Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 300149" data-attributes="member: 2011">Post 4“I'm not sure that you are in this case. Take True Seeing, for example. With True Seeing, you automatically see all illusions, shapechanged creatures and objects, polymorphed creatures and objects, etc, etc, etc, as they truly are. That's pretty damn powerful, so there must be something to offset that power. Do you actually know that the object you are looking at is illusioned, shapechanged, polymorphed, etc? No. That's the offset.”Post 5“Granted, I see your point, and in fact, I've seen it illustrated in game, but it surely isn't a game breaking problem. I have a character that possess the True Seeing ability, as well as the See in Darkness ability, and role-playing him is quite interesting. He doesn't see shadows of any kind, so there's a rogue pressed against a wall hiding in a shadow, my character sees this wierd guy just hugging the wall for some reason, and in plain sight no less. It makes for really interesting role-play and doesn't screw up the game.”In post 4, you claim that you do not know that the object you are looking at is illusioned. This as a counter  to my statement “I rule in favor of usability and playability.” So, you are implying that not knowing about the illusion is more playable. That may have not been your intent, but that’s how it reads when you disagree with a statement and then give another statement on how True Seeing works.In post 5, you indicate that your DM does it that way too.And, the rest of us were suppose to intuit from these two statements of agreement with each other and the implication that not knowing about the illusion is more playable, that your position was totally different from what you were espousing here in two back to back posts.You gotta be clearer than that if you want people to not get frustrated at you. Not once did you state "But, I do not run it that way" in either of those posts. Remember, people cannot read your mind here, they can only judge you based on what you write and how you write it. From personal experience, you write stuff that implies things that you probably do not mean.In any case, it’s moot. We now know you believe in interpretation #2.Game on! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification