D&D 5E What Rules do you see people mistake or misapply?

[robus]

As someone who is nowhere near claiming to "know" the rules, I'm immensely enjoying this thread where people who "know" the rules are arguing with each other about the rules

To the OP: be careful of the can of worms you might be opening!

Grabs some more popcorn...

 

[Oofta]

And, btw, if you think that the rules state that an invisible creature is automatically hidden, simply by virtue of being hidden...you are incorrect.

Now see, this is where you're just confusing the heck out of me. Pretty much every time I've posted on this topic I've stated that being invisible means you may or may not be undetected.

Yet you keep telling me I'm incorrect about something I've never said.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Now see, this is where you're just confusing the heck out of me. Pretty much every time I've posted on this topic I've stated that being invisible means you may or may not be undetected.

Yet you keep telling me I'm incorrect about something I've never said.

This is getting frustrating. Please reread the post. The whole post this time. Include reading words like "if" and "then". I'll bold the things you missed the first time, to help you find clarification, and escape confusion.

Nah, you're just reading that into it.

Your assertion, by implication, that everyone should obviously know already that the rule had been clarified, is supremely unreasonable. Obviously most folks who disagreed won't have seen it yet. That...isn't confrontational. Or rather, no more so than any other statement of disagreement.

"I don't know where the "PCs know where you are if you haven't taken the hide action even though you are invisible" comes from. Jeremy Crawford just clarified in a podcast that it's not true, nor is it the intent. "

You really want to tell me that you this statement doesn't imply that people should already know about that clarification? Seriously?

and then call me confrontational when I tell you such an expectation is unreasonable?

lol c'mon, man.

And, btw, if you think that the rules state that an invisible creature is automatically hidden, simply by virtue of being hidden...you are incorrect. See...the thread you linked earlier.
They might be hidden, or not, depending on the circumstance, and thus DM discretion. Simply turning invisible right in front of someone doesn't make you Hidden, just invisible. Circumstance, can, however, make you hidden, regardless of invisibility or taking an action to hide. Not being physically seen just isn't enough, by itself to make that happen.

Which is literally all I was saying, and which you haven't contradicted, so I'm not sure why you think that "people who are ruling Invisible creatures to automatically be hidden simply because they are invisibleare still wrong, or houseruling it." was directed at you, rather than just clarifying what the rule is, in the context of a thread about rules people commonly get wrong.

Do you see what happened there? I, in a thread about rules people misapply or mistake, clarified a rule and referenced the fact that there are people who mistake or misapply that rule.

I don't see why I should have needed to be any more clear about it than I was, but nonetheless I apologize for the confusion.

Do you see?

I am not now, nor have I been, saying that you think invisible creatures are automatically hidden. The italicized statement is not a statement that you think anything, or are wrong about anything.


Now, since tone isn't clear in text, obviously, the "tone" in which I wrote this was mild exasperation at having to explain what I thought I had already explained. Not confrontation, or anything else.

 

[Yunru]

I AM ALSO CONTRIBUTING

*Ahem*

[Insert reference to rule 0]

 

[Pathkeeper24601]

Now see, this is where you're just confusing the heck out of me. Pretty much every time I've posted on this topic I've stated that being invisible means you may or may not be undetected.

Yet you keep telling me I'm incorrect about something I've never said.

As someone who has engaged with you over the issue, your responses have come across stronger on the side of creatures being automatically hidden. Using such words as "contradict" usually imply an opposite ruling to what was originally provided. Crawford did not contradict the current ruling that invisible creatures on not hidden unless they take the Hide action. He expands on it to make allowances for situations where the invisible may not be automatically noticed. The fact that being hidden in not an implicit part of being Invisible [unseen] has not changed. After this, there is no question about it being situational, the question becomes which is the base assumption and which is the exception provided by the situation.

 

[Oofta]

As someone who has engaged with you over the issue, your responses have come across stronger on the side of creatures being automatically hidden. Using such words as "contradict" usually imply an opposite ruling to what was originally provided. Crawford did not contradict the current ruling that invisible creatures on not hidden unless they take the Hide action. He expands on it to make allowances for situations where the invisible may not be automatically noticed. The fact that being hidden in not an implicit part of being Invisible [unseen] has not changed. After this, there is no question about it being situational, the question becomes which is the base assumption and which is the exception provided by the situation.

There is no "hidden" condition in 5E. You hide to avoid detection. When it comes to invisibility, much like "innocent before proven guilty" I believe you are "undetected until detected". You don't have to "do" anything to remain undetected. You have to "do" something or interact with the environment in some way to be detected. If the mage disappears, I don't know if he turned invisible or teleported away unless I know what spell he cast or there's an audible "pop" when someone teleports. If he walks through mud (or any number of things to give away his position) while invisible though, I will see his footsteps.

Of course someone with keen enough senses might be able to detect a living creature, the whole "I can hear you breath, I can hear your heart beating" trope. But that would be an exception to the general rule (and I would say it would be nearly impossible to hide from someone like that).

Even then if you know something is there you may not know exact position. The other day I heard coyotes howling close to where I was. I knew there was something there, but had no clue of exact position.

But we've wasted to much time on this in this thread. There have been many, many thread dedicated to this, which is why I provided the link in the first place.

 

[Seramus]

Interpretation is what happens during the game. Everything else is pre-game, and it's unlikely that all of your expectations will hold up after the game actually starts.

You might guess what lighting conditions the party will end up fighting under, or whether a particular trap will be in effect at that time, but you have no way of knowing whether it will actually remain the case when (or if) the time comes. Maybe the players will do something different.

Pre-game is still part of being a DM. You can outsource some of that work and run a module or something, but that is still something you choose. It doesn't matter if I guess what lighting conditions the party will end up fighting under, or whether a particular trap will be in effect at that time, because I choose where to place absolutely everything in that dungeon. There is no lighting, and no traps that I did not choose, except what the players create themselves.

And if you are good at Batman Gambits, you will consistently predict the actions of your players a large majority of the time. That's not necessarily true for all Dungeon Masters, but it is a skill that can be practiced unless you have a constantly rotating roster of players.

 

[Pathkeeper24601]

There is no "hidden" condition in 5E. You hide to avoid detection. When it comes to invisibility, much like "innocent before proven guilty" I believe you are "undetected until detected". You don't have to "do" anything to remain undetected. You have to "do" something or interact with the environment in some way to be detected. If the mage disappears, I don't know if he turned invisible or teleported away unless I know what spell he cast or there's an audible "pop" when someone teleports. If he walks through mud (or any number of things to give away his position) while invisible though, I will see his footsteps.

Of course someone with keen enough senses might be able to detect a living creature, the whole "I can hear you breath, I can hear your heart beating" trope. But that would be an exception to the general rule (and I would say it would be nearly impossible to hide from someone like that).

Even then if you know something is there you may not know exact position. The other day I heard coyotes howling close to where I was. I knew there was something there, but had no clue of exact position.

But we've wasted to much time on this in this thread. There have been many, many thread dedicated to this, which is why I provided the link in the first place.

I apologize for using English here. You should be able to talk about 5th edition without everything being a key word and I expected most to understand hidden as being the result of the Hide action.

I remain unconvinced that the basic premise has changed for Invisibility. By default, you know where something is unless the situation would suggest otherwise. This still provides plenty of benefits in advantage on attack, disadvantage to be attacked, can't be targeted by certain spells, can take the Hide action out in the open, etc. Movement itself is interacting with the environment unless you make an effort (Hide action) to not make additional noise. You don't hear any movement, just attack where the mage was last seen. If somebody didn't know you were there to begin with, something caused a distraction or shift in focus(Mislead), etc, then you may not be automatically detected and would probably use Passive Stealth value against an Active (taking an action) Perception check until the Hide action is taken.

Of course what is most important is consistency between PC's using Invisibility and NPC's using it against them. Most the players I know would rather have creatures know their position than have to figure out where an invisible creature they know was there may be.

 

[neogod22]

Not true. Damage resistance halves the damage you take. That's all. If a fireball hits for 20 damage and you fail the save, you take 20 damage, whivh is halved to 10.
If you succeed on the save, you take 10 damage which is halved to 5.

Wrong, read Damage resistance and vulnerabilities on page 197. The last line says damage is reduced by half, not three quarters. Resistance doesn't stack, just like vulnerabilities, advantage, and disadvantage. When you read saving throws, the first line is, you attempt to resist a spell. Saving throws are essentially your natural resistance to magic. If you pass, half damage, fail, full damage and effect.

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk

 

[bid]

Wrong, read Damage resistance and vulnerabilities on page 197.

"Resistance and then vulnerability are applied after all other modifiers to damage."

Ice storm does not use the word "resistance" to describe the "half as much damage on a successful save".

Plato is a man, Plato is Athenian. Therefore all men are Athenians.


I would add: magic missile rolls a single die of damage that is applied for each dart. This may include the spell casting modifier to each dart.