But there is another thing, and I'm not sure if I'm alone on this or if it's aligned with what kenclary said. Since this Special Sense states "can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects", I'm ruling that if you're Hidden but not moving, Tremorsense is not useful.
RAW, it definitely does NOT work this way. It just works exactly how it was explained back in Post #2, as quoted above.
The phrase "the location of creatures and moving objects" very clearly refers to all creatures (creatures that are moving AND creatures that are not moving) as well as objects that are moving (only moving objects, not stationary objects).
Being able to locate all creatures that are Hidden (in contact with the same qualifying surface, etc.) is actually the primary useful function of Tremorsense.
Like I said from the start of this thread:
- "I'm not sure if I'm alone on this" - "I just figured that if non-moving objects can't be detected, then non-moving creatures wouldn't be either, but I admit that's just my personal ruling."
The issue isn't even the 'creatures and moving objects' part. It's that "pinpoint" has no defined meaning within the rules
But "pinpoint" has a definite definition in any dictionary et. al. To state that "x" word has no meaning in the rules is non logical. The rules define concepts and yes some words, but the you can't expect the rules to define every single word used in the rules.
"...pinpoint the location..." is a very specific definition. You also seem to ignore all of the qualifiers that go along with that pinpoint to take effect.
But there is another thing, and I'm not sure if I'm alone on this or if it's aligned with what kenclary said. Since this Special Sense states "can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects", I'm ruling that if you're Hidden but not moving, Tremorsense is not useful.
RAW, it definitely does NOT work this way. It just works exactly how it was explained back in Post #2, as quoted above.
The phrase "the location of creatures and moving objects" very clearly refers to all creatures (creatures that are moving AND creatures that are not moving) as well as objects that are moving (only moving objects, not stationary objects).
Being able to locate all creatures that are Hidden (in contact with the same qualifying surface, etc.) is actually the primary useful function of Tremorsense.
Like I said from the start of this thread:
- "I'm not sure if I'm alone on this" - "I just figured that if non-moving objects can't be detected, then non-moving creatures wouldn't be either, but I admit that's just my personal ruling."
The issue isn't even the 'creatures and moving objects' part. It's that "pinpoint" has no defined meaning within the rules
But "pinpoint" has a definite definition in any dictionary et. al. To state that "x" word has no meaning in the rules is non logical. The rules define concepts and yes some words, but the you can't expect the rules to define every single word used in the rules.
"...pinpoint the location..." is a very specific definition. You also seem to ignore all of the qualifiers that go along with that pinpoint to take effect.
Who are you directing that to, exactly? I think I'm the person with the most liberal reading of Tremorsense in this thread
My response to Tarod was just noting that absent a clear mechanical explanation for what "pinpoint" means, folks are left to their own devices to interpret it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
All Tremorsense does is allow you feel the movement of any creature within range and in/on the same surface as you are. If they stop moving, you no longer feel where they are.
This is not what the ability says
A creature with Tremorsense can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects within a specific range, provided that the creature with Tremorsense and anything it is detecting are both in contact with the same surface (such as the ground, a wall, or a ceiling) or the same liquid.
My answer was directed as a rebuttal to this statement:
It's that "pinpoint" has no defined meaning within the rules
Oh, I agree that the choice to use the word "pinpoint" implies much more precision than simply saying "determine" or whatever would have. (I can also appreciate the irony of a word that is essentially a metaphor for putting a pin in a physical map to mark a spot not being read as telling you an exact location in a map-based game...)
That still doesn't help someone looking for a clear RAW ruling on what Tremorsense does, though
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
All Tremorsense does is allow you feel the movement of any creature within range and in/on the same surface as you are. If they stop moving, you no longer feel where they are.
This is not what the ability says
A creature with Tremorsense can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects within a specific range, provided that the creature with Tremorsense and anything it is detecting are both in contact with the same surface (such as the ground, a wall, or a ceiling) or the same liquid.
: a quivering or vibratory motion especially: a discrete small movement following or preceding a major seismic event
...and?
