Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThePolarBear" data-source="post: 6910985" data-attributes="member: 6857451">I'll point them out from RAW as i know it (and i might be wrong, see my question to Corwin later in the post). Obviously, i'm talking about RAW here since that is what the OP was about.Case 1) "He can either try to hit something that might or might not be there." He knows the warlock is totally there. And it's not because the orc knows the warlock abilities, just because, by RAW, with the exception of DM ruling, taking the Hide action is the only way to make peeps lose sight and hearing and whatnot (yeah, EVEN blindsight, if it can apply) of you. So, he knows perfectly where you are. Still, invisibility, so the attack roll is at Disadvantage.Case 2) "From the barbarian's perspective: A) the evil warlock disapeared" No, it turned invisible."He strikes where the warlock was last seen." No, he strikes where he knows the warlock is. See point 1)Case 3) as said, rules for actions only apply for combat. There's no combat here. Flaw is NOT making the warlock roll for how well does he hide. The roll takes care of all the fun stuff that can happen, like a sneeze or a mouse coming out of his hole and having a nice bite at this invisible barrier that's blocking the exit. There's no fixed DC, you roll it. I might see a "passive" stealth difficulty, but that's not a fixed 13 but something that depends on your character (and that might be part of the original post and i might be misremembering)Case 4) See point 3)Btw, i'm not against houseruling and such. I've said how i would handle it (iirc, having stuff to do while posting is not the best for being consistent) but the thread is about how is written and if the OP is missing something. Yes, it does actually <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" /> Agreed. Still prefer simple to uber complicated. i can get the "overcomplication" part myself <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />The Sword itself is houseruled, you can do whatever. By the way, it's not a creature, all rules for stealth do not apply. Yeah, agree. Still not the point of the thread <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />Can you please post a reference that's not rule 0? I agree DM can make rainbows out of beholder eyes, but i would love to know if i'm wrong by RAW and where. If you already posted it i have missed it and i'm sorry.edit: Fixing all the quotes! And changing a part in point 3 since it does not make any sense!</blockquote>

Verification