Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Invsibility vs Cloak of Elvenkind
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7057241" data-attributes="member: 6683613"><p>Seeing thin air is "positive sensory evidence". It's evidence of absence. What your eyes are telling you is affirmatively inconsistent with what your ears are telling you. Negative evidence, absence of evidence, would be a situation where you simply can't see: it's dark, or the noise is behind you, or it's coming from another room. Your eyes aren't confirming what your ears are telling you, but they're not contradicting it either. See the difference?</p><p></p><p>You now appear to be arguing that the Perception skill is <em>purely</em> nonvisual. This seems implausible. You can hide from someone with standard cover or concealment. You don't need full cover or concealment. The normal presumption is that if you're hiding in shadows or behind a tree, and the other creature perceives you, they have located you at least partially with your eyes. 3rd Edition even called this out as a "Spot check" as opposed to a "Listen check".</p><p></p><p>And I'm arguing that there are no such situations. Whatever way you formulate the <em>cloak</em> as providing advantage on Stealth checks, outright invisibility ought to provide at least the same advantage. Seeing a subtle color shift is harder than seeing an uncloaked creature; seeing a ripple in the air is harder than seeing a visible creature. Concluding that a stump is actually a creature requires setting aside an assumption about physics; concluding a patch of thin air is actually a creature requires setting aside an assumption about physics. <em>All</em> the arguments you've given for advantage run in parallel this way.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 7057241, member: 6683613"] Seeing thin air is "positive sensory evidence". It's evidence of absence. What your eyes are telling you is affirmatively inconsistent with what your ears are telling you. Negative evidence, absence of evidence, would be a situation where you simply can't see: it's dark, or the noise is behind you, or it's coming from another room. Your eyes aren't confirming what your ears are telling you, but they're not contradicting it either. See the difference? You now appear to be arguing that the Perception skill is [I]purely[/I] nonvisual. This seems implausible. You can hide from someone with standard cover or concealment. You don't need full cover or concealment. The normal presumption is that if you're hiding in shadows or behind a tree, and the other creature perceives you, they have located you at least partially with your eyes. 3rd Edition even called this out as a "Spot check" as opposed to a "Listen check". And I'm arguing that there are no such situations. Whatever way you formulate the [I]cloak[/I] as providing advantage on Stealth checks, outright invisibility ought to provide at least the same advantage. Seeing a subtle color shift is harder than seeing an uncloaked creature; seeing a ripple in the air is harder than seeing a visible creature. Concluding that a stump is actually a creature requires setting aside an assumption about physics; concluding a patch of thin air is actually a creature requires setting aside an assumption about physics. [I]All[/I] the arguments you've given for advantage run in parallel this way. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Invsibility vs Cloak of Elvenkind
Top