Eyes of the rune keeper vs illusory script

[Magicspook]

eyes of the rune keeper
You can read all writing


illusory script
You write on parchment paper or some other suitable writing material and imbue it with a potent illusion that lasts for the duration.
To you and any creatures you designate when you cast the spell the writing appears normal written in your hand and conveys whatever meaning you intended when you wrote the text. To all others the writing appears as if it were written in an unknown or magical script that is unintelligible. Alternatively you can cause the writing to appear to be an entirely different message written in a different hand and language though the language must be one you know.
Should the spell be dispelled the original script and the illusion both disappear.
A creature with truesight can read the hidden message

Who wins? Who's next? You decide!

[Joe the Rat]

Illusory script.

For the first option (ancient arcane gobbledygook) - it is going to either be "these are just random symbols that don't mean anything," "purple monkey dishwasher," or the DM gets to toss some random bit of arcane secrets that has nothing to do with anything.

For the second, you can read the illusory message just fine.

Get Witch Sight, and that's a whole other story.

[Lupine]

As a DM, I would say Illusory Script.
Reason one: its a spell. A limited resource should always trump a passive one.
Reason two: You don't have to make it appear to be an unknown magical language. You can just state that if someone other than the intended recipient reads it, then it appears to be another message entirely. If someone with Eyes of the Rune Keeper could see through the magical language, then it would have no purpose. Everyone would simply have a letter read as something else. Which makes the game less fun, as it closes a flavorful option.
Reason three: If you don't put a special message in that magical glyph, then it is just gibberish.

Lastly --and this is my opinion, not rules interpretation-- if Rune Keeper could see through all writing, including magical script, then it prevents Navajo Code type things, where the text is written to say one thing, but to the recipient, means another. (Ie, "we're going to scramble some eggs for breakfast" where eggs is bombers, and the 'for breakfast' part means early in the morning. But to someone else, they're talking about their breakfast plans.)
That's how I see Thief's cant. Messages disguised behind other messages. Also, all cryptographic things would be pointless, as one rune keeper could get past it all. All in all, it makes "secret languages" pointless. It makes the rogue feel less special when someone else decodes the language only he is supposed to know, but it doesn't make that other person feel any less special if you say, "it's a cipher of some type. You can understand the words, but the meaning is pointless.

[Magicspook]

Illusory script.

For the first option (ancient arcane gobbledygook) - it is going to either be "these are just random symbols that don't mean anything," "purple monkey dishwasher," or the DM gets to toss some random bit of arcane secrets that has nothing to do with anything.

For the second, you can read the illusory message just fine.

Get Witch Sight, and that's a whole other story.

Interesting use of witch sight. Not exactly RAW but reasonable.
I'm not sure why with sight is locked to lvl 15+. What breaks when you know which villager is the werewolf? And detect magic sniffs out illusions just fine, it just doesn't reveal their true nature.

[Lupine]

Get Witch Sight, and that's a whole other story.

...No?


You can see the true form of any shapechanger or creature concealed by illusion or transmutation magic while the creature is within 30 feet of you and within line of sight.

Emphasis mine. It specifies creatures or shape changers. That does not apply to all illusions. This is not truesight 30ft.

Unless your paper is a mimic. Then I guess that applies.

[Segev]

YEah, illusory script falls under the same category as putting a minor illusion of a blank wall in front of a sign. Eyes of the Rune Keeper won't let you read the sign, because you can't see it. Eyes of the Rune Keeper will read whatever the illusory message says just fine, however.

[jmartkdr]

Since invocations are generally pretty powerful (ie allowing a 1st-level or better (in the case of Devil's Sight) spell at will), I'd want Eyes of the Rune Keeper to do more than just fail - but not necessarily see through the illusion.

I'd probably rule that it's still gobbledygook, but with enough hints that the player knows some kind of magic is going on with the text. Enough of a hint to let them try stuff to see through the spell if they can find a way.

