In an effort to get suggestions, critiques, or questions regarding some of the house rules used in our current campaign, I'd like to post them here from time to time. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate reading your thoughts - either positive or negative. Thanks. - RJ
-----------------------------------
Valusian House Rule: Improved Invisibility
Invisibility works per the Core Rules in all cases except the following: When a creature is under the effects of an Improved Invisibility spell and takes any offensive action, he is no longer invisible per the Core Rules. Instead, a slight wavering of light indicates his current position and roughly outlines his form. This translucent glimmer affords the creature Concealment and provides a 90% miss chance against any attacks or targeted spells. A creature under this effect provoke AO's as if he were not invisible, though the miss chance still applies.
------------------------------------
Rationale: We got a bit tired of the headaches caused by Improved Invisibility. It's a great 4th level spell and is consistently used by our group's sorceror. We adhered to the Coe Rules and the Sage's advice on handling invisibility, but still felt that the effort required did not correspond with increased fun.
We also had discussions as to what provoked an AO while one was Invisible (drinking a potion, flying silently through a threatened area, etc.) and found it confusing that a creature with 1/2 or more Cover could not be AO'd, but a creature that was Invisible could.
Doubtless, some of our rulings or interpretations of the rules may have been incorrect. And, certainly, invisibility may not cause headaches in your own campaign. This is just based from our experience.
The switch enables us to more quickly progress through combat. It was suggested by the party's sorceror, who stands to lost the most bang for his buck. The 90% was derived from some (very) rough math when trying to ascertain what chance the average creature had of beating a Listen/Spot DC by +20 against an average invisible creature. I can post the math if people are that interested, but I'm sure it's flawed.
Note that Invisibility works per the Core Rules until an offensive action is taken, so we still deal with the "old" +20 DC Spot/Listen stuff until that time.
Bottom line - The above house rule seems to hold the promise of increasing the speed of combat and the enjoyment of those involved, while removing any metagaming fears or problematic rulings.
We like it. Maybe you will, too.
Cheers,
RJ
-----------------------------------
Valusian House Rule: Improved Invisibility
Invisibility works per the Core Rules in all cases except the following: When a creature is under the effects of an Improved Invisibility spell and takes any offensive action, he is no longer invisible per the Core Rules. Instead, a slight wavering of light indicates his current position and roughly outlines his form. This translucent glimmer affords the creature Concealment and provides a 90% miss chance against any attacks or targeted spells. A creature under this effect provoke AO's as if he were not invisible, though the miss chance still applies.
------------------------------------
Rationale: We got a bit tired of the headaches caused by Improved Invisibility. It's a great 4th level spell and is consistently used by our group's sorceror. We adhered to the Coe Rules and the Sage's advice on handling invisibility, but still felt that the effort required did not correspond with increased fun.
We also had discussions as to what provoked an AO while one was Invisible (drinking a potion, flying silently through a threatened area, etc.) and found it confusing that a creature with 1/2 or more Cover could not be AO'd, but a creature that was Invisible could.
Doubtless, some of our rulings or interpretations of the rules may have been incorrect. And, certainly, invisibility may not cause headaches in your own campaign. This is just based from our experience.
The switch enables us to more quickly progress through combat. It was suggested by the party's sorceror, who stands to lost the most bang for his buck. The 90% was derived from some (very) rough math when trying to ascertain what chance the average creature had of beating a Listen/Spot DC by +20 against an average invisible creature. I can post the math if people are that interested, but I'm sure it's flawed.
Note that Invisibility works per the Core Rules until an offensive action is taken, so we still deal with the "old" +20 DC Spot/Listen stuff until that time.
Bottom line - The above house rule seems to hold the promise of increasing the speed of combat and the enjoyment of those involved, while removing any metagaming fears or problematic rulings.
We like it. Maybe you will, too.
Cheers,
RJ
