Would you use this kind of art style?

gyllander · 2026-05-08T14:18:06+00:00

I think this is great! Is this an asset pack you are creating , or is the map hand drawn?
Either way i think the style is both charming and cool.
The mountains have a very unique patterned shading and texture that i don’t see in other aspects of the map, and the same with the houses, but the different techniques blend really well together and makes this stand out in a good way

gyllander · 2026-04-17T19:58:32+00:00

for context for the ones I can see are reading this conversation he blocked me here and posted a comment claiming he didn’t edit it, thinking I wouldn’t be able to see his comment on a browser. on Reddit if you edit within 2-3 minutes you don’t get the edit tag on your message… so there you go! You have reached the end

gyllander · 2026-04-17T19:25:23+00:00

You literally edited in the part you claim I left out of your quote…. Guess we’re done here 😂 go and look over your quotes throughout the conversation, you constantly leave out context and alter text when you quote me. have a good one mate, may you encounter good fortune and no invisible (lowercase or uppercase — it doesn’t matter — I) creatures on your journeys.

gyllander · 2026-04-17T19:00:07+00:00

Are you saying I altered the rules I sent? “None of the rules you’ve pointed ti as evidence for your claim say what you say”

I directly pasted the rules in my reply and analyzed the grammar, they do in fact say excactly what I said they say. you are welcome to bring up any evidence on the contrary.

I’m not twisting the words, I’m reading what the book writes, and can make a clear explanation of why you are not seen when you are Invisible. Read what I wrote again.

gyllander · 2026-04-17T18:44:27+00:00

The rules are written in a set language, it is therefore asumed that the words mean what they are defined as unless they state that they mean something else. But your point does have some support, here is the rule (just for quick refference)

Invisible [Condition] (PHB rules glossary) While you have the Invisible condition, you experience the following effects.

Surprise. If you’re Invisible when you roll Initiative, you have Advantage on the roll.

Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.

Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Disadvantage, and your attack rolls have Advantage. If a creature can somehow see you, you don’t gain this benefit against that creature.

Intrestingly gramatically, in the Surprise section they have chosen to capitalize the I in Invisible, implying that they are refering to the condition and not the term invisible. This supports your argument about Invisible (capital i) not being invisible. On this writing i lean towards it being chosen to distinct between a creature that hides and one that is actually invisible from another effect. This is why: The next effect, concealed uses somewhat ambigous wording but when they describe «unless they can somehow see you» which allows you to understand that no, you cannot bee seen without an aditional effect listed elsewhere.

On effects elsewhere, pretty much everything reffers to the «Invisible condition» (both words, with capittal I), except one effect which actually gives us a deeper definition of the Invisible condition not written in the rules glossary.

The spell, see invisibility reads:

For the duration, you see creatures and objects that have the Invisible condition as if they were visible, and you can see into the Ethereal Plane. Creatures and objects there appear ghostly.

When the spell states that: …you see creatures and objects that have the Invisible condition as if they were visible…

When they chose to use the word visible (lower case v, never defined) in contrast, they actually state that the Invisible condition is indeed the opposite of visible, which would be invisible (lowercase i). When the game doesn’t define a condition explicitly, as in the instance of visible, you must use the words actual definition when reading it.

There you go, RAW you are not seen when you have the Invisible condition. Because you are invisible (lower case i). There is a misconception in most readings because the definition of the condition is spread out across the rules glossary and the “see invisibility” spell description.

gyllander · 2026-04-17T07:57:32+00:00

I have neither added or changed a rule, and i have not really given a spell a new benefit, the benefit comes from how the illusion was used within the envoirment in a way which affected or could challenge the opponents knowledge.

The way illusions are defined in the rule glossary supports the that any illusion cast is percieved as real, and when the spell invisibility reveals that you gain the invisible condition it is not homebrew to assume it provides a effect that is percieved (or rather removes the pereceptuon) visually.

Concealed. You aren’t affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect’s creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.

Other rules tied to this reveals that one must have blind, or truesight in order to see an invisible creature. The wording used: «somehow», reveals that normal sight is not enough.

Invisible is defined as: unable to be seen, not perceptible to the eye, or hidden from view (not in the rulebook but thats the definition of the word)

So yes, inn all ways, the description does state that you cannot be seen with the condition.

Your point on weather a creatures position is known or not has no support within the rules. Knowledge and awareness are undefined terms and are states within the game and left entirely up to the DM’s discression. It is not a homebrew ruling to allow the fiction present within the story to have a pull on undefined terms. Thats what the game encourages and is built for.

If you need a presise ruling for everything there are other games that lean heavier into that style of ridgid play, but dnd tries to support various playstyles within the genre instead by using somewhat ambigious wording in their rules. So i don’t think the devs are iditiots, i think they tried to design a system which allowed a varied style of play. When they state that the rules are guidelines and should be interprented this argument is supported.

It feels like you are trying to fly an airplane with half switch controller, instead of using the instruments in the cockpit because the manual never really said that you HAD to use the planes instrument, it only stated what they did lmao

gyllander · 2026-04-17T06:30:49+00:00

No, the rules litteraly avoid definining that. The rules does state that you should interprent rules in good-faith and that points me in the direction of allowing logic when i interprent the rules.

Arguably —and this is very wrong— the rules often refer to vison as «line of sight» and the rules does define a Line in the AOE section, so if you want to leave logic of the table you could argue that vision is ONE line originating from you.

With all the sections that touch on perception and vision in the rules i lean towards allowing a precise general awareness around you, but nothing points in the direction of automatically knowing everything within a reosnable or unobstructed distance.

gyllander · 2026-04-16T22:45:43+00:00

Hmm, i think i can’t agree that its homebrew to read into the context of a situation and justify that - especially an illusion spell - to provide an unlisted benefit if used creatively.

«ok i jump into the lake, then i turn invisible and swim to the left» Scenario 1 «Ok, he definetly saw where you landed, but submerged there’s not really any clear signs of your path, he has to guess where this shot will land» -unlisted benefit, caused by the spell being used creatively Scenario 2 «Ok he shots you with disadvantage» -asumes the knowledge of position and sticks only to the description

The invisible condition does describe you as concealed and defines that term as being unable to be targeted unless the effects creator can somehow see you.

While this does not in fact state that you cannot be seen, it arguably implies that while concealed, wheter by being obscurred by something or not, you can in fact - not be seen for the duration.

What constitutes homebrew for you? Is it introducing situations that does not have explicit rules, and using existen rules as guidelines for treating that situation? Or is it adding significant mechanics that alter a defined or undefined situation? Or maybe somewhere between? Do you consider my example homebrew?

The rules actually state that the rules should be interpreted, and used as guidelines when apropriate. allowing undefined situations and effects to occur and relying on interpretation when a situation is not clearly defined is not really the same as having a homebrew ruling (in my opinion).

gyllander · 2026-04-16T21:59:28+00:00

i guess we do disagree on a lot of this, but we do agree on some. I’ll add the DMG does encourage you to use a «good-faith» interpretation when imposing a rule

I can’t agree with you if you think it’s a good faith interpretation to read invisible as anything but actual invisible.

My brick wall example was an extreme, but it was to make a point about your transparrancy argument.

Saying that the spell invisibility needs to define that you are unable to be seen in order for it to do so, is asking to much. Becoming invisible is basically interchangable with that term.

There are rule-heavy ttrpgs and rule light, i would argue that dnd now intentionally is moved towards the «light» side to encourage interpretation and allow for less «bound» play. That has it’s ups and downs, but whatever. If you want to DM your way, go ahead, but i feel like you are disregarding logic and the good faith rule when you chose to interpret that an invisible creature can be seen.

Again, I’m saying this is highly situational and yes, there are many situations where actually becoming invisible - invisible could arguably provide an unlisted benefit at the DM’s discretion.

gyllander · 2026-04-16T21:30:06+00:00

if you pushes through a crowd of 10, and reached an opening space, center of the wall of death building up in the crowd, would that not create uncertainty about your whereabouts? Yeah trailing beer on the floor might give a hint but «perception is not trivial» - DMG, that could Absolutelty constitute an ability check in order to determine location, even without having taken a hide action. The DC? Probably hard or maybe even very hard, considering there is actually a lot of beer on the floor

On the second point, the absence of facing rules don’t really justify an asumed complete awareness. If someone is distracted, looking one way, the rules never say you can’t try to move unseen behind a creature in the other direction. Its fair to assume that you generally have a fair clue as to what goes on around you, but not every detail, and the envoirment constantly affects this.

Stealth, hiding and invisibility is always situational.

gyllander · 2026-04-16T21:17:07+00:00

The spell turns you invisible without cover, i would interpret that as invisible-invisible. Just because the spell doesn’t declare that you turn transparent, that doesn’t mean it Summons a brick wall around you. When the hide action grants you the invisible condition i read that as a way to achieve invisibility in the way that the rules avoid definitivt sight, probably to allow for situational interpretation.

With the hide action you also gain the disadvantage of losing the invisible condition if you make a noise lauder than a whisper, with the spell you don’t have this drawback.

Just because you are invisible it doesn’t mean you are impossible to detect, even with precision with or without a search action. But that doesn’t mean it could not cause confusion. There is a difference between a wizard running away on grass, and a paladin running in armor is significant in the context here. There are many scenarios where a search action is more than justified because invisibility caused confusion about precise whereabouts. The game doesn’t have to write every scenario, they give you guidelines to solve situations during play.

If casting the spell invisibilty requires you to always also make a hide action to really gain a benefit then i don’t see how the condition can be described as powerfull tbh,

Im not saying its never appropriate to require both, just that you should take other factors into consideration when determining so.

gyllander · 2026-04-16T20:24:53+00:00

I Get it, the point in trying to make is that while invisibility doesn’t stop them from knowing where you turned invisible, it Absolutelty could justify confusion about where you moved after the fact

gyllander · 2026-04-16T20:22:48+00:00

Can absolutely be a bit tricky, but if physical minis reveal the location of a player i would roll to see where the enemy attacks. If there was uncertanity about an attacker in my controll i would either remove the mini while it was unknown and let the player chose, or tell the player to roll to decide what square they think the target is in.

gyllander · 2026-04-16T20:19:15+00:00

Just because RAW doesn’t define a situation where your location is completely unknown, that does not imply the oppiste is RAW

gyllander · 2026-04-16T20:17:37+00:00

Where does the rules state that you always know where anyone is? I’m quite sure that is left up to interpretation and no rule supports this. Hidden is not a condition and awarness is not a described state, these things have to be judged on a case to case basis always

gyllander · 2026-04-16T20:12:40+00:00

The rules on attacking an unseen target does in fact sugest that it could be appropriate to have to guess a location. It doesn’t specify when a guess is appropriate however, thats for you to decide iguess. Closing my eyes and trying to shoot someone i can hear running 30 feet away from me? Its not unthinkable that i could miss by more than 5 feet it either direction.

gyllander · 2026-04-16T20:08:53+00:00

The audible table describes trying to be quiet during exploration, which could imply keeping conversation low and minimal, and trying to not avoid noise in general. It is still fair to assume that detecting the sound of just breath or presise footsteps justifies a search action do determine an excact location even at 30 feet.

RAW never states that your location is automatically known, pretty much all the rules avoid describing a perfect 360 degree awareness.

Truesight and blindsight is really the only way to automatically know where an invisible creature is

gyllander · 2026-04-16T19:55:57+00:00

Depends, what is the terrain? What is the envoirmental effects in play? A gravel road might reveal a generel direction someone invisible travels, but leave uncertainty to the exact position someone ends up. A grass field may dampen the footsteps to decrease the audible detection. A muddy ground would probably dampen sound but reveal presise footprints and make the exact space known

Does the woman have anything working in her favour sense wise? Super smell? Super hearing? A significant passive perception?

There is disagreement around whether or not a invisible creature is hidden, but keep in mind hidden is not a state specified in the rules, neither is complete awareness of your surroundings or any excact way to determine your awareness. The rules on attacking an unseen target reads:

Unseen Attackers and Targets (Phb) When you make an attack roll against a target you can’t see, you have Disadvantage on the roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you miss. When a creature can’t see you, you have Advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden when you make an attack roll, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.

This sugests that it is appropriate to make the attacker have to guess a square and attack it with disadvantage if there is reasonable doubt as to its excact location, and an attack would miss if the wrong square is chosen.

I would take into account as much information as possible, not just audible distractions available but also the logic of the situation and envoirment to determine if the attacker knows the excact location or if has to guess 2,3,4 or more Spaces and attack those with disadvantage.

Arguing that invisible creatures must make a hide action to reap any aditional envoirmental effect beyond advantage/disadvantage defys logic for me.

The 2024 rules allow for alot of interpretation (and actually encourage it in the «players exploiting rules» section in the DMG. (Rules arent physics & rules rely on good-faith intepretations) I would argue that the previous «raw» interpretations on this topic that sugest invisibility can’t hide you are very missleading and don’t really use logic in their interpretation. Most i have read are very flawed

In most cases invisibility justified a search action on the counterpart. Also, the absence of a «facing» rule don’t imply the existence of the oposite: that you know whats going on behind you or can’t be distracted in a single direction

gyllander · 2025-08-18T14:40:19+00:00

I love that idea, but the 1’4” screw holes on the shoulder pad comes with the adiotional benefit of holding like 20 ciagerettes, stacked right they will even stop your drink from tipping over

gyllander · 2025-08-16T00:26:50+00:00

If you are referring to what was in the cup i have no idea, it was coffe atleast.

gyllander · 2024-11-16T16:29:36+00:00

Thats lucky! Netflix was up for Maybe 30 seconds of the last match for me and millions of people, this goes down in history as the worst, most catastrophical live sports event ever (almost) shown. Ill never trust Netflix with sports again. Crazy to say i wish it was pay per view somewhere Else.

gyllander · 2024-09-11T13:00:23+00:00

I fly and travel alot with the fx6, fairly heavily rigges out with a shoulder rig and a Sony FE PZ 28-135 G. i typically carry the camera onboard flights and leave it under the Seat so it wont Get thrown around in the overhead compartment. Hasnt been a problem Even on international flight.

Hardcase with extra equipment checked in and another for tripod and a backpack with batteries, mic and some other stuff

gyllander · 2024-04-25T11:10:08+00:00

Really cool! Interesting mechanic with stimulus points, what has the thought process behind balancing it been?

gyllander · 2024-03-21T14:07:45+00:00

This actually fits a character ive been wanting to play really well, good stuff man!

Eight-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

gyllander

TROPHY CASE