Heart of the Storm What? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Yunru Jun 29, 2015 9:59:42	At 6th level, you gain resistance to lightning and thunder damage. Whenever you cast a spell other than a cantrip that deals lightning or thunder damage, a stormy aura surrounds you. In addition to the spell’s effects, creatures of your choice within 10 feet of you take lightning or thunder damage (choose each time this ability activates) equal to half your sorcerer level.
#2 mellored Jun 29, 2015 10:13:55	Whenever you cast a spell, other then a cantrip, that deals lighting or thunder damage....
#3 FrogReaver Jun 29, 2015 10:20:05	Yunru wrote:
#4 mellored Jun 29, 2015 10:19:37	There's also no rule that says it must apply to the spell, instead of modifiying the cantrip. It's abmigous.
(Reply to #4) FrogReaver	mellored wrote:
#6 Yunru Jun 29, 2015 10:29:27	I just followed basic English. I took everything after "other than" up to the next comma/full stop/(semi)colon to be what "other than" refers to. Which it is. Now obviously that's not the intent, but it is what's written.
#7 Slagger_the_Chuul Jun 29, 2015 10:51:43	Without some form of separator (like a comma), the reference to dealing thunder and lightning damage describes what immediately precedes it, rather than something earlier in the sentence. That's obviously not the intention, but it is what the sentence states if you don't include appropriate commas.
#8 Thoughts_My_Aim Jun 29, 2015 11:30:12	I think people are inventing a rule here that does not exist. Indeed I am not certain, but I suspect that the comma-less version might be strictly more correct. With commas, the clause "other than a cantrip" would be a non-restrictive relative clause (see, for example, the difference between "the man who lives here" and "the man, who lives here"). The last ambiguous way to phase out would have been "a spell that is not a cantrip and that causes..." but that would have been clunky.
#9 OnionDruid Jun 29, 2015 12:48:42	WotC has said that they use basic English when making their books, specifically the PHB, and basic use of English in America is pretty bad... So this goes along just fine with wotc's ideal use of the English language.
#10 Enevhar_Aldarion Jun 29, 2015 13:00:11	I must be reading that sentence differently than other people, but my brain automatically put in pauses before and after "other than a cantrip", as if there were actually commas there. Also remember that this comes from an Unearthed Arcana article, which is basically first draft or playtest material, and probably does not get the same level of proofreading that a final product would get.
(Reply to #8) FrogReaver	Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
(Reply to #11) Yunru	FrogReaver wrote:
#13 Thoughts_My_Aim Jun 29, 2015 14:14:35	Yunru wrote:
(Reply to #13) FrogReaver	Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:
#15 FrogReaver Jun 29, 2015 14:54:08	in fact I cant find anything in google about using 2 adjective (or relative) (or adjectival) clauses in the same sentence. I can find tons of examples of 1 being used. Always seems to depend on whether its restrictive or non-restrictive for comma usage. But I can't find anything about using 2 of them to modify the same noun.
#16 Thoughts_My_Aim Jun 29, 2015 15:03:40	I'm still trying to work this one out. I think the sentence "a spell of first level or higher that deals lightning or thunder damage" would definitely be fine, and in this case the clause "that deals lightning or thunder damage" would not be taken as modifying "level", and I think that the use of commas here ("a spell, of first level or higher, that deals...") would again have the problem of making "of first level or higher" into a comment rather than as a necessary, identifying part of the noun phrase "a spell of first level or higher". I think "a spell other than a cantrip" can be read equivalently to "a spell of first level or higher", but it has the unfortunate feature of putting the word "cantrip" at the end of the phrase, which does lead to ambiguity when it leads on to "that deals lightning or thunder damage". As I think I said earlier, the most formally correct way to express this without incorrectly marking "other than a cantrip" as a comment or introducing ambiguity would be to phrase it as "a spell that is not a cantrip and that deals...". Or indeed to say "a spell of first level or higher that deals..."
(Reply to #12) Macv12	Yunru wrote:
#18 FrogReaver Jun 29, 2015 19:24:04	Welcome to English. We don't like one noun being modified by multiple different phrases unless one comes before the noun and the other after the noun.
#19 Mad_Jack Jun 29, 2015 21:23:13	I think I'll fall back on the "rule" that when one possible interpretation makes sense and isn't overpowered and another possible interpretation makes you shake your head and go, "Now that's just dumb.", you should use the one that doesn't seem stupid.
#20 shintashi Jun 29, 2015 22:47:11	anyone remember the beholder worth 14,000 0 experience?
#21 Slagger_the_Chuul Jun 30, 2015 0:00:27	FrogReaver wrote:
#22 ORC_Nashira Jun 30, 2015 6:39:34	I've removed content from this thread because Harassment is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here.
#23 Kalani Jun 30, 2015 7:11:35	This could have been avoided easily by altering the word order to: Whenever you cast a spell that deals thunder or lightning damage, other than a cantrip...... I think a superior wording choice would have been something like the following: Whenever you cast a 1st level or higher spell that deals thunder or lightning damage..... The above wording uses the same syntax as other pre-existing rules in the game. In fact, I fully suspect the wording to be changed to the above in the final draft.
(Reply to #23) FrogReaver	Kalani wrote:
#25 Yunru Jun 30, 2015 8:22:23	It's true that all this trouble is because of "other than". It introduces a negative into the sentence that leads to this very discussion: when does the negative stop applying? But you're wrong in saying your layout was better. It still has the negative, it still has the problem. We're not going for "proper" english after all, we're going for clear english. "When you cast a spell of 1st level or higher" as above neatly addresses that problem fully.
#26 Slagger_the_Chuul Jun 30, 2015 8:32:33	If you want clarity, bracketing the "other than a cantrip" part would also achieve that, just as you did when clarifying possible meanings in post #12, Yunru. Yunru wrote:
(Reply to #25) FrogReaver	Yunru wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Yunru