Neither the ability nor the Purple Worm restrict the ability to only moving creatures. Indeed, since it says "creatures and moving objects", and not "moving creatures and objects", it explicitly includes all creatures.
Purple Worms ain't sandworms. You cannot avoid them by moving without rhythm, nor by staying still.
Normally when trying to attack an invisible target (or any target you can't see), you would need to specify which 'square' you are attacking into. Since you can't see the target, the roll is made at disadvantage. If the target is not even in that square, the attack misses regardless of the result on the die.
Tremorsense allows you to know which square the target is in (if it is moving and in contact with the same surface). It doesn't remove the disadvantage of the attack roll, it merely means you don't have to guess at which square they are in.
Someone moving while invisible (without hiding), makes noise. But even if you hear the noise, it doesn't mean you automatically know what square they are in. You might know that they are to your left, and sound farther away than they did a moment ago, but you still don't know exactly which square they are in. You either have to guess, or you can spend your action to try to preceive that info (which is pointless, because they'll move before you can utilize that info, so you might as well just guess).
A winged creature flying while invisible still has to flap its wings (makes noise) and if you are close enough, you could even feel the air movements of it.
Tremorsense, however, just works if you are in contact with the same surface, the target is moving, and just lets you know which square they are in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
IMO, it's simpler to rule the location for an Invisible creature is known (whether playing in Theater of the Mind or on a grid) unless the target is both unseen and hidden.
IMO, it's simpler to rule the location for an Invisible creature is known (whether playing in Theater of the Mind or on a grid) unless the target is both unseen and hidden.
Then specify a 5 foot area (I'm targeting the area 10' directly ahead of me, for those playing theatre of the mind, or just left of the doorway), you don't have to call it a grid - but half the utility of the invisibility spell is not being targetable if someone guesses your location wrong.
I think Tremorsense explicitly tells you where they are. Without it, you probably need a Perception check of some sort to know where they are --- this is one of those things they don't write explicit rules for, because it'd end up being a full-page minigame unto itself and way more complicated than some DMs want.
Normally when trying to attack an invisible target (or any target you can't see), you would need to specify which 'square' you are attacking into. Since you can't see the target, the roll is made at disadvantage. If the target is not even in that square, the attack misses regardless of the result on the die.
but half the utility of the invisibility spell is not being targetable if someone guesses your location wrong.
These statements are not accurate. Being unseen (invisible) only creates disadvantage on the attack. It does not make you untargetable or your location unknown. An enemy can always guess the correct square by using their hearing. They would only have to "guess the square" if you are both unseen or unheard, such as when you are hidden. In that case, an enemy would need some other way to know your location -- tremorsense provides one possible way of doing this under the right circumstances.
The rules state that if you target a location that the invisible creature is not present at, the attack misses. If you could always tell the location of the invisible creature, they would not have needed to state that.
Hearing will only get you close to a general area, it will not reveal the exact location unless it is a very loud noise or there are other signs or clues. Keep in mind, it takes an action to try to perceive those clues and signs if the DC is over your passive score (most often the targets passive stealth is used to determine that DC modified by distance).
Having trained people to fight while blinded, I can tell you that it is possible to discern someone's location by sound alone, but you need to be very close to them to do so with any accuracy. If someone is 15 feet away, with battle raging around you, and they are invisible to you - there's no way you'll be able to determine their location with enough detail to know where to target unless you are using an area of effect.
Unless you can point to a rule that says you automatically know where the invisible creature is, that's just not how it works. If that were true, they wouldn't need a rule saying if you target a spot that doesn't contain the invisible creature, it misses.
If you want a more historical picture of D&D, I have played every edition except 4th. In EVERY edition, you have had to guess the location of the invisible creature, unless you had some way (like tremorsense, blindsight, truesight, see invisibility, etc.) of actually detecting them. Hearing gives you a general area, not their exact location.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
But there is another thing, and I'm not sure if I'm alone on this or if it's aligned with what kenclary said. Since this Special Sense states "can pinpoint the location of creatures and moving objects", I'm ruling that if you're Hidden but not moving, Tremorsense is not useful.
