If someone casts Greater Invisibility on a Barbarian who is using Reckless attack - does anyone attacking the Barbarian still get Advantage on attacks against them?
RAW the Disadvantage would cancel the Advantage so they would still get to attack normally? Still seems silly to me
Taking into consideration you can attack and leave combat while invisible and shouldn't be subject to attacks of opportunity, wouldn't this just leave your opponent swinging at air anyhow?
How does your table handle attacking with ranged attacks at invisible targets that have attacked form a general area, but remain invisible?
Attackers on the barbarian having both advantage and disadvantage is entirely plausible. The barbarian is swinging wildly around and not looking to dodge any incoming blows, so even wild blows through his space are likely to hit him.
Someone invisible in dnd 5E isn't hidden, they just can't be seen - and a wildly rampaging barbarian is likely making a lot of noise, even the sound of a wildly swinging weapon will make noise.
The rules for stealth explain that unseen is not the same as hidden - so ranged attacks could still be guided to the correct location through other non-visual indications of their position.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked. I created an Improved Invisibility spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
If someone casts Greater Invisibility on a Barbarian who is using Reckless attack - does anyone attacking the Barbarian still get Advantage on attacks against them?
RAW the Disadvantage would cancel the Advantage so they would still get to attack normally? Still seems silly to me
Taking into consideration you can attack and leave combat while invisible and shouldn't be subject to attacks of opportunity, wouldn't this just leave your opponent swinging at air anyhow?
How does your table handle attacking with ranged attacks at invisible targets that have attacked form a general area, but remain invisible?
Being Invisible already gives the attacker advantage on attacks and attacks made against them have disadvantage. Reckless attack would not provide any benefit and only allow attackers to attack with straight rolls since advantage and disadvantage cancel one another completely.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility(4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is a the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility is not a homebrew spell. It can be found on pg 246 of the PHB.
You can attack or cast spells and remain invisible as the spell description is missing the wording 'The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell' that the normal Invisibility spell has.
The only way you lose the invisibility granted by Greater Invisibility is if the caster stops concentrating on it or the duration runs out.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
No, greater invisibility was added, which you linked to from the basic rules. It’s pretty funny to me that you thought it was homebrew when it clearly said it was from the basic rules/srd.
If someone casts Greater Invisibility on a Barbarian who is using Reckless attack - does anyone attacking the Barbarian still get Advantage on attacks against them?
RAW the Disadvantage would cancel the Advantage so they would still get to attack normally? Still seems silly to me
Taking into consideration you can attack and leave combat while invisible and shouldn't be subject to attacks of opportunity, wouldn't this just leave your opponent swinging at air anyhow?
How does your table handle attacking with ranged attacks at invisible targets that have attacked form a general area, but remain invisible?
Being Invisible already gives the attacker advantage on attacks and attacks made against them have disadvantage. Reckless attack would not provide any benefit and only allow attackers to attack with straight rolls since advantage and disadvantage cancel one another completely.
While this is generally true, you could have a situation where you're engaged with an ooze or something that can still see you. In that case it might be worthwhile to be Reckless.
If someone casts Greater Invisibility on a Barbarian who is using Reckless attack - does anyone attacking the Barbarian still get Advantage on attacks against them?
RAW the Disadvantage would cancel the Advantage so they would still get to attack normally? Still seems silly to me
Taking into consideration you can attack and leave combat while invisible and shouldn't be subject to attacks of opportunity, wouldn't this just leave your opponent swinging at air anyhow?
How does your table handle attacking with ranged attacks at invisible targets that have attacked form a general area, but remain invisible?
Being Invisible already gives the attacker advantage on attacks and attacks made against them have disadvantage. Reckless attack would not provide any benefit and only allow attackers to attack with straight rolls since advantage and disadvantage cancel one another completely.
While this is generally true, you could have a situation where you're engaged with an ooze or something that can still see you. In that case it might be worthwhile to be Reckless.
True, but why would you cast Greater Invisibility in that situation?
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility (4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
I created an Improved Invisibility (4th level) spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility (4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
I created an Improved Invisibility (4th level) spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
Why? Greater Invisibility already exists and is better.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility (4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
I created an Improved Invisibility (4th level) spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
Why? Greater Invisibility already exists and is better.
Yeah.
