Sneaking Imp Chain Familiar vs the World: an analysis (data collected)

[Pixel_Kitsune]

As for Pact-specific Invocation options, they're mostly disappointing:

Agree to disagree, some aren't great, some are.

•Voice of the Chain Master is basically a requirement. You can't skip it if you don't want your Pact choice to be wasted. 100ft is just nowhere near far enough to do safe scouting so having the range extension is important; the talking-through-your-familiar bit is just a ribbon. (And, based on how this thread has gone, I'm assuming a lot of DMs are forcing Warlocks to use their Familiar's stats when "perceiving through your familiar's senses" rather than allowing the Warlock to use their own perception stats. Why else all the insistence that Imps suck at noticing things with their +1 Perception [and +0 Investigation, for that matter]?)

I've Never taken this and never seen anyone else at my table take it either. It's useful, no argument, but 100' is not too short to have safe scouting and I don't get why people insist it is. And yeah, you use your familiar's senses, that's spelled out in the spell and mechanics.

•Chains of Carceri is very good, but basically unobtainable for most tables with that level 15 requirement. It doesn't matter how strong something is if you never get it.

Fair enough, though by that argument I'd be arguing against how useful any 8th or 9th level spell is, which I don't see people doing.

•Gift of the Ever-Living Ones is better on paper than in practice. Most healing comes in between encounters and from Long Rests. You're likely to never get a healing spell cast at you unless you drop, and even then it's the small healing meant to get you back on your feet, not big healing meant to significantly recover. So... enjoy maxed out Healing Word I guess? Not actually a big deal.

I see this a lot. This idea that the only healing that ever happens is Healing word based entirely on how the math rolls out in a void on paper. In practice I have seen Cure Wounds used often in multiple games. There's also things like Song of Rest, Prayer of Healing, Healing Potions. If you're a Celestial Warlock... It all adds up and the "We only use Healing Word when you drop to 0" is rare in most games in my experience because it requires a breaking of immersion to suddenly be like "Whelp, it doesn't bother me that my friend keeps getting near killed and almost bleeds out on the ground over and over, cause optimally it's better if I wait for that."

•Investment of the Chain Master is... basically another Invocation tax. Your Familiar doesn't scale at all. The higher level you get, the worse your Pact choice gets. This, in a small way, adjusts for that. It's a solid choice; unfortunate that it's basically required so that your abilities scale with your level - a mechanical consideration that most other classes get for free.

This is a tax, much like Improved Pact Weapon and Book of Ancient Secrets IMO. But it also makes your familiar amazing. The only better familiar I've seen is the Familiar Master Wizard from Kobold Press and that's essentially making a Pokemon Master.

And, all said and done, you don't want to be sending your familiar into melee to help you with combat. It's stats are just so low and it's HP never increases. Can it go in and give you advantage on an attack or deliver your touch spell? Sure. And then it gets squashed in one attack. It's a quirk benefit, not a reliable strategy.

You're right, you don't want to send your familiar into melee. But I don't know about you, that's just another argument for why the Sprite is better. Invisibility, better Stealth. You lose the super vision but who cares, you don't need it. And now I have a little friend Forcing DC 13-19 (basic range of Warlock DC) or take disadvantage on everything with a built in DC 8-14 Sleep spell. Not to mention that 1 damage forces another Concentration check on enemy spellcasters.

Why would it? Ambient and background noises are happening all the time. Why are your enemies always seemingly on high alert for anything and everything? And why are they able to hear quiet things over the other, more obvious, sounds in the room? The crackling fire. The sounds from an open window. Their own conversations or activities.
The invisible spider makes a scuffling noise on the ceiling as it's not trying specifically to be quiet. Does it make a noise? Yes. Is it reasonable that anyone could hear that noise? Maybe, but probably not. How should the game handle that? Apparently by alerting everyone that there's something on the ceiling, right there *points at 5ft square,* we just don't know what it is... yet.

Dr. Samurai already covered this, but it bears repeating. The way the game works is that when there is conflict dice are rolled and those dice determine the end result and the flavor shapes around them. It's not the other way around. I don't come up with Flavor and then have the DM set rules based on that. That'd be like saying "I'm going to dive through the enemy line and stab the wizard through the throat so they can't cast spells." And then expecting your successful check to avoid AoO's and stop the enemy spellcasting, when it won't.

The Imp is sneaking around and actively trying not to be seen, Because it is invisible it can hide and stealth even out in the open. It rolls its stealth vs the enemy's perception. If it loses the enemy knows something is there, it's that simple. No one is saying the wings always disturb dust or the imp is always knocking things around or the enemy is always micro analyzing the ceiling. We're saying that the opposed roll is how the mechanics work and when it goes to the one trying to perceive those are examples of what they saw.

[Schwann145]

I'm not prepared to say the familiar is useless if it can be detected.

Familiars are mostly a ribbon. They're the equivalent to getting a family dog. Their value for role-playing cannot be overstated, but their value for mechanics is low.

Additionally, as an action, you can see through your familiar's eyes and hear what it hears until the start of your next turn, gaining the benefits of any special senses that the familiar has. During this time, you are deaf and blind with regard to your own senses.

You can hear what you familiar hears. Are you saying what your familiar hears should be what your warlock hears? Which is what your familiar hears? Which is what the warlock hears? You are using the familiars senses, and your own senses are deaf and blind. How can you us your own Perception and Investigation when you are deaf and blind?

What I'm saying is that your perception exists at the location of your familiar, but it's still your perception, stats included. If you're looking through your familiar's eyes, you would use your (the Warlock's) Wisdom[Perception] to notice things, not the Familiar's. In fact, it's reasonable to say that both you and your familiar could make Perception rolls for the same triggers, since you're not overwriting you're Familiar, just sharing it's perspective.

Are you going to argue that the other pact boons don't also have invocation taxes??

Fewer, at least. PotBlade needs Thirsting Blade and PotTome needs Book of Ancient Secrets, but I wouldn't call the others taxes.

I've been arguing that an imp can't become microscopic, not that size doesn't matter.

True, but that position is a strawman of the other commenter's point that Tiny covers a pretty big range of possible sizes and they weren't saying Imps could be the size of fleas and crawl inside ears to blast brains directly; that was you.
A better argument than Imp artwork has them, generally, around 2ft tall and therefore Imps are pretty big would be that you don't summon an Imp, you summon a generic spirit that takes the shape of an Imp and it's likely the same size as most other Familiar options; ie the size of a bird like a Raven or a Rat rather than the size of a short Halfling.

