D&D 5E Invisibility and Perception

[Bleys Icefalcon]

Venting. Sorry. It seems at every turn I am understanding less about 5e than I thought. Adult onset brain death I guess.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Only if your DM isn't doing his job.

The elven cloak just flat-out gives advantage as a rule. Invisibility relies on a DM to assess the situation and give advantage or disadvantage as appropriate, as rulings based on circumstances. Most of the time you should have advantage to hide from anyone who can't see you, and most of the time you're at a disadvantage to perceive a thing that you can't see. It doesn't have to spell that out in the description of the spell for your DM to know it.

I'm starting the think that 3.5, Pathfinder, and 4e have left terrible psychic scars on the roleplaying community by spelling everything out in excruciatingly complex detail. DMs need to remember how to improvise.

Hey, whoa, I just said that I didn't work it like that. There was a question as to why, under the rules, the elven cloak intersection with invisibility was an odd corner case, and all I was doing was explaining why it is, indeed, an odd corner case. At no point did I insist that that corner case must be followed because it was 'in the rules', and have actually said that that doesn't work for me. So, please, step away from the 'only if your DM isn't doing his job' lever, take a breath, and let's move onto discussing more fun things, yeah?

 

[Dausuul]

The 5E stealth rules are a hot mess. Here's how I read them in this instance:

1. When the wizard casts invisibility, everyone knows where he is, but it's tough to attack him effectively since you can't see exactly what you're doing. The PC knows where he is (no check), but has disadvantage to hit him.

2. If the wizard moves without hiding, he's detectable due to the sounds and visual disturbances of his passage. The PC still knows where he is.

3. If the wizard takes an action to hide, he rolls Stealth against the PC's passive Perception. If he makes the Stealth check, the PC no longer knows where he is, and he can move at half speed. If he fails the Stealth check, the PC still knows where he is, even if he moves.

4. If the wizard makes his Stealth check, the PC can take an action to try and find him again. The PC makes a Perception check against the result of the wizard's Stealth check. If the PC succeeds, the wizard is no longer hidden from that PC; the PC knows where he is. (The wizard can try to hide again as described in #3.)

5. No matter what, the PC has disadvantage on all attack rolls against the wizard, due to the difficulty of attacking something you can't see.

6. If the PC doesn't know where the wizard is, the PC can pick a location and swing at it blindly. If the wizard is in that location, the PC attacks with disadvantage. If the wizard is not in that location, obviously, the PC is just chopping air.

 

[fjw70]

Hiding behind a waist high cardboard box, in the middle of an otherwise empty and brightly lit stone room, an elven cloaked person is strictly better at hiding than an invisible one.

Sheesh, take the meaning and stop looking for places that you can justify it if you squint.

Wait, has hiding been errated so that you can hide behind a waist high cardboard box? The original rules didn't allow that.

if not then the cloak is no use in trying to hide at all.

 

[epithet]

Hey, whoa, I just said that I didn't work it like that. There was a question as to why, under the rules, the elven cloak intersection with invisibility was an odd corner case, and all I was doing was explaining why it is, indeed, an odd corner case. At no point did I insist that that corner case must be followed because it was 'in the rules', and have actually said that that doesn't work for me. So, please, step away from the 'only if your DM isn't doing his job' lever, take a breath, and let's move onto discussing more fun things, yeah?

Wasn't saying that you were doing it wrong, just challenging your assertion that the rules of the game made an elven cloak better than invisibility. The DM's job while running the game includes setting the DCs and giving bonuses and penalties based on the circumstances and how the characters go about doing what they do. In 5e, of course, the bonuses and penalties often take the form of advantage and disadvantage. With the cloak, the advantage is spelled out so that the DM understands the extent of the magical camouflage. For invisibility, though, it seems the DM is assumed to understand the effect of "you can't see me," so the DM should be giving out advantage and disadvantage as appropriate. The invisibility spell doesn't specify the advantage/disadvantage implications of not being seen, because that's up to the DM to figure out.

Invisibility would give advantage to hiding, but a carpet of dry leaves and twigs would cancel that. Beastie gets disadvantage to perceive an invisible character, but the Keen Scent trait would cancel that. Even if an enemy detects an invisible character, it might have to pass a wisdom check to understand that there's really someone there when it turns around and looks at the spot where it thinks it heard a footstep, but sees clearly that there is no one there.

