Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ozmar" data-source="post: 1631025" data-attributes="member: 8021">Well, yeah, I s'pose. Kind of like you would have to go outside the rules to protect yourself against other magical spells or effects if you didn't have magic.But even there, I don't think there is a clear distinction here. Scent, blindsight, tremorsense and really good hearing - are these "nonmagical"? In any case, I really don't see that as a valid point. Invisibility is a magical effect, and there are many magical counters to it. Thus, the rules support a balance of powers vis-a-vis invisibility. If you disallow the magical counters (by arguing that invisibility is "unbalanced" if you "don't have magic"), then you're not really addressing the balance issue within the context of the whole ruleset. That's like taking one weight off of the scale and then saying "look how unbalanced this is".Which is, of course, the default assumption of D&D. Not that you can't change that if you want, but it seems silly to me to discount this assumption. If you want to tip the apple cart, go for it! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> But don't say: "look how bad this is now that I've tipped the cart."I have heard this before, and I completely agree that there is a certain element of "rock-paper-scissors" to D&D. "If I have protection from evil, then you can't possess me: nyah nyah nyah! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />" Similarly, you can't find scry on me if I have mind blank. But my discern location trumps your mind blank. Well my "I hide from everyone" trumps your discern location. Oh yeah, well my "I find you so there" spell trumps your "I hide from everyone" spell! Etc...Some people don't like this aspect. I understand that. I've never had a real problem with it. I just see it as a necessary effect for balancing the escalation of power in a simple manner. There are several ways to adjust for this, but I've never really felt the need.Agreed, and that's fine. It seems like a valid reason to nerf it in your own game. I probably wouldn't, but might avoid using a "certain kill" tactic against inexperienced players, but that's just me.Potayto, potahto. I find some implications of the D&D rules to be credible (cf. Eberron) and others to be less credible. YMMV and all that. I disagree that greater invis has no major reason to exist - it seems like a natural area for magical research: if I can turn invisible, but the spell ends whenever I attack someone, then I'd like to research a spell that overcomes this limitation. But again, that's just our different viewpoints on "credible" worlds.Cool. Works for you.Sounds to me like this is just a flavor issue. You don't like chunky greater invis-flavored peanuts in your D&D sundae. Cool. Works for you. I like 'em, but both sundaes work.Ozmar the Abuser of Metaphors</blockquote>

Verification