D&D 5E Greater Invis and Stealth checks, how do you rule it?

[Crimson Longinus]

I think it would be except for extenuating circumstances (e.g. silence spell) since an effectively invisible creature does still have to be quiet to be considered hidden, and in combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around.

Except this leads to blatantly absurd results so no.

 

[iserith]

Except this leads to blatantly absurd results so no.

I don't see why this is necessarily so. I would also add that while the DM can overrule what the rules intend at any time (the rules serve the DM, not the other way around), lack of clarity on this matter can lead to inconsistent adjudication which makes it harder for players to make informed decisions during play. "Hide action to hide" is relatively easy for players to understand.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I don't see why this is necessarily so. I would also add that while the DM can overrule what the rules intend at any time (the rules serve the DM, not the other way around), lack of clarity on this matter can lead to inconsistent adjudication which makes it harder for players to make informed decisions during play. "Hide action to hide" is relatively easy for players to understand.

And not being able to see makes locating things hella difficult is even easier to understand. In fact it is exactly what anyone would normally expect to happen.

 

[iserith]

And not being able to see makes locating things hella difficult is even easier to understand. In fact it is exactly what anyone would normally expect to happen.

Difficult, but not necessarily impossible. You appear to be leaving off the requirement that the hidden creature not be heard. There's two criteria here. Because most creatures are alert to signs of danger all around, this suggests uncertainty as to an invisible creature not being heard, hence the Dexterity (Stealth) check as part of the Hide action. (The meaningful consequence for failure is spending an action for no gain in a circumstance where you effectively have limited actions.) If the uncertainty is removed, however, such as with a silence spell, then the creature is hidden, no roll, since they are not clearly seen nor heard.

 

[Oofta]

And not being able to see makes locating things hella difficult is even easier to understand. In fact it is exactly what anyone would normally expect to happen.

Particularly exact location unless they're really close. That's why sometimes I'll give general direction at most.

In the case of the OP the enemies may have heard the direction the monk started moving away but saying you can locate the position of someone on the other side of a basketball court in the middle of a game is pretty far fetched.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Difficult, but not necessarily impossible. You appear to be leaving off the requirement that the hidden creature not be heard. There's two criteria here. Because most creatures are alert to signs of danger all around, this suggests uncertainty as to an invisible creature not being heard, hence the Dexterity (Stealth) check as part of the Hide action. (The meaningful consequence for failure is spending an action for no gain in a circumstance where you effectively have limited actions.) If the uncertainty is removed, however, such as with a silence spell, then the creature is hidden, no roll, since they are not clearly seen nor heard.

We are talking about a situation where the creature that cannot be seen has not taken a hide action. People argue that in such a situation their location would automatically be know. That is absurd. No one has been arguing that locating things you cannot see would be impossible, merely that it shouldn't be automatic!

 

[Maxperson]

You talk about stealth checks in combat and when I ask what the stealth check is for, if not to achieve the benefits of the Hide action, you say "it's not about being stealthy." Wha?????

If you go back and look at the bolded part of the post I quoted when I mentioned stealth, you'll see why. The person I was quoting described a declaration of stealth while saying no roll. If a player describes being stealthy, a roll will usually happen.

What is the invisible character doing that is stealthy - or, if you prefer, requiring a Dex(Stealth) check - in combat if not trying to achieve the benefits gained by the Hide action?

Invisibility by definition is an attempt to be unseen. which is part of being stealthy. Combined with the environmental conditions, it can result in being hidden.

Let's say the situation is a combat where there are no special environmental effects (fog, spell effects, full cover, etc) that affect perception. There's just the combat noise that could be a factor in hearing someone who is invisible. At what noise level do you draw the line for an invisible creature to be heard or not, assuming they are not actively trying to be stealthy? Are they always unheard if it is a battle with armored combatants with metal weapons?

If you are looking for some sort of chart where X combatants make Y noise, I don't have one. I take each case as it comes and make a ruling. Circumstances like positioning, terrain, what arms and armor are being used(and by whom), etc. all play into my decision.

 

[iserith]

We are talking about a situation where the creature that cannot be seen has not taken a hide action. People argue that in such a situation their location would automatically be know. That is absurd. No one has been arguing that locating things you cannot see would be impossible, merely that it shouldn't be automatic!

It is automatic though unless the creature is hidden. That typically requires the Hide action in combat. The DM can, of course, override this. I choose to follow the rules though since this makes it easier for players to make informed decisions and so there are no surprises as far as their characters or their opponents being hidden.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It is automatic though unless the creature is hidden. That typically requires the Hide action in combat. The DM can, of course, override this. I choose to follow the rules though since this makes it easier for players to make informed decisions and so there are no surprises as far as their characters or their opponents being hidden.

It being automatic is not a rule and regardless this leads to laughably absurd outcomes. If you want everone in your setting to be Daredevil and have a radar sense you can do that. I wouldn't.

 

[iserith]

It being automatic is not a rule and regardless this leads to laughably absurd outcomes. If you want everone in your setting to be Daredevil and have a radar sense you can do that. I wouldn't.

A plain reading of the Hiding sidebar in Chapter 7 suggests otherwise. But of course the DM can override. A blinded character in my game isn't Daredevil, but the character's ears still presumably work and that's sufficient in D&D 5e to notice someone else who isn't taking measures to be quiet. Said someone else still has advantage to attack the blinded character and the blinded character suffers disadvantage when attacking them.