Jun 29, 2015 9:59:42

At 6th level, you gain resistance to lightning and thunder damage. Whenever you cast a spell other than a cantrip that deals lightning or thunder damage, a stormy aura surrounds you.
In addition to the spell’s effects, creatures of your choice within 10 feet of you take lightning or thunder damage (choose each time this ability activates) equal to half your sorcerer level.

mellored

Jun 29, 2015 10:13:55

Whenever you cast a spell, other then a cantrip, that deals lighting or thunder damage....

FrogReaver

Jun 29, 2015 10:20:05

Yunru wrote:

mellored

Jun 29, 2015 10:19:37

There's also no rule that says it must apply to the spell, instead of modifiying the cantrip.

It's abmigous.

(Reply to #4)

FrogReaver

mellored wrote:

Yunru

Jun 29, 2015 10:29:27

I just followed basic English.

I took everything after "other than" up to the next comma/full stop/(semi)colon to be what "other than" refers to. Which it is. Now obviously that's not the intent, but it is what's written.

Slagger_the_Chuul

Jun 29, 2015 10:51:43

Without some form of separator (like a comma), the reference to dealing thunder and lightning damage describes what immediately precedes it, rather than something earlier in the sentence. That's obviously not the intention, but it is what the sentence states if you don't include appropriate commas.

Thoughts_My_Aim

Jun 29, 2015 11:30:12

I think people are inventing a rule here that does not exist. Indeed I am not certain, but I suspect that the comma-less version might be strictly more correct. With commas, the clause "other than a cantrip" would be a non-restrictive relative clause (see, for example, the difference between "the man who lives here" and "the man, who lives here"). The last ambiguous way to phase out would have been "a spell that is not a cantrip and that causes..." but that would have been clunky.

OnionDruid

Jun 29, 2015 12:48:42

WotC has said that they use basic English when making their books, specifically the PHB, and basic use of English in America is pretty bad... So this goes along just fine with wotc's ideal use of the English language.