Schwann... that's the whole point of the check. If the check fails, you've been detected. It's the entire reason you're trying to avoid the check in the first place. Yes... if you try to hide, and they beat your Stealth... SOMETHING gave you away. You as a player don't get to decide a priori that there is NOTHING that can betray your presence. The dice and the DM will determine that.

What check? The whole point is that, if the invisible Spider-Imp isn't specifically trying to hide (ie: use the Stealth skill) then everyone in the room gets to automatically know that something is in it's square. Even if there's no dirt on the ceiling to disrupt. Even if there's a loud and boisterous game of dice happening in the room. Even if there's no mist or smoke to float and outline the invisible critter. You just automatically know, circumstances be damned.

You can't escape the roll, and if the roll says you fail then *poof* some falling dust betrays that something is amiss on the ceiling.

Of course you can escape the roll, because the roll is almost never assumed. DMs call for a roll when appropriate or when combat occurs. Otherwise, rolls aren't mandatory. The best choice you can make as a player is the one that doesn't force you to roll, because you can only fail if you have to roll. I know people gain some strange therapeutic value from making the shiny rocks make the clickity-clack sound, but that's not actually in your favor, and many times it's not necessary.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Familiars are mostly a ribbon. They're the equivalent to getting a family dog. Their value for role-playing cannot be overstated, but their value for mechanics is low.

Owl Fly-by attack has saved encounters, Delivering touch spells at range has too. They are a very useful and valuable mechanic, just not a DPR one which is where most people check out I've noticed.

Fewer, at least. PotBlade needs Thirsting Blade and PotTome needs Book of Ancient Secrets, but I wouldn't call the others taxes.

And Chain needs nothing to still be better than the Wizard Familiar and needs only Investment of the Chain Master to be superior. The rest are useful but not needed, as has been discussed.

What check? The whole point is that, if the Spider-Imp isn't specifically trying to hide (ie: use the Stealth skill) then everyone in the room gets to automatically know that something is in it's square. Even if there's no dirt on the ceiling to disrupt. Even if there's a loud and boisterous game of dice happening in the room. Even if there's no mist or smoke to float and outline the invisible critter. You just automatically know, circumstances be damned.

Again, you're putting the cart in front of the horse. The Spider-Imp isn't "Specifically trying to hide"? While it is doing the task of trying to sneak through a room? It is 100% trying to hide and move quietly. It's not stupid. If you're trying to move and not be detected you are trying to hide, which is resolved in this game by a Stealth Roll against the Passive Perception of everyone that could see you and an opposed Perception from those actively looking.

Of course you can escape the roll, because the roll is almost never assumed. DMs call for a roll when appropriate or when combat occurs. Otherwise, rolls aren't mandatory. The best choice you can make as a player is the one that doesn't force you to roll, because you can only fail if you have to roll. I know people gain some strange therapeutic value from making the shiny rocks make the clickity-clack sound, but that's not actually in your favor, and many times it's not necessary.

Great, but the MOMENT you say "I turn invisible and go scout that room" I'm going to call for a Stealth roll as a DM. The PC doesn't get to choose to escape the roll.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Again, you're putting the cart in front of the horse. The Spider-Imp isn't "Specifically trying to hide"? While it is doing the task of trying to sneak through a room? It is 100% trying to hide and move quietly. It's not stupid. If you're trying to move and not be detected you are trying to hide, which is resolved in this game by a Stealth Roll against the Passive Perception of everyone that could see you and an opposed Perception from those actively looking.


Great, but the MOMENT you say "I turn invisible and go scout that room" I'm going to call for a Stealth roll as a DM. The PC doesn't get to choose to escape the roll.

Agreed. The default mechanical implementation of "try not to be detected" is invoking the Stealth rules, which call for a check. The DM may choose not to do that, but that's the DM's call. Not anything the PC has any influence over whatsoever. And someone trying to weasel-word an action to avoid a check is likely to get asked politely not to do that. If they continue, they'll be asked not to return to the table.

Not only do players not call for rolls, they can't avoid rolls. Because that's entirely 100% in the DM's court. For everything.

[Schwann145]

The Spider-Imp isn't "Specifically trying to hide"? While it is doing the task of trying to sneak through a room? It is 100% trying to hide and move quietly.

It's not trying to hide. It's just trying to move through the room and observe who and what is in the room. It chooses to be invisible because it spends most of it's time that way (people don't like devils just hanging around, after all, and this familiar looks like a devil). It's walking normally for a spider and just prefers to use the ceiling as its floor since that gives a much better vantage point for info gathering and is handy for avoiding clutter and obstacles on the actual floor.
It has no reason to try and hide because no one has paid it any attention. When someone starts paying it attention, that's when it'll feel the need to try and hide.
The overall contention is that everyone in the room gets to notice it for free, despite whatever circumstances exist that would make it unreasonable to notice it.

Great, but the MOMENT you say "I turn invisible and go scout that room" I'm going to call for a Stealth roll as a DM. The PC doesn't get to choose to escape the roll.

IMO, that's a poor call. You should first ask, "Great, how do you plan to go about doing that?" And then, depending on their answer, you either call for necessary rolls or not.

[PhoenixPhyre]

It's not trying to hide. It's just trying to move through the room and observe who and what is in the room. It chooses to be invisible because it spends most of it's time that way (people don't like devils just hanging around, after all, and this familiar looks like a devil). It's walking normally for a spider and just prefers to use the ceiling as its floor since that gives a much better vantage point for info gathering and is handy for avoiding clutter and obstacles on the actual floor.
It has no reason to try and hide because no one has paid it any attention. When someone starts paying it attention, that's when it'll feel the need to try and hide.
The overall contention is that everyone in the room gets to notice it for free, despite whatever circumstances exist that would make it unreasonable to notice it.


IMO, that's a poor call. You should first ask, "Great, how do you plan to go about doing that?" And then, depending on their answer, you either call for necessary rolls or not.

You don't hide after you're noticed. You hide to avoid getting noticed. Once you've been noticed, once things are paying attention it's way way way too late!

This goes for everyone. Stealth checks happen before you enter the area where there might be observation. Not as a reaction to observation.

