Invisible

[Nytmare]

Is this an actual rule or a house ruling? Because I've been trying to find this out, and to me the rules suggest that you can be hidden to some enemies and not to others.

I'm fairly certain that's house-rules-ville. My gut reaction to this in a game would be:

Friend who can see the invisible guy, shouting that they can see an invisible guy? No, you can not attack the square. Maaaaaaaybe I would allow a +2 bonus to the perception check depending on the specifics of the situation ("He's standing right there in the doorway!") but I think that in general, I'd relegate all of this to just using the normal numbers and letting the description of events get influenced by the result, and not vice versa.

Friend spending a standard action to #1 realize that you don't see the invisible guy, and then #2 explaining "Ok, now go straight ahead. More, more, more- STOP. Ok, now a little to your left... Swing there! No no, your other left!" Yes, you can attack the square.

Friend attacking the invisible guy, thereby giving a very strong indication as to what general area you should be attacking? Yes you can attack the square.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Is this an actual rule or a house ruling? Because I've been trying to find this out, and to me the rules suggest that you can be hidden to some enemies and not to others.

By my reading, Eyebite warlock are in a very good position. Blind the target, hide to that target and move 3 squares while the target is blind. Get concealment until the end of your next turn. At the start of your next turn, you become visible to the target, but you are still hidden. By your reading, this would only work against a lone enemy, as any friends present can point you out.

I was under the impression that it was official (or at least part of the web FAQ), but I can't find it so you may be right. (If so, it's an accidental house rule, as I've no idea where it came from but we've been playing that way since we started 4e.)

An orc who is standing on the same side of a wall as you (and who you therefore have no cover against) could shout to his buddy on the other side that you're hiding on this side, but that seems to be the extent of it. From what I can find, you remain hidden from buddy orc until he walks around the wall and breaks your cover.

From everything I can find, your reading is correct. Apologies, and thanks for pointing that out!

 

[Nifelhein]

Actually it is no house rule, the Invisible Rules are on the PHB page 281 (with January 2010 Updates applied already):

TARGETING WHAT YOU CAN’T SEE

If you’re fighting a creature you can’t see—when a creature is invisible, you’re blinded, or you’re fighting in darkness you can’t see through—you have to target a square rather than the creature. You also have to figure out which square to attack. Here’s how it works.

Invisible Creatures and Stealth: If an invisible creature is hidden from you (“Stealth,” page 188), you can neither hear nor see it, and you have to guess what space it occupies. If an invisible creature is not hidden from you, you can hear it or sense some other sign of its presence and therefore know what space it occupies, although you still can’t see it.

Make a Perception Check: On your turn, you can make a Perception check as a minor action (page 186) to try to determine the location of an invisible creature that is hidden from you.

Close or Area Attacks: You can make a close attack or an area attack that includes the square you think (or know) the concealed creature is in. Your attack roll doesn’t take a penalty from the target’s concealment.

The idea is that invisibility merely hides your image, any noise or other noticeable element is there and unless you roll a stealth check you are not trying to conceal any of those, you are just happy with the image being hidden.

 

[DracoSuave]

Is this an actual rule or a house ruling? Because I've been trying to find this out, and to me the rules suggest that you can be hidden to some enemies and not to others.

By my reading, Eyebite warlock are in a very good position. Blind the target, hide to that target and move 3 squares while the target is blind. Get concealment until the end of your next turn. At the start of your next turn, you become visible to the target, but you are still hidden. By your reading, this would only work against a lone enemy, as any friends present can point you out.

The thing is, you're plainly visible to the party, and seeing as talking is a free action, the exchange of 'Where'd he go?' 'Dude, he hit you with a spell, he's right there.' 'Thanks!' isn't exactly out of the blue. Creatures on the same team communicating (if able) is the assumption, not the exception.

Granted, the Warlock's -5 to be hit by that guy is usually good enough to dissuade him from attacking anyways.

However, once that enemy is solo, you can make stealth checks the instant you start moving.

 

[Nytmare]

The thing is, you're plainly visible to the party, and seeing as talking is a free action, the exchange of 'Where'd he go?' 'Dude, he hit you with a spell, he's right there.' 'Thanks!' isn't exactly out of the blue. Creatures on the same team communicating (if able) is the assumption, not the exception.

I'm still thinking this isn't rules as written.

I don't know if I would consider normal communication to include "He is in this square that my player is pointing to on the game map."

An invisible guy in a square right next to you? Sure, why the hell not.

