D&D 5E Why do so many DMs use the wrong rules for invisibility?

[Greenstone.Walker]

I have an idea for clarifying these rules. It got a bit big for a post in this thread, so I've created a new thread for it.

 

[Lanefan]

What, and abandon the rest of the party?

Or just get clear to a safe distance from which to cast spells.

Or abandon. Wouldn't be the first time I've seen it.

Lanefan

 

[Samir]

I'm not getting that those are the two possible readings. I'm getting Option 1.5: "can be detected" means "is usually detected, barring outside factors", and the quoted part of Feral Senses addresses those outside factors.

The point being made is that being detected while invisible isn't automatic, it's at the DM's discretion. Since "usually" and "outside factors" are in the DM's purview and the extent of those will vary game to game, I think we're on the same page.

 

[Tony Vargas]

[*]I prefer 5E because it gets away from the style of [previous edition which shall not be named] that often played like a tactical board game.

No edition of D&D ever 'played like a tactical board game,' it's always been very much an RPG (roll v role debate notwithstanding).
Though, if 5e were playing a bit more like a boardgame, right now, it might be doing even better - because, y'know, there was a big surge in boardgame popularity not long ago....
;P


Edit: In the interest of full disclosure (and precision, since it's rapidly becoming one of those threads), I should note that, though I have in fact played every edition of D&D, my familiarity & play experience with the original 1974 game is limited to playing it a few times at conventions in the 80s, and reading the booklets with moderate interest - well, and converting & running Temple of the Frog a few years ago. Then there's BECMI. I started with the Basic set (the c1979 basic set, not the famous Red Box), and didn't play it long (nor remotely 'right') before switching to AD&D. The ECMI and RC, I prettymuch just have hearsay to go on. So couldn't swear to either of them not 'playing like a board game.'

Though, a number of actual board games have been spun off from D&D including: Dungeon! (1975), The Great Khan Game (1988), Dragon Strike (1993), "Dungeons & Dragons: The Fantasy Adventure Board Game" (2002), Castle Ravenloft (2010), and Lords of Waterdeep (2013).

In fact, though I never heard of anyone actually doing it, supposedly 0D&D used a boardgame, Avalon Hill's "Wilderness Survival," for it's hexcrawling adventures, rather like it used the Wargame, Chainmail, for combat resolution. That's probably the closest D&D's ever come to 'playing like a boardgame.'

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The point being made is that being detected while invisible isn't automatic, it's at the DM's discretion. Since "usually" and "outside factors" are in the DM's purview and the extent of those will vary game to game, I think we're on the same page.

I'm not sure about that.

This edition of the game doesn't put much stock in absolutes, but it does cover generalities, and then it gives the DM broad discretion to adjudicate anything that would interfere with the general case scenario. Based on my reading, and the reading of others with whom I've discussed this, the consensus is that the wizard doesn't suddenly vanish from perception when they cast the Invisibility spell; they have to take an action to hide first, which means it isn't a viable method of escaping combat... unless there's something in the environment that would make it impossible for you to hear them - something to indicate that this is an exceptional case, in need of DM adjudication, rather than the general case which the rules describe. It may seem a little counter-intuitive at first, but considering both the words in the book and the clarifications via Twitter, that is the common consensus.

If I'm playing in a new group, and the DM hasn't stated anything to the contrary, that's my assumption for how things are going to play out. If an enemy wizard does pull of that sort of vanishing act, then it feels to me as though the DM isn't playing fairly, because there's no way that anyone could have possibly predicted it; and I could very well have taken different actions if I had imagined that it was a possibility. I may be disinclined to return to that group, since it feels like my choices don't actually matter, since the DM is making up rules without telling anyone.

Of course, the DM is perfectly welcome to make up rules, or to change rules that they don't like, but that all needs to be declared before the situation arises in-game. In the absence of declared exceptions, the rules in the book (and previous discussions) are the only clue we have as to what the rules of the game actually are, and you can't possibly play a game in a meaningful fashion if everyone doesn't know the rules.