The very clear default is that everyone notices everything that isn't trying to hide (as long as it could possibly be perceived by them). Hiding is specifically how you avoid getting noticed. It's there in black and white.

[Schwann145]

You don't hide after you're noticed. You hide to avoid getting noticed. Once you've been noticed, once things are paying attention it's way way way too late!

This goes for everyone. Stealth checks happen before you enter the area where there might be observation. Not as a reaction to observation.

The very clear default is that everyone notices everything that isn't trying to hide (as long as it could possibly be perceived by them). Hiding is specifically how you avoid getting noticed. It's there in black and white.

The wrench in this position is the invisibility. If someone "notices" the invisible spider, they still don't see it. So what does the spider do? Freezes. It doesn't want to risk that initial attention might turn into actual investigation. That absolutely calls for a Dex[Stealth] roll, because now the spider is actively trying to go unnoticed, whereas before it was simply expecting to go unnoticed.

In the real world, yeah, if you get noticed that's it. In the world where things like magical silence and invisibility are actually an option, expectations have to change accordingly.


Edit: Maybe the game needs a "Passive Stealth" value to go along with Passive Perception, and things like Invisibility can give circumstantial bonuses to this passive score.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

It's not trying to hide. It's just trying to move through the room and observe who and what is in the room. It chooses to be invisible because it spends most of it's time that way (people don't like devils just hanging around, after all, and this familiar looks like a devil). It's walking normally for a spider and just prefers to use the ceiling as its floor since that gives a much better vantage point for info gathering and is handy for avoiding clutter and obstacles on the actual floor.
It has no reason to try and hide because no one has paid it any attention. When someone starts paying it attention, that's when it'll feel the need to try and hide.
The overall contention is that everyone in the room gets to notice it for free, despite whatever circumstances exist that would make it unreasonable to notice it.

Again, you're forcing your reading that benefits you over reality. "It's not trying to hide it's just moving through the room observing who and what is in the room." While trying not to be seen is a key part you're leaving out. It doesn't want to be seen, thus "not trying to hide" is false.

And your backup means little "It's invisible most of the time because it knows people don't like devils" is yet another argument that it IS trying to not be seen.

IMO, that's a poor call. You should first ask, "Great, how do you plan to go about doing that?" And then, depending on their answer, you either call for necessary rolls or not.

That's a semantic and needless step. I ask the player how they plan to go about doing that and they tell me they're trying not to make noise and I call for stealth. Or, When I call for Stealth the PC can always say "I'm not trying to be quiet or stealthy" if they're genuinely not. I bet you players wanting to not be seen won't do that though, they'll just roll stealth.

[PhoenixPhyre]

The wrench in this position is the invisibility. If someone "notices" the invisible spider, they still don't see it. So what does the spider do? Freezes. It doesn't want to risk that initial attention might turn into actual investigation. That absolutely calls for a Dex[Stealth] roll, because now the spider is actively trying to go unnoticed, whereas before it was simply expecting to go unnoticed.

In the real world, yeah, if you get noticed that's it. In the world where things like magical silence and invisibility are actually an option, expectations have to change accordingly.


Edit: Maybe the game needs a "Passive Stealth" value to go along with Passive Perception, and things like Invisibility can give circumstantial bonuses to this passive score.

Or...not. Invisibility doesn't do anything that it doesn't say it does. In a world where invisibility and familars are known, perceiving something you don't see is identical to perceiving something you do see. At least to a first approximation--you raise the alarm. Or start actively searching/swatting at the thing. You don't go "well, I don't see it so no big deal".

You can't have it both ways. If magical silence and invisibility are common, there will be common countermeasures and reactions, so invisibility doesn't buy you much extra. If it isn't, then, well...we're not in that world.

And I keep coming back to the idea that there are no hidden/secret rules. Everything you need to run an imp is written in the stat block and the things referenced there. And they only do (or rather you can only presume that they do) exactly what they say they do. If imps were supposed to be super stealthy, they'd have either a higher stealth modifier OR some feature to improve that. No, they don't get any change in their stats when they shapeshift. So anything about spiders is utterly 100% irrelevant. Now a DM may decide to throw you an extra boon, Rule of Cool style. But that's their decision, at their whim. Not something you can argue is inherent or deserved.

[Unoriginal]

The wrench in this position is the invisibility. If someone "notices" the invisible spider, they still don't see it. So what does the spider do? Freezes. It doesn't want to risk that initial attention might turn into actual investigation. That absolutely calls for a Dex[Stealth] roll, because now the spider is actively trying to go unnoticed, whereas before it was simply expecting to go unnoticed.

An invisible creature can always attempt to hide, yes, but once noticed the NPCs will know in which square it is, and even non-sapient beings will start their search from the last spot they noticed the creature.

Freezing in place is not going to help much.

If the Imp-turned-spider moves away from where they were noticed, they have a better chance to avoid getting caught, but their scouting attempt is likely still busted if the NPC(s) who noticed them can communicate with the rest of the structure's inhabitants.

And remember: the Imp gets found out 1 time out of 5 when Commoners are *not* actively trying to find them.

[Schwann145]

Or...not. Invisibility doesn't do anything that it doesn't say it does. In a world where invisibility and familars are known, perceiving something you don't see is identical to perceiving something you do see. At least to a first approximation--you raise the alarm. Or start actively searching/swatting at the thing. You don't go "well, I don't see it so no big deal".

You can't have it both ways. If magical silence and invisibility are common, there will be common countermeasures and reactions, so invisibility doesn't buy you much extra. If it isn't, then, well...we're not in that world.

"Does exist" and "is common" are not the same thing. I doubt it's common at all to encounter invisibility, even in the D&D world. So it's unreasonable for people to be on high alert for invisible foes all the time.
There are people in the real world who believe that supernatural things actually exist, but that doesn't mean they won't hear a noise, see nothing, and brush it off as nothing. Do you never do that?

[PhoenixPhyre]

"Does exist" and "is common" are not the same thing. I doubt it's common at all to encounter invisibility, even in the D&D world. So it's unreasonable for people to be on high alert for invisible foes all the time.
There are people in the real world who believe that supernatural things actually exist, but that doesn't mean they won't hear a noise, see nothing, and brush it off as nothing. Do you never do that?

You're trying to have it both ways. You yourself said "In the world where things like magical silence and invisibility are actually an option, expectations have to change accordingly." You can't say that and expect changes and expect that people just generally brush off invisible creatures.