The benefits of an elven cloak are limited and mechanical. Invisibility, however, is a much more broadly applicable effect, and requires the DM to make rulings based on circumstances. Just because the spell description doesn't provide comprehensive and specific guidance doesn't mean the spell is of minimal benefit, it is the DMs job to determine the benefit of not being seen in any particular situation.

 

[epithet]

Wait, has hiding been errated so that you can hide behind a waist high cardboard box? The original rules didn't allow that.

if not then the cloak is no use in trying to hide at all.

Depends on whether you're crouching.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Wasn't saying that you were doing it wrong, just challenging your assertion that the rules of the game made an elven cloak better than invisibility. The DM's job while running the game includes setting the DCs and giving bonuses and penalties based on the circumstances and how the characters go about doing what they do. In 5e, of course, the bonuses and penalties often take the form of advantage and disadvantage. With the cloak, the advantage is spelled out so that the DM understands the extent of the magical camouflage. For invisibility, though, it seems the DM is assumed to understand the effect of "you can't see me," so the DM should be giving out advantage and disadvantage as appropriate. The invisibility spell doesn't specify the advantage/disadvantage implications of not being seen, because that's up to the DM to figure out.

Invisibility would give advantage to hiding, but a carpet of dry leaves and twigs would cancel that. Beastie gets disadvantage to perceive an invisible character, but the Keen Scent trait would cancel that. Even if an enemy detects an invisible character, it might have to pass a wisdom check to understand that there's really someone there when it turns around and looks at the spot where it thinks it heard a footstep, but sees clearly that there is no one there.

The benefits of an elven cloak are limited and mechanical. Invisibility, however, is a much more broadly applicable effect, and requires the DM to make rulings based on circumstances. Just because the spell description doesn't provide comprehensive and specific guidance doesn't mean the spell is of minimal benefit, it is the DMs job to determine the benefit of not being seen in any particular situation.

Yeah I think this is a good point. As a DM applying the adv/disad rules, if a player went invisible I would expect to give them adv on their hide roll - they're invisible! It just makes sense to me. I would probably also allow them a "free" immediate hide contest with any relevant observers on the spot. Then wing it from there.

 

[discosoc]

Use passive perception against whatever DC you think makes sense (possibly passive steath, or just pick a DC). In combat, I usually chose DC 20 (hard) or 25 (very hard) when it comes to invisibility, depending on how crazy the battle is. A fight in the middle of a crowded street or near a waterfall or something will be very hard, but a fight in a quite dungeon room might just be hard. This gives a few options for characters:

1. The "Observant" feat adds +5 bonus to passive perception.
2. If they have an ability to detect by something other than sight, they might get another +5 bonus due to how passive scores handle advantage. A good example of this would be a druid who shifts into a wolf form, granting keen senses for hearing and smell.
3. And of course just being proficient in perception will boost your passive score.

So at the extreme end (no magic items though), you could have a druid with the observant feat shifted into wolf form running around with something like 28 passive perception who has no trouble detecting the invisible wizard through smell and sound. No action required for searching, and the wizard probably can't even hide when actually taking an action to "hide."

Of course, characters who don't have things stacked like that, can still work as a team to find the target. For example, one takes his/her action to "search" for the wizard, thus getting to roll perception rather than relying on passive. If found, they can call out the location for free, so that other characters can now make an attack against the invisible target for that round. If a character doesn't have a good perception, they can ready their attack for when someone else calls out a location (similar to the old blind ranger Drizzt meets in Sojourn who uses his owl for eyes). Of course, people still get disadvantage to those attacks, but it makes such an encounter pretty fun and full of teamwork.

 

[fjw70]

Depends on whether you're crouching.

Good point but then that example is equivalent to the tree example. A DM could (and probably should rule) that an opaque barrier would make the cloak useless.

 

[Aenorgreen]

Well, not completely wasted, as it still means any attacks made against the invisible creature are made at disadvantage. But that doesn't seem like a great deal of benefit.

It also means they can move without drawing any opportunity attacks, as you only get those against a target you can see. This is very good for getting out of a tight spot. Additionally, it makes you untargetable to quite a few spells. Spells from Command to Disintegrate to Magic Missile all specifically require you to see the target.