It's obvious by the wording that we're talking about a THAC0 based system(specifically its the spell from AD&D 2nd, which is almost lifted verbatim from the PHB, which is against the D&D Beyond Homebrew Rules), which doesn't work. Saying that a creature that is under the benefit of the spell but detected gets a -4 AC? So they're under a buff spell but they lose overall armor class in now 5th edition?
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility (4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
I created an Improved Invisibility (4th level) spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
Why? Greater Invisibility already exists and is better.
Yeah.
It's obvious by the wording that we're talking about a THAC0 based system(specifically its the spell from AD&D 2nd, which is almost lifted verbatim from the PHB, which is against the D&D Beyond Homebrew Rules), which doesn't work. Saying that a creature that is under the benefit of the spell but detected gets a -4 AC? So they're under a buff spell but they lose overall armor class in now 5th edition?
OK to refute your comments a bit. No, I did not copy this from AD&D 2.0 and Greater Invisibility is not better than Improved Invisibility. If you actually click on the Greater Invisibility spell it is in fact not even as good as (or described) as well as the level 2nd level Invisibility spell. The minus to AC is a 5th edition scenario, example: Target has a normal AC of 14 under Improved Invisibility but gets discovered. His/her Improved Invisibility remains but since he/she has been discovered the opponent attacks at a -4 AC, so giving the target an effective AC of 18.
Sorry, you're saying Greater Invisibility is not better than Invisibility? What drugs you on?
Greater Invisibility offers everything Invisibility does but with a cost of less duration in exchange for it never breaking. You can keep the Greater version up even as you attack and cast spells. This means advantage on all attacks, and all enemies have disadvantage against you. For what is, basically, the whole combat.
How could you possibly come to the conclusion this isn't better? O.o
As for your "Improved Invisibility" - it's been taken down, so I'm guessing it was closer to previous edition spells than what you're letting on. I also don't understand "His/her Improved Invisibility remains but since he/she has been discovered the opponent attacks at a -4 AC, so giving the target an effective AC of 18." -- this isn't THAC0. That bit the dust by 4th and we're now 5th edition. Your spell (and the original Improved Invisibility your hb was clearly based on) is inferior to Greater Invisibility.
I get you want to plug your hb, but for the love of all things fluffy use logic not gaslighting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I have clarified the spell to ensure that a detected Improved Invisibility character receives a +4 AC bonus and saves. He/she is not penalized for getting detected.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Greater Invisibility (4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
I created an Improved Invisibility (4th level) spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
Why? Greater Invisibility already exists and is better.
Yeah.
It's obvious by the wording that we're talking about a THAC0 based system(specifically its the spell from AD&D 2nd, which is almost lifted verbatim from the PHB, which is against the D&D Beyond Homebrew Rules), which doesn't work. Saying that a creature that is under the benefit of the spell but detected gets a -4 AC? So they're under a buff spell but they lose overall armor class in now 5th edition?
OK to refute your comments a bit. No, I did not copy this from AD&D 2.0 and Greater Invisibility is not better than Improved Invisibility. If you actually click on the Greater Invisibility spell it is in fact not even as good as (or described) as well as the level 2nd level Invisibility spell. The minus to AC is a 5th edition scenario, example: Target has a normal AC of 14 under Improved Invisibility but gets discovered. His/her Improved Invisibility remains but since he/she has been discovered the opponent attacks at a -4 AC, so giving the target an effective AC of 18.
This spell is similar to the invisibility spell, but the recipient is able to attack, either by missile discharge, melee combat, or spellcasting, and remain unseen.
Note, however, that there are sometimes telltale traces, a shimmering, so that an observant opponent can attack the invisible spell recipient. These traces are only noticeable when specifically looked for (after the invisible character has made his presence known).
Attacks against the invisible character suffer -4 penalties to the attack rolls, and the invisible character's saving throws are made with a +4 bonus.
High Hit Dice creatures that might notice invisible opponents will notice a creature under this spell as if they had 2 fewer Hit Dice (they roll saving throws vs. spell; success indicates they spot the character).
The spell text of your spell prior to deletion carried a lot of this very same text. It's also on page 159 of the AD&D 2nd PHB. Source? My closet.