If the situation is such that security is lax enough to shrug off "there's something I can't see moving there"...well...then any kind of specialized scout is pointless. A perfectly visible dude with moderate stealth is gonna be just fine. If the situation is such that they will react to such things...being invisible is a small benefit but doesn't obviate the fact that you've been detected. You may be able to get away easier (by hiding and moving away to break contact), but the scouting run is over. You've triggered the alarm. Or at least shoved the situation along so now you have to take active measures. And there's not much in between--not much where a creature with piss-poor perception and investigation is going to help much over anyone else just by being invisible that isn't high enough security to raise an alarm on detecting an invisible creature.

You better believe that if the infrared sensors get tripped at a secure facility, the guards investigate and raise the alarm level. Even if the cameras don't catch anything. That's defense in depth, which is security 101.

[Xetheral]

I think it's worth emphasizing that however one's DM runs imps scouting in a dungeon, that's where the imp is least valuable. Where the imp truly shines (metaphorically speaking) is outdoors, where in any light level except total darkness it can stay out of hearing range entirely while still keeping a target or location under constant surveillance.

For example, in most terrain types (jungle and dense forests being the primary exceptions) it means knowing the enemy's current locations and the layout of the battlefield before combat begins. (Even if the enemies are hiding, that won't work against a flying observer unless the enemies have cover from above.) That gives the party an enormous strategic advantage: allowing them to make an informed choice whether or not to engage. And if they do engage, it allows the party to choose an attack vector and strategy that maximizes it's own ability to use full cover while denying the same to the enemy.

Other examples include persistent surveillance to track who comes and goes from a dungeon location, or to learn guard watch schedules and patrol patterns. It also allows remote monitoring of key locations, such as watching to see if the enemy boss tries to escape from an alternate entrance with the MacGuffin while the party is busy trying to clear the mooks. And if enemies send messengers to summon reinforcements, the imp is great at either (1) slowing them down by killing their horses, or, if that's too risky, (2) tailing the messengers and following whatever reinforcements are sent, letting the party know exactly what reinforcements are coming and when they'll arrive.

Lastly, when it does come to indoor surveillance, don't forget the advantage of the telepathic link to the warlock. If a scouting rogue needs a guard to move so that they can bypass a key door, they're on their own. An imp, however, can let the party know about the obstacle and the party can potentially help by (e.g.) starting a ruckus or other distraction outside that may cause the guards inside to move. And once past an obstacle, the familiar has the key advantage of not needing to sneak back out.

So yes, sneaking past a guard at close range isn't the imp's strong suit. It should avoid situations (varying from table to table) where it has to do that repeatedly--it's going to lose a check sooner rather than later. But there's a whole range of scouting needs that don't require infiltration within hearing range for which an imp chain familiar is just about a perfect tool.

[diplomancer]

I think it's worth emphasizing that however one's DM runs imps scouting in a dungeon, that's where the imp is least valuable. Where the imp truly shines (metaphorically speaking) is outdoors, where in any light level except total darkness it can stay out of hearing range entirely while still keeping a target or location under constant surveillance.

For example, in most terrain types (jungle and dense forests being the primary exceptions) it means knowing the enemy's current locations and the layout of the battlefield before combat begins. (Even if the enemies are hiding, that won't work against a flying observer unless the enemies have cover from above.) That gives the party an enormous strategic advantage: allowing them to make an informed choice whether or not to engage. And if they do engage, it allows the party to choose an attack vector and strategy that maximizes it's own ability to use full cover while denying the same to the enemy.

Other examples include persistent surveillance to track who comes and goes from a dungeon location, or to learn guard watch schedules and patrol patterns. It also allows remote monitoring of key locations, such as watching to see if the enemy boss tries to escape from an alternate entrance with the MacGuffin while the party is busy trying to clear the mooks. And if enemies send messengers to summon reinforcements, the imp is great at either (1) slowing them down by killing their horses, or, if that's too risky, (2) tailing the messengers and following whatever reinforcements are sent, letting the party know exactly what reinforcements are coming and when they'll arrive.

Lastly, when it does come to indoor surveillance, don't forget the advantage of the telepathic link to the warlock. If a scouting rogue needs a guard to move so that they can bypass a key door, they're on their own. An imp, however, can let the party know about the obstacle and the party can potentially help by (e.g.) starting a ruckus or other distraction outside that may cause the guards inside to move. And once past an obstacle, the familiar has the key advantage of not needing to sneak back out.

So yes, sneaking past a guard at close range isn't the imp's strong suit. It should avoid situations (varying from table to table) where it has to do that repeatedly--it's going to lose a check sooner rather than later. But there's a whole range of scouting needs that don't require infiltration within hearing range for which an imp chain familiar is just about a perfect tool.

This dovetails in nicely to something I wanted to add... there's a lot more that I'd like to respond to, but life's been busy lately, so I will just riff off what you've just said.

You know that worst possible situation for the Imp? When he's trying to sneak in a room with people in it close enough that they can possibly hear him crawl across the wall? That's a situation where a 20th level Rogue auto-fails, unless they're themselves invisible. Because that's a situation where Stealth is impossible for non-invisible creatures by the rules, and the Rogue doesn't get to roll, so his Stealth modifier is irrelevant.

"Oh, but he had a 40 on his Stealth check". I don't care... line of sight means you're spotted and you can't hide. Oh, and vision in 5e is omnidirectional, so good luck sneaking past the guards "when they're not looking". Incidentally, you can't shoot at people in combat either from hiding without asking "DM may I"; why does anyone play a Rogue if the assumption is "worst possible interpretation on hiding rules by the DM"? I have no idea.

Still, I have a feeling that some people here who are going on and on about "the rules" (without quoting them) will let the Rogue roll for Stealth and let him get away with it if he has a 40 on Stealth as a result.

Disclaimer: Yes, I WOULD let a Rogue to roll to sneak behind a guard. I'm just making the point that the rules don't allow for that (while they do, in fact, allow the crawling spider to walk by without rolling for Stealth and without being auto-detected, since the rules left range of hearing, unlike line of sight, entirely in the hands of the DMs).

[Unoriginal]

"Does exist" and "is common" are not the same thing. I doubt it's common at all to encounter invisibility, even in the D&D world. So it's unreasonable for people to be on high alert for invisible foes all the time.

