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

[Ilbranteloth]

The ones who are in the middle of combat and can only do one thing at a time, so they just cast a spell and haven't had time to get around to hiding yet. They probably have future intent to hide, but they aren't actually trying to hide yet.

I'd be okay with a house rule that lets someone try to hide as soon as they went invisible, if the DM was insistent, but I would prefer to play in a world where escaping combat isn't that easy. The default rules basically make it impossible for a spellcaster to flee from the party, since they'd have to weather an entire round worth of attacks between going invisible and hiding, and that sounds great to me as a player.

There really isn't a need to make a Stealth check once they are invisible. They can simply move.

"When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll...If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss."

Even if you hear them, people are quite poor at determining the location of somebody/something by sound alone. This is relatively easy to handle with a grid, since the DM will know which space the invisible creature is in, and can tell you if you hear them, the general direction, but then you've still got to select a specific square to attack.

In Theater-of-the-Mind it's a bit more difficult. In that case I use the attacker's passive Wisdom (Perception) against the invisible creature's passive Dexterity (Stealth) with whatever modifiers are appropriate to determine whether they are targeting the correct location. The same approach can be used with a grid, in which the DM can tell you which square you think is the right one.

I would apply disadvantage to the Wisdom (Perception) check, but you could just as easily grant advantage to the Dexterity (Stealth) score with similar results.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Even if you hear them, people are quite poor at determining the location of somebody/something by sound alone.

In real life, sure. The topic at hand is that the intent (and letter) of the rule states in fairly consistent terms that this is simply not the case. Within the reality of the game world, unlike in our world, you generally can determine the location of a creature by sound alone, unless it's taken active measures to silence itself (by taking the Hide action) or there's some unusual mitigating circumstance that would cause the DM to rule otherwise.

It's more than slightly counter-intuitive, but the same can be said for a lot of things in the game. A strong fighter can knock down an ogre or earth elemental and hold it to the ground with one hand. If you think something is too silly for your game, then you're encouraged to house rule it. It is unfortunate that there are so many places within the rules where obvious house rules would be beneficial, but that's just the reality of the situation.

 

[CapnZapp]

There really isn't a need to make a Stealth check once they are invisible. They can simply move.

"When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll...If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss."

Even if you hear them, people are quite poor at determining the location of somebody/something by sound alone.

By the rules of the game, if you aren't actively hiding your position is automatically known.

You will have disadvantage, though if you're a squishy, and the monster is terribly dangerous, you would probably want the extra security of actually being hidden.



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[CapnZapp]

It is unfortunate that there are so many places within the rules where obvious house rules would be beneficial, but that's just the reality of the situation.

This is the essence of the complaints against the stealth rules.

The game tries very hard to have few and simple rules.

Yet, when it comes to stealthing and hiding, the few rules there are are unintuitive to the point of being incomprehensible.

The game would have been much better served with either fewer or more rules.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[Ilbranteloth]

By the rules of the game, if you aren't actively hiding your position is automatically known.

You will have disadvantage, though if you're a squishy, and the monster is terribly dangerous, you would probably want the extra security of actually being hidden.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

I think that's an interpretation. Where in the rules does it say your position is automatically known?

It says "...and if you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase), you give away your position" and "An invisible creature can't be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, and it still has to stay quiet."

There's nothing that says an invisible creature has to hide first. The examples given are actually pretty loud and obvious noises.

I could have missed something, but I don't recall it specifically saying that your position is automatically known.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

In real life, sure. The topic at hand is that the intent (and letter) of the rule states in fairly consistent terms that this is simply not the case. Within the reality of the game world, unlike in our world, you generally can determine the location of a creature by sound alone, unless it's taken active measures to silence itself (by taking the Hide action) or there's some unusual mitigating circumstance that would cause the DM to rule otherwise.

It's more than slightly counter-intuitive, but the same can be said for a lot of things in the game. A strong fighter can knock down an ogre or earth elemental and hold it to the ground with one hand. If you think something is too silly for your game, then you're encouraged to house rule it. It is unfortunate that there are so many places within the rules where obvious house rules would be beneficial, but that's just the reality of the situation.

