And it's actually quite common, especially considering that some members of the party may have vision and others not. SuperBidi : Well, first, and as you say, you can roll Initiative without having vision on the enemy. I can certainly understand wanting it to be clearer what is and isn't included, but in this specific situation I honestly can't think of a better way of putting it without:Ī) losing the flavor / logic of a vision based item, orī) creating a list of situations and bogging down the rules

Alternatively, you can say you heard them warn you, but at that point it seems like you're looking for ways to have it not work.įor that reason I'd personally go with Cordell Kinter's idea and have it be the default, but keep it in mind when something notably not sight related is happening, such as rolling initiative while blinded, listening through a door for a perception check, etc. I mean, even if you don't see the enemy when initiative starts, if it was triggered by an ally seeing the enemy, then how do you know that the fight's started? Most likely from seeing your ally react. The only thing that's needed is that the check 'involve sight' rather than 'relying on sight', being 'based on sight', 'using primarily sight', etc. For that reason they limited it, but they limited it in the most loose and freeing way. The only reasonable alternative I can think of that doesn't include a long list of examples is to just say it's on all perception checks, but that wouldn't make much sense for something that's exclusively helping you see better. I mean, it's clearer than all the other ways I can think of them writing it and still keeping the flavor of it being useful for sight based checks. A +1/+3 bonus to initiative depending on where you are and how the GM sees the situation is just awful to adjudicate. Very often, you start combat in a situation where only a handful of PCs have vision, because they are the ones opening the door or turning the corner. I'm annoyed by the fact that it's not very clear. Sight is most PCs only Precise sense, so having a bonus to it should almost always apply.

Cordell Kintner wrote: I think it's best to assume Yes, but in certain circumstances it wouldn't.

Eyes of the eagle pathfinder