RAW, it definitely does NOT work this way. It just works exactly how it was explained back in Post #2, as quoted above.
The phrase "the location of creatures and moving objects" very clearly refers to all creatures (creatures that are moving AND creatures that are not moving) as well as objects that are moving (only moving objects, not stationary objects).
Being able to locate all creatures that are Hidden (in contact with the same qualifying surface, etc.) is actually the primary useful function of Tremorsense.
Like I said from the start of this thread:
- "I'm not sure if I'm alone on this" - "I just figured that if non-moving objects can't be detected, then non-moving creatures wouldn't be either, but I admit that's just my personal ruling."
The issue isn't even the 'creatures and moving objects' part. It's that "pinpoint" has no defined meaning within the rules
But "pinpoint" has a definite definition in any dictionary et. al. To state that "x" word has no meaning in the rules is non logical. The rules define concepts and yes some words, but the you can't expect the rules to define every single word used in the rules.
"...pinpoint the location..." is a very specific definition. You also seem to ignore all of the qualifiers that go along with that pinpoint to take effect.
I was one that also felt that Tremorsense meant that the creature had to be moving also, otherwise how can you determine something is there if their is no "tremor" of any sort.
But let's go with the RAW that the person does NOT have to be moving: once the person with the sense "pinpoints" the person, they still can't see it since RAW says it's not a type of sight. Therefore they are fighting with the Blind Condition.
I was one that also felt that Tremorsense meant that the creature had to be moving also, otherwise how can you determine something is there if their is no "tremor" of any sort.
But let's go with the RAW that the person does NOT have to be moving: once the person with the sense "pinpoints" the person, they still can't see it since RAW says it's not a type of sight. Therefore they are fighting with the Blind Condition.
Do you concur?
Yes, that's correct. Tremorsense can tell you the location of the enemy but if you cannot actually see the enemy then you would be attacking with disadvantage. You might not necessarily actually have the Blinded condition depending on the situation -- you might just be attacking with disadvantage due to the rule for "Unseen Attackers and Targets".
The rules state that if you target a location that the invisible creature is not present at, the attack misses. If you could always tell the location of the invisible creature, they would not have needed to state that.
Hearing will only get you close to a general area, it will not reveal the exact location unless it is a very loud noise or there are other signs or clues. Keep in mind, it takes an action to try to perceive those clues and signs if the DC is over your passive score (most often the targets passive stealth is used to determine that DC modified by distance).
Having trained people to fight while blinded, I can tell you that it is possible to discern someone's location by sound alone, but you need to be very close to them to do so with any accuracy. If someone is 15 feet away, with battle raging around you, and they are invisible to you - there's no way you'll be able to determine their location with enough detail to know where to target unless you are using an area of effect.
Unless you can point to a rule that says you automatically know where the invisible creature is, that's just not how it works. If that were true, they wouldn't need a rule saying if you target a spot that doesn't contain the invisible creature, it misses.
If you want a more historical picture of D&D, I have played every edition except 4th. In EVERY edition, you have had to guess the location of the invisible creature, unless you had some way (like tremorsense, blindsight, truesight, see invisibility, etc.) of actually detecting them. Hearing gives you a general area, not their exact location.
I can appreciate that being invisible may have meant something else mechanically in older versions of the game, but in 5e it simply does not work as you are describing -- not in the 2014 ruleset, nor in the 2024 ruleset. It was likely intentionally nerfed in this way when 5e was originally designed.
For reference, let's post the exact wording for "Unseen Attackers and Targets":
Unseen Attackers and Targets
When you make an attack roll against a target you can’t see, you have Disadvantage on the roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you miss.
When a creature can’t see you, you have Advantage on attack rolls against it.
If you are hidden when you make an attack roll, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
Hearing will only get you close to a general area, it will not reveal the exact location unless it is a very loud noise or there are other signs or clues. Keep in mind, it takes an action to try to perceive those clues and signs if the DC is over your passive score (most often the targets passive stealth is used to determine that DC modified by distance).
