Basically, I am proposing that JC's explanation a while back on a sage advice video that passive perception is "always on" and "creates a floor" is turned off during combat.
The rules for a passive ability check says it represents the average result for a task done repeatedly. That's fine for guards on duty standing watch, but not for a live combat situation. If swords are clashing, fireballs are exploding, and creatures are yelling, a creature is not going to be passively looking for the signs of a different hidden or invisible creature at the same time. The search action rules say you devote your attention to finding something. Many people say that a creature knows where an invisible creature is because the rule for invisibility says the creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves. I think the "can" part of this rule used instead of "is" makes a big difference here. The base rogue class and base ranger class have abilities that depend a lot on the interpretation of how all of this works together. The rogue's ability reads if you are able to hear, you are aware of the location of any hidden or invisible creature within 10 feet of you. The ranger's ability reads you are aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened. The ranger's version has a greater range but is more restrictive than the rogue's. Other creatures have to take an action to gain this same information that the rogue's and ranger's gain innately through their class abilities. If JC is saying that passive perception is "always on" (which is stated nowhere in the rules), then half of the rogue's ability and all of the ranger's ability is effectively useless. And if passive perception is "always on" would not all ability checks also be "always on" as well? And if they are "always on", that would make the rogue's 11th level ability, reliable talent, something that is shared by all creature all the time, and therefore useless.
The idea is the stress, distraction, and general sense of urgency that exists while in combat keeps folks from being able to passively go about their normal business.
Are you saying that you DO use the passive perception as a floor or minimum that is on at all times? What about the rogues natural talent ability?
...I still argue that if failure has consequences for the check, passive should not be used. Time is precious and PCs are distracted in combat. Therefore success is not guaranteed and failure has consequences.
Since we are using the game designers unofficial words as rulings, here are two other links that talk about these same rogue and ranger abilities bypassing the invisible condition for that PC...
...The rogue and ranger at high levels and under certain circumstances are not negatively effected by an invisible creature. They can target it normally as if they can see it, attack it without disadvantage, and be attacked by it without advantage.
These are not game breaking features, especially at these levels, and they fit well mechanically and thematically for these classes. It is also something that a first level spell can replicate, seen here...
An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense. For the purpose of hiding, the creature is heavily obscured. The creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.
Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have advantage.
By RAW, only treusight can see invisible creatures.
By interpretation, if blindsight and tremorsense can mechanically "see" invisible creatures, effectively negating the effects of the invisibility, I don't see why feral senses and blindsense wouldn't do the same.
By RAW, only treusight can see invisible creatures.
By interpretation, if blindsight and tremorsense can mechanically "see" invisible creatures, effectively negating the effects of the invisibility, I don't see why feral senses and blindsense wouldn't do the same.
Blindsense lets you locate a creature you can't see, blindsight lets you "see" it.
By RAW, only treusight can see invisible creatures.
By interpretation, if blindsight and tremorsense can mechanically "see" invisible creatures, effectively negating the effects of the invisibility, I don't see why feral senses and blindsense wouldn't do the same.
Blindsense lets you locate a creature you can't see, blindsight lets you "see" it.
That's not what the ability blindsight says it does though. It says a monster with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight. It doesn't say anything about seeing invisible creatures, like truesight, which specifically says that.
By RAW, only treusight can see invisible creatures.
Which part of the RAW is that ? Blind sight is a "sight" and perceives invisible creature within the radius of the sense.
As for tremor sense, it pinpoints the invisible creature again within the radius if the invisible creature is not flying for example. It's not the same thing as seeing, a creature with tremor sense would still have disadvantage to attack the invisible creature, they just know where to attack.
By interpretation, if blindsight and tremorsense can mechanically "see" invisible creatures, effectively negating the effects of the invisibility, I don't see why feral senses and blindsense wouldn't do the same.
I don't think that there is a difference between blindsense and blindsight, especially since the first one does not have an existence in the rules... :p
And I'm not sure what feral senses are, but lots of animals have advantages on finding creatures by hearing or scent, which allows them to pinpoint the invisible creature but does not remove the advantages of being invisible.
Truesight
A monster with truesight can, out to a specific range, see in normal and magical darkness, see invisible creatures and objects, automatically detect visual illusions and succeed on saving throws against them, and perceive the original form of a shapechanger or a creature that is transformed by magic. Furthermore, the monster can see into the Ethereal Plane within the same range.
