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: 296755" data-attributes="member: 2011">Re: Re: See InvisibilityThis is precisely why See Invisibility should not totally negate the invisibility, rather it should allow you to see through the invisible target.Think of it as making the invisible target transparent.Character One has See Invisibility up.Character Two does not.Character One sees a brick wall.Character Two sees the Dragon waiting on the other side of the brick wall.I do not think that Character One should be penalized on information that he would normally have, just because he has a divination spell up to give him other information.The first part of the See Invisibility spell implies that you cannot see through the brick wall with the phrase "normally visible"."The character sees any objects or beings that are invisible, as well as any that are astral or ethereal, as if they were normally visible."However, when you read the rest of the spell:"The spell does not reveal the method used to obtain invisibility…",this implies that you get the information that something is invisible, just not the method of invisibility. This sentence would not really be needed if you did not know that something was actually invisible. Taking these two sentences together implies to me that you see both, an indication that something is invisible along with the ability to see it normally.Hence, with the brick wall example, I think a colored transparent interpretation is best. Otherwise, you are penalizing a character for having a divination spell up. IMO.</blockquote>

Verification