I have a question and RAW seems clear, but I hope someone can confirm. If a caster uses a persistent damage spell i.e. Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance, etc and THEN a fellow casts invisibility on them (to protect the caster while they roast an opponent), does the invisibility break as damage is inflicted? They are not casting a new spell or attacking but the already existing spell is causing damage.
Tangent: Call lightning...bringing down the lightning probably breaks it, right?
1. Whoever cast an ongoing affect spell must make a concentration check to keep the spell going whenever they take damage. They also cant cast any other concentration spells while maintaining their other spell.
2. The target of invisibility is not the caster, and thus they do not have to keep concentration for invisibility. Whoever cast invisibilty is responsible for keeping it up, and must concentrate on it and make the concentration checks when taking damage.
Edit: The person who is invisible cannot "attack or cast a spell" (PHB), but they can keep their current one going.
I have a question and RAW seems clear, but I hope someone can confirm. If a caster uses a persistent damage spell i.e. Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance, etc and THEN a fellow casts invisibility on them (to protect the caster while they roast an opponent), does the invisibility break as damage is inflicted? They are not casting a new spell or attacking but the already existing spell is causing damage.
Tangent: Call lightning...bringing down the lightning probably breaks it, right?
Thank you,
Evan
Well, invisibility says "The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell," concentrating on a spell, dealing damage with a previously cast spell, and even using an action to deal damage with a previously cast spell are all NOT "casting a spell".
Now if the spell required making an attack roll (like spiritual weapon for example), that would end the invisibility.
I have a question and RAW seems clear, but I hope someone can confirm. If a caster uses a persistent damage spell i.e. Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance, etc and THEN a fellow casts invisibility on them (to protect the caster while they roast an opponent), does the invisibility break as damage is inflicted? They are not casting a new spell or attacking but the already existing spell is causing damage.
Like you said, if you are not attacking or casting a spell, Invisibility won't end so any spell's persistent effects or damage will keep you invisible. Just watch for concentration as many spell causing ongoing effect require concentration, which will break the moment you cast another one, such as Invisibility.
There is NOTHING about invisibility that mentions an attack needs an attack roll. If you attack with magic missile, it is still an attack (as well as casting a spell). Call lightning is making an attack when you select a target.
But ongoing effects that do not require anything on your part is not an attack. So Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance etc. do not break your invisibility.
There is NOTHING about invisibility that mentions an attack needs an attack roll. If you attack with magic missile, it is still an attack (as well as casting a spell).
This is explicitly false. An attack requires an attack roll or a special rule making something without an attack roll into an attack (as is the case with Grapple and Shove). A significant number of other rules in the game assume you are obeying this rule as it is printed in the PHB. Magic Missile is not an attack.
Call lightning is making an attack when you select a target.
Also extraordinarily false, same citation link as above. Call Lightning involves no attack. You're also contradicting yourself (see below).
But ongoing effects that do not require anything on your part is not an attack. So Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance etc. do not break your invisibility.
All of your examples do require something on the caster's part - and they don't even require the same things as each other, so you're confusing the issue:
All 3 spells require Concentration.
Heat Metal requires a bonus action in order to deal more damage. This is not an attack,
Cloudkill moves away from where you are at the start of your turn, so guiding it requires your movement. This is not an attack.
Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance, and Call Lightningall require the exact same mechanic for hurting people: the target saves to avoid damage, the caster makes no attack. Furthermore, Heat Metal and Call Lightning both require part of your action economy to deal damage. You're contradicting not only the rules, but also yourself.
Selecting a target as part of a spell effect is not an attack unless noted otherwise by specifically referring to attack (roll), which neither Magic Missile nor Call Lightning do to qualify as such.
There is NOTHING about invisibility that mentions an attack needs an attack roll. If you attack with magic missile, it is still an attack (as well as casting a spell). Call lightning is making an attack when you select a target.
Hello,
I have a question and RAW seems clear, but I hope someone can confirm. If a caster uses a persistent damage spell i.e. Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance, etc and THEN a fellow casts invisibility on them (to protect the caster while they roast an opponent), does the invisibility break as damage is inflicted? They are not casting a new spell or attacking but the already existing spell is causing damage.
Tangent: Call lightning...bringing down the lightning probably breaks it, right?
Thank you,
Evan
2 things here:
1. Whoever cast an ongoing affect spell must make a concentration check to keep the spell going whenever they take damage. They also cant cast any other concentration spells while maintaining their other spell.
2. The target of invisibility is not the caster, and thus they do not have to keep concentration for invisibility. Whoever cast invisibilty is responsible for keeping it up, and must concentrate on it and make the concentration checks when taking damage.
Edit: The person who is invisible cannot "attack or cast a spell" (PHB), but they can keep their current one going.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Well, invisibility says "The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell," concentrating on a spell, dealing damage with a previously cast spell, and even using an action to deal damage with a previously cast spell are all NOT "casting a spell".
Now if the spell required making an attack roll (like spiritual weapon for example), that would end the invisibility.
Like you said, if you are not attacking or casting a spell, Invisibility won't end so any spell's persistent effects or damage will keep you invisible. Just watch for concentration as many spell causing ongoing effect require concentration, which will break the moment you cast another one, such as Invisibility.
There is NOTHING about invisibility that mentions an attack needs an attack roll. If you attack with magic missile, it is still an attack (as well as casting a spell). Call lightning is making an attack when you select a target.
But ongoing effects that do not require anything on your part is not an attack. So Heat Metal, Cloudkill, Sickening Radiance etc. do not break your invisibility.
This is explicitly false. An attack requires an attack roll or a special rule making something without an attack roll into an attack (as is the case with Grapple and Shove). A significant number of other rules in the game assume you are obeying this rule as it is printed in the PHB. Magic Missile is not an attack.
Also extraordinarily false, same citation link as above. Call Lightning involves no attack. You're also contradicting yourself (see below).
All of your examples do require something on the caster's part - and they don't even require the same things as each other, so you're confusing the issue:
Selecting a target as part of a spell effect is not an attack unless noted otherwise by specifically referring to attack (roll), which neither Magic Missile nor Call Lightning do to qualify as such.
You are right. Attacks requiring an attack roll is a general rule that applies in all aspects of the game, not just specifically invisibility.
The rest of your comment was either wrong or self-contradictory, and utterly picked to death by other replies, so I snip.
I feel like we've been over this already.