Gaze of Two Minds 2024 -- multiple senses at once?

This doesn't make any sense. If this is the case, then sorcerers casting a spell using the Subtle Spell metamagic would always have advantage if it's an attack roll. Like you said, there's no body language relating to when the spell is being cast, the target has no idea a spell is about to materialize from the sorcerer, they don't see anyone cast a spell, so they can't prepare to react to it. So should we then just say that the sorcerer has advantage on their attack roll?

Quote from Squirrelloid >>

Quote from DnDmentil >>

Lol I'm a year late to the party, but wanted to put my thoughts here. IMO neither Warlocks should get the Advantage, and they should actually get it if their familiar is the Invisible one. Yes I'm obviously not talking about RAW, but I'm trying to apply consistent logic to what actually confers Advantage when the attack is Invisible.

The question is essentially about what gives the Advantage when you are Invisible (either magically or because you are hidden). Either it is because you can't see the attack being made (or spell being cast), or it's because you can't see the point of origin for the attack. I'd argue it's the latter, not the former.

 

Disagree.  If you are unseen when you make an attack, you get advantage.

It doesn't matter if they can see the fighter from where the attack is springing, because the fighter isn't casting a spell.  The fighter isn't aiming it.  The fighter has no body language relating to when the spell is being cast or where its aimed.  The target has no idea a spell is about to materialize from the fighter.  They don't see anyone cast a spell.  They can't prepare to react to it.

You get advantage when unseen because they can't move to dodge or block as appropriate.  The seen crossbowman in your example telegraphs their shot by where they aim, and the moment of the attack by their body language and when they squeeze the trigger.  Advantage does not require being unnoticed, the target likely knows the invisible crossbowman is there (because invisibility does not hide your location), they just can't see the attack being made.

 Dude, they literally said this wasn't about RAW.

Any verisimilitude-based arguments about how the warlock's visibility is the one that matters are going to end up with the warlock always getting advantage, because there's no visible indicator of the attack from the fighter, the attack's source. Whether you can see a guy way over there chanting and waving their arms is going to have zero effect on how you can react when the darts of mystical power come from the person in a tin can right in front of you.

Quote from Sookie_99 >>

This doesn't make any sense. If this is the case, then sorcerers casting a spell using the Subtle Spell metamagic would always have advantage if it's an attack roll. Like you said, there's no body language relating to when the spell is being cast, the target has no idea a spell is about to materialize from the sorcerer, they don't see anyone cast a spell, so they can't prepare to react to it. So should we then just say that the sorcerer has advantage on their attack roll?

 And I am honestly okay with that.  (They can just innate sorcery to get advantage on their attack roll anyway).

Quote from jl8e >>

Any verisimilitude-based arguments about how the warlock's visibility is the one that matters are going to end up with the warlock always getting advantage, because there's no visible indicator of the attack from the fighter, the attack's source. Whether you can see a guy way over there chanting and waving their arms is going to have zero effect on how you can react when the darts of mystical power come from the person in a tin can right in front of you.

 I am also okay with that.  But at least if they can see the Warlock casting, they can brace to react to a spell, even if the direction is a surprise.

Quote from Squirrelloid >>

Quote from Sookie_99 >>

This doesn't make any sense. If this is the case, then sorcerers casting a spell using the Subtle Spell metamagic would always have advantage if it's an attack roll. Like you said, there's no body language relating to when the spell is being cast, the target has no idea a spell is about to materialize from the sorcerer, they don't see anyone cast a spell, so they can't prepare to react to it. So should we then just say that the sorcerer has advantage on their attack roll?

 And I am honestly okay with that.  (They can just innate sorcery to get advantage on their attack roll anyway).

 

Quote from jl8e >>

Any verisimilitude-based arguments about how the warlock's visibility is the one that matters are going to end up with the warlock always getting advantage, because there's no visible indicator of the attack from the fighter, the attack's source. Whether you can see a guy way over there chanting and waving their arms is going to have zero effect on how you can react when the darts of mystical power come from the person in a tin can right in front of you.

 I am also okay with that.  But at least if they can see the Warlock casting, they can brace to react to a spell, even if the direction is a surprise.

 It's not about being okay with it or not, it's about whether it works like that or not. And it doesn't. So all you're saying is "this is how I'd house rule it". Which is fine, to each their own. But then you open a weird can of worms where someone should have Advantage on attacks if they attack someone from behind, even if they're not hidden on anything. I mean, technically they're not seeing anyone make an attack. And even worse, a lot of creatures in the MM have spells that don't require components. So all of them have Advantage too? At that point, you have a table with players trying to come up with whatever reason to gain free Advantage. You can still be okay with that, but that's probably not the point of this.