[A&E Guide] Blindfold of True Darkness

[kreynolds]

In your very first post.

Quote it.

But the the posts immediately before yours were discussing darkness. Since you didn't specify what issue you were replying it, it appeared that you were discussing the one in the posts just prior to yours.

It was quite clear. I stated "Take this, for example". I laid out the example. Darkness wasn't mentioned.

As I said, you weren't clear.

I disagree.

When you don't express yourself clearly, it's easy to make assumptions.

I clearly stated the example. Darkness was not mentioned.

Exactly. Please make the effort to discuss things in a more clear fashion in the future.

I don't mind that you made an assumption. I don't mind if you ask me for clarification of one of my posts. I do, however, mind when you blame me for your own assumption. You made that assumption all on your own, even when my example was clearly stated.

Since the item under discussion grants blindsight, it is to be expected that you are in a cirumstance where you will actually need to use the blindfold, unless you state otherwise. You did not state otherwise.

I defined the parameters of my example, and darkness was not part of it.

LOL. That's pretty funny. Darkness was mentioned in several posts prior to yours. If you were part of that discussion, you should have made this known.

I didn't see any need. I still don't.

When did I say you mistreated me?

Here...

You've never treated me very well...

...did you mean something else by that statement?

You are making a big assumption there.

Possibly. Would you mind clarifying that statement then?

You seem to have a rather narrow definition of "polite" and "civil" .

Possibly.

Mine is a little broader.

I'm getting that.

If you can't handle it, that's your problem, not mine.

I don't expect you to pussyfoot around. I merely expect you to refrain from being rude. If you need an example of how I would like you to treat me, simply look at my replies to you. I'm not being rude, cruel, or anything like that. I am merely speaking matter of fact, which does not include rude behavior.

I think you are just wasting a lot of time and bandwith by making a big deal over nothing...

You mean like the darkness thing? I didn't start it, and I've been trying to clear it up, but its obvious that you and I disagree. I'm willing to let it rest if you are.

...but I've seen you do this in just about every other debate where you lose ground so I'm not suprised.

Yeah, I'll admit, I remember doing that before as well. However, I'm not doing that now. I began to somewhat agree with the majority in this thread when I replied to Forrester. I'm not wasting time. I'm making progress.

If you want to "handle it another way" feel free. It's about what I expect from you by now.

Its your option. I'm trying to maintain a civil conversation, but you're making that difficult.

I had hoped for better this time. *sigh*

So had I. If you don't want to be civil, please, just say so.

 

[kreynolds]

In reply to your changes.

<--- (See? Polite request.)

That was indeed polite. Thank you.

Why should we have assumed that your example was one where there was no logical reason to have the blindfold on?

Besides the fact that darkness was never mention in what I think was a clearly laid out example? I honestly don't know.

I said you haven't treated me well, not that you mistreated me.

Ah. Then can you further define that? Does "haven't treated me well" mean I have treated you badly or just somewhat less than good? I'm trying to understand your point of view.

This thread is a perfect example.

I haven't treated you well? How is that?

 

[AuraSeer]

I agree, but darkness is pretty easy to counter[...]

So what? Invisibility is just as easy to counter; see invisibility is 2nd level, the same as daylight. As I've pointed out, the blindfold is even better for combat than a ring of invisibility, though the ring costs more than twice as much.

[...]so the solution is still relevant.

No. Even granting your previous assertion, your "solution" remains irrelevant, because the blindfold is not a permanent fixture. As soon as the lights come back on*, the user can just remove the item, and the minor disadvantages you've fixated on go away.

*(Even though the user can't directly see light while he wears the blindfold, his blindsight shows him that his opponents are suddenly no longer blundering around and disoriented.)

 

[RigaMortus]

"I'm gonna cast a Friendship spell on the both of you!"

 

[kreynolds]

As I've pointed out, the blindfold is even better for combat than a ring of invisibility... [/size]

I disagree. I think in the end, the ring of invisibility is far superior. With the blindfold, nobody is invisible to you within range. With the ring, you're invisible to everyone, no matter how close or far away they are. I think the ring has a lot more uses than the blindfold, such as stealing treasure, or anything else (no matter the lighting conditions), escape, evasion, and long range attacks, to name a few.

*(Even though the user can't directly see light while he wears the blindfold, his blindsight shows him that his opponents are suddenly no longer blundering around and disoriented.)

It does?

 

[Rugger]

Crikey!

I make a topic and 24 hours later, we are having a 2 men enter, 1 man leaves Rules Forum Deathmatch between Caliban and KReynolds...

I'm getting the general feeling that yeah, this thing is too good...and i really appreciate all the input thats come out!

-Rugger
"I Lurk!"

 

[AuraSeer]

I disagree. I think in the end, the ring of invisibility is far superior. With the blindfold, nobody is invisible to you within range. With the ring, you're invisible to everyone, no matter how close or far away they are.

Once again yet another time repeating myself repetitively with repetitiousness: I'm talking about the use of the blindfold in magical darkness. For purposes of combat, it grants the same effect as invisibility, and then some.

I can't tell whether you're just taking the piss, or just badly failing to make a coherent argument. Either way, since you're not bothering to read my posts here, I won't trouble you with any more of them.

 

[kreynolds]

I'm talking about the use of the blindfold in magical darkness.

I realize that.

For purposes of combat, it grants the same effect as invisibility, and then some.

I realize that as well, but my argument stems from my example where darkness was not a factor. If you prefer, think of the darkness as having already been negated.

I can't tell whether you're just taking the piss, or just badly failing to make a coherent argument.

Well, my example was quite clear, where darkness was not a factor. I even previously mentioned that the blindfold should probably be restricted to one sense, such as sound, scent, or vibration, so I do agree that its powerful. I just don't think its as powerful as you do.

Either way, since you're not bothering to read my posts here, I won't trouble you with any more of them.

I read your posts. I simply disagree with your opinion that the blindfold is far superior to a ring of invisibility.

 

[Henry]

What I'm sorry to see is respected posters who can't debate a magic item cost without verbal insults.

It needs to be civil, or the thread doesn't need to continue.

 

[Forrester]

I'm surprised that so much of the conversation has centered around whether someone facing the guy with the blindfold can successfully run away unnoticed. I mean, is this really the best test of game balance?

The fact that the wearer can't see squat past 60' is not trivial. But I still say that the ability to foil ALL visual and audio illusions (Blur, Invis, Improved Invis, Displacement), combined with the ability to do some particularly nasty offense (Blindfold + Darkness spell), is pretty damn cheaty, and needs to cost a lot more than 9k.