Does Summon Swarm partly counter invisibility?

[Noumenon]

It would seem that covering an invisible creature with a swarm of spiders would tend to outline its form quite clearly while it was in the square. Should Summon Swarm work as an immobile Faerie Fire? How about a swarm of bats or locusts, where the form would not be as clear? And swarms are good against invisible creatures in general, aren't they, because their attack auto hits?

This is all for the one round until the invisible creature moves away.

 

[Gilladian]

This is off the cuff, since I don't have books handy, but I would say that just like being in water, fog, or any other "air-filling" effect, a swarm of tiny or diminutive creatures would fill the space well enough to make the invisible person visible. My guess would be that tiny or larger swarms are too bulky to outline the invisible person effectively - the swarm would provide as much cover as revelation.

And yes, as soon as the invisible person moved out of the swarm's area, the effect would end. Also, invisibility is no protection from ongoing or automatic damage.

 

[kitcik]

I might drop them from full concealment to regular concealment while in the AoE.

 

[Noumenon]

The XP links aren't working right now but good point about the obscuring effect of larger swarms and I think the 20% conceal is what I'll go with now.

 

[the Jester]

I generally think it's a good idea to make one spell of a given level also do the same thing as another spell of the same level.

In other words, summon swarm and see invisibility ought to remain discrete spells, without overlapping abilities, or else you've promoted summon swarm to summon swarm that gives the whole party see invisibility for a round.

 

[Dandu]

You can have spells that will help detect invisible people. For example, if you had a spell that caused rain to start falling...

 

[Noumenon]

I used control water last night to overflow a fountain so I could see the hellcats' footprints.

I generally think it's a good idea to make one spell of a given level also do the same thing as another spell of the same level.

In other words, summon swarm and see invisibility ought to remain discrete spells, without overlapping abilities, or else you've promoted summon swarm to summon swarm that gives the whole party see invisibility for a round.

"Only one round and only one creature and keep some of your miss chance" is pretty discrete. I could call it summon swarm that poorly duplicates faerie fire for a round.

 

[the Jester]

Except that when you direct the swarm to the invisible guy the next round, it becomes "summon swarm + poor man's faerie fire" every round.

I'm just saying, as a dm, I wouldn't go for it.

 

[Buugipopuu]

It's a very weak version of Faerie Fire that doesn't help against darkness, is Close ranged, needs Concentration to function, doesn't totally eliminate concealment, is limited if the creature moves beyond the swarm's movement range, or somewhere where the swarm can't follow, or moves somewhere where you can't detect it (so you have to play 'guess the square' all over again). It also cockblocks your melee fighters if you're not careful, because Summon Swarm can't distinguish between friend or foe, and merely attacks the nearest creature to it.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

Regardless if the spell would aid the PC's in seeing the invisible target, I'd rule that the swarm itself, although possibly indicating an empty space around the individual creatures, would still not see the invisible target and therefore not be able to attack it.

Since the swarm wouldn't be as effective at spotting an invisible target and would do no damage, why not just cast See Invisibility? Is this in the context of a Sorcerer's limited spell selection? That's the kind of spell that should be carried around in a scroll anyway.