Invisablity and Mounts.

[J-Buzz]

This came up in a recent adventure. If a rogue activates a ring of invisability, does his/her mount go invisiable also. In this case the mount was a flying carpet.

We made the ruling that the mount would not be invisiable. Which I would agree with, but the rules are not clear on this subject. So I would like to know what everyones opionion is. Also if there is a rule somewhere, please give the book, version, and page of the ruling. We could not find it anywhere.

Thanks

 

[DarkMaster]

No, unless the mount is a familiar, obviously not the case here.

 

[The Souljourner]

It depends on whether it's a creature or an object. Creatures, definitely not. Flying carpets... that's another story. Obviously your equipment goes invisible (no need to strip to be invisible)... so it's the DM's call how far "equipment" goes. Personally... I don't know, that's a really tough question. A flying carpet is like right on the edge of equipment... I guess I'd say no, it's not equipment, since it's carrying you, not vice versa.

-The Souljourner

 

[RigaMortus]

I would personally say "No" as well. I'd say that only attended objects that you physically carry (or weild, or don) are considered equipment for purposes of invisibility. The Flying Carpet is not an attended object, you aren't wearing it, and you aren't carrying it (it is carrying you).

However... if it were rolled up and placed somewhere on your person (perhaps even just tucked under your arm), and you became invisible, I'd allow the carpet to become invisible as well. But it would follow the normal invisibility rules from then on (such as, if you pull an object out of your pouch and place it on the ground, it becomes visible).

 

[J-Buzz]

Thanks for the answers.

You all came to the same conclusion we came to....the carpet is carring us, it would not be invisiable.

 

[Nail]

(context: I'm a fellow player).

I'd say that only attended objects that you physically carry (or weild, or don) are considered equipment for purposes of invisibility.

Right. But it's surprising this isn't spelled out somewhere. Fortunately, it makes sense: The Carpet is carrying you, not vis versa, so it doesn't turn invisible when you do.

Isn't there some example out there about a rope not being invisible if you let it trail along 40 ft behind you? FAQ?

However... if it were rolled up and placed somewhere ...

Sure; it'd be invisible too. That part is not in dispute, fortunately.

BTW, does having the carpet move (60 ft) consitute a move action on the part of the person riding it? It's not a mount, after all, but an item......

 

[Nail]

double post, slow connection