#10

Enevhar_Aldarion

Jun 29, 2015 13:00:11

I must be reading that sentence differently than other people, but my brain automatically put in pauses before and after "other than a cantrip", as if there were actually commas there.

Also remember that this comes from an Unearthed Arcana article, which is basically first draft or playtest material, and probably does not get the same level of proofreading that a final product would get.

(Reply to #8)

FrogReaver

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:

(Reply to #11)

Yunru

FrogReaver wrote:

#13

Thoughts_My_Aim

Jun 29, 2015 14:14:35

Yunru wrote:

(Reply to #13)

FrogReaver

Thoughts_My_Aim wrote:

#15

FrogReaver

Jun 29, 2015 14:54:08

in fact I cant find anything in google about using 2 adjective (or relative) (or adjectival) clauses in the same sentence. I can find tons of examples of 1 being used. Always seems to depend on whether its restrictive or non-restrictive for comma usage.

But I can't find anything about using 2 of them to modify the same noun.

#16

Thoughts_My_Aim

Jun 29, 2015 15:03:40

I'm still trying to work this one out.

I think the sentence "a spell of first level or higher that deals lightning or thunder damage" would definitely be fine, and in this case the clause "that deals lightning or thunder damage" would not be taken as modifying "level", and I think that the use of commas here ("a spell, of first level or higher, that deals...") would again have the problem of making "of first level or higher" into a comment rather than as a necessary, identifying part of the noun phrase "a spell of first level or higher".

I think "a spell other than a cantrip" can be read equivalently to "a spell of first level or higher", but it has the unfortunate feature of putting the word "cantrip" at the end of the phrase, which does lead to ambiguity when it leads on to "that deals lightning or thunder damage".

As I think I said earlier, the most formally correct way to express this without incorrectly marking "other than a cantrip" as a comment or introducing ambiguity would be to phrase it as "a spell that is not a cantrip and that deals...". Or indeed to say "a spell of first level or higher that deals..."

(Reply to #12)

Macv12

Yunru wrote:

#18

FrogReaver

Jun 29, 2015 19:24:04

Welcome to English. We don't like one noun being modified by multiple different phrases unless one comes before the noun and the other after the noun.

#19

Mad_Jack

Jun 29, 2015 21:23:13

I think I'll fall back on the "rule" that when one possible interpretation makes sense and isn't overpowered and another possible interpretation makes you shake your head and go, "Now that's just dumb.", you should use the one that doesn't seem stupid.

#20

shintashi

Jun 29, 2015 22:47:11

anyone remember the beholder worth 14,000 0 experience?

#21

Slagger_the_Chuul

Jun 30, 2015 0:00:27

FrogReaver wrote:

#22

ORC_Nashira

Jun 30, 2015 6:39:34

I've removed content from this thread because Harassment is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here.

#23

Kalani

Jun 30, 2015 7:11:35

This could have been avoided easily by altering the word order to: Whenever you cast a spell that deals thunder or lightning damage, other than a cantrip......

I think a superior wording choice would have been something like the following:

Whenever you cast a 1st level or higher spell that deals thunder or lightning damage.....

The above wording uses the same syntax as other pre-existing rules in the game. In fact, I fully suspect the wording to be changed to the above in the final draft.

(Reply to #23)

FrogReaver

Kalani wrote:

#25

Yunru

Jun 30, 2015 8:22:23

It's true that all this trouble is because of "other than". It introduces a negative into the sentence that leads to this very discussion: when does the negative stop applying?

But you're wrong in saying your layout was better. It still has the negative, it still has the problem. We're not going for "proper" english after all, we're going for clear english. "When you cast a spell of 1st level or higher" as above neatly addresses that problem fully.

#26

Slagger_the_Chuul

Jun 30, 2015 8:32:33

If you want clarity, bracketing the "other than a cantrip" part would also achieve that, just as you did when clarifying possible meanings in post #12, Yunru.

Yunru wrote:

(Reply to #25)

FrogReaver

Yunru wrote: