Absorption + Energy Transformation Field...How?

[liquid150]

Is not Absorption a Personal range spell, with a target of You? How can you key it to an Energy Transformation Field?

PS - yeah I'm talking about tricksies. I like getting hit with rulebooks.

[sofawall]

Well, Magic of the Land and Spellguard of Silverymoon give it a range.

[liquid150]

Originally Posted by sofawall

Well, Magic of the Land and Spellguard of Silverymoon give it a range.

I don't see anything in Magic of the Land that would give it range.

[douglas]

That's because MotL is not where the non-personal part comes from. MotL just allows the spell to qualify for the Spellguard ability, and that is what converts personal range to something else.

[sofawall]

Originally Posted by liquid150

I don't see anything in Magic of the Land that would give it range.

Note: "Or" does not mean the same thing as "and".

[Siosilvar]

Originally Posted by sofawall

Note: "Or" does not mean the same thing as "and".

Except when you're using the English language, when "or" can sometimes mean a logical "and" and vice versa.

For example, if I said that Incantatrix and Arcane Thesis reduce the cost of metamagic, would you take that to mean in combination?

[sofawall]

Yes. I would. It would also be true.

[Siosilvar]

Originally Posted by sofawall

Yes. I would. It would also be true.

But either one also does it by themselves. "and" (not logical and), when used in a typical English-language sentence, usually means that one or the other or both can do something. If both are required, you (usually) need to specify in order to be clear.

[sofawall]

Originally Posted by Siosilvar

But either one also does it by themselves.
"and" (not logical and), when used in a typical English-language sentence, usually means that one or the other or both can do something. If both are required, you (usually) need to specify in order to be clear.

I tend to assume the opposite. Usually I will say "A and B both work for X" to mean either will work. "A and B work for X" I would assume means you need both.

[liquid150]

Originally Posted by sofawall

I tend to assume the opposite. Usually I will say "A and B both work for X" to mean either will work. "A and B work for X" I would assume means you need both.

A and B work for X = A and B both work for X, they are interchangeable.

The proper way to say it would be "A and B together work for X," or "Using both A and B will work for X."

[liquid150]

I suppose I might as well clarify on why I want to know. I'm looking at putting together a TO Red Wizard just for kicks to show why Red Wizards are the likely most powerful prestige class in the DMG. I know this can depend on your personal character, but humor me.

I would really like to get my Red Wizard levels to 10 for Great Circle Leader.

I also don't think Spellguard of Silverymoon really mixes with Red wizard.

[douglas]

Originally Posted by liquid150

I also don't think Spellguard of Silverymoon really mixes with Red wizard.

I don't know, maybe a deep undercover agent...

[hamishspence]

The Red Wizards set up trade enclaves everywhere- possibly including Silverymoon- and he left the enclave, volunteered for the Spellguard, and passed all the character tests?

Or- he could be a wizard born and raised in one of those trade enclaves near, rather than in, Silverymoon, he chose to explore the world, wound up in Silverymoon, and chose to sign up to the Spellguard?

Red Wizards can be any nongood alignment- a neutral Red Wizard might actually like the folk of Silverymoon.

[Siosilvar]

Originally Posted by sofawall

I tend to assume the opposite. Usually I will say "A and B both work for X" to mean either will work. "A and B work for X" I would assume means you need both.

You're just going to end up confusing the majority of English speakers.