Beating invisibility

[hong]

Well, yeah, I s'pose. Kind of like you would have to go outside the rules to protect yourself against other magical spells or effects if you didn't have magic.

But even there, I don't think there is a clear distinction here. Scent, blindsight, tremorsense and really good hearing - are these "nonmagical"?

They're all magical, yes.

1) Your first three are not something that you can just pick up on a whim, if you don't happen to be of the right race. So how do you get these? Magic.

2) Hearing just tells you there's someone there. This is something you could have figured out by the fireballs/hail of arrows already. And again, D&D by design makes it difficult to get skills up unless you're of the right class. So we're back to magic.

In any case, I really don't see that as a valid point. Invisibility is a magical effect, and there are many magical counters to it. Thus, the rules support a balance of powers vis-a-vis invisibility.

The rules support a balance of powers _assuming these powers are available_. Sometimes, especially for small parties or when players don't know what the game expects of them, this assumption is violated. Even then, often only one guy will be able to detect the invisible guy, leaving the rest to fend for themselves. This is not usually much fun for the rest.

Further, because of this assumption, it means that a lot of the time, _monsters_ will be unable to do anything. Only a select few monsters have all the skills needed to present a balanced encounter by themselves: demons, dragons, maybe powerful templated undead. All others really need favourable circumstances, overwhelming numbers, or custom abilities if they're not to be easily overcome.

If you disallow the magical counters (by arguing that invisibility is "unbalanced" if you "don't have magic"), then you're not really addressing the balance issue within the context of the whole ruleset. That's like taking one weight off of the scale and then saying "look how unbalanced this is".

1) You gotta start somewhere.

2) Let me tell you about all the weights I've taken off....

Which is, of course, the default assumption of D&D. Not that you can't change that if you want, but it seems silly to me to discount this assumption. If you want to tip the apple cart, go for it! But don't say: "look how bad this is now that I've tipped the cart."

What on earth? I'm not complaining after I tipped the cart. I complained BEFORE tipping the cart, which is why I tipped it.

Some people don't like this aspect. I understand that. I've never had a real problem with it. I just see it as a necessary effect for balancing the escalation of power in a simple manner. There are several ways to adjust for this, but I've never really felt the need.

I think the experience of having one party death per session for about 6 months in our high-level game helped persuade me to make a few changes....

Agreed, and that's fine. It seems like a valid reason to nerf it in your own game. I probably wouldn't, but might avoid using a "certain kill" tactic against inexperienced players, but that's just me.

... or even against experienced players. Speaking of which, I am --> <-- this close to banning (or nerfing) blasphemy.

Potayto, potahto. I find some implications of the D&D rules to be credible (cf. Eberron) and others to be less credible. YMMV and all that. I disagree that greater invis has no major reason to exist - it seems like a natural area for magical research: if I can turn invisible, but the spell ends whenever I attack someone, then I'd like to research a spell that overcomes this limitation.

Thinking too hard along these lines will rot your brane. You have been warned!

 

[hong]

Note the hyperbole in the second to the last sentence. It's not practically impossible to pinpoint the location of an invisible creature in certain circumstances. An invisible spellcaster, for example, is going to have to at least talk with a strong tone of voice to cast spells (barring Silent Spells). This is a DC 0 Listen check, not counting modifiers for range (-1 per 10 ft.) or barriers.

No. The DC 0 Listen check just tells you someone is present, if you hadn't already figured that out from the explosions. The DC is 20 to figure out _where_ they are, which is the important bit.

Since we're talking about a sorcerer able to cast greater invisibility, let's assume an 8th-level party. Now consider the first CR 8 monster I found in the MM: an efreeti. This creature has Listen +15.

Not everything has tons of ranks in Listen. Not by a long shot, especially not classed/templated NPCs.

In short, greater invisibility is far from a game killer. There are plenty of counters written into the rules.

... if you have them, anyway. Cf R-P-S.

 

[hong]

First, no, you're not sorry, or else you wouldn't have said it. Secondly, no, nobody had to say it. Third, perhaps you've forgotten agreeing to the rules for this forum, but those rules explicitly forbid insulting other posters. Please let me know whether you intend to start following those rules; if you don't, please email me, at siuloir@mindspring.com.

Finally, Hong, I do hope you'll resist the temptation to respond in kind.

Daniel

Spoilsport.

 

[hong]

I thought the entire point of mid-to-high-level play was to bring in odd mechanics that went far beyond regular HPs and attacks and such.

Indeed.

Umber Hulk. Ooh, that Confusion ability just nerfed those insane BAB. What do you do? Use non-melee tactics? Risk being taken out for the duration of the battle to get one round of full attack against a beastie with a not-so-good AC?

Pfeh. Any experienced player knows that maxed-out saves are an essential part of surviving high-level D&D. Further, even if you're a melee tank who's inexplicably forgotten to get Iron Will and pump up your Wis, there's always the subtle and highly complex tactic of closing or averting your eyes.

Displacer Beast. Darn, another beastie that nerfs melee and archers big time. They're fast and have reach, so they can smack you around, even tumblers. Put two of 'em in a medium-sized room and your casters will be forced to cast defensively or risk Concentration checks - whoops, now the miss percentage is suddenly on spells as well as combat. This will string the combat along longer than otherwise.

