Invisible Attack!

[Regitnui]

I recently put my level 2, 4-man party against a poltergeist in a dwarven tomb. Simply put, it kicked their rears so hard they're still planning on going back for revenge. Now part of this may be my fault. I assumed that since it was invisible, putting a marker on the table would be counterproductive. Also, I ruled that they couldn't see it or any traces of its passing, being both invisible and intangible. The monk eventually threw a bag of powder at a place they suspected it was, so I let them see "swirls of air in the dust" which let them return fire quite effectively. Until it moved through a wall.

Eventually, I threw the players a bone and let them 'win' when the sorcerer put dancing lights between them and it. Suitably guarded by lights, and the poltergeist badly hurt, I gave them the xp.

Here's my question for the more experienced DMs out there. Did I do anything wrong in running an unseeable enemy, and if so, how could I improve next time? None of the players had any special vision modes, beyond darkvision.

[j_spencer93]

Unseeable and intangible. Not i think you did good. Without a means of detecting it that would be a hard battle

[Maxilian]

Just because you can't see a target, doesn't mean they can detect where the target is (in the end they are not hiding), so they can be attacked (Unless is with a spell that needs you to see your target), is not like just because they are invisible, you can't find out where they are (You would have Disadvantage on your attack though)

[Plaguescarred]

I recently put my level 2, 4-man party against a poltergeist in a dwarven tomb. Simply put, it kicked their rears so hard they're still planning on going back for revenge. Now part of this may be my fault. I assumed that since it was invisible, putting a marker on the table would be counterproductive. Also, I ruled that they couldn't see it or any traces of its passing, being both invisible and intangible. The monk eventually threw a bag of powder at a place they suspected it was, so I let them see "swirls of air in the dust" which let them return fire quite effectively. Until it moved through a wall.

Eventually, I threw the players a bone and let them 'win' when the sorcerer put dancing lights between them and it. Suitably guarded by lights, and the poltergeist badly hurt, I gave them the xp.

Here's my question for the more experienced DMs out there. Did I do anything wrong in running an unseeable enemy, and if so, how could I improve next time? None of the players had any special vision modes, beyond darkvision.You should still know the location of an invisible creature unless it's hidden. While you could certainly have decided the poltergeist was hidden when encountered, after it attacked the poltergeist's location should have been revealed until it use an action to hide again.

Unseen Attacker & Target: If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.

[Malifice]

I recently put my level 2, 4-man party against a poltergeist in a dwarven tomb. Simply put, it kicked their rears so hard they're still planning on going back for revenge. Now part of this may be my fault. I assumed that since it was invisible, putting a marker on the table would be counterproductive. Also, I ruled that they couldn't see it or any traces of its passing, being both invisible and intangible. The monk eventually threw a bag of powder at a place they suspected it was, so I let them see "swirls of air in the dust" which let them return fire quite effectively. Until it moved through a wall.

Eventually, I threw the players a bone and let them 'win' when the sorcerer put dancing lights between them and it. Suitably guarded by lights, and the poltergeist badly hurt, I gave them the xp.

Here's my question for the more experienced DMs out there. Did I do anything wrong in running an unseeable enemy, and if so, how could I improve next time? None of the players had any special vision modes, beyond darkvision.

Yeah.

Invisible only allows you to take the Hide action. It doesnt make you autmatically hidden (and even if it was hidden, it automatically reveals itself after it makes an attack, succesful or not).

The PCs should have been able to attack it (at disadvantage - see the invisible condition) but be unable to target it with AoO or most spells (which require you to be able to see the target).

It could attempt to Hide by taking the Hide action at will (making it immune to attacks unless the PC guesses where it is) but that takes an action, and may not be sucessful (and they could find it by using the Search action).

[j_spencer93]

Never used an invisible creature yet, just figured it was like 3.5. Wow wasnt aware it was so different in this addition

[Corran]

Just wanted to add that the unheard condition can be satisfied by other ways than taking the hide action (eg being inside the radius of a silence spell, in which case an invisibile creature is automatically successfully hidden without even needing to take the hide action).

Also, tell your players that they can always ready an action when in similarr situations in the future.

