This may be a stupid question bit im alittle rusty at my rules, are they considered the same bonus (a concealment bonus) or is it the case that an invisible and displaced creature gets a 50% chance to miss if targeted (invisibility) and if that hits they get ANOTHER 50% chance to miss (displacement) (I know they dont stack outright)?
Does invisibility and displacement apply at the same time??
- Thread starter Belzbet
- Start date
Wyvernhand
First Post
I don't have the quote in front of me, but check the Rules Compendium. Multiple miss chances expressed as percentiles do not stack. The only thing you can layer is a non-invisibility miss chance (like blur or displacement) and Mirror Image.
Thurbane
First Post
I think Blink will work in conjunction with a visual-based miss chance, like Blur, Displacement or Invisibility...
Empirate
First Post
Mirror Image (eight images), Blink, Displacement, and Entropic Shield: 2.2 percent hit chance with ranged attacks, 2.8 percent for melee. With a successful attack roll, that is.
result: layered miss chance effects >>> armor class. Every time.
Also, to answer the OP's question: it has nothing to do with bonuses and everything with visibility. Displacement plus Invisibility really only does anything for you if you fight creatures with and without Blindsight at the same time. Displacement relies on vision, it produces an illusionary image of the target. If the target is invisible, Displacement produces an invisible illusionary image.
(However, one could even argue that Invisibility does nothing if Displacement was cast first, and vice versa: after all, Displacement already renders the target invisible, then reproduces a figment of what the target looks like 2' further left (or right, or wherever). If, OTOH, the target is already invisible, Displacement has nothing to reproduce. I wouldn't rule it like that in my game, though.)
result: layered miss chance effects >>> armor class. Every time.
Also, to answer the OP's question: it has nothing to do with bonuses and everything with visibility. Displacement plus Invisibility really only does anything for you if you fight creatures with and without Blindsight at the same time. Displacement relies on vision, it produces an illusionary image of the target. If the target is invisible, Displacement produces an invisible illusionary image.
(However, one could even argue that Invisibility does nothing if Displacement was cast first, and vice versa: after all, Displacement already renders the target invisible, then reproduces a figment of what the target looks like 2' further left (or right, or wherever). If, OTOH, the target is already invisible, Displacement has nothing to reproduce. I wouldn't rule it like that in my game, though.)
Wyvernhand
First Post
Wrong wrong wrong wrong.
The only "miss chance" that would stack would be Mirror Image, since its not a true "miss chance", but rather a chance to hit a fake image. Mirror Image won't work with Invisibility, though, explicitly, because if you are invisible, your images are too (and the clause that you can ignore Mirror Image if you close your eyes enforces this).
Displacement, Blink, Blur, Incorporporialness, Darkness, Entropic Warding and Invisibility all don't stack. You can't exceed 50% because no effect grants more than 50%. The only thing that layering them would give you is that your foe would need varying degrees of offense to overcome them. See Invis would counter Invisibility and half of Blinking, but not Displacement or Blur. True Seeing would counter most of them, but not the last 20% of Blinking. Etc.
RulesCompendium said:
The only "miss chance" that would stack would be Mirror Image, since its not a true "miss chance", but rather a chance to hit a fake image. Mirror Image won't work with Invisibility, though, explicitly, because if you are invisible, your images are too (and the clause that you can ignore Mirror Image if you close your eyes enforces this).
Displacement, Blink, Blur, Incorporporialness, Darkness, Entropic Warding and Invisibility all don't stack. You can't exceed 50% because no effect grants more than 50%. The only thing that layering them would give you is that your foe would need varying degrees of offense to overcome them. See Invis would counter Invisibility and half of Blinking, but not Displacement or Blur. True Seeing would counter most of them, but not the last 20% of Blinking. Etc.
Empirate
First Post
Thanks for the actual rules on this, I was unaware of that bit of information!
However, Rules Compendium can kiss my behind on this, as in a few other instances. That ruling is just retarded.
Blink and Displacement not stacking? I don't see it. Displacement makes it impossible to see exactly where you are, how you will move next etc. Blink on the other hand makes it so you're simply not there to be hit half the time. Why shouldn't the two both apply and work together to make it even harder to hit you?
Similarly with Incorporeality.
Probably balance reasons. Retarded from a logical standpoint though.
However, Rules Compendium can kiss my behind on this, as in a few other instances. That ruling is just retarded.
Blink and Displacement not stacking? I don't see it. Displacement makes it impossible to see exactly where you are, how you will move next etc. Blink on the other hand makes it so you're simply not there to be hit half the time. Why shouldn't the two both apply and work together to make it even harder to hit you?
Similarly with Incorporeality.
Probably balance reasons. Retarded from a logical standpoint though.
Eldritch_Lord
Adventurer
Prior to the Rules Compendium's *ahem* clarification, the only miss chances that didn't stack were concealment miss chances, as the definition of concealment specified that it didn't stack with itself. Which makes sense--it's hard to be more concealed than totally concealed, so capping concealment at the amount granted by total concealment is fine. But the only reason the RC stealth nerfs miss chances is that the WotC designers didn't realize until then that AC << Miss Chances and they wanted to fix their mistake from 8 years before. I continue to play with all stacking miss chances (sans concealment) and it works out just fine.
Wyvernhand
First Post
Agreed. You can't get any worse to hit than if you just closed your eyes and swung blindly.
The funny thing is, the RC is kinda wrong. Incorporiality doesn't really give a miss chance. It's a chance that the Incorp creature is actually immune to the magic weapon at that moment. It behaves similar to a miss chance, in that it is a flat chance to miss, but its based on a different principle. If it wasn't explicitly called out by the RC, there would be a case to argue.
The funny thing is, the RC is kinda wrong. Incorporiality doesn't really give a miss chance. It's a chance that the Incorp creature is actually immune to the magic weapon at that moment. It behaves similar to a miss chance, in that it is a flat chance to miss, but its based on a different principle. If it wasn't explicitly called out by the RC, there would be a case to argue.
Similar Threads
D&D (2024)
Creating good stealth rules for 2024 5e