[Kane0]

You get that feeling like when you’ve read the same sentence three times but havent actually taken it in.

Like reader’s Déjà vu.

[Joe the Rat]

...No?



Emphasis mine. It specifies creatures or shape changers. That does not apply to all illusions. This is not truesight 30ft.

Unless your paper is a mimic. Then I guess that applies.

Oop. next time I need to reread.

[Segev]

Oop. next time I need to reread.

Sometimes, it takes somebody pointing to it for you. I have, on a number of occasions, read and re-read something before posting about it here, only for somebody else to point out a sentence, line, or phrase that I somehow missed with every single reading I gave it that completely changes, invalidates, or clears up whatever I was posting about.

[Arkhios]

Reading and understanding what you read are two separate things.

I'm sure we all can read 'Lukutaidottomuus' but whether you understand it is another thing.

[Segev]

Reading and understanding what your read are two separate things.

I'm sure we all can read 'Lukutaidottomuus' but whether you understand it is another thing.

I'm also sure we can all read, "Kono bangumi wa kora no sponsor no teikyo de okarishimasu," in the same sense we can all read "Luktaidottomuus" - that is, we can sound it out - but only those of us who watch a lot of anime or otherwise speak Japanese likely know what it means.

It is pretty clear that Eyes of the Rune Keeper is intended to make the Japanese sentence I wrote in Romanji intelligible, not merely sound-out-able. It also would let you read that sentence written in Katakana, Hiragana, Kanji, or even spelled phonetically in Cyrillic.

It probably even pierces cyphers, though not coded messages.

What's the difference? Coded messages read perfectly intelligibly, but have a hidden meaning. Eyes of the Rune Keeper won't translate innuendo, merely what the words mean. Understanding the innuendo is on the reader.

But Eyes of the Rune Keeper absolutely will tell you that, "Guvf vf na rapvcurerq zrffntr," reads as, "This is an enciphered message." It won't tell you that the cipher is rot13, nor that the fact that "This is an enciphered message" written in rot13 has a coded meaning where "enciphered" means "lucrative" and "message" means "target" to the local thieves' guild.

[patchyman]

Reading and understanding what your read are two separate things.

I'm sure we all can read 'Lukutaidottomuus' but whether you understand it is another thing.

I can’t. Unfortunately, I’m illiterate.

More seriously, from a game perspective, I’d probably let Eyes of the Rune Keeper trump Illusory Script. If a warlock is using one of their 3 invocations to “read all languages”, you better believe that as the DM, I’m going to take an expansive approach as to what constitutes language.

The game as a whole benefits if so-called “trap” options are interpreted broadly.

Also, in response to another poster, invocations are a more limited resource than 1st level spells.

[Segev]

I can’t. Unfortunately, I’m illiterate.

More seriously, from a game perspective, I’d probably let Eyes of the Rune Keeper trump Illusory Script. If a warlock is using one of their 3 invocations to “read all languages”, you better believe that as the DM, I’m going to take an expansive approach as to what constitutes language.

The game as a whole benefits if so-called “trap” options are interpreted broadly.

Also, in response to another poster, invocations are a more limited resource than 1st level spells.

They are, and I understand your reasoning, but I disagree for the same reason that I wouldn't let Eyes of the Rune Keeper read a sign that had been thoroughly painted over, or hidden behind a tarp, or concealed under a silent image of a different sign.

[Arkhios]

Tangent to my point earlier, having Eyes of the Rune Keeper, to me, means that you are someone who can read any kind of writing, be it in western or cyrillic alphabet, in futhark runes, or kanji etc.
Or, in context, "common" alphabet, dwarvish runes, elvish script or, heck, druidic, whether you've seen it used before or not. They may recognize it has a pattern, and even read it, but do they understand the meaning? That's another thing.

So, I would say Illusory Script wins. Even if it was scripted in formerly unknown symbols, but actually is a cypher, all you see with Eyes of the Rune Keeper is the text in cypher form. It's still gibberish to you, unless you know the code to decipher it.