[Malifice]

Never used an invisible creature yet, just figured it was like 3.5. Wow wasnt aware it was so different in this addition

Yeah, they nerfed it in 5E away from the 'automatically make the Rogue redundant' spell it once was. To make the most out of invisibilty, you need a good Dex (stealth) skill, and preferably expertise and cunning action (to enable you to become invisible as your action, AND hide on the same turn).

If you're invisible and dont take the Hide action, the assumption is that nearby creatures have enough of a clue of where you are to be able to make wild attacks in your general vicinity (with disadvantage). It still protects you from AoO's (require a target 'you can see') and most spells that require LOS (which is most of them, including things like Power Word Kill).

Being invisible also lets you take the Hide action at will (as an action, unless you're a Rouge 2 or a high level Ranger with 'vanish' at which point it becomes a bonus action).

If you take the Hide action while invisible (which you can do at any time, usually as an action or in some cases a bonus action) you become impossible to target at all without a lucky guess. In many cases your opponents wont even know you're there.

They did similar with Charm person (its no longer the 'automatically make the party Face redundant' spell either - it just grants advantage on social skills, meaning you'll need both the spell and the skill to make the spell worthwhile).

In general as a Wizard, you're better off casting either spell on the guy with the skills to back it up. It encourages teamwork, removes the ability of the caster to invalidate other classes, and protects niche roles in the party.

Its a feature, not a bug.

[Regitnui]

They did know where the poltergeist was directly after it attacked the cleric directly. But it also threw a hammer at them from the darkness, whereupon I told them that they couldn't see what threw it. Similarly with the other telekinetic thrusts it used; something just smacked them from that direction. How would a naturally and permanently invisible creature become visible after hitting someone from twenty feet away?

[VanCucci]

How would a naturally and permanently invisible creature become visible after hitting someone from twenty feet away?
It dosen't become visible, it gives away its location.

[Malifice]

They did know where the poltergeist was directly after it attacked the cleric directly. But it also threw a hammer at them from the darkness, whereupon I told them that they couldn't see what threw it. Similarly with the other telekinetic thrusts it used; something just smacked them from that direction. How would a naturally and permanently invisible creature become visible after hitting someone from twenty feet away?

It doesnt become visible. It gives away its location. The characters sense a telekinteic thrust from a particular direction, and see swirling dust, feel a coldness on their skin or sense an unnatural presence in a rough area (enough for them to launch an attack in that general area at disadvantage).

They have one round to attempt to do something to it (however most spells and AoO's are out, and any attacks are made with disadvantage, and as its incorporeal it cant be grabbed) before it's turn comes around again and it can (if it wants) attempt to hide using the Hide action.

If it decides to take advantage of its invisibility and hide (as an action) it must defeat the PCs passive perception scores (from memory it only gets +2 to its Stealth from Dex, so its not particularly stealthy, obviously giving off a sense of dread, unnatural coldness, or swirling dust and debris around itself which is hard to conceal).

[Regitnui]

It doesnt become visible. It gives away its location. The characters sense a telekinteic thrust from a particular direction, and see swirling dust, feel a coldness on their skin or sense an unnatural presence in a rough area (enough for them to launch an attack in that general area at disadvantage).

They have one round to attempt to do something to it (however most spells and AoO's are out, and any attacks are made with disadvantage, and as its incorporeal it cant be grabbed) before it's turn comes around again and it can (if it wants) attempt to hide using the Hide action.

If it decides to take advantage of its invisibility and hide (as an action) it must defeat the PCs passive perception scores (from memory it only gets +2 to its Stealth from Dex, so its not particularly stealthy, obviously giving off a sense of dread, unnatural coldness, or swirling dust and debris around itself which is hard to conceal).

The one time it did give away its position with a direct melee attack on the cleric, they hit it quite successfully three times in a row. It then moved into a wall and out again about 15ft further away. Would they have any reasonable idea of knowing it is now 15ft. away? I certainly didn't give them any hints.

[Saggo]

The one time it did give away its position with a direct melee attack on the cleric, they hit it quite successfully three times in a row. It then moved into a wall and out again about 15ft further away. Would they have any reasonable idea of knowing it is now 15ft. away? I certainly didn't give them any hints.

