So Perception basically allows you to notice (see?) things Concealed. The Hide action clarifies that someone who succeeds at the perception check ends the condition.
The invisible spell grants you the Invisible Condition. The invisible condition at most makes you concealed (at least seems just suggest that as it doesn't actually ever say you are concealed.) it does not state that Perception ends the Condition, but it also doesn't state you can't be seen anywhere in the description of the Invisible condition or the Invisible spell.
So let's say someone has a passive perception of like 30 so they have no need to actively roll to notice someone.
By my reading of the Perception skill it allows you to notice someone who is concealed. Though I don't believe it explicitly states whether or not you only notice them but don't see them.
Concealed is not a game term so presumably if you succeed at perception you can see a concealed character unless they are behind total cover. As you are behind total cover or in an area of heavy obscurement with the invisible spell, it seems that someone who notices you can see you, thus while the condition itself doesn't end, it's two main options cease to function against someone with a passive perception of 30.
But you also don't automatically roll a stealth check. Which may itself become moot because unless you can't be seen it doesn't matter.
So, is the invisible spell missing a section that says you are in a heavily obscured area? (That use to be part of the condition) Or have I vastly misinterpreted something?
Someone make this make sense to me with the rules themselves. I think I know how it's supposed to function but I can't really get there from the rules as far as I know them from online sources.
There are two threads that went into this, and neither clarified the rule because arguments got adversarial. I am going to give you the RAI interpretation as I understand from reading all the rules from the book itself. This interpretation below is meant to be in good faith (sincere attempt to understand what the author is trying to say):
No. The Invisibility spell is pretty much the same as the 2014 version, but it changes the word invisible to the Invisible condition and removes the line about equipment since it was moved to the condition itself. The spell doesn't require a Perception check because the Invisible condition granted by the spell is magical in nature as per the Magical Effect description on page 371 of the 2024 PHB:
Magical Effect: An effect is magical if it is created by a spell, a magic item, or a phenomenon that a rule labels as magical.
Now, as you've read, the Invisible condition grants you this benefit:
Concealed: "You aren't affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect's creator can somehow see you"
This was written this way because the condition is also used for the Hide [Action], so the Invisibility Spell is supposed to tell us how to negate or break the condition. Meanwhile, Perception says "using a combination of senses, notice something that's easy to miss". WotC had in mind the dictionary definition of the word "Invisible" when they wrote the rules, which means you're not actually transparent. The reason the spell doesn't require a Perception check is because you're supposed to be unable to be perceived by the senses due to a Magical Effect, unlike the Hide [Action]. A creature can still know the general location of where you are and attempt to attack you using the Unseen attackers rule on page 26, but you cannot be targeted by sight unless the creature can somehow see you (which was left ambiguous so it can apply based on the circumstances). The listed special senses in page 19 are Blindsight, Darkvision, Tremorsense; out of these, only Blindsight and Truesight specify that they can see into the Invisible condition, while Tremorsense can cheat it's way through it. Obviously, the See Invisibility spell works too, and it specifically states "For the duration, you see creatures and objects that have the Invisible condition as if they were visible, and you can see into the Ethereal Plane", which does imply magical invisibility does exist and can affect creatures and objects.
This should be the RAI interpretation in play when you take into consideration the Spell description, Perception, the Invisible Condition and the Magical Effect rules. Now, some rules literalists may disagree with all of this because it's not written on the Invisible condition itself like in 2014--therefore their "I can still see you" claims--but the intention is for the spell to function the same as in 2014.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
I don't think there is a general rule that allows perception to see the invisible condition (i.e. end its concealed nature). That is a rule specific to hiding. Therefore, I suspect you can't use perception to defeat the spell.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
I don't think there is a general rule that allows perception to see the invisible condition (i.e. end its concealed nature). That is a rule specific to hiding. Therefore, I suspect you can't use perception to defeat the spell.
The book defines Perception as "Using a combination of senses...notice something that is easy to miss." and more specifically Passive perception as noticing ones surroundings without making a perception check. So the general rule is passive perception is always happening. And it is also what allows you to target an invisible creature in 2014, as you know where invisible creatures are because of sounds and other contextual clues (presumably the same here).
Like I don't know if I could figure out how invisibility is supposed to work if I just picked up the PHB for the first time. But as far as I can tell perception doesn't say you can see the person you perceived.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Basically, at this point your better off making up rules regarding invisibility, as the design of the new rules are non existent.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Basically, at this point your better off making up rules regarding invisibility, as the design of the new rules are non existent.
