first written the spell in your oqn spellbook
To do that you also need to have deciphered the arcane magical writings at DC 20 + spell level.
Read magic takes care of that.
To do that you also need to have deciphered the arcane magical writings at DC 20 + spell level.
Or just happen to have read magic, a cantrip. I'm not thinking deciphering it here is an issue.
Edit: Dang ninja.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the problem is that these two don't really care about their fellow players.
If they are smart enough to find these tricks they are smart enough to realize how they are marginalizing the other players.
The fact that they apparently don't care is the real problem.
Bluntly: No, the problem is you relish in drama, and refuse to take the sound advice of all the people on the boards. You surround yourself with drama-causing people, and you complain on the internet for attention to further spread your drama, and you refuse and ignore proactive, valid, reasonable solutions and suggestions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I assume this is the diamond spray being discussed?
Diamond Spray
Source Pathfinder #24 60
School evocation [earth]; Level sorcerer/wizard 3
Casting
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a lump of coal)
Effect
Range 20 ft.
Area cone-shaped burst
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Reflex half; Spell Resistance yes
DescriptionA cone of tiny, sparkling slivers as hard and sharp as filed diamonds springs from your outstretched fingers at tremendous speed. Any creature in the area of the torrent takes 1d6 points of slashing damage per caster level (maximum 10d6). These magical slivers are treated as adamantine and cold iron for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction. In addition, this spell bypasses up to 1 point of an object’s hardness per 2 caster levels (maximum 10).
A bit off topic, but what a poorly thought out spell. It should obviously be a conjuration (creation) spell, and likely not require SR checks since it also tests against DR, which spells normally don't. It looks like it may have been intended to give evokers something they could do against golems (noting that it bypass DR/adamantine), but anything with SR or immunity like Golems ignore it anyway...
Likewise, spells overcome DR by default. If you do bend the rules to make it so that DR applies, it is described as magical slivers that count as adamantine and cold iron for overcoming DR, but it's not capable of overcoming DR/magic; even though being a spell makes it auto-pierce DR anyway...
*Confused face.*
Yeah I was wondering about that spell as well. Unless you're waging war on doors or low level golems I don't really see the point. I wonder if there was a typo somewhere. I don't have the source other than d20.
You know that the wizard can just keep the enemies spellbook and prepare the spells from there right?I should note that the Wizard has been spending a lot of his money on scrolls, he may only have so many spells per day but his spells known list is pretty damn large, he knows 12 level 3 spells already (partially my fault for having them fight a wizard, he decoded the spell books and almost doubled his list in one go).You should probably get more familiar with the Magic section of the Core Rule Book. The wizard probably shouldn't have as many spells as does.
It takes 1 hour per spell level to scribe the spell. It also takes 1 hour to learn it. 12 level 3 spells would require 48 hours. That may sound like it's not much (it's only 2 days), but when you are adventuring, needing 4 hours per spell is quite a bit.
It also takes money to scribe the spells into his spell book. Those 3rd level spells each cost 90 gold to scribe. So at level 5, he should have 2 free 3rd level spells. the other 10 spells should have cost him 900 gold to scribe plus the cost of the scrolls.
Next time you put a spell book in there, make sure that it has several spells that are already on his spell list. Some spells are going to be rather universal.
Yes, but Frustrated mentioned two things: buying scrolls and using an acquired spell book. Buying scrolls requires spending money. The spell book should count against the WBL. It still requires 1 hour to learn plus 1 hour per spell level to scribe. It also still requires all that money I mentioned to scribe.
The thread can end now. The more I read what I will have to do to make this work the more I stand by what I said in the original post: I should not have trusted this group to play Pathfinder. I would rather GM a game I don't have to bend over backwards to make work with my s&*%ty group.
Sounds like you have a solution: find a better group. If they are causing havoc in Pathfinder because the GM isn't willing or able to put in the required work then they will do the same thing in other games because the GM isn't willing or able to put in the required work.
Sounds like you either need to read the Game Mastery Guide (it's free if you use the PRD, but having a book to sit down with is sometimes easier) or you should relegate the GMing duties to someone willing and able to fill that role.
And yet he can still prepare spells from that book quite easily until he gets the money to scribe them in his own. As far as him buying scrolls without additional input there is no way to tell if he had enough money and time to scribe them or not.
