D&D 5E Invsibility vs Cloak of Elvenkind

[nswanson27]

An invisible creature doesn't normally need to make Dexterity (Stealth) checks to hide, because other creatures automatically fail Wisdom (Perception) checks to spot it. If the other creatures are under the effect of see invisibility, though, and therefore can make Wisdom (Perception) checks to see the invisible creature, then yeah, cloak of elvenkind can help. All of which makes sense.

Another important note: If you're a rogue (and worried about sneak attack), all this is moot, since you only need to be unseen to get advantage - you don't need to be hidden. If you're worried about enemies finding you - see above. Cloak is effective against blindsight, since it specifies nothing about being limited to only sight-related senses - it would impair smell and sound from heartbeat and breathing, etc... Tremorsense you would need the boots of elvenkind to mask, however.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Don't they?

No. You've mistakenly equated what the rules are easily interpreted as saying and what the rules explicitly say. The rules are not explicit that (do not "call out") the mechanical effects of a cloak of elvenkind don't apply when the wearer is invisible.

An invisible creature doesn't normally need to make Dexterity (Stealth) checks to hide, because other creatures automatically fail Wisdom (Perception) checks to spot it.

That's not what the rule book says. The rule book says being invisible means you can always "try to hide", not that you are without need to try or that your tries don't normally involve a Dexterity (Stealth) check.

 

[Jester David]

What I find amusing is if you become invisible while wearing the cloak of elvenkind, you have advantage on Stealth checks as the invisible cloak change colours to match the terrain.

 

[Kobold Stew]

No. You've mistakenly equated what the rules are easily interpreted as saying and what the rules explicitly say. The rules are not explicit that (do not "call out") the mechanical effects of a cloak of elvenkind don't apply when the wearer is invisible.

*eyeroll*
The rules do not explicitly state that colour is a quality identified by sight.

I trust readers to work it out, just as they must know that subject nouns and noun phrases govern verbs.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

That's not what the rule book says. The rule book says being invisible means you can always "try to hide", not that you are without need to try or that your tries don't normally involve a Dexterity (Stealth) check.

No, but the DM can tell you not to BOTHER rolling, because the observer *automatically fails* to spot you, so rolling would be a waste of time.

Now, if there is reason to believe that you've made some noise, or disturbed something, the DM could have the observer roll to notice that.

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A cloak of elvenkind does not grant advantage to hide... the same as dim light... it just allows you to hide in plain sight and if you move you still make noises. Invisibility just rules out that you can be detected by sight... except when you are standing on a ground that leaves visible footprints or worse... and If you were invisible to begin with, I would still grant at least advantage on your hide check...

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

What I find amusing is if you become invisible while wearing the cloak of elvenkind, you have advantage on Stealth checks as the invisible cloak change colours to match the terrain.

Thanks for showing me I'm not the only one that can have a laugh at what the rules say.

As for the other bits of conversation regarding the point I was making, I seem to have failed to clearly communicate it. I was not trying to say that everyone should be running their game as some abstruse strict reading of the written rules would dictate. I was trying to communicate that trying to treat D&D game rules for magical effects as though they are predictable like real-world phenomena is only going to lead to ridiculous conclusions (as evidenced by the cause for this thread).

 

[TheCosmicKid]

That's not what the rule book says. The rule book says being invisible means you can always "try to hide", not that you are without need to try or that your tries don't normally involve a Dexterity (Stealth) check.

And as [MENTION=61026]tuxgeo[/MENTION] cited, anybody trying to spot you when you are hidden and invisible automatically fails their Perception check. So having advantage on the "try to hide" Stealth check is redundant. You could be wearing a cloak of Liberace granting you disadvantage on Stealth checks and a -100 penalty on top of it, and creatures still wouldn't be able to see you, because that's what "invisibility" means in common English and for a wonder the rules actually support that.

Of course, creatures can still try to locate you through hearing or smell, and you can still try to avoid those senses through Stealth checks, but that's not hiding, and the cloak of elvenkind's benefit doesn't apply to it.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

As for the other bits of conversation regarding the point I was making, I seem to have failed to clearly communicate it. I was not trying to say that everyone should be running their game as some abstruse strict reading of the written rules would dictate. I was trying to communicate that trying to treat D&D game rules for magical effects as though they are predictable like real-world phenomena is only going to lead to ridiculous conclusions (as evidenced by the cause for this thread).

Elaborate on what you mean by magical effects not being predictable. What is unpredictable about becoming invisible and, as a consequence, creatures not being able to see you?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Elaborate on what you mean by magical effects not being predictable. What is unpredictable about becoming invisible and, as a consequence, creatures not being able to see you?

Being unseen because magic made you invisible is predictable, yes... but magical camouflage having X effect, so invisibility will have X effect and/or better? Not quite - because, unlike real-world phenomena of something blending in well (camouflage) and blending in so well as to be unseen, not just harder to see (invisibility), the effects of different forms of magic that make you harder to notice have no inherent relationship.

Not being able to accurately gauge what a thing will do based on what other conceptually related things are know to do = not predictable.