D&D 4th Edition RulesAsk questions about 4th-Edition rules and the like in here. General discussion about 4E or any other game belongs in General RPG Discussion, above.
When you become invisible you can make a stealth check to hide.
Umm... what?
I've read the invisibility rules over a few times and I still just don't get it. How the hell can you be invisible, and yet not be hidden?
Can someone explain this to me in very slow, monosyllabic sentences so that I can comprehend what the frig they were thinking when they made up those rules?
I've read the invisibility rules over a few times and I still just don't get it. How the hell can you be invisible, and yet not be hidden?
Can someone explain this to me in very slow, monosyllabic sentences so that I can comprehend what the frig they were thinking when they made up those rules?
The explanation is easy: There are more senses than just vision.
Yep an invisible creature is not totally 'un-detected'. You know which square they are in (unlike 3E< let it go brother!) automatically unless they succeed at a stealth check.
Invisibility gives you: CA vs enemies; enemies a penalty to hit; you don't provoke OA AND (drum roll please) the opportunity to make a stealth check without having to be in total concealment. Invisibility is basically 'total concealment'.
Invisibility gives you: ... the opportunity to make a stealth check without having to be in total concealment...
Note that by the revised stealth rules, you still need to make a stealth check as part of a move action. Unless, of course, you have the Assassin's Cloak feat(IIRC) that allows you to make a stealth check whenever you go invisible.
__________________ Robots, assassins, hobgoblins, the Ashen Tower, polite beholders, land pirates, gnome genocide, the Corpse Ramp, artifacts, exploding zombie dragons, flying islands, dying heroes, blood feuds, vanished races, the Black City: Rise of Felskein.
I think of 4e invisibility like the Predator's invisibility from the movie. You are really transparent, but you still have that hazy outline that can be seen.
That works, but it really isn't needed - the "there's more senses than vision" really provides sufficient rationale.
Does this mean 4E is the first D&D edition where people actually make noise when they move around (probably in plate mail with dozens of pieces, carrying another dozen easily-accessible items, as well as a third dozen bads and pouches filled with loot? )
Does this mean 4E is the first D&D edition where people actually make noise when they move around (probably in plate mail with dozens of pieces, carrying another dozen easily-accessible items, as well as a third dozen bads and pouches filled with loot? )
No, the DM could always require you to roll a Move Silently check vs. your opponent's Listen check in 3e.
The key rules text, btw, is "If an invisible creature is not hidden from you, you can hear it or sense some other sign of its presence and therefore know what space it occupies, although you still can’t see it."
I've read the invisibility rules over a few times and I still just don't get it. How the hell can you be invisible, and yet not be hidden?
Can someone explain this to me in very slow, monosyllabic sentences so that I can comprehend what the frig they were thinking when they made up those rules?
If you fail your Stealth check, you knock over a lamp.
I believe the rules say no. I give a +5 to stealth anyway because it just seems to make sense.
Not really. Whether you can't be seen because you're behind a wall or you can't be seen because you're invisible, you still can't be seen. I would tend to think that it's easier to hide behind a wall, because it helps to obscure any sound that you'd make.
If you're invisible then the observer could still make out dust that you kick up or footprints that you leave, so it gives no greater inherent advantage over total concealment.
Yes, but what really bends my noggen is whether or not you would have knocked over the lamp if you didn't make a Stealth check...
Yes, you would have knocked over the lamp if you did not make a stealth check. The stealth check is to try and avoid knocking over the lamp. You can replace knocking over a lamp with leaving a foot print, leaving a distinctive smell, making a distinctive sound, etc. You will do those things by default, your stealth check is an attempt to avoid doing such things to the extent that they are noticeable to your enemies.
Not really. Whether you can't be seen because you're behind a wall or you can't be seen because you're invisible, you still can't be seen. I would tend to think that it's easier to hide behind a wall, because it helps to obscure any sound that you'd make.
Perhaps, but most folks would tend to think it's harder to notice someone who's invisible (by the bits of dust he kicks up or little noises he makes) than it is to notice someone who's crouching between two bushes (because look, there's foot) or just standing in the shade (hey, there's a face!). To put it another way, the level of concealment should impact the detectability, not just the chance to hit them with an attack.
I guess one issue there is that 4e doesn't distinguish between noticing a creature's presence and pinpointing its location.
Another is that they may not have wanted to stack stealth bonuses from invisibility with the perception penalty from being blinded.
Last edited by Felon; 4th November 2009 at 04:21 AM..
Yes, you would have knocked over the lamp if you did not make a stealth check. The stealth check is to try and avoid knocking over the lamp. You can replace knocking over a lamp with leaving a foot print, leaving a distinctive smell, making a distinctive sound, etc. You will do those things by default, your stealth check is an attempt to avoid doing such things to the extent that they are noticeable to your enemies.
I can do these both at the same time!
__________________ "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." - Samuel Johnson 18th century English author.
Not really. Whether you can't be seen because you're behind a wall or you can't be seen because you're invisible, you still can't be seen. I would tend to think that it's easier to hide behind a wall, because it helps to obscure any sound that you'd make.
If you're invisible then the observer could still make out dust that you kick up or footprints that you leave, so it gives no greater inherent advantage over total concealment.
For what it is worth, I think it is. Passive perception is still a check and is still affected by modifiers. When listening through a wall the DC is increased by 10 (PHB page 187) and I see know reason why it shouldnt apply to a stealth check vs passive perception as well.
Perhaps, but most folks would tend to think it's harder to notice someone who's invisible (by the bits of dust he kicks up or little noises he makes) than it is to notice someone who's crouching between two bushes (because look, there's foot) or just standing in the shade (hey, there's a face!). To put it another way, the level of concealment should impact the detectability, not just the chance to hit them with an attack.
I guess one issue there is that 4e doesn't distinguish between noticing a creature's presence and pinpointing its location.
Another is that they may not have wanted to stack stealth bonuses from invisibility with the perception penalty from being blinded.
I'm not sure I'd call knowing that the target is somewhere within a 5x5' square "pinpointing," but that's why the attack penalty vs invisible targets is there.
You are standing on square X. You go invisible. I saw you do so. I know that you are in square X, and can even see what visible evidence there is of your presence- footprints, etc, things I'd expect to see given that I just saw you go invisible.
But if you make a stealth check, maybe I lose sight of these things, and don't know where you are.
)
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
