D&D 5E Woo Hoo, Invisibility Stopped It's Downward Spiral

[KarinsDad]

If I'm understanding you correctly... you're suggesting a situation where someone is invisible but no one is there to sense him. Sure, in that case I wouldn't ask for a DEX (Stealth) check, just like I wouldn't ask for someone standing alone in a room to make a DEX (Stealth) check, invisible or not. If no one is there to sense him, then he is by definition 100% beyond being sensed.

But if someone is invisible and the possibility exists that someone could walk by and sense him (through Passive Perception)... then I absolutely would ask for a DEX (Stealth) check right at the top so that I'm prepped for when the passerby goes by. Now depending on the situation and where the invisible person was standing I might give Advantage on the DEX check or perhaps even some other additional bonuses... but they still need the check just to see how well or poorly they're holding themselves. If you're invisible but you still stand in the middle of a room with people walking by you, that makes you more prone to being noticed. Or if you try and regulate your breathing but for whatever reason are breathing heavy, that also will make you prone to being noticed. That DEX check tells me how well you're doing.

For me, just being invisible doesn't give you a free pass to never being sensed, even if someone isn't specifically trying to find you. The one thing the Invisible condition gives you is satisfying the Heavily Obscured requirement regardless of where you happen to be.

I get what you are saying, I just think that a trained Stealth invisible PC should only be rolling if there is a reasonably decent chance of being found. The invisible PC is in a room looking for stuff. A maid opens the door. The PC freezes. No need for a check in my mind unless the maid walks directly to him (through his location, whatever). I do understand that in this scenario, the DM might want to add to the suspense of the scene, especially if it is a small room and he asks for a check. But a large banquet room? I probably would not even bother.

And even if the maid were to hear something, without seeing something, she would probably just shrug it off and go on with her day.

The vast majority of NPCs shouldn't be suspicious of an occasional strange sound or odor or whatever. In the tavern's beer cellar and the stableboy hears a sound? It's probably rats or the creaking of the floor boards above. I wouldn't expect most NPCs to suspect invisible creatures.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Give you an example of where the stealth rules are a bit faulty.

An NPC walking down the trail. A PC is using lightly obscured area to hide in the first place. So, passive perception vs. stealth. However, if the hiding PC makes noise, than it is disadvantaged perception (lightly obscured) vs. stealth. So it is harder to find the guy when you know that he is there than if you do not know he is there.

Granted, a DM could make it passive perception at -5 (for lightly obscured) vs. stealth for spotting the hiding PC in the first place, but the odds of making that are really low which means that most every creature hiding behind lightly obscured area cannot easily be detected, but most every creature hiding behind cover can more easily be detected. The bushes hide you really well, but the large rock doesn't.

Either way the DM runs it, the rules here have an issue.

Whaaaaaaaa?

 

[DEFCON 1]

I get what you are saying, I just think that a trained Stealth invisible PC should only be rolling if there is a reasonably decent chance of being found. The invisible PC is in a room looking for stuff. A maid opens the door. The PC freezes. No need for a check in my mind unless the maid walks directly to him (through his location, whatever). I do understand that in this scenario, the DM might want to add to the suspense of the scene, especially if it is a small room and he asks for a check. But a large banquet room? I probably would not even bother.

And even if the maid were to hear something, without seeing something, she would probably just shrug it off and go on with her day.

The vast majority of NPCs shouldn't be suspicious of an occasional strange sound or odor or whatever. In the tavern's beer cellar and the stableboy hears a sound? It's probably rats or the creaking of the floor boards above. I wouldn't expect most NPCs to suspect invisible creatures.

Understood. I think it might just be our differences in playstyle then that has you going in your direction and me going in mine. If I was running the scenario you outlined... the only reason I'd be introducing an NPC such as the maid into the room would be to introduce the tension of possibly being discovered-- in which case I'd absolutely need the player to have rolled the check. I've never been a DM that describes inconsequential people or events going on around the PCs in any sort of real detail. If I'm introducing and describing a person or event, it's because they're something the PCs will potentially interact with.

So in your scenario... if I didn't want or expect the PC to possibly be discovered in the banquet hall (or make the player *think* there was a chance of possibly being discovered in the banquet hall), I wouldn't bother having a maid walk in in the first place. I'd skip over that bit of inconsequence and only describe the things that really mean something to the PC. But that's just my particular way of DMing.

