Timeline for If Invisibility ends because the original caster casts a non-concentration spell, does Invisibility also end on other targets of the original casting?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Mar 13, 2019 at 16:00 | comment | added | Xirema | @Mołot Existing convention and context. I was going to try to find a counterexample, i.e. "here's a spell where the spell ending on one target explicitly causes the spell to fail for all the others" to show how the difference, but I couldn't find one, so if you know one, I could probably use that to make the answer better. | |
| Mar 13, 2019 at 15:48 | comment | added | Mołot | " the spell's description would say so explicitly." - Why shouldn't we assume that if spell was meant to continue for other targets spells description would say so explicitly? Why shouldn't we assume that if spell was meant to end for that target only, description would say so? What makes your interpretation more true than its opposites? | |
| Mar 13, 2019 at 15:40 | history | answered | Xirema | CC BY-SA 4.0 |