They would, because as was mentioned being invisible doesn't prevent a player from knowing their location. It also works in reverse for you as a DM, your NPCs know the location of invisible players. Players (and NPCs) are allowed to discern the hints even though you didn't give them any.

You must be hidden to be unlocated. The Hide Action is the most common way. Being inside the walls is another, but as soon as the target left the walls it was no longer hidden.

Abstractly, you only know the 5' square a target is in. That's a lot of space, but finite space, hence the disadvantage. Tables always have the prerogative of houseruling it.

[Vogonjeltz]

The one time it did give away its position with a direct melee attack on the cleric, they hit it quite successfully three times in a row. It then moved into a wall and out again about 15ft further away. Would they have any reasonable idea of knowing it is now 15ft. away? I certainly didn't give them any hints.

If it's inaudible and it has no effect at all on its surroundings, then no, they would not know the new location and have to guess.

If it makes any noise at all or has any effect on its surroundings, then it wouldn't be hidden and its location would be known.
That being said, if it's in a wall it should also have no idea where the players are. So if they relocate, it should itself be surprisable.

[Telok]

In this edition everything is automatically noticed unless it is a trap, secret door, or makes a dex check (proficiency may apply) that beats a wis check (proficiency may apply). Invisibility, inaudibility, incorporeality, nothing matters but dex vs. wis unless it's a trap or secret door. That's the rules.

If the rules are in the way of a good game this is also the edition of "rulings over rules."

[Regitnui]

It looks like I didn't do anything majorly wrong. I told the players the direction the poltergeist was in, but I didn't give them exact squares. This seems to be the main bone of contention; whether I should have told my players the exact square or let them merely know "west of you".

[Mellack]

If it did not make a successful hide check, then the players should have know the square the creature was in.

[Regitnui]

If it did not make a successful hide check, then the players should have know the square the creature was in.

By getting the screaming heebie-jeebies and using the crawling sensation of fear as a makeshift radar? Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to have to go with common sense over RAW.

[Saggo]

By getting the screaming heebie-jeebies and using the crawling sensation of fear as a makeshift radar? Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to have to go with common sense over RAW.

It's not just as you put it screaming heebie-jeebies and the crawling sensation of fear, which is all just narrative. It could be moaning, the rush of wind, loose particles stirring, literally anything that didn't involve seeing the creature directly, and it could also be screaming heebie-jeebies and the crawling sensation of fear. The narrative is malleable and can easily be derived from the mechanics provided. A poltergeist comes with a feature to be innately Unseen, but it has no features that innately make it Unheard or automatically cover its tracks.

In mechanical terms, in this fight a CR2 creature was given a feature to be auto-hidden. That could easily increase the challenge rating a level or two, making the encounter a higher difficulty than the medium difficulty it originally was. XP should be awarded accordingly.

To answer the question:

Did I do anything wrong in running an unseeable enemy, and if so, how could I improve next time?
As explained, an Invisible target isn't automatically hidden (i.e. presence and location obscured from players), per the Invisible condition in the appendix. Stealth and Hiding (obscuring the location) requires you to make some sort of use of action economy, either through clever movement or consuming your Action to Hide. Combat was designed with this notion in mind.

In your favor, Telekinetic Thrust isn't an attack, but a skill check contest. If the poltergeist was hidden, Telekinetic Thrust wouldn't automatically reveal the location as per Unseen Attacker rules. But if the poltergeist was hidden, players would be allowed to contest its Stealth with Perception. Then you would narrate how the Perception beat the Stealth roll, i.e. "you feel cold from this spot" or "you hear the wind and dust rushing to this spot."

[Telok]

Yup, by the rules a blinded and deafened human character will automatically know the position of an invisible, silenced, unconsious pixie that is several hundred feet away in a completely dark cave with a dozen dwarven bagpipers playing at full volume. No dex check = no hiding = they know where you are.

[Corran]

Yup, by the rules a blinded and deafened human character will automatically know the position of an invisible, silenced, unconsious pixie that is several hundred feet away in a completely dark cave with a dozen dwarven bagpipers playing at full volume. No dex check = no hiding = they know where you are.
This is untrue. Distance and any other source of noise can satisfy the inaudible unheard condition regarding the invisible creature. It is up to the DM to determine how such factors interact with combat. Some DM screens have also guidelines regarding hearing distances.
Also, knowing the 5' square is very different than knowing the exact location, and the disadvantage takes care of that distinction mechanically. Perhaps not the most realistic approach, but it is a very good approximation IMO, while also keeping combat simple and fast.

