Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Protections from the Blasphemy spell ?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ElectricDragon" data-source="post: 1304857" data-attributes="member: 10778"><p>But if you are permanently deaf in the first place (as the result of a spell or otherwise) it can have no effect on you. If you have no eyes, how can a spell or effect blind you? If you are permanently paralyzed (as by a lich) can you be further paralyzed? Would it need to be separately dispelled? Overlapping works sometimes, but not all the time.</p><p></p><p>Changing Gears:</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>By this statement, an invisible creature gains a bonus to attack all sighted opponents (whether they can see them or not) and ignores their Dex bonuses to AC (whether they can see them or not).</p><p></p><p>The See Invisibility spell description states nothing about negating these things. So, every sighted creature is +2 to be hit by an invisible creature and doesn't get a Dex bonus to AC versus them even if they can see them. Because the spell doesn't state that the bonuses or penalties are removed.</p><p></p><p>Is this true? Wow, Invisibility just got better...</p><p></p><p>Back to Blasphemy:</p><p></p><p>Straight from the SRD. Notice the line stating no save.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This separate paragraph explains the banishment effect (which does allow a save unlike the previous <u>effects</u>). Notice the wording: This effect (not: this spell, but just: this effect) takes effect regardless of whether the creatures hear the blasphemy. </p><p></p><p>Again, I contend that since they didn't remove this sentence and even in fact added another sentence to the end of this paragraph (about the save) that this means the first part of the spell needs hearing to work. Only the second part works regardless of hearing. </p><p></p><p>Your answer that the sentence was supposed to be removed can be nothing more than supposition. This spell mentions that hearing has no effect on one effect of the spell; meaning that hearing does have an effect on the other parts of the spell. By not specifically clairfying that the previous effects do not rely upon hearing either; they left the idea that the dazed, weakened, paralyzed, and killed effects do require hearing to work. It can be read that way without it being a "House Rule". It can also be interpeted the way you have without it being a "House Rule". If the writing is ambigous, differing interpetations will happen. If they don't intend to errata it; I can go on claiming that I was right and so can you.</p><p></p><p>If they errata it, we'll probably both be wrong.</p><p></p><p> Ciao</p><p> ED</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ElectricDragon, post: 1304857, member: 10778"] But if you are permanently deaf in the first place (as the result of a spell or otherwise) it can have no effect on you. If you have no eyes, how can a spell or effect blind you? If you are permanently paralyzed (as by a lich) can you be further paralyzed? Would it need to be separately dispelled? Overlapping works sometimes, but not all the time. Changing Gears: By this statement, an invisible creature gains a bonus to attack all sighted opponents (whether they can see them or not) and ignores their Dex bonuses to AC (whether they can see them or not). The See Invisibility spell description states nothing about negating these things. So, every sighted creature is +2 to be hit by an invisible creature and doesn't get a Dex bonus to AC versus them even if they can see them. Because the spell doesn't state that the bonuses or penalties are removed. Is this true? Wow, Invisibility just got better... Back to Blasphemy: Straight from the SRD. Notice the line stating no save. This separate paragraph explains the banishment effect (which does allow a save unlike the previous [u]effects[/u]). Notice the wording: This effect (not: this spell, but just: this effect) takes effect regardless of whether the creatures hear the blasphemy. Again, I contend that since they didn't remove this sentence and even in fact added another sentence to the end of this paragraph (about the save) that this means the first part of the spell needs hearing to work. Only the second part works regardless of hearing. Your answer that the sentence was supposed to be removed can be nothing more than supposition. This spell mentions that hearing has no effect on one effect of the spell; meaning that hearing does have an effect on the other parts of the spell. By not specifically clairfying that the previous effects do not rely upon hearing either; they left the idea that the dazed, weakened, paralyzed, and killed effects do require hearing to work. It can be read that way without it being a "House Rule". It can also be interpeted the way you have without it being a "House Rule". If the writing is ambigous, differing interpetations will happen. If they don't intend to errata it; I can go on claiming that I was right and so can you. If they errata it, we'll probably both be wrong. Ciao ED [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Protections from the Blasphemy spell ?
Top