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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="radmod" data-source="post: 5265292" data-attributes="member: 93008">Now that I've got the proper pleasantries out of the way, I will now comment on other things that I really probably shouldn't but will anyway.Ah, yes, vegepygmy, I remember you from several years back when I used to post. It seems your attitude hasn't changed. Too bad.First off, it should be clear, even to you, that these are ruminations and not hard and fast rules. Hence, the word "thoughts." I already have. Invisibility makes YOU invisible. It's been pretty clear to the literally hundreds of people I've played with for over 30 years that your aura is part of YOU.To quote (or mangle) the famous line, "I don't think that word means what you think it means." Cover an invisible creature with a sheet, you can see it. Cast invisibility on it and it disappears. Boy, that was tough thinking.Special note: this was satisfactorily cleared up and inviso has been nerfed against glitterdust since 3e. Is this what you really mean? I agree, it wouldn't suck. It would suck if "someone who's really good at hiding" could be thwarted so easily.Of course, you've decided to minimize what I wrote but that's no surprise. If you can't see how automatically negating a high level character's skills (that he's spent years forging) with a first level spell equivalent ability sucks then I feel sorry for the people you play with. Even though I personally disdain the rogue type characters I'm not looking to nerf them but give them a chance.And that's all I think needs to be said.</blockquote>

Verification