That is probably true. I was just trying to figure out how logically the designers wanted it to work. I feel like anyway to make sense of invisibility as a spell causes issues with Hide. Then making sense of Hide causes issues with Invisibility and how are you concealed if you are standing by yourself in the middle of a field after walking out from behind a tree.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Like @kenclary said, Perception is specific to Hiding because it is written as such on it's rules, but also because you're using normal means to gain the condition while the Invisibility spell is magical in nature.
From what I have read in terms of comments and quotations, the Invisible spell doesn't say anything about being unseen. It doesn't say anything about being difficult to see. The spell itself only appears to give the creature the invisible condition. The invisible condition mentions "if a creature can somehow see you". However, the invisible spell doesn't mention anything about being difficult to see or considered heavily obscured or anything at all except the word "invisible" in the spell name and the condition.
However, they use the invisible condition for both the invisibility spell (where presumably magic is making the creature impossible to be seen without special senses - but which the spell fails to mention) and hidden where the creature still has the effects of the invisible condition but there isn't actually anything in hiding preventing them from being seen.
If the invisible condition caused creatures to become impossible to see without special senses then a creature affected by an invisibility spell and a hidden creature could walk in front of another creature without being seen. In the case of hidden, the invisibility condition can be lost by a creature finding the hidden creature. However, I haven't seen the details on what "finding" is described as. In addition, many creatures have a low perception and thus passive perception, they won't notice a rogue who makes a stealth check of 20 (which with expertise, high dex, and reliable talent is somewhat trivial) ... but this means that the creature will not see the rogue hiding in plain sight 10' away if they have the "invisible condition". In order for that to work as one might expect, the rules have to rely on the DM saying "Well hiding isn't possible if you can be clearly seen" ... which, in my opinion, should be in the rules and not rely on a DM ruling to make their rules work.
Anyway, I'll be interested to see the rules and read them myself in a few days. Hopefully, if these rules are issues then they will be less reluctant to issue errata to fix them.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Like @kenclary said, Perception is specific to Hiding because it is written as such on it's rules, but also because you're using normal means to gain the condition while the Invisibility spell is magical in nature.
It seems to me the only reason the Hide action mentions perception at all is because it ends the condition. But even if it didn't mention perception, perception would still work to nullify the 2nd and third points of the condition. (the condition itself just wouldn't end) The action doesn't need to mention perception, because passive perception is always active in the game.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Like @kenclary said, Perception is specific to Hiding because it is written as such on it's rules, but also because you're using normal means to gain the condition while the Invisibility spell is magical in nature.
It seems to me the only reason the Hide action mentions perception at all is because it ends the condition. But even if it didn't mention perception, perception would still work to nullify the 2nd and third points of the condition. (the condition itself just wouldn't end) The action doesn't need to mention perception, because passive perception is always active in the game.
It wouldn't. The invisible condition doesn't say it can be negated with Perception, and the Invisibility spell says it ends when duration is over, when you attack, deal damage or cast a spell. If the spell doesn't say it uses perception to break it then it doesn't. Like I mentioned before, the "somehow can see you" part of the Invisible condition is meant to be vague so that whatever feature triggers it specifies how it ends. Back during playtest, the Invisible condition used to have a line that specified that you needed magic or a special sense to negate it, but then WotC realized that also gave Hide magical invisibility so they removed it after the playtests were over.
Edit: for your example, page 19 also specifically mentions the DM decides when the circumstances for Hiding are appropriate. So if you walk in the middle of the day in front of an enemy from a hiding position the enemy WILL see you if the DM says so.
So this is likely going to rehash some of what was said, but I'm going to try to condense the interaction here. Going to paraphrase a bit so I don't have to type every last word out, but the relevant text will be included.
Invisibility (Spell): Grants the Invisible condition until the spell ends.
Invisible (Condition): Can't be targeted by anything requiring sight unless you can be seen by the targeter. All you wear and carry are also concealed. -No, it doesn't explicitly state you are transparent. This seems clearly meant to be inferred by the conditions and the name. -Unlike what the OP says, the fact that "Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed" means you are. The word also is key here in showing that the target of the condition is, in fact, concealed. -That you are concealed no matter the conditions and that certain types of sight and spells allow their users to see through the Invisible condition clearly shows that even being within line of sight isn't enough to see something with the Invisible condition unless the circumstances break it (such as line of sight while using the Hide action).
Blindsight and Truesight: Both specify that you can see through Invisibility.
As previous threads have noted, this is a mess. I believe the intent is that the Invisible condition has an additional effect along the lines of:
Hidden: the character cannot be seen unless the observer has exotic senses, or the ability granting the invisible condition specifies an alternative method.
