Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 6696023" data-attributes="member: 6799649">We can have no objection to each other putting our case, but that doesn't stop us from pointing out the errors we see in each other's argument.The main culprit is the idea that 'you aren't surprised any more when you can  move/take actions/reactions'. There are posts, even now, that boldly state that 'the rules do say this, when it's simply not the case. I don't think they're deliberately lying, I just think that it is a misunderstanding that has been repeated so many times that some people believe it to be true.But it isn't. Here's a rule example which demonstrates that 'able to move/act' does not equal 'not surprised':PHB p49, Feral Instinct: "By 7th level, your instincts are so honed that you have advantage on initiative rolls. Additionally, if you are surprised at the beginning of combat and aren't incapacitated, you can act normally on your first turn, but only if you enter your rage before doing anything else on that turn."Note that the barbarian is still surprised, but he can move/act despite being surprised. How is this possible? Because not being able to move/act was never the definition of surprise, just one of its possible effects.Note also that he is still vulnerable to auto-crits from Assassinate. Why? Because the auto-crit applies whenever the target is 'surprised', not whenever the target 'cannot move/act/react'. This is also widely misunderstood. In combat, the participants (the ones that aren't surprised) are aware that they are in danger, and are assumed to be looking around in all directions, ready to respond to any threat. BTW, this is why Assassinate auto-crits won't work on them. Therefore, when a hidden creature attacks, the victims notice.But do they always notice? Is this 'noticing' a magical effect that always works even if the victim has no way to sense the attacker or the attack?PHB p170, Skulker feat: "When you are hidden from a creature and miss it with a ranged weapon attack, making the attack doesn't reveal your position."But it magically does reveal your position, doesn't it? Even if you have no eyes and ears!The Skulker feat represents training, not magic. Most people reveal themselves with the attack, but Skulkers have been trained not to. This would not be the case if the simple act of shooting a bow let the blind person see and the deaf person hear and the oblivious person...blivious?The usual 'attacking gives your position away' is the usual consequence of shooting at people alert for danger and looking for the threat. When you attack, they see you because they are looking out for you, and you have no special training to offset that. They still have to be able to sense you, still have to be aware of a threat.Losing your cover by attacking probably will give you away, but if you are invisible and silent, the target is deaf/blind, and you haven't managed to hit, then if he didn't notice a threat before then nothing has let him notice a threat now.By what means? He can't see the arrow fly by or the bushes move. In theory, he could hear what's going on, so I'd probably let him roll a Perception/Stealth contest, but if he failed that (or was deaf anyway) he doesn't magically just know!Daredevil could! Daredevil has super hearing! Daredevil has Radar Sense! Daredevil has the means to know where the arrow is, without using vision. But even Daredevil, if he was in a sensory deprivation tank or under the effect of a supervillain power that makes him unable to use any sense, even Daredevil would not be able to catch the arrow in those circumstances. Because shooting from hidden doesn't magically let the target know anything; the target still has to be able to sense the attack and/or attacker.</blockquote>

Verification