I can't speak for the intent of the rules, since I didn't write them.

Nor do I recall it being spelled out in the letter of the rules, consistent or otherwise, that you know their position unless they hide.

My approach is my interpretation of the rules, not a house rule - which does give a couple of examples of what gives away your position. The examples are making an attack (which also ends most invisibility), and making a noise (and gives two examples that are making obvious, loud noises, not just the noise of moving, etc.).

So my interpretation is simple, if an invisible creature does something that gives away their position, then you know their position. But if something changes that, such as moving from that position, then you don't.

In other words, as far as I can tell, the rules indicate that you don't know their position unless they do something that gives away that position.

 

[Oofta]

By the rules of the game, if you aren't actively hiding your position is automatically known.

You will have disadvantage, though if you're a squishy, and the monster is terribly dangerous, you would probably want the extra security of actually being hidden.



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

Once again, please show me where it says this. I'm still waiting.

 

[Oofta]

I can't speak for the intent of the rules, since I didn't write them.

Nor do I recall it being spelled out in the letter of the rules, consistent or otherwise, that you know their position unless they hide.

My approach is my interpretation of the rules, not a house rule - which does give a couple of examples of what gives away your position. The examples are making an attack (which also ends most invisibility), and making a noise (and gives two examples that are making obvious, loud noises, not just the noise of moving, etc.).

So my interpretation is simple, if an invisible creature does something that gives away their position, then you know their position. But if something changes that, such as moving from that position, then you don't.

In other words, as far as I can tell, the rules indicate that you don't know their position unless they do something that gives away that position.

For what it's worth, I agree that the phrase "you are automatically detected if you are not hiding" is a complete confabulation. It does not exist in the book, nor is it implied.

Unfortunately all the response you will get is that since "an invisible creature can be detected..." it means that they are automatically detected. The response of course is that in the first place the phrase "can be" doesn't mean "always". If they are interacting with the environment in a manner that can be detected or making significant noise, they are detected. The fact that it's not spelled out in grinding detail what those interactions could be people just say "RAW SAYS" and then add words to the text that don't exist.

But ... holy thread necromancy batman! This thread went on forever. People will never agree that "if you are not hiding people know your location" is not in the book. Somewhere. If you look hard enough.

 

[transcendantviewer]

One thing I do in all of my games is establish each character's "Passive Stealth Score". We do it the same way you make a passive perception score. It represents how hard it is to naturally notice the character when you aren't looking for them and they aren't actively attempting to hide. Like when we're making our way through a dungeon but we aren't trying to be stealthy, this helps determine how easy or hard it is for enemies in other rooms to catch on that there's hostiles invading their dungeon. Unlike other passive scores, since it's quite easy to notice someone/something that's not trying to hide, it's calculated as 6 + your bonus to Dexterity (Stealth) checks.
Of course, things such as invisibility or the actual inability to see the target would grant rather large bonuses to the passive stealth score. Probably a +5.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

For what it's worth, I agree that the phrase "you are automatically detected if you are not hiding" is a complete confabulation. It does not exist in the book, nor is it implied.

Unfortunately all the response you will get is that since "an invisible creature can be detected..." it means that they are automatically detected. The response of course is that in the first place the phrase "can be" doesn't mean "always". If they are interacting with the environment in a manner that can be detected or making significant noise, they are detected. The fact that it's not spelled out in grinding detail what those interactions could be people just say "RAW SAYS" and then add words to the text that don't exist.

But ... holy thread necromancy batman! This thread went on forever. People will never agree that "if you are not hiding people know your location" is not in the book. Somewhere. If you look hard enough.

I should be clear that I don't have any problem with people interpreting the rules to say that an invisible creature is always detectable unless they hide. My point is simply that it is an interpretation of the rules, and that other interpretations are valid (and are not house rules, nor "wrong").

And we haven't even reached 1000 posts yet in this thread, 279 posts is nothing!