Regardless of your real-life experience, it does not work this way in 5e.
In 5e, by default, a creature can hear another nearby creature well enough to discern its location. It does not have to be making a "very loud noise", it just has to be making a default level of noise. No action and no perception check necessary in this case. You do not have to "guess the square" in that case -- you can simply target that creature directly with an attack. However, since you cannot see that creature, the attack is at disadvantage. In a sense, this is how the game emulates your concept of "hearing will only get you close". It will get you well within the 5-foot location that the creature occupies. It just is not quite as precise as being able to see the creature in which case you attack normally. Instead, you are slightly inaccurate which leads to attacking at disadvantage instead of attacking normally.
Now, things change when a creature attempts to Hide successfully. They are now making an effort to make less than the default amount of noise and so now by default you are unable to hear that creature without a successful perception check (or passive perception). In that situation you must now "guess the square" if you want to attempt to attack the creature.
The above mechanics regarding hearing a creature are explained by the rule which explains that . . .
This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see.
So, if you flip that around, the first scenario is that you are targeting a creature that you can hear but not see -- in which case you do not have to guess the square (as noted by the "or" in the statement). The second scenario is that you're guessing the target's location precisely because you cannot hear or see that target.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
But "pinpoint" has a definite definition in any dictionary et. al. To state that "x" word has no meaning in the rules is non logical. The rules define concepts and yes some words, but the you can't expect the rules to define every single word used in the rules.
"...pinpoint the location..." is a very specific definition. You also seem to ignore all of the qualifiers that go along with that pinpoint to take effect.
Who are you directing that to, exactly? I think I'm the person with the most liberal reading of Tremorsense in this thread
My response to Tarod was just noting that absent a clear mechanical explanation for what "pinpoint" means, folks are left to their own devices to interpret it
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It's the same ability Purple worms have.
tremor
noun
My answer was directed as a rebuttal to this statement:
It's that "pinpoint" has no defined meaning within the rules
Oh, I agree that the choice to use the word "pinpoint" implies much more precision than simply saying "determine" or whatever would have. (I can also appreciate the irony of a word that is essentially a metaphor for putting a pin in a physical map to mark a spot not being read as telling you an exact location in a map-based game...)
That still doesn't help someone looking for a clear RAW ruling on what Tremorsense does, though
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
...and?
Neither the ability nor the Purple Worm restrict the ability to only moving creatures. Indeed, since it says "creatures and moving objects", and not "moving creatures and objects", it explicitly includes all creatures.
Purple Worms ain't sandworms. You cannot avoid them by moving without rhythm, nor by staying still.
Normally when trying to attack an invisible target (or any target you can't see), you would need to specify which 'square' you are attacking into. Since you can't see the target, the roll is made at disadvantage. If the target is not even in that square, the attack misses regardless of the result on the die.
Tremorsense allows you to know which square the target is in (if it is moving and in contact with the same surface). It doesn't remove the disadvantage of the attack roll, it merely means you don't have to guess at which square they are in.
Someone moving while invisible (without hiding), makes noise. But even if you hear the noise, it doesn't mean you automatically know what square they are in. You might know that they are to your left, and sound farther away than they did a moment ago, but you still don't know exactly which square they are in. You either have to guess, or you can spend your action to try to preceive that info (which is pointless, because they'll move before you can utilize that info, so you might as well just guess).
A winged creature flying while invisible still has to flap its wings (makes noise) and if you are close enough, you could even feel the air movements of it.
Tremorsense, however, just works if you are in contact with the same surface, the target is moving, and just lets you know which square they are in.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
What if you're not playing on a grid?
IMO, it's simpler to rule the location for an Invisible creature is known (whether playing in Theater of the Mind or on a grid) unless the target is both unseen and hidden.
