|
Yes you can use that reaction against Terrifying Gaze. Combine it with Avert Gaze for an even better bonus.
Not sure actually you are "targeted" by an Aura. Same way that if someone throws a fireball he doesn't "target" creatures inside, no?
I thought there was at one point some rules text that said that creatures in an area effect are targeted by the effect. But I am not finding it with my Lore(AoN) skill currently. So either it doesn't exist any more, or I just failed the check.
If you have to make a save against something you are being targeted by it.
No, that just means that you are being affected by it.
Yes. And still this seems just another case where we shouldn't read into wordings too much (and allow Pearl to work). Even if difference between 'affected' and 'targeted' is indeed very real for the rules.
Yeah. I would probably run it that way too.
But, to be clear, that is a reasonable ruling in the face of ambiguity caused by having the rules written in a loose language like English - not necessarily a hard and fast RAW. (I still have memory regarding arguments made about AoE effects and targeting that were based on and citing rules about 'all creatures in an area are targeted by the effect'. Something about Golem Antimagic, IIRC.)
Gaze effects aren't targeted effects any more than a Fireball is.
Gaze effects aren't targeted effects any more than a Fireball is.Yes, because as I understand mechanically they all are auras. That's the problem for the Pearl. Kind of, which is fixable by waving aside too restrictive wording of the item, which doesn't have much sense to keep.
I don't think the item is restrictive at all. The item is still pretty clear in what works and doesn't work with it based on its written execution; for it to be restrictive, it needs to be niche, and there are plenty of targeted mental effects, like Demoralize, Phantasmal Killer (or whatever the Remaster calls it now), etc. If the idea was that it needs to work against non-targeted effects as well, then it should have used a different word, or different phrasing entirely; that fact that it hasn't after several prints and a remaster would mean that the intent is pretty clear that it must be an effect specifically targeting you.
Just as well, if this item was worded in a way that a different kind of effect would work (such as a damaging effect), then it would still be clear as to what kinds of things would and wouldn't apply. Expanding this example, the item would work with Blazing Bolt, Thunderstrike, or even Force Barrage. But it would not work with a Lightning Bolt or Fireball. In this case, we still have pretty clear examples of what would work versus what would not, since targeting has specific rules, and it's not like the current wording doesn't have a clear response.