Seriously, is Pathfinder really that much harder than 3.5? That much more work or that unbalanced?
And yet he can still prepare spells from that book quite easily until he gets the money to scribe them in his own. As far as him buying scrolls without additional input there is no way to tell if he had enough money and time to scribe them or not.
That may be true but he said that the wizard knows 12 level 3 spells. That's the specific thing I was addressing.
I didn't know the wizard's Spellcraft modifier but I assumed it was at least +12 (+14 for necromancy spells, +7 for opposition schools) which mostly eliminates the problem of needing to know the spells.
I have a feeling that the GM didn't realize this. I believe it was similar in 3.5 as well (with the exception of the opposition schools penalty).
|
|
No Jak, he cannot prepare spells from a borrowed spellbook until he has scribed the spell in his own book.
Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks
A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell he already knows and has recorded in his own spellbook, but preparation success is not assured. First, the wizard must decipher the writing in the book (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Once a spell from another spellcaster's book is deciphered, the reader must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell's level) to prepare the spell. If the check succeeds, the wizard can prepare the spell. He must repeat the check to prepare the spell again, no matter how many times he has prepared it before. If the check fails, he cannot try to prepare the spell from the same source again until the next day. However, as explained above, he does not need to repeat a check to decipher the writing.
And yet he can still prepare spells from that book quite easily until he gets the money to scribe them in his own. As far as him buying scrolls without additional input there is no way to tell if he had enough money and time to scribe them or not.
He said that the wizard knows 12 level 3 spells. That's the specific thing I was addressing.
I didn't know the wizard's Spellcraft modifier but I assumed it was at least +12 (+14 for necromancy spells, +7 for opposition schools) which mostly eliminates the problem of needing to know the spells.
I have a feeling that the GM didn't realize this. I believe it was similar in 3.5 as well (with the exception of the opposition schools penalty).
Mergy, we're going to have to agree to disagree. You're reading the rules one way and I'm reading them another. At least until we have a ruling defining "knowing" and breaking down the stages of it as well as the terms of ownership in relation to spells. Because for all intensive purposes it is his spell book, he just cannot read it without some work and an hour of "understanding" the spell.
Bob I don't think that we have anywhere near enough information. I was arguing whether or not it was possible. The question of whether or not his player was rolling to determine if he could memorize it for the day or not and considering that to be knowing or if the group was just doomed from the onset because no one bothered to know the rules. You are probably correct. Something that I was not trying to disagree with.
He hasn't borrowed it. He owns it empirically. He spent the hour understanding it. He can use it.
See how that works. We can type this at each other all day and I doubt you'll convince me or I'll convince you and honestly I'm not really interested in trying. To me the above is logical and would be RAI and is not negated by RAW. To you it reads differently. I understand that and I'm not inclined to change that fact. As I said we're going to have to agree to disagree.
Jak the Looney Alchemist has a point... but still, Jak kinda sounds like he is the Wizard player the OP mentioned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone keeps saying increase encounters per day and if that is really the best way to solve the problem I would rather not DM Pathfinder. I have no interest in running that combat heavy a campaign, that much combat will just bog down the speed at which the plot advance.
Don't increase the number of encounters, increase the size and variety of those encounters. It is perfectly reasonable, and epic in scope, to have encounters with large numbers of mooks, of lower CRs. Have them come in waves, as different teams arrive. This way spellcasters can't really blast all their foes in one go.
For example, a CR 12 encounter can support roughly 142 CR 1/3 NPCs, 48 CR CR 1 NPCs, 16 CR 4 NPCs, etc. They don't all have to be coming at once.
So let's say your party has rushed to the area where the encounter was going down. Suddenly, they are ambushed the first set of guards. 10 CR 1/3 enemies led by a CR 1 commander. As they battle with this team, the next team consisting of 20 CR 1/3 enemies, 5 CR 1 commanders, and a CR 4 leader are quaffing potions and casting spells to buff their teams, before rushing into the room to do battle, followed by team #3 who surprises everyone by coming in through the sunroof.
The encounter is bold, dramatic, and is difficult to overcome just by spamming spells, since the waves are separated, and could come from different directions, it can call for more castings of a given spell than typical (the team of 10 CR 1/3 foes is excellent fireball fodder, but that's a fireball you don't have come the next team).
