PDA

View Full Version : invisible spell feat question



Korivan
2009-06-15, 06:33 PM
the feat doesnt give any rules or examples with attack rolls with spells or area of effects.
example, the area is covered in a greese spell, do the opponents get a savings throw, or is the DC increased because they dont see it coming, or is nothing changed because then the +0 level adjustment would be broken. another example is using ray spells, would the target keep thier dex and dodge bonus if for example you tacked on silent, still, invisible, with eschew materials for a +2 level adjustment, or could you concievably catch them flatfooted since there is no indication at all that you did anything, other than the spell effect itself (which might not always be apparent either)

Korivan
2009-06-15, 07:18 PM
almost 30 views and noone would make a ruling either way?

RTGoodman
2009-06-15, 07:20 PM
The feat does exactly what it says it does, and no more.

So if it doesn't say that opponents are flat-footed against invisible rays, they don't. Like you said, it'd be WAY too good of a feat if all of your opponents were flat-footed or took other penalties because your spell was invisible.

Korivan
2009-06-15, 07:21 PM
ya, i feared that, but hey, cant blame a guy for trying, thanks.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-06-15, 07:39 PM
the feat doesnt give any rules or examples with attack rolls with spells or area of effects.
example, the area is covered in a greese spell, do the opponents get a savings throw, or is the DC increased because they dont see it coming, or is nothing changed because then the +0 level adjustment would be broken. another example is using ray spells, would the target keep thier dex and dodge bonus if for example you tacked on silent, still, invisible, with eschew materials for a +2 level adjustment, or could you concievably catch them flatfooted since there is no indication at all that you did anything, other than the spell effect itself (which might not always be apparent either)

I'd say it adds nothing to the DC. Why?

Well for one the invisibility of the spell effect itself is a pretty good advantage in itself. The enemy won't see that the area is greased or that a spread of stinking cloud is coming and so won't take steps to avoid it. Or, if you are invisible or concealed, your opponent won't be able to trace a ray spell back to you.

Second, why would adjudicate a higher penalty? If you step on a pitfall trap, you get a reflex save because you didn't see it before you triggered it. And D&D combat is abstract. You are denied your dexterity bonuses against foes you can't see (because, for ex, they are totally concealed or you are blind). But you are not denied the Dex bonus against someone attacking from behind you. The game does not break down what you did to avoid each sword swing or arrow shot. So, similarly, if you are aware of the arcane caster casting at you, you keep your Dex bonus.

Starbuck_II
2009-06-15, 08:03 PM
I agree with Hamster.

Its major benefit is is the low chance of spellcraft since can't see it and don't know area.

Glimbur
2009-06-15, 08:39 PM
You need more Invisible Walls of Fire, Invisible Prismatic Walls, Invisible Maws of Chaos, Invisible Resilient Spheres on allies, and most importantly: Invisible Invisibility.

Darrin
2009-06-15, 10:10 PM
almost 30 views and noone would make a ruling either way?

The feat is designed specifically to cause DMs to open their own skulls with a spoon. It has no practical use other than that.

Deth Muncher
2009-06-15, 10:17 PM
You need more Invisible Walls of Fire, Invisible Prismatic Walls, Invisible Maws of Chaos, Invisible Resilient Spheres on allies, and most importantly: Invisible Invisibility.

A friend of mine actually did this in HERO system.

For those who are unfamiliar, HERO is a game in which you essentially create skills and powers from points, which every character is allotted. Spells kinda work the same way that Epic Magic does in 3.5 - you start out with a base power, and add or subtract things to it depending on advantages/limitations of the power.

So, the Invisibility "seed" lets you be invisible to a particular sense, not just sight.

So.

My friend makes the Invisible: All power. So he would cut someone. And they couldn't feel it, because he's invisible to touch. So they'd look down when they felt their arm was wet and be like "OHGOD I have a huge cut in my arm! Why!?"

Zaq
2009-06-15, 10:46 PM
You need more Invisible Walls of Fire, Invisible Prismatic Walls, Invisible Maws of Chaos, Invisible Resilient Spheres on allies, and most importantly: Invisible Invisibility.

There's a Yo Dawg in there somewhere for someone intrepid enough to make it.

arguskos
2009-06-15, 11:00 PM
There's a Yo Dawg in there somewhere for someone intrepid enough to make it.
Yo dawg, I heard you like being invisible, so I put some invisible in your invisibility so you can be invisible while you are invisible.

Also, that just does NOT roll off the keyboard. >_<

quick_comment
2009-06-15, 11:39 PM
Invisible flare or invisible celestial brilliance are sillier I think.

Its so bright it blinds you before it even blinds you!

ericgrau
2009-06-15, 11:43 PM
UV induced blindness?

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-06-15, 11:49 PM
Don't forget:Invisible Summon Monster, Invisible Fabricate, Invisible Light and Invisible Animate Dead.

Bayar
2009-06-16, 01:53 AM
Don't forget:Invisible Summon Monster, Invisible Fabricate, Invisible Light and Invisible Animate Dead.

Yes, Invisible summons are a way to get a bonus out of the feat. Enemies lose their DEX bonus to AC when they are attacked by them.