Every single Duergar mook can turn invisible.

Every single Imp and every single Quasit can turn invisible as well.

It may not be "common", but it is a known possibility. Any dwarf can probably tell you the story of how one of their relatives got ambushed by invisible foes during a war, for example.

And anyone with a military education will likely be taught about the fact that yes, invisible creatures are a threat you have to handle seriously.

[Goobahfish]

How would you feel if a DM said "ok, you go to sleep...and you don't wake up because an invisible assassin killed you one shot, no save, no damage roll because you were sleeping. Roll a new character"? That's what you're advocating for. And there's a literal infinity of DM-controlled invisible assassin characters out there. There's only one of you.

Late reply but...

I'm not sure that is what I am advocating for? The issue with that example is more 'mean spirited' than 'illusion-breaking'. It is... a bit like rocks-fall-everybody-dies and has little different from "you are ambushed by 15 deranged elder dragons" other than there is no roll. Even save-or-die abilities which let you make a 'roll' (over which you have no control) fall into this category.

But... conflating the actions of PCs and Monsters is a bit weird? The game is "PCs acting as heroes fighting the world." It is designed in such a way as the heroes don't regularly die but the monsters do. Having a mechanism for 'insta-monster-deaths' doesn't seem anathema to this design intent.

----

As for the rest of this thread. I think it is becoming a bit silly. Certainly some 'argument for the sake of argument' completely devoid of any reality-checks.

This whole thread is just an analogy of:

"The rules for a 10ft pole don't say you can use it to push a door open. So you definitely can't."

Seriously... there are no 'secret rules'. 10 ft poles can't open doors. That is D&D canon.

At some point, y'all will need to realise that D&D is a game that has written rules and a lot of unwritten rules. If you are contending that being invisibility never grants advantage or removes the need for a check at all... well... that is a very odd opinion.

I have never contended the opposite. I have contended that sometimes it should do nothing helpful, sometimes it should grant advantage and sometimes it should remove the need for a check. I have opined that most of the time it should fall into the second category and that I need a reasonable explanation to have it do 'nothing helpful' for stealth beyond (can hide in plain sight).

The entire premise of this thread relies on denying the utility of invisibility so... I think it is time to duck out.

[Tanarii]

For example, in most terrain types (jungle and dense forests being the primary exceptions) it means knowing the enemy's current locations and the layout of the battlefield before combat begins. (Even if the enemies are hiding, that won't work against a flying observer unless the enemies have cover from above.) That gives the party an enormous strategic advantage: allowing them to make an informed choice whether or not to engage. And if they do engage, it allows the party to choose an attack vector and strategy that maximizes its own ability to use full cover while denying the same to the enemy.

Agreed, an invisible aerial reconnaissance drone with a datalink to report back is extremely valuable terrain without thick overhead cover. Even in urban environments this can hold true, at least on the streets.

A lot of D&D assumptions break down in semi-open wilderness terrain. That's when you start seeing the power of characters with long range attacks and high speed too.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

"Oh, but he had a 40 on his Stealth check". I don't care... line of sight means you're spotted and you can't hide. Oh, and vision in 5e is omnidirectional, so good luck sneaking past the guards "when they're not looking". Incidentally, you can't shoot at people in combat either from hiding without asking "DM may I"; why does anyone play a Rogue if the assumption is "worst possible interpretation on hiding rules by the DM"? I have no idea.

Because no one argued that and the difference between "The Invisible Imp still needs to roll Stealth to avoid being detected by the guards" and "It's 100% impossible to duck behind someone's back via a stealth roll" are miles apart and not the same argument.

PS, the Invisible Imp walking by in line of sight and the rogue waiting for a guard to turn their back are BOTH represented by Stealth Rolls vs Perception.

Still, I have a feeling that some people here who are going on and on about "the rules" (without quoting them) will let the Rogue roll for Stealth and let him get away with it if he has a 40 on Stealth as a result.

I would allow the Rogue to roll Stealth vs the Guard's Active Perception roll, just like I'd allow the Imp to do. If you really want to make flavor arguments I'll point out that the Rogue being a visible presence and well trained is better equipped to not make a sound and to time their movements with the Guard's and their vision where as the Imp is so used to "I can't be seen" that they're more sloppy and rely too much on that boon.

I know the 40 is Hyperbole, but to be clear, a 20 Dex Rogue over level 11 with Expertise in Stealth has a minimum roll of 23 Which means they have trained specifically to not be seen despite being a visible creature to such a degree that they take into account how to avoid even the most alert regular guard if there's no special factors involved. (IE a Level 17+ Character with a 20 Wisdom and Perception training is a Passive of 21.

Now we keep saying simple things like "Hiding" and "Being stealthy" But that theoretical Rogue's 23 is not just "hiding" it's a full gamut of carefully balancing steps to not make noise, watching where every step goes to not nudge or disturb anything, watching their body movement to not do the same, watching the room for anyone who might see them and then timing their movements in line with when those anyone's look somewhere other than their direction.

Disclaimer: Yes, I WOULD let a Rogue to roll to sneak behind a guard. I'm just making the point that the rules don't allow for that (while they do, in fact, allow the crawling spider to walk by without rolling for Stealth and without being auto-detected, since the rules left range of hearing, unlike line of sight, entirely in the hands of the DMs).

The rules 100% allow for that, the Rogue starts their stealth NOT in line of sight of the person they're trying to sneak past. Heck, you can even see it in BG3 where the rules are programmed in. You can attempt to hide when you're not in line of sight but not when you are.

This whole thread is just an analogy of:

"The rules for a 10ft pole don't say you can use it to push a door open. So you definitely can't."

Seriously... there are no 'secret rules'. 10 ft poles can't open doors. That is D&D canon.

Except that's disingenuous. Because the reality is, maybe the pole CAN push open the unlatched light interior door but it's not able to push open the latched heavy oak exterior door and such a decision and any rolls needed are in the hands of the DM. Just like a DM could choose to allow the Imp to auto succeed on a stealth roll.

But that's clearly the DM's call, not an automatic PC success and it's not "Wrong" if the DM agrees a way you don't.

A lot of D&D assumptions break down in semi-open wilderness terrain. That's when you start seeing the power of characters with long range attacks and high speed too.