It's also a difficult encounter, as mooks can focus fire enemies pretty harshly. Alchemical goods, nets, potions, reach weapons, and so forth can make the encounter quite nasty. It's alright if a given mook goes down quickly. They should, because more waves are coming. Plus, it tends to have the side effect of making everyone in the party feel like super badasses, as the warriors can wade through crowds of enlarged CR 1/3 warriors to take out the special foes, while the mages CC or nuke large numbers of mooks, etc.
In Short: If you aren't interested in having multiple encounters per session, instead drop more APL+3 encounters with more enemies, split it out, and have an idea as to how they will fight, what sorts of tricks they will use, how the scene will be set. Will there be any special tricks they or the party can use (like valves for rushing water, perhaps), etc, etc. Spread out your enemies so that spells need to be spread out too. You won't inflate your game with lots of encounters, you will have more dramatic encounters, and you won't cause your party to level abnormally fast.
Void munchkin: That makes less sense. Because I debate about the function of rules I must have a personal interest in them... Please don't take this wrong I mean no offense.
Welcome to the internet. This is the one place where you can find someone at any hour of the day to argue with you over something that doesn't matter, extra people if the question at hand is trivial.
The point I was making refers solely to the process of adding a spell to a spell book. Once a spell is understood in function as long as you can read the language you can repeat it. The writing, logically, is incidental as long as you have it written where you can understand it. You can find this information in the section on recording a spell.
Read magic is handy, but not necessary for this procedure.
|
Ashiel has some good points. instead of using fewer but stronger foes, use more but weaker ones.
here is an idea.
(assuming the party is 5th level)
try 1 CR 7 Boss with 2 CR 3 Bodyguards and 8 CR 1/3 mooks. effectively an EL9 encounter. but color spray shouldn't be as bad a problem. try mixing up the roles of the foes and using cheap but effective low level consumables. if you have to use spells from partial caster lists to cheat costs, who cares? use of flanking and aid another can help too.
Void munchkin: That makes less sense. Because I debate about the function of rules I must have a personal interest in them... Please don't take this wrong I mean no offense.
Welcome to the internet. This is the one place where you can find someone at any hour of the day to argue with you over something that doesn't matter, extra people if the question at hand is trivial.
The point I was making refers solely to the process of adding a spell to a spell book. Once a spell is understood in function as long as you can read the language you can repeat it. The writing, logically, is incidental as long as you have it written where you can understand it. You can find this information in the section on recording a spell.
Read magic is handy, but not necessary for this procedure.
.
.No offence taken.
I kinda understand why some DM/GM either ban Read Magic or change its spell level...
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, is Pathfinder really that much harder than 3.5? That much more work or that unbalanced?
"Frustrated" complained about running 3.5 earlier in this thread too, if I recall aright. I think the problem is more than just the players-- it's also a GM who isn't up to the game either. Although--
At this point, "Frustrated" wouldn't have to worry about me, if I were in this game, 'cause I would quit and find a different group, rather than continue with the three less-than-effective complaining players and a GM who obviously doesn't want to run the system or fix the group problems in a tolerable way that respects the players who actually know what they're doing in the game.
Jak in 3.5 there was a special rule made in a splat book* to make someone else's spellbook your own. That rule does not exist in Pathfinder. By the rules someone else's book can not become your book. You must copy every spell from the other book into your book.
The 3.5 rule that is not in Pathfinder
Mastering a Foreign Spellbook
Instead of laboriously copying each spell of interest from a spellbook into his own, a wizard might instead madke a dedicated effort to master the spell book's particular ciphers and notations.........Mastering a spellbook requires a successful Spellcraft check(DC 25+ the level of the highest level spell in the book) and takes one week plus one day per spell contained withing. If the wizard succeeds, he can use the foreign spellbook as his own, requiring no further Spellcraft checks to preare or copy spells from it...
That rule does not exist in Pathfinder.
At what point does a spellbook become "mine"? If I kill a wizard and take his stuff the spellbook is mine right? Or what if I buy a pre-made spellbook from a magic shop?
Alright according to the idea that you cannot use a spellbook other than one you wrote then how does a preconstructed spellbook work?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thread can end now. The more I read what I will have to do to make this work the more I stand by what I said in the original post: I should not have trusted this group to play Pathfinder. I would rather GM a game I don't have to bend over backwards to make work with my s$$#ty group.
