Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Herpes Cineplex" data-source="post: 1448328" data-attributes="member: 16936">Actually, I'm suggesting to you that in the history of the existence of D&amp;D campaigns, this particular limitation (whether an invisible wizard casting fireball on a space he knows to be completely empty counts as an attack and therefore makes him visible) has never been interesting, important, or relevant. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />If it's it's a strictly hypothetical case that is never actually going to happen, is it really worth coming up with a ruling for it?&nbsp; It might be better to focus on the actual, in-game situations where you genuinely need to know what ends invisibility and what doesn't; namely, spells you can or can't cast next to potential witnesses without becoming visible again.Trust me, I understand the allure of thought experiments, and trying to come up with a pleasing rationale for how a fictional process really works based on the few rules you have on hand to describe it.&nbsp; I'm just momentarily dazzled by how silly this particular thought experiment is getting.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> --not that silly is a bad thing, as long everyone knows that's what it is</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Herpes Cineplex, post: 1448328, member: 16936"] Actually, I'm suggesting to you that in the history of the existence of D&D campaigns, this particular limitation (whether an invisible wizard casting fireball on a space he knows to be completely empty counts as an attack and therefore makes him visible) has never been interesting, important, or relevant. ;) If it's it's a strictly hypothetical case that is never actually going to [i]happen[/i], is it really worth coming up with a ruling for it? It might be better to focus on the actual, in-game situations where you genuinely need to know what ends invisibility and what doesn't; namely, spells you can or can't cast next to potential witnesses without becoming visible again. Trust me, I understand the allure of thought experiments, and trying to come up with a pleasing rationale for how a fictional process really works based on the few rules you have on hand to describe it. I'm just momentarily dazzled by how silly this particular thought experiment is getting. :D -- not that silly is a bad thing, as long everyone knows that's what it is [/QUOTE]

Verification