An invisible guy standing next to some kind of landmark? "He's by the wall, next to that chair!" Yeah, probably.

Trying to explain to a scattered group of archers which square to shoot at in a big open field doesn't make as much sense to me.

Having people hold so that they can follow someone else's lead actually makes the most sense to me.

 

[Flipguarder]

HE'S IN SQUARE B7 BOSS!


HIT, Aww, you sunk my battleship.

 

[DracoSuave]

I'm still thinking this isn't rules as written.

I don't know if I would consider normal communication to include "He is in this square that my player is pointing to on the game map."

*points to you* There.

Now you try it.

Not that tough or implausible is it?

Now... give yourself training in combat and tactics and teamwork with your fellow soldiers. In a magic world where things turn invisible.

Not so implausible now?

An invisible guy in a square right next to you? Sure, why the hell not.

An invisible guy standing next to some kind of landmark? "He's by the wall, next to that chair!" Yeah, probably.

He's right there.

Trying to explain to a scattered group of archers which square to shoot at in a big open field doesn't make as much sense to me.

But that's not the situation is it? It's a scattered group of archers explaining to one guy where someone is. And those archers have a very effective method of communication.

TWANG!

Follow the arrow.

Having people hold so that they can follow someone else's lead actually makes the most sense to me.

This is one guy with Eyebite here, not a ninja.

HUGE difference.

 

[Nytmare]

*points to you* There.

Now you try it.

Not that tough or implausible is it?

I find it really implausible actually. There's a difference between pointing to a thing and having people look at that thing, and pointing to nothing and having people know exactly what bit of nothing in amidst all the other nothing you're talking about.

Now... give yourself training in combat and tactics and teamwork with your fellow soldiers. In a magic world where things turn invisible.

Not so implausible now?

I play paintball religiously. On a team full of people who play religiously. About 75% of the team is ex-military and special forces guys mixed in with the weekend warriors and trigger happy teenagers. We deal with people trying to point out invisible people all day long. It's a whole lot of:

*point*

(where?)

*point point*

"Where?"

(by the tree!)

"I don't see him?"
​

That's a +2 to perception at best, not instantaneous and complete shared knowledge.

But that's not the situation is it? It's a scattered group of archers explaining to one guy where someone is. And those archers have a very effective method of communication.

TWANG!

Follow the arrow.

That's exactly what I was saying, but shooting at someone eats up a standard action and pointing and giving a list of directions is (arguably) a free action. Shoot who I'm shooting at makes sense. Shoot who I'm stabbing makes sense. Shoot the guy in this square on the imaginary grid doesn't.

Unfortunately, I don't see anything in the rules that talks about this explicitly, and that makes it a house rule. The bit about "opposed by each enemy's passive Perception check" however would mean a completely different thing if it said "opposed by the best passive Perception of all enemies".

This is one guy with Eyebite here, not a ninja.

HUGE difference.

You can't argue that it's easy to find invisible people because everyone is an awesome, highly trained, magic-wise ninja and then claim that the highly trained, invisible, magic ninja, with eyebite isn't equally awesome.

 

[DracoSuave]

You can't argue that it's easy to find invisible people because everyone is an awesome, highly trained, magic-wise ninja and then claim that the highly trained, invisible, magic ninja, with eyebite isn't equally awesome.

Um... there's a world of difference between 'You do something that hides you from everyone' and 'You do something that hides you from a single person while everyone else can plainly see them.'

The first renders you hidden, and the second doesn't do anything to the entirety of your opposition except for one confused guy.

But the point is moot, that one confused guy isn't likely to go after you anyways, unless it's with a close/area attack, where pointing at your general area is pretty much 'good enough.'

'He's by the tree.'
(tosses a grenade by the tree, taking out the tree and a few around it.)
'Did I get him?'

 

[Nytmare]

Um... there's a world of difference between 'You do something that hides you from everyone' and 'You do something that hides you from a single person while everyone else can plainly see them.'

The first renders you hidden, and the second doesn't do anything to the entirety of your opposition except for one confused guy.

Rules:

Opposed Check: Stealth vs. passive Perception. If multiple enemies are present, your Stealth check is opposed by each enemy’s passive Perception check.

Success: You are hidden, which means you are silent and invisible to the enemy (see “Concealment” and “Targeting What You Can’t See,” page 281).
​

To that one confused guy, you are hidden. For you to not be hidden from him, he needs to make a perception check. That's all spelled out and in no way do the rules say that you should be treated as though you are not hidden.