Persisting Invisibility and Freedom of Movement

[Arjun Garg]

I am a cleric with DMM persistent spell, and access to the trickery domain, and I was wondering if I could persist invisibility? What about freedom of movement?



My DM isn't worried about game balance. He just wants to know if this is legal rules as written.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

You should ban Persistent Spell, but aside from that...

Yes, you can persist either of those. DMM doesn't care if the effective spell level is far beyond what you could cast at the moment (a normally persisted freedom of movement would be level 10, for example).

Invisibility is a poor choice, since it still ends as soon as you attack, regardless of duration. Just my opinion.

 

[Arjun Garg]

Its not the spell level I'm concerned about. Maybe should have clarified that.

My dm's confusion with this stems from the phrase in Persistent Spell which states that you cannot persist spells which can be discharged, and so he would argue that Invisibility cannot be Persisted, as it is discharged when you attack a creature.


My argument is that because the spell doesn't have the discharge keyword under its duration, it can be persisted.

 

[Jack Simth]

I am a cleric with DMM persistent spell, and access to the trickery domain, and I was wondering if I could persist invisibility? What about freedom of movement?



My DM isn't worried about game balance. He just wants to know if this is legal rules as written.

Potentially. The big question needed to be addressed before you can say yes or no is "does a range of 'touch' count as a fixed range?"

If yes, then yes. If no, then you're going to need to add a few tricks to make the range fixed. But ultimately, yes, you can.

Oh, and Deja vu.

 

[irdeggman]

Its not the spell level I'm concerned about. Maybe should have clarified that.

My dm's confusion with this stems from the phrase in Persistent Spell which states that you cannot persist spells which can be discharged, and so he would argue that Invisibility cannot be Persisted, as it is discharged when you attack a creature.


My argument is that because the spell doesn't have the discharge keyword under its duration, it can be persisted.

Invisibility does not "discharge" when you attack - it "ends".

Major difference.

Shocking grasp counts as a spell that is "discharged" even though no where in the spell description does it say so, but it is covered by the text on pg 141 of the PHB under "holding the charge".

Invisibility clearl states the spell ends though.