Casting defensively is trivial at high levels, and displacer beasts are wimps anyway.

Succubus. Whoops, one of your party is charmed, and refuses to fight, while the allies she gated in are whipping up on your other part members. One entire set of abilities at your disposal is now nerfed. Better solve it using other tools!

Heh. You haven't even mentioned the most broken aspect of the succubus (at least in 3.0)....

Beastie with massive SR? Hope you have high BAB, or Melf's Acid Arrow!

SR is a sucky mechanic, yes. Just like DR 20/x or 30/x in 3.0 was a sucky mechanic. Unfortunately, it's too ingrained into the spell system to dike out as easily as greater invis.

Spells are the same way. Haste/Slow. Hold/Remove Paralysis. Charm/Break Enchantment. Entangle/Freedom of Movement. There's always a tactic and a 'trump' or 'nerf' for that tactic.

Rock trumps scissors. Paper nerfs rock.


Hong "or is it the other way round?" Ooi

 

[Syntallah]

Hong, you don't need to go outside the rules framework to overcome invisibility. We've already seen dozens of counters, within the strict guidelines of the established rules, that immediately counter invisibility. You don't need to "be creative" (although it helps) to use:

see invisibility, blindsight, blindsense, tremorsense, invisibility purge, glitterdust, faerie fire, or true seeing.

So, while I completely respect and support your freedom to play your game the way you like it, I am just pointing out that your contention that invisibility is somehow the "only spell" that requires someone to go outside the rules framework to counter, is incorrect. You do not have to go outside the rules to counter invisibility.

Ozmar the Observant

I have to agree with Hong. In the Campaign I've just started I have banned the spells Greater Invisibility and Fly because as soon as they are able to, every spellcaster that's been run in one of my campaigns has taken these spells. This combo takes out most of the counters mentioned in earlier posts. Combine these two spells with the Silent spell feat and you've got a problem. My Players wouldn't think outside the box so I have "encouraged" them to.

 

[hong]

I personally see nothing wrong with tossing a problematic spell or ability. Much like Hong, I need things to look good and make some kind of sense.

When the creeping HEROization of D&D is complete, then will the DM's prerogative to change game assumptions be given its proper due, and not before, it seems.

For instance, Shadowdancers are banned - as well as anything with the Hide In Plain Sight ability. It doesn't exist, it makes no sense. You can't hide in plain sight unless you're invisible. If you're invisible, say so instead of using the Hide mechanic. It makes no sense - if someone makes their spot check against HIPS I have no idea how to describe that to the group other than 'now you see him. But the others can't.' Some people have no trouble with this, but I find it highly distasteful.

Heh. I complain about greater invis, but also have no problem with HIPS. It's just your basic ninja "now you see me, now you don't" ability, really.

 

[maddman75]

Heh. I complain about greater invis, but also have no problem with HIPS. It's just your basic ninja "now you see me, now you don't" ability, really.

My problem is my compulsion to narrate everything. And I have no idea how to narrate that. Ninjas don't just disappear, they hide, take cover, stick to the shadows. I can't parse it from game mechanics into narrative, therefore its history.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

First, no, you're not sorry, or else you wouldn't have said it. Secondly, no, nobody had to say it. Third, perhaps you've forgotten agreeing to the rules for this forum, but those rules explicitly forbid insulting other posters. Please let me know whether you intend to start following those rules; if you don't, please email me, at siuloir@mindspring.com.

Finally, Hong, I do hope you'll resist the temptation to respond in kind.

Daniel

I was sorry that I had to be the one to say it because some people wouldn't see that I wasn't insulting him. Just telling him to work harder.

I do think it was the most logical answer and should have been brought to his attention. Just because something isn't normally said doesn't mean it is automatically an insult.

I was citing his weakness as a DM to challenge him to do better. An insult requires ill will of which I had none.

He doesn't seem to have disagreed with me or taken it the wrong way so I don't see why such a stern reprimand was necessary.

Oh... and one other thing. So Hide in Plain Sight is okay? *double take* How does that make sense? Invisible Stalkers...how about them? What about explosive runes... I mean BAM out of nowhere somebody could be killed by that an enemy they never saw. Sharp objects? Maybe, since as a good shepherd you need to keep your players safe, you should get rid of all weapons that do lethal damage... I mean somebody might get hurt.

Peace

 

[hong]

I was sorry that I had to be the one to say it because some people wouldn't see that I wasn't insulting him. Just telling him to work harder.

... because, as we all know, D&D is supposed to be character building.

He doesn't seem to have disagreed with me or taken it the wrong way so I don't see why such a stern reprimand was necessary.

You're new here, aren't you?

 

[Mark Chance]

No. The DC 0 Listen check just tells you someone is present, if you hadn't already figured that out from the explosions. The DC is 20 to figure out _where_ they are, which is the important bit.

That's what I meant. Sorry for my lack of clarity.

Not everything has tons of ranks in Listen. Not by a long shot, especially not classed/templated NPCs.

One doesn't "tons of ranks in Listen" to make a DC 20 Listen check, but that wasn't my point. My point was that defeating greater invisibility is something that can be done in a variety of different ways, some of which involve no magic or special abilities at all.