Everyone makes fun of my Warlock with Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Spear, Antagonizing Blast and the Spell Sniper Feat for taking "Suboptimal" choices until I sit back 600' away taking shots at anything not in total cover while they are at minimum 10 rounds away from engaging me.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Except that's disingenuous. Because the reality is, maybe the pole CAN push open the unlatched light interior door but it's not able to push open the latched heavy oak exterior door and such a decision and any rolls needed are in the hands of the DM. Just like a DM could choose to allow the Imp to auto succeed on a stealth roll.

But that's clearly the DM's call, not an automatic PC success and it's not "Wrong" if the DM agrees a way you don't.

Exactly. My point is not that such things are impossible and anyone saying that they are possible is wrong. It's that players cannot rely on rule where rule is silent. And in this particular case (stealth), the rules are not only silent on the idea that invisibility is somehow special beyond what it says, the rules actively cover "trying not to be detected" and recommend[1] a check in that case. So it's not only not left wide open, it's constrained in the opposite direction from what people are arguing for. And certainly a DM who rules that you absolutely need stealth in that case is not doing it wrong. Because the DM cannot be wrong when calling for a check or not doing so, as doing so or refraining from doing so are entirely within their purview.

[1] rules cannot command the DM to do anything. To the DM, rules are suggestions. To the players they are commands unless overridden explicitly by the DM. That's the fundamental asymmetry here. Players can't presume that the rules will be bent; the DM can do so or not do so at their sole whim, subject only to the usual meta pressures of players walking out/etc.

[diplomancer]

Because no one argued that and the difference between "The Invisible Imp still needs to roll Stealth to avoid being detected by the guards" and "It's 100% impossible to duck behind someone's back via a stealth roll" are miles apart and not the same argument.

Yes. They are not the same argument. The invisible imp still needing to roll for Stealth is a possible DM decision; "It's 100% impossible to duck behind someone's back via a Stealth roll" is an actual game rule. Vision is omnidirectional in 5e, Facing is an optional rule. And no, you don't get now to make arguments about "real life", you have to follow the game rules like a computer. Here's what it says about line of sight:

"To precisely determine whether there is line of sight between two spaces, pick a corner of one space and trace an imaginary line from that corner to any part of another space. If at least one such line doesn't pass through or touch an object or effect that blocks vision -- such as a stone wall, a thick curtain, or a dense cloud of fog -- then there is line of sight."

PS, the Invisible Imp walking by in line of sight and the rogue waiting for a guard to turn their back are BOTH represented by Stealth Rolls vs Perception.

No. The first one can be represented by a Stealth roll, IF the DM determines that sound conditions are low enough that the Imp might give away its presence. The second one, with a strict reading of the rules, is impossible, except perhaps under particular lighting conditions or perhaps dense fog (and in this world of omnidirectional sight, people would know that light conditions are the only reliable natural way- without invisibility that is- of someone slipping by guards, and so guard posts would be well lit).

I would allow the Rogue to roll Stealth vs the Guard's Active Perception roll, just like I'd allow the Imp to do. If you really want to make flavor arguments I'll point out that the Rogue being a visible presence and well trained is better equipped to not make a sound and to time their movements with the Guard's and their vision where as the Imp is so used to "I can't be seen" that they're more sloppy and rely too much on that boon.

I know you would allow it. I even said that you (and the others on your side of the argument) would; and, by doing that, you're breaking the rules to favor the Rogue

I know the 40 is Hyperbole, but to be clear, a 20 Dex Rogue over level 11 with Expertise in Stealth has a minimum roll of 23 Which means they have trained specifically to not be seen despite being a visible creature to such a degree that they take into account how to avoid even the most alert regular guard if there's no special factors involved. (IE a Level 17+ Character with a 20 Wisdom and Perception training is a Passive of 21.

Line of sight means hiding is not possible. Specially if we assume "DM will always apply the most strict reading".

Now we keep saying simple things like "Hiding" and "Being stealthy" But that theoretical Rogue's 23 is not just "hiding" it's a full gamut of carefully balancing steps to not make noise, watching where every step goes to not nudge or disturb anything, watching their body movement to not do the same, watching the room for anyone who might see them and then timing their movements in line with when those anyone's look somewhere other than their direction.

Possible only if playing with the optional facing rules.

The rules 100% allow for that, the Rogue starts their stealth NOT in line of sight of the person they're trying to sneak past. Heck, you can even see it in BG3 where the rules are programmed in. You can attempt to hide when you're not in line of sight but not when you are.

I'm glad that the 3rd party designers of BG3 fixed the bad (not really- they work well enough if we assume the DM is not an automata and is mostly 'on the side' of the players- but I'm not the one arguing here for the majestic application of the most anti-stealth reading possible... but only if it's about magical abilities, of course) stealth rules of 5e, but that's not exactly an argument for the ways those rules work, is it?

[Kane0]

I'm glad that the 3rd party designers of BG3 fixed the bad (not really- they work well enough if we assume the DM is not an automata and is mostly 'on the side' of the players- but I'm not the one arguing here for the majestic application of the most anti-stealth reading possible... but only if it's about magical abilities, of course) stealth rules of 5e, but that's not exactly an argument for the ways those rules work, is it?

I still haven't gotten around to picking it up, how does it handle it?

[Dr.Samurai]

"Does exist" and "is common" are not the same thing. I doubt it's common at all to encounter invisibility, even in the D&D world. So it's unreasonable for people to be on high alert for invisible foes all the time.
There are people in the real world who believe that supernatural things actually exist, but that doesn't mean they won't hear a noise, see nothing, and brush it off as nothing. Do you never do that?

I think all of these are below CR 1.

Invisible
1. Duergar
2. Elves (Mark of Shadow, Pallid)
3. Firbolg
4. Tiefling (Glasya)
5. Pixies
6. Sprites
7. Skulk

Magical Darkness
1. Darkmantle
2. Drow

False Appearance/Camouflage/Mimicry
1. Grimlock
2. Kenku
3. Mephits (Mud, Ice, Magma)
4. Vegepygmy
5. Violet Fungus
6. Darkmantle
7. Gazer
8. Gray Ooze
9. Piercer
10. Blights (Vine)

Disguise Self
1. Deep Gnome
2. Changelings
3. Firbolg

Then there's all the creatures that can cast Pass Without Trace. Then there's all the creatures that can speak with little critters like Yuan-ti, Xvarts, Gnomes, etc. The fact that any trained mage can have a familiar.

