Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FitzTheRuke" data-source="post: 8711571" data-attributes="member: 59816">Let me try to keep the discussion going without repeating the circle if I can:I have a question for those of you who assume that doing anything to interfere with the attacker would automatically (or close enough to automatically for our purposes) reveal your location if you were invisible: Why would it?I've read it's "close enough to an attack", which would make me ask: In what way? I mean, as we all know, it's not an attack (by the rules) - it's not anything. So, why?If we assume that the rules are right (and are friends to the fiction, not adversaries) then it's not close to an attack. And, out of curiosity, does that mean (to you - it doesn't to me) that the description clearly can't then be something like "hacked the arrow out of the air with your sword" (the closest description I can think of to an attack that might cause the effect).Can it be anything less like an attack than that? Where is the line? Does it really go all the way down to no description would make sense in this case?Is it that it's quicker-and-easier to ditch/modify/add to the rule than to go through all the possible scenarios to pick one that you like?</blockquote>