D&D 5E Invisible, hidden and within 5 feet of an enemy making a ranged attack

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Telling stories is not ridiculous. It's literally what the game is about. You can certainly change rules to suit your narrative if you like, but there isn't always reason to. Most of the time it is a simple thing (IMO) to come up with a bunch of reasons for why a rule might work like it does.

EnWorld's lack of quote pyramids means that sometimes a quote really gets taken out of context

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Why would they assume it was caused by something invisible? (Other than maybe the whisper).

The whisper could be a minor illusion spell.
But that is irrelevant. If you do something that might give away your position you might stop being hidden.
Hence the sleight of hand or maybe a deception check.

 

[Shiroiken]

But aside from "because I say so". Why do you assume that any of these things automatically reveal that you are there? The rules don't say they do.

Yeah, they kinda do.

PHB pg 176, Hiding Sidebar

---

... and if you make noise, you give away your position. An invisible creature can't be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, however.

Emphasis mine, but giving away your position obviously ends hiding. Doing other things reveals signs of your passage, doing the same.

 

[Hriston]

No, they don't.
Imposing disadvantage will automatically give away that something is off. If you are hidden you are unnoticed however.
This is a contradiction.

What's the contradiction? Does targeting a mage that cast foresight on themselves reveal they can see into the future?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

What's the contradiction? Does targeting a mage that cast foresight on themselves reveal they can see into the future?

Relevancy?

Edit: and probably yes.
If you tell the story, as you propose, you should say something like:
"the wizard dodges the arrow as though he knew exaxctly where you would aim"
A bit like the Matrix move probably?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

But aside from "because I say so". Why do you assume that any of these things automatically reveal that you are there? The rules don't say they do. Attacking does. Distracting someone doesn't. All you need to do next is decide why. (By telling stories). This is all Hriston is trying to say, AFAICT.

Also:
Don't mix up RAW and TRDSIC

Just because the rules don't say poking reveals your position, does not mean it does not.

 

[Hriston]

People have different ideas of "what makes sense". But that doesn't make your statement about "telling stories" any less ridiculous!

Well, what do you call it when the rules by which the table has agreed to play say what happens in a given situation, but the DM unilaterally decides something else happens instead?

 

[Hriston]

Relevancy?

Edit: and probably yes.
If you tell the story, as you propose, you should say something like:
"the wizard dodges the arrow as though he knew exaxctly where you would aim"
A bit like the Matrix move probably?

That's only if you miss.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Well, what do you call it when the rules by which the table has agreed to play say what happens in a given situation, but the DM unilaterally decides something else happens instead?

I call it "playing Dungeons & Dragons".

 

[Hriston]

I call it "playing Dungeons & Dragons".

Well, you can spend your time however and call it whatever you want, but it doesn't sound like playing any sort of game to me. It sounds like the players are all gathering around for DM storytime.