Timeline for Are your resistances optional?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Aug 8, 2018 at 3:25 | history | suggested | user22884 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
I think you got that backwards
|
| Aug 8, 2018 at 1:40 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Aug 8, 2018 at 3:25 | |||||
| Aug 7, 2018 at 19:19 | history | edited | GcL | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 409 characters in body
|
| Aug 7, 2018 at 19:12 | history | edited | GcL | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 409 characters in body
|
| Aug 7, 2018 at 19:00 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | More relevantly though, I'm still unclear what point you are making by using that ruling as part of your logic. Could you maybe elaborate on it in your answer? | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 19:00 | comment | added | GcL | I concur, but if it were restating a general rule, there would be a general rule to cite. | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 18:58 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | I find that logic actually not very compelling at all. There are plenty of examples of specific things in the rules restating general effects as part of their descriptions. It is not really logically sound to deduce general rules from perceived specific exceptions. | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 18:56 | comment | added | GcL | Which is why I offered the example of the spell with a specific provision for it. I assume if it were always an option, it would not need to be stated. | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 18:55 | comment | added | Rubiksmoose | Regarding that JC quote about failing saves, it is important to note that he does not say you cannot intentionally fail. He just says there are no rules about it and therefore it is a DM call. So is that your conclusion here as well? | |
| Aug 7, 2018 at 18:53 | history | answered | GcL | CC BY-SA 4.0 |