5e invisibility and Detect Magic

[Ovinomancer]

This makes no sense. Why give it the ability to hide in plain sight, then give it virtually no ability to hide in plain sight. Were that ability meant to be for visibility only, it would give some sort of bonus, but it fails to even give advantage. A dex bonus of 0 and no bonus to hiding for the ability means that it will be noticed the majority of the time by anyone with a bonus and the vast majority of the time by a group of people. The whole point of the ability is that it gets the jump of those it attacks. The wording in gargoyles in 5e says that they can be perfectly still by the way, and prior editions also said that they could be perfectly still. Below are quotes from 5e and 3e.

5e: "A gargoyle lurks among masonry and ruins, as still as any stone sculpture."

3e: "Gargoyles often appear to be winged stone statues, for they can perch indefinitely without moving and use this disguise to surprise their foes."

Both editions let you know that they can be perfectly still with those statements. Stone sculptures don't move a hair, and perching indefinitely without moving is also perfect stillness.

For you to be correct here, you have to ignore both logic and flat out statements to the contrary. Invisibility would only remove the ability to mistake it for a statue, not the perfect stillness and therefore perfect silence of gargoyle itself.

I was (properly) taken to task earlier for reading "can" as "does". Onky fair to point it out, here.

That said, gargoyles in 5e are indistinguishable from an inanimate statue when motionless. I think it's just fine to rule they can remain motionless at will.

 

[Maxperson]

I was (properly) taken to task earlier for reading "can" as "does". Onky fair to point it out, here.

That said, gargoyles in 5e are indistinguishable from an inanimate statue when motionless. I think it's just fine to rule they can remain motionless at will.

In this case, it's crystal clear which "can" is being used, though. They are utterly useless as what they are if it's only a possibility. There is literally no point in making them look like statues and saying that they can sit still forever, and give them no ability to do so. A 0 bonus to the roll is not a possible way to stay still forever.

 

[Hriston]

This makes no sense. Why give it the ability to hide in plain sight, then give it virtually no ability to hide in plain sight. Were that ability meant to be for visibility only, it would give some sort of bonus, but it fails to even give advantage. A dex bonus of 0 and no bonus to hiding for the ability means that it will be noticed the majority of the time by anyone with a bonus and the vast majority of the time by a group of people. The whole point of the ability is that it gets the jump of those it attacks. The wording in gargoyles in 5e says that they can be perfectly still by the way, and prior editions also said that they could be perfectly still. Below are quotes from 5e and 3e.

5e: "A gargoyle lurks among masonry and ruins, as still as any stone sculpture."

3e: "Gargoyles often appear to be winged stone statues, for they can perch indefinitely without moving and use this disguise to surprise their foes."

Both editions let you know that they can be perfectly still with those statements. Stone sculptures don't move a hair, and perching indefinitely without moving is also perfect stillness.

For you to be correct here, you have to ignore both logic and flat out statements to the contrary. Invisibility would only remove the ability to mistake it for a statue, not the perfect stillness and therefore perfect silence of gargoyle itself.

The bonus is that it can hide in plain sight. Against an average person that’s alert for threats (passive Perception 10) it will succeed 55% of the time, so it isn’t remotely true that it will be noticed in the majority of cases. You think this trait is an ability to auto-surprise, and it’s fine for you to rule it that way if that’s your conception of gargoyles, but as has already been said, “they can hold themselves so still that they appear inanimate” doesn’t mean they’re always successful when attempting to do so. To me, it’s uncertain and calls for a check in most cases.

 

[Maxperson]

The bonus is that it can hide in plain sight.

It can't. Against a party it has almost no chance of escaping notice.

Against an average person that’s alert for threats (passive Perception 10) it will succeed 55% of the time, so it isn’t remotely true that it will be noticed in the majority of cases.

First, you are tilting at Strawmen again. I didn't say the average person. I said by anyone with a bonus, so 12 or higher wisdom giving a +1 or better bonus.

Against an average person it has a 52.5% chance of escaping evasion. The average roll of a d20 is 10.5. Barely about 50% against farmer Joe is hardly a decent ability, let alone what is described for gargoyles. Against the the 37.5% of the population that has a 12 or higher wisdom, it is found out most of the time. Against a party with proficiency in perception and higher wisdom scores it will almost always be seen.