This spell is similar to Invisibility, but the recipient is able to attack by missile discharge, melee combat, or spellcasting while remaining unseen. Note, however, that telltale traces (such as a shimmering effect) sometimes allow an observant opponent to attack the invisible spell recipient. These traces are only noticeable when specifically looked for (after the invisible character has made his presence known). Attacks against the invisible character suffer a -4 penalty to attack rolls, and the invisible character's Saving Throws are made with a +4 bonus.
This spell effectively has 2 states: invisible and undetected and invisible but detected.
While undetected, the spell acts just like normal invisibility.
Once detected:
The spell effectively becomes a buff with -4 AC and -4 Saving Throw bonuses.
The recipient is still safe from magics that effect single targets (but not from AoE spells and physical attacks)
Beings with high Hit Dice that might normally notice invisible opponents will notice a creature under this spell as if they had 2 fewer Hit Dice (they roll saving throws vs. spell; success indicates they spot the character).
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 5th level or higher, the duration is extended at + 1 rd./level.
I have clarified the spell to ensure that a detected Improved Invisibility character receives a +4 AC bonus and saves. He/she is not penalized for getting detected.
There are no penalties for "being detected". An invisible character has advantage on attacks and enemies have disadvantage on attacks against the the character for the duration of the spell. Also, a 4 round casting time means that the caster is basically doing nothing for 4 rounds of combat. That by itself makes the homebrew spell bad.
I have clarified the spell to ensure that a detected Improved Invisibility character receives a +4 AC bonus and saves. He/she is not penalized for getting detected.
There are no penalties for "being detected". An invisible character has advantage on attacks and enemies have disadvantage on attacks against the the character for the duration of the spell. Also, a 4 round casting time means that the caster is basically doing nothing for 4 rounds of combat. That by itself makes the homebrew spell bad.
It had a 4 minute casting time. So 40 rounds. Then lasted for 4 rounds. This is also a holdover from AD&D 2nd where rounds and turns were different lengths of time.
I have clarified the spell to ensure that a detected Improved Invisibility character receives a +4 AC bonus and saves. He/she is not penalized for getting detected.
There are no penalties for "being detected". An invisible character has advantage on attacks and enemies have disadvantage on attacks against the the character for the duration of the spell. Also, a 4 round casting time means that the caster is basically doing nothing for 4 rounds of combat. That by itself makes the homebrew spell bad.
It had a 4 minute casting time. So 40 rounds. Then lasted for 4 rounds. This is also a holdover from AD&D 2nd where rounds and turns were different lengths of time.
Oh, yeah, my bad. I got it backwards, so it is actually even worse.
I have clarified the spell to ensure that a detected Improved Invisibility character receives a +4 AC bonus and saves. He/she is not penalized for getting detected.
There are no penalties for "being detected". An invisible character has advantage on attacks and enemies have disadvantage on attacks against the the character for the duration of the spell. Also, a 4-round casting time means that the caster is basically doing nothing for 4 rounds of combat. That by itself makes the homebrew spell bad.
The casting time has actually been changed to 2 minutes and should be done pre-combat. I spell never gave the invisible character any disadvantages it was just worded incorrectly and has now been corrected.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Fizikal
For the King!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If someone casts Greater Invisibility on a Barbarian who is using Reckless attack - does anyone attacking the Barbarian still get Advantage on attacks against them?
RAW the Disadvantage would cancel the Advantage so they would still get to attack normally? Still seems silly to me
Taking into consideration you can attack and leave combat while invisible and shouldn't be subject to attacks of opportunity, wouldn't this just leave your opponent swinging at air anyhow?
How does your table handle attacking with ranged attacks at invisible targets that have attacked form a general area, but remain invisible?
Attackers on the barbarian having both advantage and disadvantage is entirely plausible. The barbarian is swinging wildly around and not looking to dodge any incoming blows, so even wild blows through his space are likely to hit him.
Someone invisible in dnd 5E isn't hidden, they just can't be seen - and a wildly rampaging barbarian is likely making a lot of noise, even the sound of a wildly swinging weapon will make noise.
The rules for stealth explain that unseen is not the same as hidden - so ranged attacks could still be guided to the correct location through other non-visual indications of their position.
To better respond I need to understand the following. I see no difference in the spell description so any action while invisible will break your invisibility.
Invisibility - (Players Handbook) A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.
Greater Invisibility - (Homebrew?) You or a creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person.