There's a lot of reasons for people in the D&D world to not simply rely on their vision for guarding locations and not to dismiss little animals running around where they shouldn't be. There's also Teleportation magic on virtually every other race you can play.

If you really want to go common sense and realism... then every enemy lair would have Shriekers around, Tressym companions accompanying every guard contingent and patrolling perimeters, etc.

I'm not saying that you should find this stuff everywhere all the time. But if players insist that common sense and realism means a warlock's familiar can just go wherever they want undetected without so much as rolling a single Stealth check, well... two can play that game. And the DM can play it much better.

Player: Since I'm invisible and in spider form, I don't have to roll a Stealth check because I can't be perceived.
DM: Since there's a Tressym watching from this platform here, I don't have to roll a Perception check, your invisibility fails and you are detected.

Congrats... we're back to Cops and Robbers...

I think it's worth emphasizing that however one's DM runs imps scouting in a dungeon, that's where the imp is least valuable. Where the imp truly shines (metaphorically speaking) is outdoors, where in any light level except total darkness it can stay out of hearing range entirely while still keeping a target or location under constant surveillance.

For example, in most terrain types (jungle and dense forests being the primary exceptions) it means knowing the enemy's current locations and the layout of the battlefield before combat begins. (Even if the enemies are hiding, that won't work against a flying observer unless the enemies have cover from above.) That gives the party an enormous strategic advantage: allowing them to make an informed choice whether or not to engage. And if they do engage, it allows the party to choose an attack vector and strategy that maximizes it's own ability to use full cover while denying the same to the enemy.

Other examples include persistent surveillance to track who comes and goes from a dungeon location, or to learn guard watch schedules and patrol patterns. It also allows remote monitoring of key locations, such as watching to see if the enemy boss tries to escape from an alternate entrance with the MacGuffin while the party is busy trying to clear the mooks. And if enemies send messengers to summon reinforcements, the imp is great at either (1) slowing them down by killing their horses, or, if that's too risky, (2) tailing the messengers and following whatever reinforcements are sent, letting the party know exactly what reinforcements are coming and when they'll arrive.

Lastly, when it does come to indoor surveillance, don't forget the advantage of the telepathic link to the warlock. If a scouting rogue needs a guard to move so that they can bypass a key door, they're on their own. An imp, however, can let the party know about the obstacle and the party can potentially help by (e.g.) starting a ruckus or other distraction outside that may cause the guards inside to move. And once past an obstacle, the familiar has the key advantage of not needing to sneak back out.

So yes, sneaking past a guard at close range isn't the imp's strong suit. It should avoid situations (varying from table to table) where it has to do that repeatedly--it's going to lose a check sooner rather than later. But there's a whole range of scouting needs that don't require infiltration within hearing range for which an imp chain familiar is just about a perfect tool.

I agree with all of this.

Still, I have a feeling that some people here who are going on and on about "the rules" (without quoting them) will let the Rogue roll for Stealth and let him get away with it if he has a 40 on Stealth as a result.

Lol

Me: Hey, why are imps the best scouts in the game?
Forum: Because if you tell the DM you are an invisible spider, you don't have to roll stealth checks.
Me: Really? Does the DM get a say?
Forum: Sure, but if he disagrees, you can use ad hominems against him like "you're a bad DM" or "you run games that aren't fun".

Yes, very rules heavy argument...

[diplomancer]

Me: Hey, why are imps the best scouts in the game?
Forum: Because if you tell the DM you are an invisible spider, you don't have to roll stealth checks.
Me: Really? Does the DM get a say?
Forum: Sure, but if he disagrees, you can use ad hominems against him like "you're a bad DM" or "you run games that aren't fun".

Yes, very rules heavy argument...

I've quoted the rules on line of sight... you know, just to continue the tradition of actually quoting the rules that support my claims... while you continue your tradition of making up dialogues and putting words in my mouth, instead of quoting rules to back up your claims.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

I still haven't gotten around to picking it up, how does it handle it?

The way you'd imagine a DM handling it game despite certain opinions that it's somehow omnidirectional vs just acknowledging that things look about.

The cone of their vision is represented in Red when you attempt to or are in stealth.

PS, can see in all directions is not omni, it's the ability to look everywhere. Just like stabbing a sleeping target in the throat and not doing enough damage to kill them means they shifted or something threw the attack off some, not that they just don't care about a knife in the larynx

[Dr.Samurai]

I've quoted the rules on line of sight... you know, just to continue the tradition of actually quoting the rules that support my claims... while you continue your tradition of making up dialogues and putting words in my mouth, instead of quoting rules to back up your claims.

Diplomancer, respectfully, the position boils down to "we think we shouldn't have to roll for Stealth, and since there is no Stealth roll, there is no contest, and the imp can't be detected, therefore it is the best scout". This is not supported by any of the rules. I've already quoted the Hiding rules that say an Invisible creature can always TRY to hide, but it must remain quiet. You and others insist the imp-spider is always quiet. I've provided a link to show that spiders make noise when they crawl. I'm not going to keep providing evidence over and over again, no matter how many times you insist we're not providing anything. If it didn't sway you the first time, no need to provide it again.

With regards to line of sight, the Stealth skill says "... when you attempt to... slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen..."

The rules for hiding also say that even if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, if it is distracted the DM may let you stay hidden as you approach.

So it's not as hard and fast as you think it is.

[Tanarii]

The very clear default is that everyone notices everything that isn't trying to hide (as long as it could possibly be perceived by them). Hiding is specifically how you avoid getting noticed. It's there in black and white.

No, you're overstating it.

Everyone notices anything that isn't trying to Hide, as long as in the DM's determination they would automatically perceive them without any other checks. If they could possibly be perceived by them the DM should determine the check needed.

I've quoted the rules on line of sight...

Those DMG line of sight rules are optional for use with a battle mat.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Everyone notices anything that isn't trying to Hide, as long as in the DM's determination they would automatically perceive them without any other checks. If they could possibly be perceived by them the DM should determine the check needed.

I've avoided it this thread because we're trying to discuss RAW, but I tend to run Passive EVERYTHING in my games. If you're not being deliberately loud but not trying to hide what's 8+Prof+Dex? That's the DC for enemy passive or active perception.

What's your Arcana base of 8+Prof+Int? that's the threshold you will just know at least basic things.