 

[Hussar]

Well, to be fair, invisibility kinda is a good way of getting out of combat. For one, it negates all opportunity attacks. So, the wizard drops invisibility and then can move out of combat. At that point, the enemies still know what square he's in, so, they can follow and attack at disadvantage. Then the wizard can move (typically at half speed) and hide, which means now the enemies need to make a check to find which square he's in. Which gives the wizard more time to escape and so on. Add on other abilities that monsters might have, like a teleport or flight, and even at half speed, you can make your position pretty hard to find.

So, it's not a perfect escape, but, it's not a bad one either. It's just not an autowin. If invisible creatures are automatically hidden, then it makes invisibility very, very powerful. After all, now I don't even need to move half speed - I'm automatically hidden, which means you need to spend actions to find me.

While it's true that Hidden is not a condition in 5e, my personal take on the whole thing is that as soon as you make Hidden an actual condition, separate from obscured, the rules work perfectly fine. It cuts down on frustration, makes the rules actually work, and keeps the game moving along at a good pace.

Seems the simplest answer to me. It's not called out as a condition, true, but, Hidden is mentioned separately from obscured and invisible enough times that it becomes, IMO, a de facto condition.

 

[ThePolarBear]

Then maybe try something different:

1)- cast 'Light' to cancel the darkness
- or 'Dispel Magic' if you need a bigger cannon
- back off and drop some heavy area damage on the situation
- if melee is your only option, pull out the longest weapon you've got and sweep the area - not to hit for damage, but to find a target. Then grapple what you find.
- and if all else fails but you know the darkness is artificial, stop moving completely and just wait for the darkness to end 1)/

Obviously, assuming there's a non-darknessed place to go and you can find it/stumble on to it.

Or they simply made a bad call.

This is not the point i'm making (referring to "1"), nor it does address my response to your point. It's not about how to deal with darkness, it's about what are the pratical effect on the gameplay of said darkness patch. Having people roll at "normal" level when all the fighting is inside the heavily obscured area does speed up the gameplay over rolling with any sort of disadvantage since said disadvantage is applied to everyone involved. Applying a malus would slow down the game for everyone and that's it. The end results would still be the same for the great majority of situations with just more time invested. What you gain in speed you lose in realism you say... but that it's true for ALL of the adv/dis system, not for darkness in particular. In fact, darkness is the one place where i do sort of kind of see a reason to be this way and working kind of sort reasonably realisticly.

How realistic is that a prone creature can make itself as difficult as it can be to be hit just by dodging, no matter in how advantageous of a situation his melee opponent is in?

5e does not bother with this mechanically over a certain point. It leaves to DMs that are unsatisfied with the current state of affairs to find their own answers to have the best time they can with the game, while providing a somewhat simple structure of rules that are quite easy to be picked up fast to play.

Personally having a "everyone" wide malus would bring nothing to the table, and might as well not be there.

Yeah, that might have been a bad call. Personally, i do not feel the need to make anything more complex than it is right now for now. Prehaps in the future. There are things that i would like to change, but for now it's mostly skills (or better, how some "powers" interact with skills).

 

[ccs]

No edition of D&D ever 'played like a tactical board game,' it's always been very much an RPG (roll v role debate notwithstanding).
Though, if 5e were playing a bit more like a boardgame, right now, it might be doing even better - because, y'know, there was a big surge in boardgame popularity not long ago....
;P

You never played 4e I take it?

9 Hells, it played so much like a board game they snipped out a few details, boxed it up, & sold it as such. 4 times! (Wrath if Ashardolan, Ravenloft, Legend of Drizzt, & Elemental Evil

 

[Hussar]

You never played 4e I take it?

9 Hells, it played so much like a board game they snipped out a few details, boxed it up, & sold it as such. 4 times! (Wrath if Ashardolan, Ravenloft, Legend of Drizzt, & Elemental Evil

Do we really need to rehash edition warring crap over a game that's been off the shelves for, what, three years now?

 

[Oofta]

Do we really need to rehash edition warring crap over a game that's been off the shelves for, what, three years now?

The first (and last) time the rules defined hidden as a "condition", or explicitly stated that if you were not hidden people knew your exact position was 4E.

In 3.5, the Invisibility spell stated that you could not be seen. It merely noted that you were not silenced and you could still give away your position by stepping into a puddle or similar.

So I make the assumption that people state that your position is automatically known unless you've taken the hide action because they got used to 4E. No one has pointed to any rules in 5E that explicitly state otherwise.