Search results

...

Yes, more was done, no seeming about it, but everyone else was finishing up a battle. The eldritch knight and fairy were a floor below, the rest of the party unaware of what they were doing. Of the bonus action to turn invisible (DM's home-brew armor), the fairy's action to cast fly, the...

You say you understand what I am saying, yet I never said I wanted to control "what players are allowed to think." I'm talking about what their characters think. You're calling my idea "silly" and telling me to "skip" how I might run a game while championing the right for letting people...

I'm sure you meant "does" instead of "dies" but cannot interpret "tin." Anyway, I think your paraphrase of the invisible condition makes things more ambiguous. The invisible condition states on p. 291 of the PHB: "Invisible: An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic...

Dispel does not interrupt the flyer's action so would be cast when the flyer is out of the dungeon, clearly with a wall(s) between him and caster. Even if invisibility didn't keep flyer from being perceived, would the dispel - though within range - work? I don't think dispeller could intuit...

That cluster of secret doors was the horror I felt trying to run players through it.

The wand is a homebrew magic item of significant power. One of properties gave it a % chance not to turn invisible. I'm not sure why that is a problem; home-brew is fairly common.

So what if you dispel had been cast on the flying magical effect and not the wand or invisible flyer?

The spell says, "Choose one creature, object, or magical effect within range." Why do some spells say "that you can see" and this one just says "within range"? Is there a difference or just ambiguous wording?

I think it might be the wand of Orcus (not sure if it's DMG version or home-brew) because it has a skull on top and shrank when picked up.

Sorry, not trying to confuse. It happened. I wanted to post it because there was much table discussion, actually bled over to other groups nearby. I posted without actual results that might influence. In hindsight, I should have mentioned that. I was the player and don't know what the wand is...

Sure. It sounds like a home-brew wand with a specific rule giving it a chance to not turning invisible.

Except specific beats general. DM ruled wand had chance to not turn invisible that failed. I don't think anyone disagrees. Yes, if it worked, both fly and invisibility would be dispelled. Nothing says the wizard can see the invisible flyer. Did Sage Advice rule the target must be perceived...

Situation: A player is wearing magic armor that turns him invisible (DM describes "as the spell"). He grabs a wand, and his Pixie familiar casts Fly on him. So he dashes 120' up a stairwell, passed the other players who only see a flying wand (player failed roll to see if wand would turn...

I ordered for $20 from Amazon about a month ago; it's showing a ship date of September 12. Also, on Critical Role live, they mentioned that vinyl stickers of Scanlan* would be available for GenCon participants getting books signed, but they weren't ready. Any one know if these will be available...

Or run it with combat situations that the players must desperately try to avoid; it seems like that might be a scenario to look at, making it real world. I'd try my best to avoid or talk my way out of a situation with a guy holding a crossbow if I would likely be unarmed and untrained in combat.

That was my impression as well.

That sounds very similar to mine. None of my players are power gamers so the variety of player power makes them like it more.

The DMG actually says it changes its "size" not shape; to me, change size would imply changing weight. Yes, I was remembering a previous edition of the wand - Monster Manual 1 Orcus: