D&D 5E Why do so many DMs use the wrong rules for invisibility?

[Caliban]

Does this seem reasonable? (I'm aware it's not RAW, but I'm trying to make up my mind how to run it before it becomes an issue in my game.)

If creatures in your vicinity are aware of your presence at the time you turn invisible, they can automatically sense your location unless you make a special effort to hide (i.e. take the Hide action).

If creatures in your vicinity are unaware of your presence at the time you turn invisible, you are automatically hidden from them. Use your passive Stealth if you have not made any special effort to hide.

If you attempt to hide while invisible, you have advantage on the Stealth check.

 

[Oofta]

Does this seem reasonable? (I'm aware it's not RAW, but I'm trying to make up my mind how to run it before it becomes an issue in my game.)

As long as you are consistent and it makes sense to you and your group, it's reasonable.​

If creatures in your vicinity are aware of your presence at the time you turn invisible, they can automatically sense your location unless you make a special effort to hide (i.e. take the Hide action).

In a relatively quiet dungeon, a creature wearing plate armor (which doesn't clank as much as some people think, but that's another topic) turns invisible and walks away on the stone floor as his footsteps echo down the hall.

Versus a wizard in robes during a fight is during a torrential thunderstorm. Wind is howling, thunder booms constantly and the wizard 50 feet away at the top of a battlement. He turns invisible and flies away on a broom. Does anyone know where he went? Why?
​

If creatures in your vicinity are unaware of your presence at the time you turn invisible, you are automatically hidden from them. Use your passive Stealth if you have not made any special effort to hide.

You are resting quietly in a silent hallway when an invisible iron golem powered by gnomish tech comes stomping towards you chugging and clanking like a steam locomotive. Why would you not know he was there?
​

The way I run it is that I have general rules. If I think it's reasonable that someone could be detected if not seen I ask for stealth checks vs passive perception. I modify that based on the situation and may give advantage/disadvantage as I see fit. Sometimes I may allow an investigation check if they suspect someone is there, or fleeing to decide the most logical location. In many cases you may hear something and know approximate direction and distance but not a precise location.

On the other hand I don't always call for rolls. The wizard on the battlement? Nobody knows where he is, or I set a DC 30 perception check for someone actively looking. The invisible steam punk gnomish iron golem? You know where he is when he gets close enough.

IMHO there are simply too many variables to come up with simple rules since I don't want to play D&D the Board Game(tm)*. Obviously there are many, many simplified rules in D&D but this does not have to be one of them.

*not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just not what I want from the game.

 

[Caliban]

Versus a wizard in robes during a fight is during a torrential thunderstorm. Wind is howling, thunder booms constantly and the wizard 50 feet away at the top of a battlement. He turns invisible and flies away on a broom. Does anyone know where he went? Why?

Eh, adding extreme environmental variables doesn't really add to the discussion. Of course you make allowances for that. Plus, he's not in your vicinity if he's 50 feet away at the top of a battlement. And would have advantage (at least) on the passive stealth check due to the storm.

In a relatively quiet dungeon, a creature wearing plate armor (which doesn't clank as much as some people think, but that's another topic) turns invisible and walks away on the stone floor as his footsteps echo down the hall.

I covered this. If you were nearby and saw him turn invisible, then you would be aware of their location. Otherwise they would have use passive stealth with a -5 due to disadvantage from wearing heavy armor. Or they could try to walk quietly and take the Hide action.

You are resting quietly in a silent hallway when an invisible iron golem powered by gnomish tech comes stomping towards you chugging and clanking like a steam locomotive. Why would you not know he was there?

Apparently you are deaf. Why did you make a deaf character?

But I actually covered this - if you make no special actions to hide, use your passive stealth. If a golem is making noise like a steam locomotive, then it's passive stealth is very low (ie - below 10) and everyone's passive Perception would spot you.

 

[ThePolarBear]

Well, since I don't believe that invisibility and hiding necessarily have anything to do with each other, I don't really give two figs.

YOU might not give two figs, but the quote you posted does not start the way it starts and since YOU commented on "what are the rules for invisibility" YOU should give at least a couple of figs on what are the rules for invsibility IN FULL. The part regarding invisible creatures i commented on specifically refers to "an invisible creature can always try to hide", and that IS connected to the rest of the rules regarding hiding - like the one that states its the DM that allows you to hide or not in the first place. Posted as "this are all the rules" and missing half of them while also getting some of them from outdated material is not the way to provide "all" the rules correctly.