The invocation literally says you can read all writing.
It does not say you can understand all languages.

@Segev: Just in case, it would seem you misreferenced the word I used (Lukutaidottomuus) as being japanese, which it isn't (it's finnish for illiteracy).

[Segev]

Tangent to my point earlier, having Eyes of the Rune Keeper, to me, means that you are someone who can read any kind of writing, be it in western or cyrillic alphabet, in futhark runes, or kanji etc.
Or, in context, "common" alphabet, dwarvish runes, elvish script or, heck, druidic, whether you've seen it used before or not. They may recognize it has a pattern, and even read it, but do they understand the meaning? That's another thing.I half-agree. It says you can read the writing. The notion that this merely means "recognize the symbols" is silly; I can recognize cyrillic symbols and kanji and various kana, and I can even make an educated guess as to kanji vs. korean writing. I can't read them. Even when I can sound them out, I can't read them.

"reading" implies understanding.


So, I would say Illusory Script wins. Even if it was scripted in formerly unknown symbols, but actually is a cypher, all you see with Eyes of the Rune Keeper is the text in cypher form. It's still gibberish to you, unless you know the code to decipher it.Disagree with the mechanism even though I agree illusory script "wins." Illusory script creates an illusion that covers the true text. The Warlock literally can't see the true text, so he can't read it any more than he could read it if it were inside a closed envelope.


The invocation literally says you can read all writing.
It does not say you can understand all languages.If you can read it, you can understand it, more or less by definition.

According to google, the first definition of "read" is a verb that means: "look at and comprehend the meaning of (written or printed matter) by mentally interpreting the characters or symbols of which it is composed."


@Segev: Just in case, it would seem you misreferenced the word I used (Lukutaidottomuus) as being japanese, which it isn't (it's finnish for illiteracy).Actually, I thought it was deliberate gibberish. I chose a Japanese sentence because I couldn't think of a novel one in Spanish quickly and that one popped into my head. I don't actually speak Japanese, and barely speak Spanish. But I watch enough anime to know that sentence by heart, as it transliterates roughly to, "This program is brought to you by these sponsors, to whom we are grateful."

[Arkhios]

"reading" implies understanding.


Agree to disagree then.

I can see the letters form words and read-out-loud texts written in spanish, italian, german, swedish, norse, danish, or estonian for example and tell them apart from each other, to varying extent, but I can hardly understand any of those (swedish and estonian perhaps the most, because swedish is the second official language here in Finland (although I made a (stupid) decision back at school that I won't bother learning it because english is much more useful in the long term; a decision I now regret) and Estonian which is in same language group as Finnish and they're incredibly similar both written and spoken).

[DrKerosene]

If one is being used by me as a DM, and the other is being used by a Player, I’d probably rule in the favor of whatever works for the PC.

If I had two PCs using these against each-other, I’d rule in favor of Illusory Script.
1) I’ve never seen Illusory Script be used by a Player (and I took it as one of my two known spells from Ritual Caster (wizard) in a game that lasted months), while EotRK should still be useful in a number of scenarios.
2a) EotRK doesn’t say it can see through illusions.
2b) EotRK doesn’t automatically decode things like Thieve’s Cant.
3) I’d allow Illusory Script to be seen through with Truesight, while suppressed by an Anti-Magic Field, or if a Rakshasa is involved.

I’d probably default to saying it’s basically the spell Comprehend Languages at-will, except without the touching part.

[Lupine]

Disagree with the mechanism even though I agree illusory script "wins." Illusory script creates an illusion that covers the true text. The Warlock literally can't see the true text, so he can't read it any more than he could read it if it were inside a closed envelope.