That's basically the same as 2014, except it allows a hiding character to be found (because the hide action specifies alternative means of seeing them).
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Like @kenclary said, Perception is specific to Hiding because it is written as such on it's rules, but also because you're using normal means to gain the condition while the Invisibility spell is magical in nature.
It seems to me the only reason the Hide action mentions perception at all is because it ends the condition. But even if it didn't mention perception, perception would still work to nullify the 2nd and third points of the condition. (the condition itself just wouldn't end) The action doesn't need to mention perception, because passive perception is always active in the game.
It wouldn't. The invisible condition doesn't say it can be negated with Perception, and the Invisibility spell says it ends when duration is over, when you attack, deal damage or cast a spell. If the spell doesn't say it uses perception to break it then it doesn't. Like I mentioned before, the "somehow can see you" part of the Invisible condition is meant to be vague so that whatever feature triggers it specifies how it ends. Back during playtest, the Invisible condition used to have a line that specified that you needed magic or a special sense to negate it, but then WotC realized that also gave Hide magical invisibility so they removed it after the playtests were over.
Edit: for your example, page 19 also specifically mentions the DM decides when the circumstances for Hiding are appropriate. So if you walk in the middle of the day in front of an enemy from a hiding position the enemy WILL see you if the DM says so.
A couple of things. (1) The Invisible condition itself does not, the second and third points specifically state that they are nullified if someone can somehow see you. The default way of seeing someone is with perception. So why the condition doesn't end per se, the final two elements of the condition would not function.
(2) It states the DM determines when you can hide, not anything past that point. So the DM should determine that you can hide behind the tree. You then simply move out from the tree. Technically at this point if no one is around the hide condition doesn't break as long as you are silent (so perhaps you have silence on yourself)
Since it doesn't say the DM can determine when hiding is no longer applicable, you can presumably stand in a field and be invisible casting spells all day long.
If someone then walks up and never beats your stealth check, you can presumably just hang out without anyone seeing you.
So this is likely going to rehash some of what was said, but I'm going to try to condense the interaction here. Going to paraphrase a bit so I don't have to type every last word out, but the relevant text will be included.
Invisibility (Spell): Grants the Invisible condition until the spell ends.
Invisible (Condition): Can't be targeted by anything requiring sight unless you can be seen by the targeter. All you wear and carry are also concealed. -No, it doesn't explicitly state you are transparent. This seems clearly meant to be inferred by the conditions and the name. -Unlike what the OP says, the fact that "Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed" means you are. The word also is key here in showing that the target of the condition is, in fact, concealed. -That you are concealed no matter the conditions and that certain types of sight and spells allow their users to see through the Invisible condition clearly shows that even being within line of sight isn't enough to see something with the Invisible condition unless the circumstances break it (such as line of sight while using the Hide action).
Blindsight and Truesight: Both specify that you can see through Invisibility.
I don't know if I mentioned it above, but I don't think granting you concealment changes anything because it would still say "you are concealed unless someone can somehow see you" and normally the perception check is used to determine if you can see someone who is concealed.
So this is likely going to rehash some of what was said, but I'm going to try to condense the interaction here. Going to paraphrase a bit so I don't have to type every last word out, but the relevant text will be included.
Invisibility (Spell): Grants the Invisible condition until the spell ends.
Invisible (Condition): Can't be targeted by anything requiring sight unless you can be seen by the targeter. All you wear and carry are also concealed. -No, it doesn't explicitly state you are transparent. This seems clearly meant to be inferred by the conditions and the name. -Unlike what the OP says, the fact that "Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed" means you are. The word also is key here in showing that the target of the condition is, in fact, concealed. -That you are concealed no matter the conditions and that certain types of sight and spells allow their users to see through the Invisible condition clearly shows that even being within line of sight isn't enough to see something with the Invisible condition unless the circumstances break it (such as line of sight while using the Hide action).
Blindsight and Truesight: Both specify that you can see through Invisibility.
I don't know if I mentioned it above, but I don't think granting you concealment changes anything because it would still say "you are concealed unless someone can somehow see you" and normally the perception check is used to determine if you can see someone who is concealed.
It is. That's why the Hide action specifies that a Perception check is what has to beat the DC of the Stealth check. Invisibility lists no such condition, but certain senses do specify they can see those with the Invisible condition.
Since nothing about Perception states it can normally see a creature with the Invisible condition, it can't.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
Like @kenclary said, Perception is specific to Hiding because it is written as such on it's rules, but also because you're using normal means to gain the condition while the Invisibility spell is magical in nature.