Only truesight specifically says you can see invisible creatures. Blindsight and tremorsense say nothing about seeing invisible creatures. They say "perceive" and "detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations". Neither of those have anything to do with seeing invisible creatures. Feral senses is from the ranger base class. If blindsight allows you to "see" invisible creatures it would say so. Also, JC says blindsight and blindsense is not the same thing here...https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/976917047106916352
That's not what the ability blindsight says it does though. It says a monster with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight. It doesn't say anything about seeing invisible creatures, like truesight, which specifically says that.
You have a very restricted view of what the surrounding means. If it meant what you mean, it would not even be able to see other visible creatures, which would be ridiculous. And because invisibility only rendres you invisible to normal sight, it does not do this for blindsight.
Blindsight is clearly a special sense not fooled by the invisible condition, see here.
Also see here, clearly blindsight lets you "see" invisible creatures, you need cover to be able to hide from it.
Well, right out of the gate, those unofficial tweets by JC are from 2015. Is there some official or at least more recent examples we can look at? Remember that I'm arguing that the rogue and ranger ability are a special sense and can do what blindsight and tremorsense can do. None of them say you can see an invisible creature or ignore the effects of an invisible creature. Only true sight says that. "Perceive", "detect", "locate", none of this says you can see an invisible creature.
I am confused as to what you might think blindsight actually does if it doesn't detect invisible creatures.
And the second part of Feral Senses sounds like it was written by someone who didn't know the rules in the first place. You already know the location of invisible creatures because invisible only tricks your eyes, not your ears or nose or detecting the displacement of air as something goes by. That is the difference between invisible and hidden.
I don't agree that the rules are clear. Like much of 5E they are open to some interpretation. I don't disagree that blindsight works the way you are saying it does. I'm saying the rule doesn't specifically say that it does any more than tremorsense or darkvision, only truesight does. A bat knows the location of a creature or a wall, it can't see a creature or a wall. So a bat would still have disadvantage to attack a mosquito using it's blindsight because it is an unseen target. A bat knows where a mosquito is as well as it knows where an invisible creature is, but nothing more. The rogue and ranger both gain a "special sense". They can locate an invisible creature. Using hearing and/or sight. Great. Anyone can do that. I'm suggesting that they can do what the bat can.
Right. So that's all it does, because that's what it says. Only things like truesight and faerie fire specifically say you can see past or ignore the effects of invisibility. Blindsight doesn't say either of these.
I’m currently inclined to rule towards if the rogue isn’t deafened the rogue isn’t negatively effected by a creature’s hidden or invisible condition within 10 feet of the rogue, and if the ranger isn’t deafened or blinded and a creature isn’t successfully hidden the ranger isn’t negatively effected by a creature’s invisible condition within 30 feet of the ranger.
This is similar to the very last part of the text from the faerie fire spell.
Basically, I am proposing that JC's explanation a while back on a sage advice video that passive perception is "always on" and "creates a floor" is turned off during combat.
The rules for a passive ability check says it represents the average result for a task done repeatedly. That's fine for guards on duty standing watch, but not for a live combat situation. If swords are clashing, fireballs are exploding, and creatures are yelling, a creature is not going to be passively looking for the signs of a different hidden or invisible creature at the same time. The search action rules say you devote your attention to finding something. Many people say that a creature knows where an invisible creature is because the rule for invisibility says the creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves. I think the "can" part of this rule used instead of "is" makes a big difference here. The base rogue class and base ranger class have abilities that depend a lot on the interpretation of how all of this works together. The rogue's ability reads if you are able to hear, you are aware of the location of any hidden or invisible creature within 10 feet of you. The ranger's ability reads you are aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened. The ranger's version has a greater range but is more restrictive than the rogue's. Other creatures have to take an action to gain this same information that the rogue's and ranger's gain innately through their class abilities. If JC is saying that passive perception is "always on" (which is stated nowhere in the rules), then half of the rogue's ability and all of the ranger's ability is effectively useless. And if passive perception is "always on" would not all ability checks also be "always on" as well? And if they are "always on", that would make the rogue's 11th level ability, reliable talent, something that is shared by all creature all the time, and therefore useless.
Thoughts?
The idea is the stress, distraction, and general sense of urgency that exists while in combat keeps folks from being able to passively go about their normal business.
Are you saying that you DO use the passive perception as a floor or minimum that is on at all times? What about the rogues natural talent ability?