 

[KarinsDad]

Understood. I think it might just be our differences in playstyle then that has you going in your direction and me going in mine. If I was running the scenario you outlined... the only reason I'd be introducing an NPC such as the maid into the room would be to introduce the tension of possibly being discovered-- in which case I'd absolutely need the player to have rolled the check. I've never been a DM that describes inconsequential people or events going on around the PCs in any sort of real detail. If I'm introducing and describing a person or event, it's because they're something the PCs will potentially interact with.

So in your scenario... if I didn't want or expect the PC to possibly be discovered in the banquet hall (or make the player *think* there was a chance of possibly being discovered in the banquet hall), I wouldn't bother having a maid walk in in the first place. I'd skip over that bit of inconsequence and only describe the things that really mean something to the PC. But that's just my particular way of DMing.

I would probably do the same thing as a general rule. No maid because it is not pertinent to the story. However, I might also throw a maid in their, just to let the player know that this is a living breathing world with things going on. He has to be careful in case he runs into a more suspicious NPC like a lieutenant or whatever. But, I do sometimes throw in random stuff, just to make the world feel a bit more plausible.

 

[KarinsDad]

Whaaaaaaaa?

The issue is that hiding in lightly obscured results in disadvantage for perception, hiding in cover does not. With two different mechanics, it means that bushes are really good places to hide behind and large rocks are not. The former gets -5 to passive perception and disadvantage to normal perception rolls, the latter does not.


Oh and Darkvision is the same as seeing in dim light which is the same as lightly obscured, so a creature can hide out in the open in a pitch black room and his foe with darkvision would be at disadvantage to spot him.

 

[Skyscraper]

Actually it doesn't. Invisibility is a lesser condition than hiding. It only prevents things from seeing you to target you and allows you to try to hide. If you haven't made a stealth check they can still hear you.

The real question is: can you eat spaghetti while invisible? There is no specific rule against it, but there is no rule supporting it. Thus, I am totally in the dark.

Which begs the sub-question: when does the noodle being slurped in become invisible? When it touches the PC's lips? Halfway through? When it has been gobbled down entirely? Or does spaghetti never become invisible because it doesn't say it does in the rule?

I'll have to agree with you that invisbility is a lesser condition than any other, because of the spaghetti clause.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The issue is that hiding in lightly obscured results in disadvantage for perception, hiding in cover does not. With two different mechanics, it means that bushes are really good places to hide behind and large rocks are not. The former gets -5 to passive perception and disadvantage to normal perception rolls, the latter does not.


Oh and Darkvision is the same as seeing in dim light which is the same as lightly obscured, so a creature can hide out in the open in a pitch black room and his foe with darkvision would be at disadvantage to spot him.

WotC's headquarters ARE in Washington.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

An NPC walking down the trail. A PC is using lightly obscured area to hide in the first place. So, passive perception vs. stealth. However, if the hiding PC makes noise, than it is disadvantaged perception (lightly obscured) vs. stealth. So it is harder to find the guy when you know that he is there than if you do not know he is there.

Granted, a DM could make it passive perception at -5 (for lightly obscured) vs. stealth for spotting the hiding PC in the first place, but the odds of making that are really low which means that most every creature hiding behind lightly obscured area cannot easily be detected, but most every creature hiding behind cover can more easily be detected. The bushes hide you really well, but the large rock doesn't.

Either way the DM runs it, the rules here have an issue.

If someone makes noises, you have no disadvantage on perception checks.
If someone makes a noise and is still then (does not move) The observer may have advantage to detect a creature in light obscurement (cancelling disadvantage), but only if that creature has an ability to hide in plain sight at all (like the woodelf). If the creature has no ability to hide in plain sight, you automatically see the hiding creature without a check. Because you are not hidden anymore.

 

[Psikerlord#]

It appears that they are keeping the 4e approach. Invisible is fairly easily detectable unless coupled with stealth.

I think this depends on the DM. I would allow adv on many invisible stealth checks, when no-one is expected to be sneaking invisibily.... also, if they hear yiu.... well, what do they hear? What do they deduce from the noise. Possibly very little, depending on the situation.

 

[Mark CMG]

I've never allowed invisibility to last through sleeping.

In areas where insect concentration is high, I also had periodic checks to see if dealing with these small annoyances constituted "an attack" having been made and thus foiling the invisibility.