D&D 5E Invisible, hidden and within 5 feet of an enemy making a ranged attack

[FitzTheRuke]

If the invisible character IS hidden, as far as the shooter knows, there's no one there. No threat. No distraction.

If you want that to be the case, that's fine, but there's no reason you have to chose that to be the case. There's plenty of story-based reasons how it could be done.

Yeah, they kinda do.

Emphasis mine, but giving away your position obviously ends hiding. Doing other things reveals signs of your passage, doing the same.

I don't see any reason why any of my suggestions (other than whispering) would make noise. There's no reason to assume that they'd give away your position, unless you want to rule that way. But you're choosing to make how the rules work "make no sense" - they don't make no sense on their own.

Just because the rules don't say poking reveals your position, does not mean it does not.

Just because you think something might reveal your position doesn't mean that it automatically would. In this case, it's not unreasonable (IMO) that it wouldn't, and the rules say it wouldn't, so why would I need to change that?

I call it "playing Dungeons & Dragons".

It's also playing Dungeons & Dragons to accept what the rules tell you is happening, and tell stories around that. You can choose your narrative first, and change the rules when you don't like what they're telling you is happening, OR you can accept what they tell you is happening and tell stories as to why. We all do both all the time. This discussion appears to be about degrees, and about when it's appropriate (or necessary) to do so.

I don't think you have to change the rules to suit the story here. YMMV.

 

[Mannahnin]

Well, you can spend your time however and call it whatever you want, but it doesn't sound like playing any sort of game to me. It sounds like the players are all gathering around for DM storytime.

Part of the point of tabletop RPGs which use a GM is to utilize the judgement of that GM to adjudicate corner cases where the rules do not adequately or accurately represent the fiction envisioned by the folks at the table.

Speaking as a DM, I have explained what I understand the rules in question to be representing in the fiction. I try to make sure I'm on the same page as my players about that, so they can make meaningful decisions. If my explanation doesn't make sense to them, I'm certainly open to appeals and alternate explanations.

Can you explain what you think the rules are representing in the fiction, and where I've imagined incorrectly in post #49?

 

[Mannahnin]

If you want that to be the case, that's fine, but there's no reason you have to chose that to be the case. There's plenty of story-based reasons how it could be done.

Please offer some more. As I said, everything you've offered so far would either clearly give away the invisible character's position or require an action (like physically interacting with the shooter's weapon).

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Just because you think something might reveal your position doesn't mean that it automatically would. In this case, it's not unreasonable (IMO) that it wouldn't, and the rules say it wouldn't, so why would I need to change that?

Hey, you can do whatever you want. So can I. I just can't accept that someone tells me that I am doing it wrong if I chose to apy a rule that might be illogical in my view. Which is what Hriston did.

That commentary about: if you don't use all rules all the time, you can as well just tell your story as a DM was very close to badwrongfun.

I reminded them about the role of the DM. You jumped in and told me that whispering and poking can be done undetected by an invisivle creature. I never denied that. I told you that we were discussing an invisible and hidden creature, and I refuse that it is my job as a DM to find a reason why you can poke and whisper and grab the bow without telegraphing your position.

So no. Play as you like. But don't tell me how my ruling is badwrongfun.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That's only if you miss.

Probably. But if you hit anyway, why bother. I would probably only give that explanation if you hit with one die, but miss with the other.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Look, let's focus on just one example, so we don't get bogged down in picking one of a list (like the whispering example) to ruin the bunch:

Say you're invisible. And you've taken your action (or cunning action) to hide. You're standing in front of a goblin with a shortbow, who's decided to shoot at your wizard buddy who's 20 feet away.

With me?

You lift up your arm, which the goblin can't see, and gently push the top of his bow slightly to the left. Now, you're doing this gently enough that it's not an "attack" - you're not trying to damage his bow. You're not shoving it so hard that he has NO CHANCE of hitting your friend, he's just gonna have trouble adjusting his shot. You're not moving enough to give away your position. He can't tell you're there, so he's not going to fight you on this (aside from trying to correct his shot). It might be the wind that's tipping his bow. You're using about as much effort as you would to pick something up off a shelf (a free object interaction). You're not attacking, casting a spell or making noise (things that ruin invisibility and hiding, respectively).

You could do this slowly, like my description sounds, or you could do it desperately, in a brief moment as he fires.

Like, say (for a slightly different example, under the same circumstance), you have a shortsword in hand, and you hold your sword up as his arrow leaves the bow. If he misses your wizard buddy, then that means the arrow deflected off your sword, if he hits your buddy, then it means you missed blocking it and it passed you buy.