You think this trait is an ability to auto-surprise, and it’s fine for you to rule it that way if that’s your conception of gargoyles, but as has already been said, “they can hold themselves so still that they appear inanimate” doesn’t mean they’re always successful when attempting to do so. To me, it’s uncertain and calls for a check in most cases.

Not auto surprise, but certainly better than virtually no chance to ever surprise an adventuring party.

 

[Oofta]

The bonus is that it can hide in plain sight. Against an average person that’s alert for threats (passive Perception 10) it will succeed 55% of the time, so it isn’t remotely true that it will be noticed in the majority of cases. You think this trait is an ability to auto-surprise, and it’s fine for you to rule it that way if that’s your conception of gargoyles, but as has already been said, “they can hold themselves so still that they appear inanimate” doesn’t mean they’re always successful when attempting to do so. To me, it’s uncertain and calls for a check in most cases.

So all those monsters that have false appearance are just ... what? Lying? Fake monsters?

You may not want to use them in your campaign, but "gotcha" monsters are a pretty common trope in D&D's history. Look through the construct list sometime, several have false appearance which grants them the ability to be indistinguishable from mundane inert items.

 

[Hriston]

It can't.

It does. A Stealth/Perception contest then decides if it’s noticed.

Against a party it has almost no chance of escaping notice.

It depends on the composition of the party. Certain individuals may easily be surprised, which is the point of the ability. The gargoyle doesn’t have to surprise the whole party for its trait to be effective.

First, you are tilting at Strawmen again. I didn't say the average person. I said by anyone with a bonus, so 12 or higher wisdom giving a +1 or better bonus.

You said a group of people would notice it the vast majority of the time. Most groups of people are composed of individuals who are average. Those individuals would be surprised the majority of the time.

Against an average person it has a 52.5% chance of escaping evasion. The average roll of a d20 is 10.5. Barely about 50% against farmer Joe is hardly a decent ability, let alone what is described for gargoyles.

A tie results in the gargoyle remaining unnoticed, so if it rolls a 10 or above on its DEX check (which it does 55% of the time) it surprises farmer Joe and gets dinner with very little risk.

Against the the 37.5% of the population that has a 12 or higher wisdom, it is found out most of the time.

Your population appears to have a 3d6 distribution of scores. That isn’t a default assumption. Personally, I think 3d6 yields too many outliers and prefer a distribution that produces scores 12 and above for only 27.78% of the population. Regardless, a gargoyle is only noticed half the time against a passive Perception of 11, and while its chances worsen with higher scores, those scores are relatively rare. For example, under my favored distribution, only 3.24% of the population has a WIS of 14 or higher.

Against a party with proficiency in perception and higher wisdom scores it will almost always be seen.

Not by every member of the party. Individual members can be surprised, those who haven’t invested in WIS and proficiency in Perception. Total party surprise is very difficult to achieve in this game and very powerful. If False Appearance was intended to be an auto-surprise ability I think the gargoyle’s CR would be higher than it is.

Not auto surprise, but certainly better than virtually no chance to ever surprise an adventuring party.

Maybe I don’t understand. How do adventurers notice that the perfectly still and silent gargoyles are not statues in your games?

 

[Maxperson]

It does. A Stealth/Perception contest then decides if it’s noticed.

When they are getting noticed 40% of the time by people with penalty to wisdom, it's a crappy, crappy ability.

It depends on the composition of the party. Certain individuals may easily be surprised, which is the point of the ability. The gargoyle doesn’t have to surprise the whole party for its trait to be effective.

When it's failing 35-40% of the time to surprise anyone in the party, it's virtually useless as a special ability.

You said a group of people would notice it the vast majority of the time. Most groups of people are composed of individuals who are average. Those individuals would be surprised the majority of the time.

In a group 1, probably 2 out of 5 will notice it the majority of the time. If one of them has +2 or better, it will be even more lopsided. That's an average group by the way. In your average group of 5, that 37.5% of a 12 or higher means that usually there will be two that are above average with wisdom.

