Detecting Invisibility

[Infiniti2000]

I thought all Tenser's had a loud electric motor in the back?

Exactly! If one assumes the disk can make one silent, why not other things? Sitting on the disk makes you invisible, too, right?

Regarding the disk itself, Switchback, you'd have to double-check the book but I believe the definition of "force" means that the disk is invisible. At least, it did in previous editions.

 

[Badwe]

not intending to perform thread necromancy but I am a DM having a somewhat similarly hard time coming up with a fair adjucation. Additionally, besides this thread I've read the one about gnomes/eyebite, several threads on WotC and gleemax, and pored over the rules to completion (I think, maybe i missed something).

One of my players is a feylock, eladrin, with a +3 modifier to dex. He took training in stealth as his feat and everyone got to pick backgrounds so he took focus in stealth as well. Clearly he wants to be stealthy.

The new stealth rules have alleviated things somewhat in that he has to be out of LoS before he can attempt his stealth check, but then the rules seem to imply that so long as he maintains cover or concealment, which he can do via his "3 steps to concealment" ability, he can stay hidden until he attacks or fails (unlikely he'll fail). Now i'm fine with letting him go largely unattacked and having a decent bonus the rest of the time, that seems to be the point.

The problem that arises is somewhat more of a metagame issue. Aside from the bonuses he gets from being hidden, he takes issue when i move the monsters in a way that seems to be clearly aware of where his character is and should therefore not be done. Much to the consternation of the remaining players, I allowed him to pull his mini off the board and secretly record his moves. None of us suspect he is cheating, it just adds substantially to combat times, especially when each creature is spending their minor action to make a perception check, we're adding about 5 rolls to every single round, but at least I don't have to question weather or not i'm metagaming.

Unfortunately, then we got to the point where he had no good way to get out of LoS with EVERY monster on the board, but managed to eyebite one and proceeded to stealth from invisibility. Now he's hidden to only one creature but the rest can detect him (and at a -5, hit him). Still, he can't take his mini off the board and though the target he's hiding from doesn't attack him, i instinctively shift this archer away and he states the kobold shouldn't do that. By now the whole table is discussing what would happen "in real life" if your assailant suddenly disappeared, and the case was even made that the eladrin warlock might have feystepped, the kobold doesn't know. Finally fed up with it all i agreed to roll a die to determine if the kobold was smart enough to guess he should shift away. So now not only can he not be attacked, has combat advantage, and can do so indefinitely, now his mere presence inflicts a condition upon enemies somewhere between muddle/confuse and dominated.

I'm honestly stumped because in concept the character seems very cool, but in practice it's dragging my session down and feels fairly unbalanced. I want to come to a solution without squashing his character concept. Also, and maybe i'm just a lazy DM, but i can't be bothered to reason out what each of the monsters would or wouldn't do given incomplete information that i, the DM, have. I'm trying to make a dungeon, not answer a philosophical quandrary.

So long story short: i'm wondering if anyone else has had this situation and how they handled it, or perhaps how they would handle it. Also, most of the info related to this was from before the stealth errata, so if anyone has found anything particularly new that would be helpful.

 

[Infiniti2000]

What jumped out at me was the double standard of the player. He wants you to trust him that he's not cheating and yet he accuses you to your face of cheating (metagaming). Very bad form on your player's part.

 

[tmatk]

Firstly, I agree with Infinti, your player is being ridiculous. If he doesn't trust you as a DM he should find a new one. Put your foot down and don't let him take the mini off the table, period.

Also, make sure he's making a -5 check every time he shadowwalks, since he's moving more then 2 squares.

Unfortunately, then we got to the point where he had no good way to get out of LoS with EVERY monster on the board, but managed to eyebite one and proceeded to stealth from invisibility. Now he's hidden to only one creature but the rest can detect him (and at a -5, hit him). Still, he can't take his mini off the board and though the target he's hiding from doesn't attack him, i instinctively shift this archer away and he states the kobold shouldn't do that. By now the whole table is discussing what would happen "in real life" if your assailant suddenly disappeared, and the case was even made that the eladrin warlock might have feystepped, the kobold doesn't know. Finally fed up with it all i agreed to roll a die to determine if the kobold was smart enough to guess he should shift away. So now not only can he not be attacked, has combat advantage, and can do so indefinitely, now his mere presence inflicts a condition upon enemies somewhere between muddle/confuse and dominated.

Invisibility is a -5 to hit, thats it. If the PC doesn't stealth from all foes that can see him, then he's not stealthed at all. Look at as the monsters calling out the invisible guy's location to his allies.

 

[Nytmare]

I wrote like a dozen different grumbly responses about your friend, but in the end decided to just agree with what Infiniti said. If he can trust you to pretend that he's an extra-dimensional elf, he shouldn't have any problems trusting you to pretend that he's an invisible extra-dimensional elf.

Now for a handful of different "at my table"s:

Unless there's a specific meta-game that I have planned for an invisible creature, they stay on the board and I put a white marker under them so that everyone knows that they're invisible and that they've got a -5 to hit them.

If the creature is hidden, and you don't make the perception check, you can't attack it; or more to the point, you can't hit it. We ignore the whole "you have to guess what square it occupies" and simply pretend that you chose the wrong space to swing your sword.


If the character is trying to snag a hidd-invisible creature in an area of effect, I decide on a case by case basis if there's a chance that they might do it as a smart character, instead of a smart-assed player.

• "I'd assume that he's running for the door." Sure.
• "I'd assume that he's running for A door." Sure, flip a coin.
• "I aim for the two guys he came in here with and hope I catch him in the blast." Why the heck not?
• "I am for this square cause I can see the miniature for the guy right here on the map." Sorry you missed.

Thankfully we all play together nicely and we've not yet had an incident where the players (at least overtly) use their knowledge of where the invisible things are to their own advantage.

In general I leave the enviornmental specifics of what screws over the pee, and en pee cees till after the dice are rolled. In general, dusty hallways and squeaky floor boards are only there after someone flubs a stealth roll or makes a perception check.

To avoid arguments and confusion, spells and effects look like the spells and effects that they are. If you're fey stepping, it looks like you're fey stepping, complete with fey-stepping light and sound and smell effects. When something turns invisible it looks like it turns invisible, and it looks nothing like something that's teleporting. I'm all for reskinning powers, but not in such a way that it makes the powers more powerful. If a player wanted to try to confound and confuse his enemies in a clever way, I'd let them try to bluff (maybe also by burning an action point in the process) them into thinking that they were teleporting instead of turning invisible.

All skill checks are active vs passive so we don't have to keep track of past rolls. If you're hiding you roll against their perception + 10. If they're looking for you, they roll against your stealth + 10.

 

[Badwe]

definitely appreciate the suggestions, and i think they're inline with what i want to do. Even though it never came up with this (relatively new) group, i generally just put invisibility as a status where you get -5 to be hit and leave it on the board too. Too much fiddly-ness for my taste otherwise.

I guess i'm wussy-footing around the issue because this was the guy's first and second session (we do doubles) ever gaming with me and i didn't want him to think i was antagonizing him. Just the same, i never want to have another argument of "what would a kobold do?". I liked the suggestion of forcing a bluff check to fool the kobold if he wants it to think he did something other than teleport, wish i had thought of it at the table!

I'm thinking i'll send out an email to everyone at some point to the effect. thanks again for the reinforcement, gents.