Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IceBear" data-source="post: 156076" data-attributes="member: 1118">I can't argue with the literal reading of the table.  I'm not sure that's how it was intended to be, but that's how it literally reads.However, on this topic. all I can say is: How can you target something that you don't know is there?Let's say you enter a room where there are two invisible wizards and you have no idea that they are there.  If you cast True Strike on yourself, you get a +20 insight bonus on your next attack.  If you fire an arrow into the room, you would have it that you suddenly gain the knowledge of where one of these two wizards are located so you could shoot the arrow at them.  If you didn't even know the wizards were there, how does the spell read into the future and tell you which one you wanted to attack (rather than, say, the lock on the door)?In my mind, you have to have a target in mind before the spell will work.  Thus, I might allow you to enter a room where you *knew* an invisble wizard was and allow the spell to work if you fired an arrow in at least the right general direction, but even then can you ever be 100% sure that there is an invisible person nearby without a Spot or Listen check?IceBear</blockquote>