Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 298115" data-attributes="member: 2011">Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: See InvisibilityEither you are being stubborn (take a deep breathe, that wasn't an insult), or you aren't getting it. I'll try one more time.True Seeing either works your way, or my way, or some other person's way. Let's consider just yours and mine.Yours: True Seeing pierces the illusion, but you are unaware that it did this.Mine: True Seeing pierces the illusion, but you are aware that it did this.So far, so good.Now, the question comes up, what does pierces the illusion mean?Every word in the True Seeing spell indicates that it only pierces the visual portion of the illusion. So, if an opponent puts up an illusion with no visual portion, say an Invisible Dire Bear that smells real bad and roars real loud, True Seeing would do nothing for you against that illusion.You could try to argue against this, but I cannot see (pun intended) how you could be successful based on the description of True Seeing in the book. For now in the discussion, we'll assume that True Seeing only affects the visual portion and we'll discuss further on whether this is true.Now, with your interpretation of True Seeing, you are unaware of the visual portion of the Mirage Arcana. It just does not exist for you at all. But, the other illusion components must exist for you since True Seeing does not pierce them.In my interpretation of True Seeing, I am aware of the visual portion of the Mirage Arcana. It exists for me, but I know it is an illusion. Since I know the illusion is there and exists, I automatically save against the other portions of it because I have knowledge of its existance as an illusion.But since in your interpretation, you do NOT know that the visual portion exists as an illusion (you cannot see it at all), you also do not know that the other portions of it exists as an illusion. Hence, you must make your will save to figure out that they are illusions.The only possible counter to this point is your belief that True Seeing pierces the entire illusion.But, you haven't yet substantiated that in any way. We cannot discuss that possibility unless you explain why it is so. So far, you are just saying that it is so. But, the book does not state that.So, the question boils down to:Why does True Seeing pierce the entire illusion in your interpretation when it only talks about visual elements in the spell description?</blockquote>

Verification