A link to a decent article on the subject and the audio from when JC talks about passive perception always being on is below...
https://thinkdm.org/2018/12/22/passive-skills/
...I still argue that if failure has consequences for the check, passive should not be used. Time is precious and PCs are distracted in combat. Therefore success is not guaranteed and failure has consequences.
Since we are using the game designers unofficial words as rulings, here are two other links that talk about these same rogue and ranger abilities bypassing the invisible condition for that PC...
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/05/02/is-a-rogue-with-blindsense-still-basically-screwed-vs-an-invisible-enemy/
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/03/05/rangers-feral-senses/
...The rogue and ranger at high levels and under certain circumstances are not negatively effected by an invisible creature. They can target it normally as if they can see it, attack it without disadvantage, and be attacked by it without advantage.
These are not game breaking features, especially at these levels, and they fit well mechanically and thematically for these classes. It is also something that a first level spell can replicate, seen here...
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/faerie-fire
...So how about that as an interpretation and ruling on these abilities?
In game terms, what do the words "special sense" mean?
Invisible
So only a creature with truesight can see invisible creatures.
By RAW, only treusight can see invisible creatures.
By interpretation, if blindsight and tremorsense can mechanically "see" invisible creatures, effectively negating the effects of the invisibility, I don't see why feral senses and blindsense wouldn't do the same.
Blindsense lets you locate a creature you can't see, blindsight lets you "see" it.
That's not what the ability blindsight says it does though. It says a monster with blindsight can perceive its surroundings without relying on sight. It doesn't say anything about seeing invisible creatures, like truesight, which specifically says that.
Only truesight specifically says you can see invisible creatures. Blindsight and tremorsense say nothing about seeing invisible creatures. They say "perceive" and "detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations". Neither of those have anything to do with seeing invisible creatures. Feral senses is from the ranger base class. If blindsight allows you to "see" invisible creatures it would say so. Also, JC says blindsight and blindsense is not the same thing here...https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/976917047106916352
Well, right out of the gate, those unofficial tweets by JC are from 2015. Is there some official or at least more recent examples we can look at? Remember that I'm arguing that the rogue and ranger ability are a special sense and can do what blindsight and tremorsense can do. None of them say you can see an invisible creature or ignore the effects of an invisible creature. Only true sight says that. "Perceive", "detect", "locate", none of this says you can see an invisible creature.
I am confused as to what you might think blindsight actually does if it doesn't detect invisible creatures.
And the second part of Feral Senses sounds like it was written by someone who didn't know the rules in the first place. You already know the location of invisible creatures because invisible only tricks your eyes, not your ears or nose or detecting the displacement of air as something goes by. That is the difference between invisible and hidden.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I don't agree that the rules are clear. Like much of 5E they are open to some interpretation. I don't disagree that blindsight works the way you are saying it does. I'm saying the rule doesn't specifically say that it does any more than tremorsense or darkvision, only truesight does. A bat knows the location of a creature or a wall, it can't see a creature or a wall. So a bat would still have disadvantage to attack a mosquito using it's blindsight because it is an unseen target. A bat knows where a mosquito is as well as it knows where an invisible creature is, but nothing more. The rogue and ranger both gain a "special sense". They can locate an invisible creature. Using hearing and/or sight. Great. Anyone can do that. I'm suggesting that they can do what the bat can.
Sight is in the name of blindsight. Ok. Sense in in the names of blindsense and feral senses. So are they a special sense?
Right. So that's all it does, because that's what it says. Only things like truesight and faerie fire specifically say you can see past or ignore the effects of invisibility. Blindsight doesn't say either of these.
Ok. I'll concede.
Is being in a heavily obscured area the same as being blinded? Is being in a very loud environment the same as being deafened?
Is suffering from the blinded condition the same as being blinded?
I think the deafened equivalent you are most likely to encounter in D&D is an area under the effects of Silence.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Alright, everyone. So what does the last little bit of blindsense and last part of feral senses even do?
Thank you very much!
I’m currently inclined to rule towards if the rogue isn’t deafened the rogue isn’t negatively effected by a creature’s hidden or invisible condition within 10 feet of the rogue, and if the ranger isn’t deafened or blinded and a creature isn’t successfully hidden the ranger isn’t negatively effected by a creature’s invisible condition within 30 feet of the ranger.
This is similar to the very last part of the text from the faerie fire spell.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/faerie-fire