Your "s@%$ty" group?" The "thread can end now?"
I don't think the problem here is with your players. Go back to whatever game it is you like to play by yourself and let your players find a new GM. Troll.
By the rules the spells you prepare must be the ones you wrote down yourself. Even if another wizard said "the spell on page 34 of my spellbook is scorching ray", you still could not prepare it from his book. You would have to copy it into your spellbook.
Killing him, and taking ownership of the book also does not help.
To further enforce this:
A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell he already knows and has recorded in his own spellbook
You can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell, but only if it is one that is already in his book. I can't see this coming in handy though unless your spellbook is not availible, but even then success is not guaranteed.
The rules then go on to say:
but preparation success is not assured. First, the wizard must decipher the writing in the book (see Arcane Magical Writings, above). Once a spell from another spellcaster's book is deciphered, the reader must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell's level) to prepare the spell. If the check succeeds, the wizard can prepare the spell. He must repeat the check to prepare the spell again, no matter how many times he has prepared it before. If the check fails, he cannot try to prepare the spell from the same source again until the next day. However, as explained above, he does not need to repeat a check to decipher the writing.
So even though this other wizard is helping you to prepare a spell from his book that you already have in your book you still might fail, and that spellcheck applied to every spell from the borrowed(one that is not yours) book that you try to use.
What do mean by preconstructed spellbook?
1. I'm challenging the negation of the first quote which states that a wizard cannot know a spell that he did not record in his spell book.
2. Where did you get this helpful wizard? I've been, theoretically, rolling to read his scratch or using read magic.
3. Preconstructed spellbooks can be found in the ultimate magic book. You find them as loot, or in theory purchase them, and prepare spells directly from them. Preparing spells from them can even give you additional effects if you prepare 3 or more in a given sitting.
1. The spells in his book are his spells known by the rules for the most part.
2. You have a point. The read magic part can probably be bypassed with
To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in another's spellbook or on a scroll), a character must make a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + the spell's level). If the skill check fails, the character cannot attempt to read that particular spell again until the next day. A read magic spell automatically deciphers magical writing without a skill check. If the person who created the magical writing is on hand to help the reader, success is also automatic.
That only refers to deciphering which you can do anyway with a read magic spell so that wizard still is not needed unless you did not prepare read magic, and I have never met a player who did not have it ready.
By the rules the helpful wizard is not really all that useful unless his spellbook is trapped.
3. I found them after I asked the question. The text reads as though the player should be able to read them, but does not come out and say you can bypass the normal rules.
It seems that section will need errata to make it so that those books are automatically usable. Otherwise I see no need for them.
2. Yeah I know, I was jokingly referring to the discussion above. Detect magic is kinda a staple.
3. This is a spellbook written by someone else, but you can learn and study spells from it assuming you can read it. The mechanics dictate the necessity.
1. Therefore I conclude that the spells in his spellbook refers to a spell he knows via the whole taking time to learn the spell, 1 hour plus spellcraft check.
Could 3. be errata'd to force an exemption sure, but on what logic? The spellbooks from ultimate magic are set to be made by others, but are then readily available for reading some how? This is where the logic puzzle hits me and I decide that if he's rolled to understand it, then by function he knows it since there is evidence of such an action occurring. He may not be able to do it perfectly every time, rolling to memorize, but he knows the spell.
Edit for analogy: If I have a manual for building a specific car engine written in german then I have to be able to understand it to use the information to build my new engine. If I get a friend, or google translate to tell me what said manual says then I get to try to understand the shoddy translation. Then I get to try to use the translation to make my new engine my success or failure based on my previous experience with automotive mechanics. Now until I write this down in my way I'm going to have one hell of time using this as a reference source if it vanishes from my head, i.e. spellcasting. But it can be done easier now because I spent the time to understand how it works. I do not know all of the steps or even necessarily the components, but I do know the general idea.
The above analogy is crap, but hey its four in the morning where I'm at and I don't get to sleep until eleven. So please don't pick it apart as an imperfect analogy, trust me I know. I'm just to fuddle minded to think of a better one.
I will acknowledge that it could be read another way. I just find logically that a statement does not necessitate negation of an exempt clause, specifically when there is evidence which necessitates such a clause through function either intentionally or not.