paperkruto.blogg.se

I see what you're saying here, I think that it could be worded slightly better.

The effects of the Invisible condition do not apply, in relation to the creature with Truesight, within that range.

Truesight explicitly allows the creature to see invisible creatures up to the limit of their visual range. They do not suffer disadvantage when trying to perceive a lightly obscured creature within that range. That's absurd.ĭarkvision explicitly treats areas of dim light as if they were brightly lit up to the limit of their visual range. The argument you are trying to make is analogous to saying a creature in a an area of dim light, which makes them lightly obscured-and which imposes disadvantage to other creatures trying to perceive them visually-is somehow not countered by another creature whom has darkvision. What part of "An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense", and "A creature with truesight can, out to a specific range, see invisible creatures and objects" are you having trouble grasping? If the second part of the Invisible condition was completely removed, that would make more sense to me, or if Truesight had the line "Invisible creatures gain no benefit from their invisibility against you", that would work as well. Therefore, having Truesight (RAW) still means that an invisible creature has advantage against you and you have disadvantage against it. This doesn't seem to depend (RAW) on the creature actually being unseen. Invisibility gives you advantage on attack rolls and gives all other creatures disadvantage on attack rolls against you. Furthermore, the monster can see into the Ethereal Plane within the same range.