(Before I'm told "that would reveal you" - why would it? The goblin would just see his arrow suddenly (and maybe only very slightly) go off-course. (As, say, it's fletching is cut off, or simply brushes by your sword).

Given time, I could keep going and come up with dozens of scenarios, I expect, as to how "invisible guy (being there) makes shot harder but not impossible" - which is all "grants disadvantage" actually means.

In D&D, there's potentially infinite reasons as to why disadvantage is granted, depending on the scenario. This scenario (IMO) is far from "nonsensical" (as some have suggested) it just drops "infinite" down to "dozens" of potential reasons.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You lift up your arm, which the goblin can't see, and gently push the top of his bow slightly to the left. Now, you're doing this gently enough that it's not an "attack" - you're not trying to damage his bow. You're not shoving it so hard that he has NO CHANCE of hitting your friend, he's just gonna have trouble adjusting his shot. You're not moving enough to give away your position. He can't tell you're there, so he's not going to fight you on this (aside from trying to correct his shot). It might be the wind that's tipping his bow. You're using about as much effort as you would to pick something up off a shelf (a free object interaction). You're not attacking, casting a spell or making noise (things that ruin invisibility and hiding, respectively).

Sounds very much like sleight of hand vs (passive) perception or maybe investigation, don't you think?

 

[FitzTheRuke]

So no. Play as you like. But don't tell me how my ruling is badwrongfun.

Ah, typical internet discussion. I mean, how many times in my posts did I take great pains to tell you "do what you like" and "IMO" and "It's reasonable to do so, if you want, but you don't have to".

I'm certainly not telling you your ruling is badwrongfun, and Hriston isn't either, even if he's overstated his position a few times, undiplomatically (easy enough to do in this kind of communication).

We're just supporting that what the rules say is happening is not "nonsense" or at least, doesn't have to be, with an open mind and some storytelling. Part of the fun of the game for us all, regardless of "playstyle" (which is probably not as different as it sounds).

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Sounds very much like sleight of hand vs (passive) perception or maybe investigation, don't you think?

Sure, if you want to add rolls to it. Or you can just let it happen in this case, like the rules say it does. (As an aside: trust me, I'm not beholden to "the rules" at all, this is just for the sake of this discussion - I really don't care much about RAW, myself, but that's what we're talking about here, so I'm stuck with it).

But if it makes you feel better to add rolls? By all means.

 

[Mannahnin]

You lift up your arm, which the goblin can't see, and gently push the top of his bow slightly to the left. Now, you're doing this gently enough that it's not an "attack" - you're not trying to damage his bow. You're not shoving it so hard that he has NO CHANCE of hitting your friend, he's just gonna have trouble adjusting his shot. You're not moving enough to give away your position. He can't tell you're there, so he's not going to fight you on this (aside from trying to correct his shot). It might be the wind that's tipping his bow. You're using about as much effort as you would to pick something up off a shelf (a free object interaction). You're not attacking, casting a spell or making noise (things that ruin invisibility and hiding, respectively).

You could do this slowly, like my description sounds, or you could do it desperately, in a brief moment as he fires.

Like, say (for a slightly different example, under the same circumstance), you have a shortsword in hand, and you hold your sword up as his arrow leaves the bow. If he misses your wizard buddy, then that means the arrow deflected off your sword, if he hits your buddy, then it means you missed blocking it and it passed you buy.

Great scenario, thank you.

I am envisioning this as best I can, in context with the invisibility and hiding rules, and in context of my own background with combat sports, archery, fencing and wrestling.

As I picture it, the "slow and careful" method would take several seconds, and would be an action rather than an item interaction. And to do it quickly and desperately would need some sort of roll or be likely to reveal your position, due to sound made during your hasty action. The feelings of wind pressure on my body and much narrower bow from a given direction and some discrete force pressing just on the end of my bow are, physically, totally dissimilar.

I note we're also talking about standing in front of a shooter but accepting that there is no chance that the archer inadvertently shoots the invisible person. Which would likely be a real risk, especially if the archer is tracking a moving target behind the invisible character, who can't see the target behind himself. I accept that there's no chance of that, given the game's inherent assumption that invisible characters are deliberately staying out of such firing paths.

Remember that to hide requires an action, and to remain hidden requires an ongoing effort at stealth. Physically interfering with people in detectable ways is going to make them aware of you.

Let's think also about the wider context. What are the likely repercussions or other applications of ruling that an invisible character can easily physically interact with another character or their equipment? Will an invisible bad guy be able to pickpocket a character's belt pouch without any rolls? Can they remove a weapon from his sheath, or arrows from his quiver? Are these things the players want to see happen in the campaign?