A tie results in the gargoyle remaining unnoticed, so if it rolls a 10 or above on its DEX check (which it does 55% of the time) it surprises farmer Joe and gets dinner with very little risk.

If someone came to you and asked you to invest $10,000 in a stock that has a 45% chance of failing, would you really consider that "very little risk"?

Your population appears to have a 3d6 distribution of scores. That isn’t a default assumption. Personally, I think 3d6 yields too many outliers and prefer a distribution that produces scores 12 and above for only 27.78% of the population. Regardless, a gargoyle is only noticed half the time against a passive Perception of 11, and while its chances worsen with higher scores, those scores are relatively rare. For example, under my favored distribution, only 3.24% of the population has a WIS of 14 or higher.

3d6 has been standard since basic. Your favored distribution doesn't matter for this discussion, since we are discussing D&D and not house rules. 16.2% have a 14 or higher.

Maybe I don’t understand. How do adventurers notice that the perfectly still and silent gargoyles are not statues in your games?

With perception. How else? It's just not an opposed hide check as the gargoyle isn't trying to hide. It's more in the nature of a disguise. What I would do is set a DC to notice odd things, like perhaps light scratches near the feet of where the gargoyles perch. Pushing off and landing might cause scraping. There might be bits of dried blood on the "statues".

By the way, in 4e gargoyles actually turn into statues. They don't hold still like one. They don't just look like one. They become statues. It's crystal clear that you are just choosing to ignore the intent and logic behind gargoyles for some reason. And that's fine for your game, but it's not how they work by RAW. Read the 5e description again. The ability doesn't involve a hide check at all. They are simply flat out indistinguishable from a statue. The PCs aren't even supposed to get a roll to tell the difference. If they were, there would be rules for it.

 

[Ovinomancer]

When they are getting noticed 40% of the time by people with penalty to wisdom, it's a crappy, crappy ability.



When it's failing 35-40% of the time to surprise anyone in the party, it's virtually useless as a special ability.



In a group 1, probably 2 out of 5 will notice it the majority of the time. If one of them has +2 or better, it will be even more lopsided. That's an average group by the way. In your average group of 5, that 37.5% of a 12 or higher means that usually there will be two that are above average with wisdom.



If someone came to you and asked you to invest $10,000 in a stock that has a 45% chance of failing, would you really consider that "very little risk"?



3d6 has been standard since basic. Your favored distribution doesn't matter for this discussion, since we are discussing D&D and not house rules. 16.2% have a 14 or higher.



With perception. How else? It's just not an opposed hide check as the gargoyle isn't trying to hide. It's more in the nature of a disguise. What I would do is set a DC to notice odd things, like perhaps light scratches near the feet of where the gargoyles perch. Pushing off and landing might cause scraping. There might be bits of dried blood on the "statues".

By the way, in 4e gargoyles actually turn into statues. They don't hold still like one. They don't just look like one. They become statues. It's crystal clear that you are just choosing to ignore the intent and logic behind gargoyles for some reason. And that's fine for your game, but it's not how they work by RAW. Read the 5e description again. The ability doesn't involve a hide check at all. They are simply flat out indistinguishable from a statue. The PCs aren't even supposed to get a roll to tell the difference. If they were, there would be rules for it.

Emphasis added.

This is cool! Do it! But... if you're going to argue that you can do this, perhaps you should also allow others the leeway to set their DCs how they wish, yes? And, if that's rolling DEX(stealth) instead of your preferred method, that's still good. [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] hasn't misread the rules here, and no amount of appeals to the authority of 4e (or basic, for stats) really makes his way any worse than yours.

 

[Ovinomancer]

So all those monsters that have false appearance are just ... what? Lying? Fake monsters?

You may not want to use them in your campaign, but "gotcha" monsters are a pretty common trope in D&D's history. Look through the construct list sometime, several have false appearance which grants them the ability to be indistinguishable from mundane inert items.

I'm amused that you add your 'disclaimer' as if it actually absolves you of arguing the opposite as often as you do.

 

[SkidAce]

Does any of the individuals here think a mimic should be detectable? I do not. But they have a similar ability to gargoyles...

A mimic in its altered form is nearly unrecognizable until potential prey blunders into its reach, whereupon the monster sprouts pseudopods and attacks.