That's a one way relationship:
If you have total concealment, you have total cover =/= If you have total cover, you have total concealment.
Why say the glass is thin? Especially in old times thin glass isn't going to keep in much heat.
D&D 5E What Rules do you see people mistake or misapply?
That's a one way relationship:
If you have total concealment, you have total cover =/= If you have total cover, you have total concealment.
Why say the glass is thin? Especially in old times thin glass isn't going to keep in much heat.
This is not a rule (and also not the only valid approach to DMing), so it is indeed off topic in this thread.
Last edited:
Glass would protect against a spell because it doesn't go through solid materials or deal damage beyond its stated effect.
Think of it this way: If you could see through a wooden wall with xray vision or scrying, would your fireball go through the wall or detonate on impact?
Why is the glass different than a wooden wall? It is a solid material as well. Sure we know a crossbow bolt would go with enough force to punch through it so that is a logical way to run the game (you could decide to roll damage against the glass window and say its ineffective on the target past the glass). But when dealing with an unknown you typically do not grant it powers beyond what is stated in its effect. Fireball doesn't say it can be cast through solid objects, so it isn't allowed to.
Think of it this way: If you could see through a wooden wall with xray vision or scrying, would your fireball go through the wall or detonate on impact?
Why is the glass different than a wooden wall? It is a solid material as well. Sure we know a crossbow bolt would go with enough force to punch through it so that is a logical way to run the game (you could decide to roll damage against the glass window and say its ineffective on the target past the glass). But when dealing with an unknown you typically do not grant it powers beyond what is stated in its effect. Fireball doesn't say it can be cast through solid objects, so it isn't allowed to.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yeah, that's more a case of "rules the designers got wrong".
"You walk into a room. There is an invisible stalker standing motionless and silent in the corner" sounds prettying stupid...
If it arrived in the room mere seconds before the party, it may not have had time to slow and quiet it's breathing. If it arrived a while ago, it did have time. Still need a stealth check to determine how well it is hiding, because Invisibility doesn't automatically mean you are hidden.
Well, firstly, it comes from the fact that not everyone on the forums reads every thread or listens to podcasts, so yeah, he just clarified it. Expecting everyone to know about it immediately is supremely unreasonable.
But what still needs to be said on the subject here, is that people who are ruling Invisible creatures to automatically be hidden simply because they are invisible are still wrong, or houseruling it.
In the example used in a thread a while back, if you you run into a room, pursued by enemies, and turn invisible, that doesn't mean you are hidden when, in the same round, enemies come into the room. You aren't. They can hear your heavy breathing, and can try to attack you. If you're fast enough, and have time to take an action to make a Hide Action Stealth check, you are then hidden, as long as your check exceeds their Perception checks.
Yeah, Saelorn has a very rigid, very specific, and very unusual sense of how the game works. Pretty sure, by their book, you are literally not playing a role playing game.
This isn't true. You can potentially have two reactions per round (or three if you are a high enough level thief). I've seen this error online now times then I can count
Someone attacks you on initiative count 20. You still have a reaction. You cast shield. You act on initiative count 15. You get your reaction back. Your shield drops. Someone attacks you on initiative count 10. You spend your reaction to cast shield. You have now spent two reactions in one round.
Since we're discussing people getting rules wrong: "An invisible stalker requires no air, food, drink, or sleep."
It doesn't have to quiet and slow its breathing, because it wasn't breathing in the first place. There is no reason why an invisible stalker standing still should be making any noise at all.
doctorbadwolf
Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Please don't quote or mention me just to quibble with inconsequential pedantic nitpicking over the particulars of a specific example case.
I don't care.
that comes across, a bit more angry than it is. aplogies.
I just don't see how there could possibly be a reason to pick apart a specific example, especially in a post with multiple examples.
Last edited:
The Crimson Binome
Hero
A round is the time between the start of your turn and the start of your next turn, and that's the period during which you can only make one reaction. If you're referring to the period between when the highest initiative goes and when the character with the lowest initiative goes, then it would also make sense to refer to that as a round, but any confusion that results is from a difference of terminology rather than misunderstanding the actual rules being used.
You tried to refute this example case by suggesting the stalker might be breathing loudly. It's not. Therefore, your refutation doesn't work, and the example stands: An invisible stalker that isn't moving has no reason to make any noise, and should not be auto-detectable.
Then why reply?
Your definition can't be true. If it were true the thief's 17th level ability wouldn't be possible. If a round is from the start of your turn to the start of your next turn a 17th level thief could never take two turns in the first round of combat.
By definition, rounds end when everyone has taken a turn. By definition, combat starts (and, therefore, the round) with the highest initiative.
By definition, rounds end when everyone has taken a turn. By definition, combat starts (and, therefore, the round) with the highest initiative.
Last edited:
