Can you see yourself when you're invisible?

[KillianHawkeye]

I had this come up in a game last week when the party's wizard wanted to cast a spell from a scroll after becoming invisible. I decided that it would work, but it doesn't really specify in the spell's description.

So I wanted to see what other people's opinions on the subject were. Does invisibility only make you invisible to others, because that's less restrictive and makes more sense? Or does it make you completely and equally invisible to all, yourself included?

[Kurald Galain]

Generally, there are two kinds of invisibility: optical (which works like a chameleon, only better, but you can still be heard and so forth) and mental (which means you magically convince people not to notice you, and foils all senses but generally not cameras). In the latter, you're obviously not fooling yourself, but in the former, you would be.

Examples of the latter include Obfuscate, and Death's ability from Pratchett novels. D&D uses the former.

Therefore, in earlier editions, I would have said that a drawback of the spell would be that you can't see yourself either, just like a levitate spell would subject you to winds, and so forth. However, part of the design intent of 3E appears to have been to remove pretty much every drawback of spells (except material components or XP costs) - other examples of this include Haste, Fly, and Shout. So, while I can't find it explicitly spelled out anywhere, I do believe the 3E rules-as-intended would let the caster see himself.

[egg_green]

In my game, people can see themselves while invisible. But in my game, they can also see any other invisible creatures! (Remember in Lord of the Rings, where Frodo and the Ringwraiths can see each other when he puts on the ring? It's like that.)

In the case of a normal D&D game, I would say that invisible people are invisible even to themselves. Given how powerful it is for a 2nd level spell, I think it makes sense to add that little drawback.

[Raum]

It may be worth pointing out that invisibility caused by bending light around a subject would also blind the subject. If the light can't hit is eyes, he can't see at all.

I recommend either making it a mental effect (a "don't notice me spell") or not trying to explain it and leaving it as "magic". Either way it's best for playability if the invisible subject can see themselves.

[Xuincherguixe]

No, because it only works when no one is looking at you.

[Collin152]

Suppose my version worked by surrounding myself with an illusion of empty space. I could see myself then, right?

[Kurald Galain]

It may be worth pointing out that invisibility caused by bending light around a subject would also blind the subject. If the light can't hit is eyes, he can't see at all.

That's a catgirl killer.

But yes, I know at least one RPG book that explicitly "physicizes" invisibility like this, as a more-or-less handwaved explanation for why invisibility doesn't really work in that system. Which is silly because it allows far more powerful things, like reality shaping...

[Raum]

That's a catgirl killer.

That's why I recommended other solutions. :)

[SerroMaroo]

The main problem with the light bending invisibility is that you also cannot see out as no light is hitting your eyes. This version of invisibility (while the most realistically feasible) also leaves you essentially blind to anything outside your bubble of bent light.

[Collin152]

What if it isn't bending it, but passing it through you? The light hits your eyes, moves on.

[SerroMaroo]

Then you wouldn't be able to see yourself because no light is bouncing off of you to reach your eyes.

[Fiery Diamond]

That's already been said, SerroMaroo. You should actually read all the posts. This isn't even a full page.

I would say that the invisible person can see himself because it's a "magical," not "scientific," cause of invisibility. In fact, Collin152 has hit the nail on the head, I think, for what the spell is actually supposed to do. The spell invisibility is in -guess what- the Illusion School.

-Fiery Diamond

Edit-I was responding to your first post...I started typing before the post after your first post. Your second post is true. I was also responding to Collin152's first post. The second post is silly, for the reason you pointed out.

[Zincorium]

In the Gaurdians of the Flame series of novels, which borrow heavily from D&D, invisibility normally would blind the person who is invisible. It's specifically altered so that the person's pupils aren't invisible, so technically if someone is paying close enough attention they can see the two back dots moving around. That and since your eyelids are invisible it's very easy to get blinded by bright lights.

[SerroMaroo]

I was under the impression that we were discussing different magic systems and their effect. Not necessarily just the D&D version of invisibility. I was simply discussing the effects of a version of invisibility that would bend light around you to make you invisible.

I did in fact read the entire thread and I find your accusation that I did not a bit insulting.

[_Puppetmaster_]

Examples of the latter include Obfuscate, and Death's ability from Pratchett novels.

The Shadow does that too.


I have ruled that you can see yourself when your invisible because that way is simpler. Simplicity is good in D&D.

[Aquillion]

What if it isn't bending it, but passing it through you? The light hits your eyes, moves on.

No, your retinas need to actually absorb light to be able to see. If the light is simply passing through them completely, you can't see at all.

But don't forget, our magic can do more than just redirect light -- we can add and subtract it, too. So a better solution: You're just bending, altering, and replacing light traveling away from you, essentially reconstructing it as if you weren't there. This would make you invisible without blindness. Of course, the idea of just grabbing and bending light in midair is, itself, totally absurd, but so is magic in general.

With this you'd still be invisible to yourself, but it's easy to add a clause that light bouncing off of you and headed straight for your eyes is 'corrected' and not altered.

[Ascension]

Oh, you're still fully visible, but your enemies simply see you as someone else's problem...

Hitchhikers' reference FTW!

[Sir Giacomo]

Hmmm,

quite a difficult call.
Invisibility is a glamer (like disguise self), so you do not see through it once you "disbelieve" it (say, since you cast the invisibilty yourself you automatically would disbelieve it).

So yes, the caster could no longer see the writing on his own scroll.

In general, though, you get no penalty to attacks or skill checks for being invisible (quite the contrary in combat you get +2 to hit vs those who are flat-footed vs your invisibility). So it is straightforward to assume that apart from reading, your body awareness lets you manipulate your equipment, arrange stuff, draw potions, sheathe weapons, put scrolls from tubes all without penalties.

- Giacomo

[Fiery Diamond]

@Serromaroo: The OP has the word "invisibility" in italics, which is a convention when referring to a specific D&D spell. That means that the discussion was (supposed to be) about the effect of the invisibility spell (and by extension, things like the spell greater invisibility) in D&D.

-Fiery Diamond

[Grug]

What if it isn't bending it, but passing it through you? The light hits your eyes, moves on.

That sounds fun. The only visible part of your body is your Pupils.

[Jayngfet]

I think holly blue said it best

of course you can see me, were both invisible

[Talic]

Suppose my version worked by surrounding myself with an illusion of empty space. I could see myself then, right?

If the space was empty, they could see through it. If they could see through it, they could see you. No, if that were the case, Silent image could make you invisible.

Only spells that make you invisible can do that effect. And if it's not mind-affecting, then yes, you and all your possessions are invisible. No reading scrolls.

[Reinboom]

It may be worth pointing out that invisibility caused by bending light around a subject would also blind the subject. If the light can't hit is eyes, he can't see at all.

That's a catgirl killer.

More to the topic:

Write your scrolls in braille, of course!

[Kurald Galain]

If the space was empty, they could see through it. If they could see through it, they could see you. No, if that were the case, Silent image could make you invisible.

I am of the opinion that it can. At least, effectively, it can create an image of a wall, tree, or darkness right in front of you, which means that people won't be able to see you unless they interact with that and disbelieve it.

[Learnedguy]

Not seeing oneself isn't that big deal. Even if you close your eyes you still know where you have your hand, right?

[kamikasei]

Not seeing oneself isn't that big deal. Even if you close your eyes you still know where you have your hand, right?

Sure, but I can't read the mystical writings on the scroll I'm holding in that hand. ...Which was the OP's question.

[bosssmiley]

My answer: no, because you're invisible. You raise your hand up in front of you and can't see it. That's how you know the spell's worked, see? (no pun intended)

Just don't ask me about the mechanics of trying to sleep while you have invisible eyelids. Go ask H. G. Wells.

"But Eggy, surely someone who can't see where their extremities or weapons are should suffer appropriate penalties to Dex when trying to move or attack?"
"*Meh* Now are you going to backstab the BBEG, or sit there with your thumb up yer butt debating the physics of optics in a fantasy setting?"

'The rules serve the game...'

[kjones]

I think that, the way the spell is worded, that you technically wouldn't be able to see yourself, or anything you're holding... a simple work-around could be to just drop the scroll (thus making it visible) and read it off of the ground. You'll reveal your position after doing so, but as long as you don't stay in one place, you'll be all right.

[sikyon]

You can't cast from a scroll while invisible if you are holding the scroll, as the scroll is invisible as well. I would also rule you can't see yourself.

[Metal Head]

I can imagine so many difficulties if you can't see yourself while going to the bathroom

"Where's the damn zipper?"

And so on. Come to think of it, how does it happen that with invisibilty your clothes also usually become invisible? How does the magic tell the difference between your clothes, and anything else that's with you? Then again, magic (or invisibilty) never need to be sane.