I would say agree. Even if you choose to make the cover be "unknown magical language", the warlock should not be able to read the message. They may be able to see and understand the words, but the will be something entirely unintelligible. (ie. "teenage purple laundry elephantiasis orange foot")

Yes, they can see the word. Yes, they can understand each of the languages, but the "unknown magical language" is just weave gibberish. Heck, you could even make it say "AJNAHGKJSBGHBSKJKGHBSGJKSsjhgskjhgjkbsjkghsjk! 7356778&&*^&*^@&^&& sggsiuhahyrguihfsvyureia3fgis" The warlock can read the glyphs, sure, but there's nothing there to read.

Overall, you as the DM are well within your rights to say, "Your Warlock can read the letters and sound them out, but it means about as much as if you, the player, were reading welsh."

Naturally, pick another language, if someone at your table knows welsh.

[WaroftheCrans]

Agree to disagree then.

I can see the letters form words and read-out-loud texts written in spanish, italian, german, swedish, norse, danish, or estonian for example and tell them apart from each other, to varying extent, but I can hardly understand any of those (swedish and estonian perhaps the most, because swedish is the second official language here in Finland (although I made a (stupid) decision back at school that I won't bother learning it because english is much more useful in the long term; a decision I now regret) and Estonian is in same language group as Finnish and incredibly similar with finnish).

Wouldn't this interpretation render Eyes of the Rune Keeper totally useless? Recognizing that something is in a particular language is a skill that many of us have, and isn't really exceptional: I don't speak any Asian languages, any Cyrillic languages, any Germanic languages (apart from english), any indo-iranian lanuages and only a smattering of other Romance languages (terrible, but understandable Italian, semi-fluent Spanish, extremely basic french and Portuguese). Despite this, I can differentiate most of these languages from each other, and I certainly won't confuse slavic root languages for Asian roots. For that matter, I won't confuse korean for chinese, or japanese.

This reduces this invocation to being basically worthless, as opposed to a tool that lets them read all languages. A simple history or investigation check could tell them what language family it is.

Also, per the usual definitions: Read (v): To examine and grasp the meaning of (written or printed characters, words, or sentences).

Grasping the meaning = understanding. Lets not put eyes of the rune keeper even further into the trash heap of invocations.

Edit: the more I look at your logic, the less it makes sense. If someone can read and write common, does that mean they can simply string out letters in a line and pronounce letters in a line without understanding it? That would be ridiculous, and the very definition of illiterate.

[Arkhios]

Wouldn't this interpretation render Eyes of the Rune Keeper totally useless? Recognizing that something is in a particular language is a skill that many of us have, and isn't really exceptional: I don't speak any Asian languages, any Cyrillic languages, any Germanic languages (apart from english), any indo-iranian lanuages and only a smattering of other Romance languages (terrible, but understandable Italian, semi-fluent Spanish, extremely basic french and Portuguese). Despite this, I can differentiate most of these languages from each other, and I certainly won't confuse slavic root languages for Asian roots. For that matter, I won't confuse korean for chinese, or japanese.

This reduces this invocation to being basically worthless, as opposed to a tool that lets them read all languages. A simple history or investigation check could tell them what language family it is.

Also, per the usual definitions: Read (v): To examine and grasp the meaning of (written or printed characters, words, or sentences).

Grasping the meaning = understanding. Lets not put eyes of the rune keeper even further into the trash heap of invocations.

Edit: the more I look at your logic, the less it makes sense. If someone can read and write common, does that mean they can simply string out letters in a line and pronounce letters in a line without understanding it? That would be ridiculous, and the very definition of illiterate.

Have you not heard of the design intent of including ribbons in 5e? Eyes of the Rune Keeper is, in my opinion, intended as one; a Ribbon.

Ribbons aren't necessarily the most effective pieces of mechanisms, but rather mostly for flavor. Not everything is or need be "pure power over others".

FWIW, I would still take Eyes of the Rune Keeper over Agonizing Blast, because the former is at least flavorful, but also cool in my opinion. YMMV, of course.