[Mellack]

By getting the screaming heebie-jeebies and using the crawling sensation of fear as a makeshift radar? Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to have to go with common sense over RAW.

You started this thread asking if you had done anything "wrong." I have to infer from that you meant with regards to the rules as written. Otherwise there is no way to play the game "wrong" as we can all make whatever changes we want.
By the RAW, you ran the poltergeist wrong. You gave it the ability to auto-hide. Doing so changed the creatures power. I am not trying to demean you. If you think a creature should have a certain power, by all means let it. Just remember that by changeing the poltergeist you also change the combat with it.
Now DMs can (and probably should) sometimes alter monsters. When you do so, you need to understand that you have altered the power level and adjust accordingly.

[Xetheral]

I recently put my level 2, 4-man party against a poltergeist in a dwarven tomb. Simply put, it kicked their rears so hard they're still planning on going back for revenge. Now part of this may be my fault. I assumed that since it was invisible, putting a marker on the table would be counterproductive. Also, I ruled that they couldn't see it or any traces of its passing, being both invisible and intangible. The monk eventually threw a bag of powder at a place they suspected it was, so I let them see "swirls of air in the dust" which let them return fire quite effectively. Until it moved through a wall.

Eventually, I threw the players a bone and let them 'win' when the sorcerer put dancing lights between them and it. Suitably guarded by lights, and the poltergeist badly hurt, I gave them the xp.

Here's my question for the more experienced DMs out there. Did I do anything wrong in running an unseeable enemy, and if so, how could I improve next time? None of the players had any special vision modes, beyond darkvision.

It's worth pointing out that hiding and visibility are one of the most-contentious aspects of 5e. Just something worth keeping in mind when reading responses giving a RAW viewpoint. (Even whether or not it is contentious is contentious.)

[Regitnui]

Duly noted, and thanks all GitPers. I wanted an encounter where they wouldn't know where or what was attacking, and I guess I achieved that, though by skirting fast and loose around the rules for Hidden.

[Telok]

This is untrue.

It's quite true, the rules are really simple. If there's no dex check that beats the wis check/passive then there's no hiding.

You can rule differently, and I certainly would, but the rules as written are very simplistic and make no exceptions.

[Corran]

It's quite true, the rules are really simple. If there's no dex check that beats the wis check/passive then there's no hiding.

You can rule differently, and I certainly would, but the rules as written are very simplistic and make no exceptions.
In order for a creature to be hidden, it must satisfy the unseen and unheard conditions, NOT to succeed in a dexterity (stealth) check against the enemy/ies' (passive) wisdom (perception). Taking the hide action (ie rolling stealth) is the most common way to achieve that, yes, but that is not the only way to do it, neither RAW nor RAI/RAL.

Also, remember, skill checks need not always apply, they only do if there is both a chance at suceeding and at failing a specific task. Sometimes you dont have to roll because you cant fail, other times because you cant succeed. This is why being hidden is not defined as the result of a succeessful stealth check afterall.

[Telok]

In order for a creature to be hidden, it must satisfy the unseen and unheard conditions, NOT to succeed in a dexterity (stealth) check against the enemy/ies' (passive) wisdom (perception). Taking the hide action (ie rolling stealth) is the most common way to achieve that, yes, but that is not the only way to do it, neither RAW nor RAI/RAL.

Also, remember, skill checks need not always apply, they only do if there is both a chance at suceeding and at failing a specific task. Sometimes you dont have to roll because you cant fail, other times because you cant succeed. This is why being hidden is not defined as the result of a succeessful stealth check afterall.

Well in that case the phantom should always be hidden. It's invisible and incorporeal, so you can't see it and it doesn't interact with the environment to create sound. It would also mean that combining invisibility and silence spells would result in perfect stealth until the end of the spells.

You can ask in the RAW thread, or any of the other stealth debates past, present, or future, but every time I've seen anyone talk about it there's a dev vs. wis check involved.