Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Infiniti2000" data-source="post: 2670932" data-attributes="member: 31734">It does not count as an attack.  There's some ambiguity if you charge, however.  But, IMO, unless the horse actually attacks at the end of a charge, I would not remove his invisibility.Additionally, unless you have see invisible running, I'm not sure how I would rule the riding.  There are no rules about riding invisible mounts. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> The target isn't the square itself, it's something in the square.  This is probably just a typo by you, but it's an important and subtle distinction.  In any case, this provides a lot more vagueness than I originally realized.  If you have to consider each creature that could be located in the square, do you also have to consider each object?  I mean, objects are valid targets, so don't you have to consider anything and everything that could be attacked if you don't just consider the intended target?As a simpler example, let's consider an invisible rogue standing on a chair, fighting a fighter.  The fighter (cannot see invisible) attacks into the square containing the rogue and the chair.  The fighter could conceivable attack the chair, and isn't it as valid a target as the rogue?  Intriguing.</blockquote>