Aren't Liches immune to invisibility?

[Charles Phipps]

I thought all undead were, actually.

Am I totally wrong here.

Illusions and Undead never mixed in my Ravenloft campaign.

[EmeraldPhoenix]

Nope.
Nah.
Nada.
Not as such.
No siree.
Not really.
Not to my knowledge.
Nein.
Niet.



In other words: No.

[Salt_Crow]

No. Undeads are immune to mind-affecting effects and are still subject to figments and whatnots ;)

[Silverraptor]

Besides, people are still entitled to spot checks with invisibility as I recall. The DC is just alot higher. And for those of you who will say, "How can you see something invisible?" Well, say you shift some dust on the ground. That's the kind of example I'm using.:smallsmile:

[Zeta Kai]

No, your probably thinking of mind-affecting effects.

BTW, the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType) is your friend, your lover, & sometimes your only hope. :smallamused:

[factotum]

If Xykon WERE immune to Invisibility, how would it make a difference? Nobody's trying to turn him invisible last time I checked (and besides, we know for a fact he's been invisible at least once during the run of the strip).

[HamsterOfTheGod]

I thought all undead were, actually.


I thought everyone was. What you can't see can't hurt you.

[PId6]

I thought everyone was. What you can't see can't hurt you.
Unless what they're using is Greater Invisibility rather than regular Invisibility, in which case they most definitely can hurt you. Alot.

[Silverraptor]

Though what determines an hostile action? Dropping a grenade on them will drop the invisibility but dropping a potato won't? And does this mean that opening the door would display V for all to see?:smallconfused:
I guess the answer is, Magic!

[HamsterOfTheGod]

Unless what they're using is Greater Invisibility rather than regular Invisibility, in which case they most definitely can hurt you. Alot.

But even the greater invisibility guy can't hurt you by being invisible. Or rather you can't be immune to someone being invisible...well not normally. You might as well be immune to someone being an elf. Granted the OP meant something else by his use of the word.

[TheGrimace]

No, opening the door is not a hostile action. V would remain invisible for this.

<Consider to following>

You're a high level sorcerlich who has just been insulted by some snooty elf who tried to cheat during his fight with you.

You beat the elf, who turned invisible and ran away.

You don't know where he is, but you have a Meteor swarm at the ready (or glitterdust, who knows?).

A door opens for no apparent reason.

"suspected result"

The door gets much bigger, like... four fireballs bigger.

[Flickerdart]

But even the greater invisibility guy can't hurt you by being invisible. Or rather you can't be immune to someone being invisible...well not normally. You might as well be immune to someone being an elf. Granted the OP meant something else by his use of the word.
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=139446&type=card

[HamsterOfTheGod]

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=139446&type=card

Good hit! Does the 'normally' save me?

I was thinking more of "The early Anglo-Saxons not only made use of amulets of wood or other material, on which were engraven Runic characters, to secure protection from elves and demons, but they carried about with them the herb called periwinkle, of the botanical genus Vinca, as a charm against snakes and wild animals." (http://www.sacred-texts.com/etc/mhs/mhs59.htm).

[Zeful]

I thought all undead were, actually.

Am I totally wrong here.

Illusions and Undead never mixed in my Ravenloft campaign.

Only one undead can actually see through invisibility, the Dread Wraith (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/wraith.htm#dreadWraith). And that's because it possesses the Lifesense Supernatural Ability. Undead are immune to all Mind-effecting effects (unless the spell says otherwise), but they can still be affected normally by illusions.

[Ancalagon]

Illusions and Undead never mixed in my Ravenloft campaign.

Invisibility isn't an illusion, as I got it. You are actually invisible, not "seemingly invisible".

[Lemarc]

Invisibility isn't an illusion, as I got it. You are actually invisible, not "seemingly invisible".
It's an illusion spell, according to its stats. But since it works by manipulating light, rather than your enemies' minds (unlike psionic invisibility), there's no reason it shouldn't work on undead. Nor most other sorts of illusions.

[BlueWizard]

Invis. counts as a Phantasm right? Illusion?

[Douglas]

Glamer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#glamer), actually. As Lemarc says, it works by making you actually invisible, not by affecting the minds of people who see you and making their brains edit you out.

[Innis Cabal]

Though what determines an hostile action? Dropping a grenade on them will drop the invisibility but dropping a potato won't? And does this mean that opening the door would display V for all to see?:smallconfused:
I guess the answer is, Magic!

How are those even remotely similar?

[Decoy Lockbox]

Our group always had arguments about this. On the one hand, nothing in the rules say that undead see through invisibility. On the other hand, the existence of the "invisibility to undead" spell implies that they can in fact see through normal invisibility. A conundrum, indeed.

