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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Patryn of Elvenshae" data-source="post: 2436448" data-attributes="member: 23094">No, my "interpretation" is that that is what they wrote.  Whether or not that's what they wanted to write is immaterial.  As for the commonality ...1.  Clairaudience/clairvoyance:  Divination spells which allow you to view things at a distance via a remotely-created sensor.  Also would include spells like Arcane Eye and Scrying.2.  Locate object:  Spells which tell you the direction (and distance, sometimes) based on the diviner's mental image.  Also would include spells like Locate Creature.3.  Detect spells:  Spells which provide information about a creature's "metastats" - the state of its soul, its creature type, etc.  Note that a Detect Magic spell would actually register against a creature so warded, because it could potentially detect the Nondetection spell itself, even though the creature would not register.Now, since you're taking me to task because of my emphasis on the lack of a comma, I present Exhibit B, the Obscure Object spell (note, incidentally, that it is the very next spell in the SRD after Nondetection):Note, here, that the comma is used - and therefore, Obscure Object protects against all divination (scrying) effects; it is sufficient information to evaluate the sentence, and "the scrying spell or a crystal ball" is merely additional, superfluous, information.So, this means we have two choices if we want to divine the writers' intentions:1. The writers knew what they were doing.  Nondetection protects against certain flavors of divination spells, regardless of their subtype, and Obscure Object protects against one particular subtype of divination effects.  The writers' use of commas is consistent with their desired meaning.2.  The writers have no clue.  It is equally as likely that the writers meant Nondetection to protect against all divinations as they meant Obscure Object to work against certain kinds of divination (scrying) effects.  The writers' use of commas is inconsistent with their desired meaning.Since I'm willing to give the writers the benefit of the doubt, I go with #1 - which means that we interpret the rules according to what the rules of grammar of the English language are, rather than as we might wish they were.</blockquote>

Verification