Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Caliburn101" data-source="post: 7349916" data-attributes="member: 6802178">There are touch based attacks in the game and touch based spells - neither of which may be successful but which count as an attack. A grapple is a touch based attack that does no damage for instance, and would break invisibility. A touch spell or natural ability which the opponent saved against would in fact just be a touch, but would break invisibility.Why have an artificial split between a touch that doesn't do anything to the target whatsoever (because they saved, or the attack vs. AC was not successful) compared to a touch which successfully distracts?If you accept that invisible distraction by touching is a possibility, then something like a Paladin's Lay on Hands should not break invisibility as it is not an attack or a spell - which would be an abuse of the system, and for that matter neither would a Clerics Turn Undead attempt, even if it was successful.Who needs the Sanctuary spell when you can do such things?Moreover, it is open to further abuse - you could enjoy advantage rolling to touch someone in combat and THEN cast a touch spell after you have done so with your spare hand - breaking invisibility after the fact if the DM doesn't count the initial attempt to touch as an attack.There are so many ways to game this if the GM doesn't regard a touch to distract while invisible as an attack, as the spell is poorly written. By way of illustration, on the one hand a you break invisibility if you fire a bow silently and miss everything in the area by a mile, but you can summon radiant power from your god and have all undead flee from around you without breaking invisibility.Counter-intuitive to say the least.If this was allowed, by the same logic, imagine the Warlock whose familiar has had invisibility cast on it and takes the aid action every round on hapless targets of the masters Eldritch Blast. A second level spell for unlimited advantages on attack with no chance for the targets to avoid it unless they can see invisible... I would argue that any sensible GM is not going to allow that to stand.</blockquote>

Verification