I do disagree with the statement "you can attack and leave combat while invisible". This is just not true. If you engage you lose your invisibility and thus can be attacked. I created an Improved Invisibility spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
I also noticed by looking through the Player's Handbook that Improved Invisibility is not there. Was that removed from 5th Edition?
Fizikal
For the King!
Being Invisible already gives the attacker advantage on attacks and attacks made against them have disadvantage. Reckless attack would not provide any benefit and only allow attackers to attack with straight rolls since advantage and disadvantage cancel one another completely.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Greater Invisibility(4th level spell) is not broken by making attacks. It is a the primary benefit of using it over Invisibility (2nd level spell).
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Greater Invisibility is not a homebrew spell. It can be found on pg 246 of the PHB.
You can attack or cast spells and remain invisible as the spell description is missing the wording 'The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell' that the normal Invisibility spell has.
The only way you lose the invisibility granted by Greater Invisibility is if the caster stops concentrating on it or the duration runs out.
No, greater invisibility was added, which you linked to from the basic rules. It’s pretty funny to me that you thought it was homebrew when it clearly said it was from the basic rules/srd.
While this is generally true, you could have a situation where you're engaged with an ooze or something that can still see you. In that case it might be worthwhile to be Reckless.
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
True, but why would you cast Greater Invisibility in that situation?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I created an Improved Invisibility (4th level) spell within the D&D Homebrew spell list.
Fizikal
For the King!
Why? Greater Invisibility already exists and is better.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Yeah.
It's obvious by the wording that we're talking about a THAC0 based system(specifically its the spell from AD&D 2nd, which is almost lifted verbatim from the PHB, which is against the D&D Beyond Homebrew Rules), which doesn't work. Saying that a creature that is under the benefit of the spell but detected gets a -4 AC? So they're under a buff spell but they lose overall armor class in now 5th edition?
OK to refute your comments a bit. No, I did not copy this from AD&D 2.0 and Greater Invisibility is not better than Improved Invisibility. If you actually click on the Greater Invisibility spell it is in fact not even as good as (or described) as well as the level 2nd level Invisibility spell. The minus to AC is a 5th edition scenario, example: Target has a normal AC of 14 under Improved Invisibility but gets discovered. His/her Improved Invisibility remains but since he/she has been discovered the opponent attacks at a -4 AC, so giving the target an effective AC of 18.
Fizikal
For the King!
Sorry, you're saying Greater Invisibility is not better than Invisibility? What drugs you on?
Greater Invisibility offers everything Invisibility does but with a cost of less duration in exchange for it never breaking. You can keep the Greater version up even as you attack and cast spells. This means advantage on all attacks, and all enemies have disadvantage against you. For what is, basically, the whole combat.
How could you possibly come to the conclusion this isn't better? O.o
As for your "Improved Invisibility" - it's been taken down, so I'm guessing it was closer to previous edition spells than what you're letting on. I also don't understand "His/her Improved Invisibility remains but since he/she has been discovered the opponent attacks at a -4 AC, so giving the target an effective AC of 18." -- this isn't THAC0. That bit the dust by 4th and we're now 5th edition. Your spell (and the original Improved Invisibility your hb was clearly based on) is inferior to Greater Invisibility.
I get you want to plug your hb, but for the love of all things fluffy use logic not gaslighting.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I have clarified the spell to ensure that a detected Improved Invisibility character receives a +4 AC bonus and saves. He/she is not penalized for getting detected.
Fizikal
For the King!
Alright, let's go down this rabbit hole.
https://adnd2e.fandom.com/wiki/Improved_Invisibility
The spell text of your spell prior to deletion carried a lot of this very same text. It's also on page 159 of the AD&D 2nd PHB. Source? My closet.
There are no penalties for "being detected". An invisible character has advantage on attacks and enemies have disadvantage on attacks against the the character for the duration of the spell. Also, a 4 round casting time means that the caster is basically doing nothing for 4 rounds of combat. That by itself makes the homebrew spell bad.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
It had a 4 minute casting time. So 40 rounds. Then lasted for 4 rounds. This is also a holdover from AD&D 2nd where rounds and turns were different lengths of time.
Oh, yeah, my bad. I got it backwards, so it is actually even worse.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The casting time has actually been changed to 2 minutes and should be done pre-combat. I spell never gave the invisible character any disadvantages it was just worded incorrectly and has now been corrected.
Fizikal
For the King!