Ending invisibility

[kender]

During last gaming session this situation happened:







the fighter was held prisoner and the sorcerer cast on him invisibility but after a round or two the fighter was unable to escape (they were fighting on fresh snow) and had to end his spell (without attacking anyone) in order to save his life.













In my opinion he could have done it at will; but the sorc. said he was the only who could end the spell if the fighter didn't anything that make invisibility end (such as attacks).













How would you rule this?

 

[Artoomis]

During last gaming session this situation happened:

he fighter was held prisoner and the sorcerer cast on him invisibility but after a round or two the fighter was unable to escape (they were fighting on fresh snow) and had to end his spell (without attacking anyone) in order to save his life.

In my opinion he could have done it at will; but the sorc. said he was the only who could end the spell if the fighter didn't anything that make invisibility end (such as attacks).

How would you rule this?

Simplicity itself - only the spell caster can end his own spell, and only if it is dismissable. Invisibility is dismissable, so the sorceror could end the spell - but the fighter most certainly cannot (unless he takes an offensive action like attacking).

I suppose you could allow the fighter to "attack" a fly or gnat or something, thus ending the spell, if you wanted to be really, really generous.

 

[Pielorinho]

Re: Re: Ending invisibility

I think I know one sorcerer who's gonna get dopesmacked by his fighterfriend if he doesn't watch out.

Daniel

 

[Crothian]

Remember, the fighter can technically attack the ground or other mundane object. Even if he's tied up he can kick or throw a shoulder at the ground, so while he couldn't end it with a mental command, he should have had no problem causing the spell to end.

 

[SpikeyFreak]

Remember, the fighter can technically attack the ground or other mundane object. Even if he's tied up he can kick or throw a shoulder at the ground, so while he couldn't end it with a mental command, he should have had no problem causing the spell to end.

I don't know about that. It has been stated that cutting the rope on a rope bridge wouldn't end the spell, and that's an attack on the rope.

I would say that he should have thrown a snow-ball at someone.

--Hungry Spikey

edit: actually the spell desciprtion says: "The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature."

 

[godfear]

I don't know about attacking inanimate objects causing the invisibility to fade. In the spell description it specifically says that you can cut a rope bridge free from your side (even if there are enemies on it) without breaking your invisibility. An attack roll would be needed to sunder the ropes, but you wouldn't lose the spell because of it. Attacking the ground should be right out!

*EDiT*

(Points at Spikey's Post... Yea... What he said)

 

[Pielorinho]

edit: actually the spell desciprtion says: "The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature."

Does the description say, "The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature other than himself"?

If not, and if no sorcerer is around to smack, the fighter could bite her tongue and suddenly appear.

Since she's not proficient in bite attacks she'd suffer a -4 penalty to hit, of course, and since she's attacking unarmed, she'd be subject to an AoO. OTOH, you could reasonably argue that her tongue wasn't protected by her armor or shield, and she could hold her tongue still, effectively granting it a -5 dex penalty to its AC.



Daniel

 

[Crothian]

I didn't realize the spell specified creature. I was basing mine of a Sage response answer. There is a feat that allows you to stand as a free action if you make an attack. The Sage ruled that you could attack the ground and then use the free action to stand up. It was something like that.