Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arial Black" data-source="post: 7056903" data-attributes="member: 6799649">Yep, things work how they say they work. Creatures will soon learn to take advantage of the way things actually work and do things like use Dust of Disappearance so they don't have to use up their concentration maintaining invisibility, and use magic items that work without allowing you to 'cast a spell'.Creatures will base strategies around 'how things actually work', and not around 'how we think things aught to work'. Evolution in progress.It's wrong for the DM to change the way things actually work on a whim during the action just because the DM thinks it should work another way, while claiming his made-up rubbish is actually the rules. Imagine playing a game of chess when out of the blue your opponent claims that queens can jump over pieces just like knights; his house his rules.The DM might wish that invisibility is lost for anything that the DM wants to interpret as hostile, but it doesn't. 'Attack' really does have a specific rules meaning in 5E, and to pretend on the fly that it doesn't means that the DM is failing in his duty to conduct a fair game.If the DM wants to create a houserule about what negates invisibility then he should state it up front before character creation. If that's the way his world works then PCs should be made knowing that. It shouldn't be a 'gotcha' to a PC made under the assumption that the invisibility rules are as written.</blockquote>

Verification