[WaroftheCrans]

2a) EotRK doesn’t say it can see through illusions.
2b) EotRK doesn’t automatically decode things like Thieve’s Cant.
3) I’d allow Illusory Script to be seen through with Truesight, while suppressed by an Anti-Magic Field, or if a Rakshasa is involved.

I’d probably default to saying it’s basically the spell Comprehend Languages at-will, except without the touching part.

I agree with the assessment that it's basically Comprehend Languages in regards to written text, without the touching part. I also don't think it has the restrictions that Comprehend Languages does.

You also understand any written language that you see, but you must be touching the surface of which the words are written. It takes about 1 minute to read one page of text.

This spell doesn’t decode secret messages in a text or glyph, such as an arcane sigil, that isn’t part of a written language.

You can read all writing.
Note that this does not have the restrictions of Comprehend Languages. In addition, in 5e, Thieve's Cant and Druidic are proper languages, and can be taught to others. They follow most of the same rules as other languages.

That leads me to disagree with 2b, as Thieve's Cant is writing, and there is no restriction, like there is in Comprehend Languages. The real question is whether EotRK helps with spotting these messages. I'd personally say no, but if someone writes a letter in Thieve's Cant and they catch a hold of it, they can read it, and understand it.

As for 3, that's in the text of the spell.

For the OP, I agree, EotRK can't see through the illusion, as that's not a feature of it.

[Arkhios]

It would seem everyone else is "against" my point of view, so I have little reason to keep arguing about it; it clearly won't be heard.

I'm willing to assume you're right and I'm wrong, and get over it :smallsmile:

[Segev]

Agree to disagree then.You are also disagreeing with the basic definition of "to read (https://www.google.com/search?q=read+definition&rlz=1C1GCEB_enUS894US894&oq=read+definition&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l7.2093j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&ssui=on)."


look at and comprehend the meaning of (written or printed matter) by mentally interpreting the characters or symbols of which it is composed.

This is unambiguous. "To read" something includes "comprehend the meaning of" it.



Have you not heard of the design intent of including ribbons in 5e? Eyes of the Rune Keeper is, in my opinion, intended as one; a Ribbon.

Ribbons aren't necessarily the most effective pieces of mechanisms, but rather mostly for flavor. Not everything is or need be "pure power over others".

FWIW, I would still take Eyes of the Rune Keeper over Agonizing Blast, because the former is at least flavorful, but also cool in my opinion. YMMV, of course.
Ribbons are not things you spend resources on. Ribbons are things that are tied around other things, as "freebies," that make them "look pretty." An entire Invocation is never, ever a ribbon. If it is, it's badly designed.

Eyes of the Rune Keeper is extremely niche, even with its most liberal reading. It wouldn't be particularly strong if it absolutely penetrated [I]illusory script. It doesn't, but not because I think it'd be overpowered if it did.

Eyes of the RUne Keepere does what it says it does: it allows you to read all writing.

If the writing conveys meaning, you can read it. It only loses ability to do so if the meaning conveyed lies in something other than the overt message. But even if it also decoded innuendo and encoded language (not merely enciphered), it would not be overpowered.

[DrKerosene]

Thieve's Cant and Druidic are proper languages, and can be taught to others. They follow most of the same rules as other languages.

That leads me to disagree with 2b, as Thieve's Cant is writing, and there is no restriction, like there is in Comprehend Languages. The real question is whether EotRK helps with spotting these messages. I'd personally say no, but if someone writes a letter in Thieve's Cant and they catch a hold of it, they can read it, and understand it.

As for 3, that's in the text of the spell.

I disagree with Thieves’ Cant being a proper language. Thieve’s Cant is used in conjunction with another language (or a combination of them) that the Rogue is proficient with, except maybe unless you’re specifically only using the symbols option.

I feel like the question has turned from “Does EotRK let you read a mathematic formula, or understand a computer coding line?” into something like “Does it tell you the answer to the the math equation, or correct any flaws in the computer script?” EotRK does not say it automatically deciphers codes, or answers riddles, etc, just that you can read things.