[spectralphoenix]

Our group always had arguments about this. On the one hand, nothing in the rules say that undead see through invisibility. On the other hand, the existence of the "invisibility to undead" spell implies that they can in fact see through normal invisibility. A conundrum, indeed.

Hide from Undead is a 1st level cleric spell that affects the entire party, while Invisibility is a 2nd level wizard spell that only affects one creature. Invisibility is less powerful and a higher level because it renders you invisible to everything. And clerics tend to have more undead/outsider specific spells.

Edit: And Hide from Undead can't be penetrated by any sense, while Invisibility only hides you from sight.

[Zeful]

Our group always had arguments about this. On the one hand, nothing in the rules say that undead see through invisibility. On the other hand, the existence of the "invisibility to undead" spell implies that they can in fact see through normal invisibility. A conundrum, indeed.

Incorrect, Hide from Undead (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/hideFromUndead.htm), like Hide from Animals (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/hideFromAnimals.htm) is a specific ward that creatures of that type can't penetrate with there senses. Invisibility creates the Illusion of normalcy where the invisible creature/object is.

Further by your logic, Hide from Animals implies Animals can see through invisibility as well, rather than it being a form of invisibility that only works against a specific creature type. Technically a caster could research a spell that provides invisibility against a single named target (Hide from Bob Thatguy III) and it would be a 0-level spell (as it's more restrictive than a creature type, which is in turn more restrictive than anything).

[Juron Pilo]

The hide from series would actually be incredibly useful if it worked on more creature types. I'm just sayin'.

edit: Now theres another gamebreaker strategy you could use. Can clerics craft their own spells? Cuz I'd make my own hide from spells that would hide from... well any number of things. Using Unearthed Arcana Urban Ranger style rules you could even hide from people by specifying an organization instead.

[spectralphoenix]

The hide from series would actually be incredibly useful if it worked on more creature types. I'm just sayin'.

edit: Now theres another gamebreaker strategy you could use. Can clerics craft their own spells? Cuz I'd make my own hide from spells that would hide from... well any number of things. Using Unearthed Arcana Urban Ranger style rules you could even hide from people by specifying an organization instead.
While clerics can research spells, new spells are only researchable if the DM specifically allows the spell. Saying that you could break the game by researching custom spells is a bit silly.

Besides which, Hide from Undead gives intelligent creatures a Will save, meaning that a Hide from Humanoids or a Hide from the Thranish Army spell would give all intelligent creatures a save as well, making it considerably less reliable.

[Juron Pilo]

You got me, but it could still be useful say in a war situation. And nothing says I can't add Greater, Epic, or Superb to the spell and buff its stats accordingly.:smallcool:

You know, using tropes for fun and profit is actually pretty fun.

edit: and disregarding the whole creating a greater version of the same spell angle, wouldn't the check be effected by... I don't know... caster level?

[spectralphoenix]

Not really - it would improve with your casting stat, but a higher caster level doesn't improve DCs.

Spell level does, but if you're willing to heighten it much you might as well just use invisibility spells and not worry about the save at all.

[Juron Pilo]

... Invisibility has a check too... granted its an easier one because its higher level. Plus you can detect normally invisible people with spot and suchforth. Hide would have no check of that sort, and near as I can tell doesn't end if you attack. And its almost implied by omission that you can't see the tracks of a hidden person either.

[Green Bean]

Well, this is what the SRD says;


# Immunity to all mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects).

It doesn't say anything about illusions, and Invisibility (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/invisibility.htm) doesn't have the 'Mind-Affecting' tag. Xykon is perfectly vulnerable to Invisibility, along with most other Glamers and Figments.

[Juron Pilo]

So your saying that the pre-existing spell sucks even worse than I thought? I mean, what kinda Cleric is gonna have problems defeating undead.:smalltongue:

[Ashiver]

As a lot of folks have already pointed out, Liches are not immune to invisibility in 3.5 which is more or less what the comic follows. I would bet the same is true of 4th edition. If you go back to 2nd edition though (which is what you are talking about, since Ravenloft is a 2nd edition campaign setting..) they sometimes were. The Ravenloft campaign setting may have had specific different rules concerning undead as well, but even core they randomly were able to see invis.

[Juron Pilo]

I was talking about hide from undead but come to look at it it actually has no tags, so whatever.

But if anything, that only means my entire "create a buffed version of hide" would work.

[Dagren]

You got me, but it could still be useful say in a war situation. And nothing says I can't add Greater, Epic, or Superb to the spell and buff its stats accordingly.:smallcool:Actually no, a war situation is where it would likely be the most useless. The more people in the group you are using it on, the more likely someone is to make their save. If each enemy soldier has a 50% chance of making their save, trying to hide from a platoon of 15 men would only work once every 30 thousand times, statistically speaking. The only reason that Hide from Undead is useful is that many undead are mindless and thus get no save. (Same goes for animals I guess, typically having, well, animal intelligence)