D&D 5E Woo Hoo, Invisibility Stopped It's Downward Spiral

[DracoSuave]

It appears that they are keeping the 4e approach. Invisible is fairly easily detectable unless coupled with stealth.

Detectable != easily detectable. If you're not stealthing you aren't TRYING to be undetected. Itd probably still apply disadv to Perception checks to find you.

 

[Piratecat]

In the 1e DMG, 10% of rings of invisibility also stopped you from making any noise. In retrospect, that may have been a wee bit overpowered.

 

[Joddy37]

With invisibility you can be detected by other methods than making a noise. You may be detected by Scent. No matter how clean you think you are to animals you have a detectable smell. You may leave tracks in snow, sand, dust flour, and so forth. You may cause a flame to flutter by moving too close to it.
I am sure there are other circumstances that have not come to mind.

All the above can apply to stealth also I would rule.

I would like to make a ruling like the following.

Scent:
Yes, if an invisible person is not moving and trying to be extremely silent, no check is needed, he is invisible. Only his scent may give him away to beasts and animals. So in that case, I prefer to have the PC succeed a stealth check vs. the passive perception of a beast within 60 ft.

Sound:
If the invisible character is moving, he makes noise. First, his feet may make sound on the ground. A soft and thick carpet? No sound. Crunchy leaves in a forest? Yeah he is making some noise. A stealth check is required. Walking on a rope bridge? Haha, he is definitely not that invisible.

His armor may create noise. If he is wearing metal armor, he needs a successful stealth check to remain undetected.

Tracks:
Generally if an invisible person is leaving obvious tracks behind him, he can be easily detected. Walking on a sand dune or a dusty/wet floor, a muddy ground, for instance. Otherwise, creatures with extremely sharp visual senses may spot the invisible character by subtle tracks left behind.

 

[KarinsDad]

I would like to make a ruling like the following.

Scent:
Yes, if an invisible person is not moving and trying to be extremely silent, no check is needed, he is invisible. Only his scent may give him away to beasts and animals. So in that case, I prefer to have the PC succeed a stealth check vs. the passive perception of a beast within 60 ft.

Sound:
If the invisible character is moving, he makes noise. First, his feet may make sound on the ground. A soft and thick carpet? No sound. Crunchy leaves in a forest? Yeah he is making some noise. A stealth check is required. Walking on a rope bridge? Haha, he is definitely not that invisible.

His armor may create noise. If he is wearing metal armor, he needs a successful stealth check to remain undetected.

Tracks:
Generally if an invisible person is leaving obvious tracks behind him, he can be easily detected. Walking on a sand dune or a dusty/wet floor, a muddy ground, for instance. Otherwise, creatures with extremely sharp visual senses may spot the invisible character by subtle tracks left behind.

This.

This is why we have DMs, to make common sense adjudications and not have the game just be about the roll of dice.


I'm a firm believer of the DM only calling for dice rolls when he is on the fence as to what happens. A 1% chance of something happening, doesn't need a dice roll. 1% for all intents and purposes is 0%.

 

[Nebulous]

I agree, 4e invisibility was the worst! So many utility spells were a big disappointment. It's nice to get some of the good old "magical" magic back, if that makes any sense.

Yes, 5e brought back decent utility magic.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm a firm believer of the DM only calling for dice rolls when he is on the fence as to what happens. A 1% chance of something happening, doesn't need a dice roll. 1% for all intents and purposes is 0%.

Unless you're trying to get psionic powers or trying for divine intervention.

 

[KarinsDad]

Unless you're trying to get psionic powers or trying for divine intervention.

Agreed.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For myself now in 5E... I always ask for DEX (Stealth) checks. Not because I'm trying to find out if a character is or is not Hidden-- but because to me... DEX (Stealth) is telling me how well someone is Hidden. It's a ranking, not an on-off switch.

If someone is Invisible and not making noise, then they are Hidden. Of course they are. Full stop. But the question then becomes just how well they are Hidden-- and that's where the check comes in. I mean, other than in the midst of combat (where you have to use your Action to become Hidden)... there's nothing stopping anyone from being Heavily Obscured and not making noise. That's part of just the general roleplay.

So the question then becomes... do you make that person roll a DEX (Stealth) check?

And for me, the answer is "Of course!". Because I'm not checking to see *if* they've done it-- we all know they've done it automatically just by saying they're quiet and being Heavily Obscured. But what I need to know now is "how well"? And that's why I ask for a check.

 

[KarinsDad]

For myself now in 5E... I always ask for DEX (Stealth) checks. Not because I'm trying to find out if a character is or is not Hidden-- but because to me... DEX (Stealth) is telling me how well someone is Hidden. It's a ranking, not an on-off switch.

If someone is Invisible and not making noise, then they are Hidden. Of course they are. Full stop. But the question then becomes just how well they are Hidden-- and that's where the check comes in. I mean, other than in the midst of combat (where you have to use your Action to become Hidden)... there's nothing stopping anyone from being Heavily Obscured and not making noise. That's part of just the general roleplay.

So the question then becomes... do you make that person roll a DEX (Stealth) check?

And for me, the answer is "Of course!". Because I'm not checking to see *if* they've done it-- we all know they've done it automatically just by saying they're quiet and being Heavily Obscured. But what I need to know now is "how well"? And that's why I ask for a check.

But what do you compare that check against? If they roll well, do you automatically prevent them from being preceived? How about an average roll? A low roll?

To me, if the player rolls a low roll when invisible and trying to be generally quiet, it would not matter. Unless a foe is actually actively seeking him out, why bother slowing up the game with a roll and some additional "should I or shouldn't I give the NPC a chance to find him" adjudication? You yourself said that he was hidden pre-roll. Why add a layer on top of that?

 

[DEFCON 1]

If I'm understanding you correctly... you're suggesting a situation where someone is invisible but no one is there to sense him. Sure, in that case I wouldn't ask for a DEX (Stealth) check, just like I wouldn't ask for someone standing alone in a room to make a DEX (Stealth) check, invisible or not. If no one is there to sense him, then he is by definition 100% beyond being sensed.

But if someone is invisible and the possibility exists that someone could walk by and sense him (through Passive Perception)... then I absolutely would ask for a DEX (Stealth) check right at the top so that I'm prepped for when the passerby goes by. Now depending on the situation and where the invisible person was standing I might give Advantage on the DEX check or perhaps even some other additional bonuses... but they still need the check just to see how well or poorly they're holding themselves. If you're invisible but you still stand in the middle of a room with people walking by you, that makes you more prone to being noticed. Or if you try and regulate your breathing but for whatever reason are breathing heavy, that also will make you prone to being noticed. That DEX check tells me how well you're doing.

For me, just being invisible doesn't give you a free pass to never being sensed, even if someone isn't specifically trying to find you. The one thing the Invisible condition gives you is satisfying the Heavily Obscured requirement regardless of where you happen to be.