Being able to read druidic, infernal, etc, is cool. Doesn’t mean the secret meaning of Thieves’ Cant will be immediately laid bare for anyone who has access to EotRK or Comprehend Languages. Similarly, I’d still expect coded messages to require something more to properly decipher/understand. Pretend someone writes out a message in binary (or hex), you could easily read all the 1’s and 0’s in whatever language was used to write, but that doesn’t mean you automatically receive a full translation into plain text.



I’m pretty sure a Rakshasa being able to see through Illusory Script as part of their limited magic immunity, or Anti-Magic Field suppressing only the illusory message part, is in the realm of DM adjudication and not covered by the spells. I mentioned Truesight because I haven’t seen that spell referenced enough when talking about if EotRK should be able to do X in this thread. True Seeing is a sixth level spell, which I think should imply that EotRK doesn’t automatically work against the spell Illusory Script like is being suggested by some people here.

[Segev]

I disagree with Thieves’ Cant being a proper language. Thieve’s Cant is used in conjunction with another language (or a combination of them) that the Rogue is proficient with, except maybe unless you’re specifically only using the symbols option.

I feel like the question has turned from “Does EotRK let you read a mathematic formula, or understand a computer coding line?” into something like “Does it tell you the answer to the the math equation, or correct any flaws in the computer script?” EotRK does not say it automatically deciphers codes, or answers riddles, etc, just that you can read things.

Being able to read druidic, infernal, etc, is cool. Doesn’t mean the secret meaning of Thieves’ Cant will be immediately laid bare for anyone who has access to EotRK or Comprehend Languages. Similarly, I’d still expect coded messages to require something more to properly decipher/understand. Pretend someone writes out a message in binary (or hex), you could easily read all the 1’s and 0’s in whatever language was used to write, but that doesn’t mean you automatically receive a full translation into plain text.



I’m pretty sure a Rakshasa being able to see through Illusory Script as part of their limited magic immunity, or Anti-Magic Field suppressing only the illusory message part, is in the realm of DM adjudication and not covered by the spells. I mentioned Truesight because I haven’t seen that spell referenced enough when talking about if EotRK should be able to do X in this thread. True Seeing is a sixth level spell, which I think should imply that EotRK doesn’t automatically work against the spell Illusory Script like is being suggested by some people here.

I draw the distinction between a cipher and a code.

A cipher is generally just a character-replacement. The example I gave of a rot-13 enciphering of "This is a ciphered message" contains all of the information necessary to read that sentence, provided you know the character set being used.

A code is not a cipher, though you can embed coded messages in ciphers. A code is ... formalized innuendo. To borrow from Monty Python, "She has HUGE...tracts of land!" It's clear what "tracts of lands" tands in for in context (and by the way it's acted out), but without my "staging" the text, if it was just a written note, "You'll find Lady Molly to be a good marriage prospect. She has huge tracts of land," could be innuendo about her figure, or it could literally just mean that her wealth in land makes her a good political match.

When getting a call from an agent you've sent into a delicate situation, if you ask, "Are you under duress?" and they say, "Nope! All's well!" but that's an agreed-upon signal that yes, they're very much under duress and their life is in danger, that's a code. If you saw "Nope! All's well!" written down, even in a language you don't speak or in a cipher, Eyes of the Rune Keeper would let you know it says, "Nope! All's well!" but it wouldn't let you know that that means anything but what the words themselves do. The coded response is still hidden, because without the specific context surrounding it, it's meaningless.

A simple code is "opposite day." The speakers just use the exact opposite word from what they mean whenever there's a singificant point to it. "No," means "yes," "happy" means "sad," "left" means "right," etc.

"Go north to the third house on the right," then, would mean, "go south to the third house on the left."

Eyes of the Rune Keeper wouldn't help with this. But it would translate the first sentence from a foreign language or a cipher.