jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
It has to do with how you interpret an attack. AFAIK it has nothing to do with previous editions.
Distract drop invisibility?
- Thread starter WilliamCQ
- Start date
Concerning magic missile and mirror image, the issue has more to do with whether or not you target one of the images (the illusions) created by mirror image or the caster.
The way I rule it is that in 5E magic missile targets a creature you can see. Can you see the creature with mirror image up? Yes, although you also see duplicates of the creature. Since you can see the target creature, they are a valid target unlike the illusory images of the creature.
Which doesn't pertain to this thread as far as I know.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
Huh, interesting. Well it leads me to conclude that you're simply wrong about invisibility (or at least in how you've explained your reasoning), but I can't think of any reason you would care about my opinion on that.
Well, I can't see any reason you keep repeating that you think I'm wrong. You made that quite clear quite some time ago.
Satyrn
First Post
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
Actually not really, it was clear you disagreed with me, but you convinced me there could be more than one right way to interpret this. Or maybe "consistent" way to interpret it would be better.
Gardens & Goblins
First Post
If it helps, I can be wrong. I'm really good at it.
I've had a lot of practice.
I've had a lot of practice.
jaelis
Oh this is where the title goes?
Wrong isn't the right word. Obviously anyone can play how they want, and everyone should play the way that makes their game the most fun.
But interpreting the game rules haphazardly is, IMO, a form of house ruling. In the sense that you aren't trying to "follow" the rules, you're just doing what seems right at the moment. Which is again fine and probably even a good idea in play.
But if someone asks a rules question here, I think we ought to answer according to an overall consistent interpretation of what the rules say. Even then there are often multiple correct answers... things to do with stealth are a great example. I would not, going into this, have said that interpreting attacks is that kind of case. I'm now pretty much convinced that it is, and that you could have an overall consistent interpretation where dragon breath pops invisibility. But it would have to impact other places in the game.
But interpreting the game rules haphazardly is, IMO, a form of house ruling. In the sense that you aren't trying to "follow" the rules, you're just doing what seems right at the moment. Which is again fine and probably even a good idea in play.
But if someone asks a rules question here, I think we ought to answer according to an overall consistent interpretation of what the rules say. Even then there are often multiple correct answers... things to do with stealth are a great example. I would not, going into this, have said that interpreting attacks is that kind of case. I'm now pretty much convinced that it is, and that you could have an overall consistent interpretation where dragon breath pops invisibility. But it would have to impact other places in the game.
Satyrn
First Post
Interesting topic.
I'd rather each poster answer however they prefer, ideally in whatever manner they think might be most helpful to the person asking the question. I prefer to answer these questions based on how I'd be most likely to rule during the game.
And since you think an overall consistent interpretation of what the rules say is the best way, then you should answer that way. Oofta should answer his way, and everyone else, too.
The person asking the question can then choose the answers that work for them.
Similar Threads