Then specify a 5 foot area (I'm targeting the area 10' directly ahead of me, for those playing theatre of the mind, or just left of the doorway), you don't have to call it a grid - but half the utility of the invisibility spell is not being targetable if someone guesses your location wrong.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I think Tremorsense explicitly tells you where they are. Without it, you probably need a Perception check of some sort to know where they are --- this is one of those things they don't write explicit rules for, because it'd end up being a full-page minigame unto itself and way more complicated than some DMs want.
These statements are not accurate. Being unseen (invisible) only creates disadvantage on the attack. It does not make you untargetable or your location unknown. An enemy can always guess the correct square by using their hearing. They would only have to "guess the square" if you are both unseen or unheard, such as when you are hidden. In that case, an enemy would need some other way to know your location -- tremorsense provides one possible way of doing this under the right circumstances.
I agree and rule this way considering the Invisible condition provide no check DC to determine location otherwise.
The rules state that if you target a location that the invisible creature is not present at, the attack misses. If you could always tell the location of the invisible creature, they would not have needed to state that.
Hearing will only get you close to a general area, it will not reveal the exact location unless it is a very loud noise or there are other signs or clues. Keep in mind, it takes an action to try to perceive those clues and signs if the DC is over your passive score (most often the targets passive stealth is used to determine that DC modified by distance).
Having trained people to fight while blinded, I can tell you that it is possible to discern someone's location by sound alone, but you need to be very close to them to do so with any accuracy. If someone is 15 feet away, with battle raging around you, and they are invisible to you - there's no way you'll be able to determine their location with enough detail to know where to target unless you are using an area of effect.
Unless you can point to a rule that says you automatically know where the invisible creature is, that's just not how it works. If that were true, they wouldn't need a rule saying if you target a spot that doesn't contain the invisible creature, it misses.
If you want a more historical picture of D&D, I have played every edition except 4th. In EVERY edition, you have had to guess the location of the invisible creature, unless you had some way (like tremorsense, blindsight, truesight, see invisibility, etc.) of actually detecting them. Hearing gives you a general area, not their exact location.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I was one that also felt that Tremorsense meant that the creature had to be moving also, otherwise how can you determine something is there if their is no "tremor" of any sort.
But let's go with the RAW that the person does NOT have to be moving: once the person with the sense "pinpoints" the person, they still can't see it since RAW says it's not a type of sight. Therefore they are fighting with the Blind Condition.
Do you concur?
Yes, that's correct. Tremorsense can tell you the location of the enemy but if you cannot actually see the enemy then you would be attacking with disadvantage. You might not necessarily actually have the Blinded condition depending on the situation -- you might just be attacking with disadvantage due to the rule for "Unseen Attackers and Targets".
I can appreciate that being invisible may have meant something else mechanically in older versions of the game, but in 5e it simply does not work as you are describing -- not in the 2014 ruleset, nor in the 2024 ruleset. It was likely intentionally nerfed in this way when 5e was originally designed.
For reference, let's post the exact wording for "Unseen Attackers and Targets":
First, let's look at this:
Regardless of your real-life experience, it does not work this way in 5e.
In 5e, by default, a creature can hear another nearby creature well enough to discern its location. It does not have to be making a "very loud noise", it just has to be making a default level of noise. No action and no perception check necessary in this case. You do not have to "guess the square" in that case -- you can simply target that creature directly with an attack. However, since you cannot see that creature, the attack is at disadvantage. In a sense, this is how the game emulates your concept of "hearing will only get you close". It will get you well within the 5-foot location that the creature occupies. It just is not quite as precise as being able to see the creature in which case you attack normally. Instead, you are slightly inaccurate which leads to attacking at disadvantage instead of attacking normally.
Now, things change when a creature attempts to Hide successfully. They are now making an effort to make less than the default amount of noise and so now by default you are unable to hear that creature without a successful perception check (or passive perception). In that situation you must now "guess the square" if you want to attempt to attack the creature.
The above mechanics regarding hearing a creature are explained by the rule which explains that . . .
So, if you flip that around, the first scenario is that you are targeting a creature that you can hear but not see -- in which case you do not have to guess the square (as noted by the "or" in the statement). The second scenario is that you're guessing the target's location precisely because you cannot hear or see that target.