Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9589704" data-attributes="member: 6779196">There are two places where ambiguity creeps in: one is in the wording “an enemy finds you,” as it is not explicit how exactly an enemy does this. Do they need to succeed at a Perception check, or does simply looking in your direction while you are unobscured within their line of sight count as finding you?&nbsp;The other is in the wording of the Invisible condition, which says its effects don’t apply to an enemy that “can somehow see you.” This often gets pointed to in trying to argue that, yes, an enemy looking directly at you when you lack any cover or obscuration would obviously see you, and therefore the effects of the invisible condition don’t apply. However, the problem with this argument is that it would also apply to the effects of the invisibility spell, since nothing in the text of the spell says enemies need special vision to see you.Basically, neither the hide action nor the invisibility spell explicitly state under what conditions you can or can’t be seen. They both just grant the invisible condition, which also does not state if you can be seen or not, and its effects are worded in such a way that they don’t work if you can be seen. If we assume you can’t be seen while under the effects of the invisible condition then stealth seems more effective than it should be. But if we assume you can be seen while under the effects of the invisible condition, then the invisibility spell doesn’t actually do anything. In order to make both things work the way we intuitively expect them to, we need to insert an unwritten rule to disambiguate the effects of the Hide action from the effects of the Invisibility spell.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 9589704, member: 6779196"] There are two places where ambiguity creeps in: one is in the wording “an enemy finds you,” as it is not explicit how exactly an enemy does this. Do they need to succeed at a Perception check, or does simply looking in your direction while you are unobscured within their line of sight count as finding you? The other is in the wording of the Invisible condition, which says its effects don’t apply to an enemy that “can somehow see you.” This often gets pointed to in trying to argue that, yes, an enemy looking directly at you when you lack any cover or obscuration would obviously see you, and therefore the effects of the invisible condition don’t apply. However, the problem with this argument is that it would also apply to the effects of the invisibility spell, since nothing in the text of the spell says enemies need special vision to see you. Basically, neither the hide action nor the invisibility spell explicitly state under what conditions you can or can’t be seen. They both just grant the invisible condition, which also does not state if you can be seen or not, and its effects are worded in such a way that they don’t work if you can be seen. If we assume you can’t be seen while under the effects of the invisible condition then stealth seems more effective than it should be. But if we assume you can be seen while under the effects of the invisible condition, then the invisibility spell doesn’t actually do anything. In order to make both things work the way we intuitively expect them to, we need to insert an unwritten rule to disambiguate the effects of the Hide action from the effects of the Invisibility spell. [/QUOTE]

Verification