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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 2037254" data-attributes="member: 2011">To my knowledge, the 3.0 FAQ is official clarification for 3E and for 3.5 unless either the 3.5 rules supercede it or the 3.5 FAQ supercedes it.Apparently, they did not want to just cut and paste 90+% of the 3E FAQ into a 3.5 one.In our current discussion, the rules (and wording) for Mind Blank has not changed between the versions with one exception.The word "him" was replaced with the word "it" in the wish sentence:3E"Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about him."3.5"Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it."This change can be interpreted in one of two ways (or possibly more):1) The designers wanted to allow the wish type spells to get non-mental information about the target.2) The designers wanted to emphasize that the divination information gathering limitation is constrained to mental only information.The problem with the second interpretation is that they cleaned up one word in the entire description as if that would stop the debate (which, btw, has been raging on and off for four years now). If this was their attempt at clarity in support for your interpretation, they failed miserably.I apologize. I thought you were being snarky to me, so I decided to return the favor.Not impossible, just not reasonable.It's sometimes a very difficult thing to explain when you interpret sentences totally different from someone else.In this case, the bottom line does indeed come down to the phrase "as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects". To me, this phrase is no different than "as well as mind affecting by enchantment spells or effects". To me, all divination spells gather information in some manner (just like all enchantment spells are mind-affecting), so the phrase "information gathering" is totally superfluous to the conversation at hand (i.e. a red herring or muddying the waters).Secondly, I look at ease of drawing the line. If no divination spells work with regard to the target, then that is fairly easy to adjudicate. Picking and choosing on a case by case spell basis is more difficult and open to more debate in game.And finally, I do indeed check both FAQs to find out designer intent. I might not agree with it, but I do want to find out what the designers thought the sentences meant when possible.So, on all three of these counts (in this case), I see your interpretation as non-reasonable. Understandable in general (but not in the specifics as to where the line is actually drawn, that's still murky), but non-reasonable.</blockquote>

Verification