The topic is not about hiding, it is about invisibility and the fact that some people think that the only way to avoid detection is to have this "condition" called "hidden" which is not mentioned anywhere in the book.

The post is about the rules governing invisibility and invisibility changes the way the rules for hiding work. Those should be quoted for reference, bolding the part about invisibility. You missed that part, and i'm commenting on this.

Ummm ... I'm quoting the rules for Blinded, page 290 of the PHB or 105 of the basic rules, not the rules for Vision and Light heavily obscured area. I guess I could have included those rules, but I did not.

I've not quoted the part for the blinded condition, stop editing my quotes. I've quoted till "Someone in darkness is effectively blinded" and stopped there. That part has been changed and it should not be quoted as such since it's no longer like that. Again, provide the rules.

Example:

http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/PH-Errata.pdf , First page, "Adventuring" section, "Vision and Light" - normally found on p183 of the PHB.

You might have quoted the blindness condition. You still wrote something that's no longer correct. Edit: and you asked to reply if someone had something to add. I did.

If you really want to provide "all" the rules, provide them and also create a bibliography so people can go and check that what you quoted is actually what is in the material. You should also provide the instances where is described the default assumption of detection and awareness both in combat and out of combat since those are relevant to invisibility and you are providing how invisibility interacts with said rules without quoting them.

 

[Oofta]

YOU might not give two figs, but the quote you posted does not start the way it starts and since YOU commented on "what are the rules for invisibility" YOU should give at least a couple of figs on what are the rules for invsibility IN FULL. The part regarding invisible creatures i commented on specifically refers to "an invisible creature can always try to hide", and that IS connected to the rest of the rules regarding hiding - like the one that states its the DM that allows you to hide or not in the first place. Posted as "this are all the rules" and missing half of them while also getting some of them from outdated material is not the way to provide "all" the rules correctly.



The post is about the rules governing invisibility and invisibility changes the way the rules for hiding work. Those should be quoted for reference, bolding the part about invisibility. You missed that part, and i'm commenting on this.



I've not quoted the part for the blinded condition, stop editing my quotes. I've quoted till "Someone in darkness is effectively blinded" and stopped there. That part has been changed and it should not be quoted as such since it's no longer like that. Again, provide the rules.

Example:

http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/PH-Errata.pdf , First page, "Adventuring" section, "Vision and Light" - normally found on p183 of the PHB.

You might have quoted the blindness condition. You still wrote something that's no longer correct. Edit: and you asked to reply if someone had something to add. I did.

If you really want to provide "all" the rules, provide them and also create a bibliography so people can go and check that what you quoted is actually what is in the material. You should also provide the instances where is described the default assumption of detection and awareness both in combat and out of combat since those are relevant to invisibility and you are providing how invisibility interacts with said rules without quoting them.

I gave my reasons, I quoted rules I thought were relevant. Sorry you feel like you have to harp on something irrelevant instead of discussing the topic of the thread.

 

[Barolo]

(...)

If you really want to provide "all" the rules, provide them and also create a bibliography so people can go and check that what you quoted is actually what is in the material. You should also provide the instances where is described the default assumption of detection and awareness both in combat and out of combat since those are relevant to invisibility and you are providing how invisibility interacts with said rules without quoting them.

I guess we all should start contacting our attorneys to check our posts before submitting them to the forum.

 

[Oofta]

Kind of combining posts here...

Oofta
Versus a wizard in robes during a fight is during a torrential thunderstorm. Wind is howling, thunder booms constantly and the wizard 50 feet away at the top of a battlement. He turns invisible and flies away on a broom. Does anyone know where he went? Why?

---

Caliban
Eh, adding extreme environmental variables doesn't really add to the discussion. Of course you make allowances for that. Plus, he's not in your vicinity if he's 50 feet away at the top of a battlement. And would have advantage (at least) on the passive stealth check due to the storm.

How do you define "in your vicinity". Is it 10 feet? 20? 30?

You didn't like my scenario so how about another one. A witch flying 10 feet overhead on a broom turns invisible and flies away. Do you know where they are?

I would say you may have a general idea of the direction she initially took but speed on a broom is 50 feet so good luck with knowing her exact location at the end of her move. In addition, environmental factors can apply, why wouldn't they? Did the witch just fireball a busy marketplace? People (and animals) are screaming, people are shouting, fire is crackling. All of that is going to mask any minor "whooshing" sound the broom might make.

Oofta
In a relatively quiet dungeon, a creature wearing plate armor (which doesn't clank as much as some people think, but that's another topic) turns invisible and walks away on the stone floor as his footsteps echo down the hall.

---

Caliban
I covered this. If you were nearby and saw him turn invisible, then you would be aware of their location. Otherwise they would have use passive stealth with a -5 due to disadvantage from wearing heavy armor. Or they could try to walk quietly and take the Hide action.

I agree that there are times when you will know where someone is even if they turn invisible. In some cases I may roll and ask for stealth and perception checks if it makes sense. I just don't attempt to make a "one size fits all" rule.

Oofta
You are resting quietly in a silent hallway when an invisible iron golem powered by gnomish tech comes stomping towards you chugging and clanking like a steam locomotive. Why would you not know he was there?

---

Apparently you are deaf. Why did you make a deaf character?

Huh? I'm honestly confused.

But I actually covered this - if you make no special actions to hide, use your passive stealth. If a golem is making noise like a steam locomotive, then it's passive stealth is very low (ie - below 10) and everyone's passive Perception would spot you.

I just gave it as an example of when I wouldn't even bother with numbers, passive or otherwise. If you've decided that the PCs should be able to hear the creature, why even bother with numbers?

None of your suggestions discuss distance, adjustments or other factors. As I said before if that's ok with you and your group I don't see a problem and I don't care.

I was just giving my feedback and explaining how I run it. If you ask for feedback, don't get your grundies in a bundle because I disagree with you.

 

[Caliban]

How do you define "in your vicinity". Is it 10 feet? 20? 30?

Whatever the DM decides is appropriate for the circumstances. That's why I said "vicinity" instead of giving a number.

You didn't like my scenario so how about another one. A witch flying 10 feet overhead on a broom turns invisible and flies away. Do you know where they are?

Sure. The broom is still visible. She's not carrying or wearing it, she's riding it.

I would say you may have a general idea of the direction she initially took but speed on a broom is 50 feet so good luck with knowing her exact location at the end of her move. In ddition, environmental factors can apply, why wouldn't they? Did the witch just fireball a busy marketplace? People (and animals) are screaming, people are shouting, fire is crackling. All of that is going to mask any minor "whooshing" sound the broom might make.

If she flew away, she's no longer in your vicinity.

Huh? I'm honestly confused.

You're the one who asked for a reason why you wouldn't know they were there. I gave you one. Not my fault your character is deaf.

I just gave it as an example of when I wouldn't even bother with numbers, passive or otherwise.

No you didn't. You proposed a scenario, but did not say how you would handle it. That would be a question, not an example.

If you've decided that the PCs should be able to hear the creature, why even bother with numbers?

Sometimes the numbers are what tell you the PC's should be able to hear them. If the numbers hit one extreme or another, there's no dice rolling involved as the check either can't be failed or can't be made.

Sometimes it's the story or plot that determines if someone will be spotted or not, but that wasn't the topic under discussion.

None of your suggestions discuss distance, adjustments or other factors. As I said before if that's ok with you and your group I don't see a problem and I don't care.

Make up your mind. "It sounds reasonable". Then you ask a bunch of nit picky questions and really unlikely scenarios (all of which were easily handled by my proposed rules, I'll note), and then you say you don't care.

I was just giving my feedback and explaining how I run it. If you ask for feedback, don't get your grundies in a bundle because I disagree with you.

I thought you said it was reasonable...or was it that you don't care? And now you are saying you disagree with me. I don't think i'm the one with my "grundies in a bundle" here.

FYI - you are coming off as very adversarial here. I've answered your latest round of interrogation, but I think i'm done now.

In any case, thank you for the feedback, I feel much more confident that my proposed house rules can handle invisibility well enough.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Please stop justifying the biggest clusterfrack of inconsistent, incomprehensible stealth rules in the history of D&D.

I still don't see what the confusion is. The rules make perfect sense to me, and my players have never complained about them or disagreed with them.

I can understand that some people don't immediately intuit the difference between invisible and hidden, but once that part has been clarified, there's no issue.

 

[CapnZapp]

I still don't see what the confusion is. The rules make perfect sense to me, and my players have never complained about them or disagreed with them.

I can understand that some people don't immediately intuit the difference between invisible and hidden, but once that part has been clarified, there's no issue.

I am happy for you.

However, I sincerely hope you are joking that "there's no issue" (unless you forgot to add "...for me"): this thread alone will soon break 200 posts, and it is neither the first nor the last on the subject.

There most assuredly is "an issue".