[Schwann145]

I think all of these are below CR 1.
*snip*

Ah yes, a list full of monstrous races that are not presumed to be part of inclusive society, very uncommon races, campaign-setting-specific races, and super-rare "bloodline" versions of specific races.

I'm sure most people, friend or foe, are very familiar with all of them. Everyone in-world has their copy of the MM, right? Gotta be studied up for when you come across one of those subterranean races that never come to the surface, or those extra-planar creatures that can't come without being conjured via magic, etc and so fourth. You see them all the time, of course.

Me: Hey, why are imps the best scouts in the game?
Forum: Because if you tell the DM you are an invisible spider, you don't have to roll stealth checks.
Me: Really? Does the DM get a say?
Forum: Sure, but if he disagrees, you can use ad hominems against him like "you're a bad DM" or "you run games that aren't fun".

Yes, very rules heavy argument...

More strawmanning, I see.

Diplomancer, respectfully, the position boils down to "we think we shouldn't have to roll for Stealth, and since there is no Stealth roll, there is no contest, and the imp can't be detected, therefore it is the best scout". This is not supported by any of the rules. I've already quoted the Hiding rules that say an Invisible creature can always TRY to hide, but it must remain quiet. You and others insist the imp-spider is always quiet. I've provided a link to show that spiders make noise when they crawl. I'm not going to keep providing evidence over and over again, no matter how many times you insist we're not providing anything. If it didn't sway you the first time, no need to provide it again.

Demonstrably untrue. I've never said the imp-spider is always quiet. I've always maintained that it is simply quiet enough naturally that it's unreasonable that foes should be able to auto-detect it with zero effort, zero role of a skill, etc.
Nuance and suspension of disbelief are important in a game where "story" plays a major part, and there is zero nuance in the rules as written on this subject.

However, to offer an olive branch: If the Imp just chooses to be invisible, remain in it's regular form, and fly through the room, not only could it be noticed, but it should probably be impossible to roll for Stealth. Those wing flaps can't be muffled, after all, unless magic is used specifically to do so. The sound of some kind of bird or bat flying through a room that no one can see? Absolutely raises an alarm. A spider shuffling along? Not even in the same league, from an auditory standpoint.

With regards to line of sight, the Stealth skill says "... when you attempt to... slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen..."

The rules for hiding also say that even if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, if it is distracted the DM may let you stay hidden as you approach.

So it's not as hard and fast as you think it is.

The rules are clear that you cannot become hidden if you can be seen (at least not unless you have a specific ability that allows you to do so, such as being invisible, the Ranger's Hide in Plain Sight, a Wood Elf's Mask of the Wild, or similar ability). If you are within an enemy's line of sight then you can be seen. Line of sight is clearly determined by comparing square corners, not by the potential direction an enemy's eyes are facing. That's the RAW.
Please don't accuse one side of an argument of bending over backwards in bad faith to manipulate the DM/game on one hand, and then make incredibly similar arguments in favor of the other side of the argument when unfavorable RAW is pointed out to you.

[diplomancer]

Diplomancer, respectfully, the position boils down to "we think we shouldn't have to roll for Stealth, and since there is no Stealth roll, there is no contest, and the imp can't be detected, therefore it is the best scout". This is not supported by any of the rules. I've already quoted the Hiding rules that say an Invisible creature can always TRY to hide, but it must remain quiet. You and others insist the imp-spider is always quiet. I've provided a link to show that spiders make noise when they crawl. I'm not going to keep providing evidence over and over again, no matter how many times you insist we're not providing anything. If it didn't sway you the first time, no need to provide it again.

Except I've never said "the Imp should never roll for stealth". My position is the same as others in this thread have said; there are situations where the Imp should not roll for Stealth, because detecting it is not possible. There are other situations where it should have advantage. And there are yet other situations where it should roll normally. There are even situations where it should be auto-detected even though that contradicts the rule that Invisible creatures can always try to hide! (because there are senses that allow seeing Invisible creatures, and you can't hide if you can be seen clearly).

And the whole diversity of all these different situations makes the table of the opening post of very limited use, since it applies to only one of these groups of situations, and not even the most common one -and, as I've mentioned recently, in many situations of this particular group of situations, stealthing without invisibility is impossible by the rules, so the Stealth modifier is irrelevant, and the mediocre Stealth modifier of the Imp still gives you a better chance of hiding than the awesome Stealth modifer of the Rogue- unless the party decides to sink more resources to make the Rogue invisible (or if the Rogue doesn't try to sneak by at all and tries to use different skills, like Deception or Performance- but then this is also entirely at the hands of the DM, and makes comparison with the Imp impossible), and I think this is something we all agree: an Invisible Rogue will usually make for a better scout in enclosed spaces than an Imp, and an Invisible flying Rogue is a better scout than an Imp in pretty much any situation.

I'll try another way of stating my position: It is not true that the Stealth modifier is the beginning and the end of how hard a creature is to detect¹. The Stealth modifier is only relevant in situations where hiding is both needed (I.e, there is danger of detection) and possible, and the creature is actually trying to hide (which, by the way, and out of combat at least, the rules say it requires slower speed, so "avoiding hiding" is as simple as moving at your normal speed). The DM decides which are these situations. And these situations are different for different types of creatures, as determined by the DM. For instance, a Rat can try to hide in an empty football field in broad daylight, but an Ancient Red Dragon can't, even though it has a higher Stealth modifier.

And because it is not true that the Stealth modifier is the beginning and the end of how hard a creature is to detect, a table of percentages that assumes this is true is not very useful.

¹- I have the impression that this belief is a holdover from past editions- but it is entirely absurd for a game with Bounded Accuracy where a skill modifier is dependant on dexterity score and proficiency bonus alone- and proficiency bonus scales with a creature's Challenge Rating (and, to a less defined extent, so does the Dex score, as it influences AC and maybe to-hit bonuses).

[Unoriginal]

This is going out of hand.


Folks, if you disagree with the methodology used in the OP, it is absolutely fair.


I encourage you to start your own thread so you can present your own methodology and your own results at your leisure.

If you do not wish to start your own thread, you can of course present your own methodology and your own results in this one, but your contribution risks to be lost in the waves, and that would be a shame.


Regardless, systemic procedure has to be followed. An idea must be examined and analysed in a clear, delimited way.

That is how scientific knowledge is achieved.