It seems to me the only reason the Hide action mentions perception at all is because it ends the condition. But even if it didn't mention perception, perception would still work to nullify the 2nd and third points of the condition. (the condition itself just wouldn't end) The action doesn't need to mention perception, because passive perception is always active in the game.
It wouldn't. The invisible condition doesn't say it can be negated with Perception, and the Invisibility spell says it ends when duration is over, when you attack, deal damage or cast a spell. If the spell doesn't say it uses perception to break it then it doesn't. Like I mentioned before, the "somehow can see you" part of the Invisible condition is meant to be vague so that whatever feature triggers it specifies how it ends. Back during playtest, the Invisible condition used to have a line that specified that you needed magic or a special sense to negate it, but then WotC realized that also gave Hide magical invisibility so they removed it after the playtests were over.
Edit: for your example, page 19 also specifically mentions the DM decides when the circumstances for Hiding are appropriate. So if you walk in the middle of the day in front of an enemy from a hiding position the enemy WILL see you if the DM says so.
A couple of things. (1) The Invisible condition itself does not, the second and third points specifically state that they are nullified if someone can somehow see you. The default way of seeing someone is with perception. So why the condition doesn't end per se, the final two elements of the condition would not function.
(2) It states the DM determines when you can hide, not anything past that point. So the DM should determine that you can hide behind the tree. You then simply move out from the tree. Technically at this point if no one is around the hide condition doesn't break as long as you are silent (so perhaps you have silence on yourself)
Since it doesn't say the DM can determine when hiding is no longer applicable, you can presumably stand in a field and be invisible casting spells all day long.
If someone then walks up and never beats your stealth check, you can presumably just hang out without anyone seeing you.
- And what score will you beat? You can run as many Perception checks as you want, but you have no score to beat to be able to see someone under the Invisible condition granted by the Invisibility spell, therefore you can't find them using Perception.
- The rule in page 19 for Hiding says the DM determines if the circumstances are applicable, and that is a very broad term that applies to many things and goes both ways. Your character in your example walking out in plain view can be called by the DM as circumstances no longer applicable to hiding.
- And what score will you beat? You can run as many Perception checks as you want, but you have no score to beat to be able to see someone under the Invisible condition granted by the Invisibility spell, therefore you can't find them using Perception.
And therefore the DM sets the DC. If no DC is listed for a check, that doesn't mean it's impossible. It could be impossible, it could be automatic, it could be anywhere in between. In general you would figure the DC as the normal for that situation (generally zero if in full view) plus any listed situational modifiers... which there aren't any of.
- And what score will you beat? You can run as many Perception checks as you want, but you have no score to beat to be able to see someone under the Invisible condition granted by the Invisibility spell, therefore you can't find them using Perception.
And therefore the DM sets the DC. If no DC is listed for a check, that doesn't mean it's impossible. It could be impossible, it could be automatic, it could be anywhere in between. In general you would figure the DC as the normal for that situation (generally zero if in full view) plus any listed situational modifiers... which there aren't any of.
Concealed isn't a game term, which means it uses the standard meaning in English. Tell me, what does concealed mean?
Honestly. Any player or DM who uses such uninformed pedantry to say "Invisibility doesn't make you invisible just because it gives the Invisible condition" really needs to step away from the game.
- And what score will you beat? You can run as many Perception checks as you want, but you have no score to beat to be able to see someone under the Invisible condition granted by the Invisibility spell, therefore you can't find them using Perception.
And therefore the DM sets the DC. If no DC is listed for a check, that doesn't mean it's impossible. It could be impossible, it could be automatic, it could be anywhere in between. In general you would figure the DC as the normal for that situation (generally zero if in full view) plus any listed situational modifiers... which there aren't any of.
Concealed isn't a game term, which means it uses the standard meaning in English. Tell me, what does concealed mean?
Honestly. Any player or DM who uses such uninformed pedantry to say "Invisibility doesn't make you invisible just because it gives the Invisible condition" really needs to step away from the game.
Bro, all they're doing is trying to exploit ambiguities, tensions, or contradictions, to look for ammunition for an argument they are are already determined to make, which is that the rules are broken. It's nothing more than adversarial reading of the text for the sake of pedantry. The previous two threads died off because of this.
- And what score will you beat? You can run as many Perception checks as you want, but you have no score to beat to be able to see someone under the Invisible condition granted by the Invisibility spell, therefore you can't find them using Perception.
And therefore the DM sets the DC. If no DC is listed for a check, that doesn't mean it's impossible. It could be impossible, it could be automatic, it could be anywhere in between. In general you would figure the DC as the normal for that situation (generally zero if in full view) plus any listed situational modifiers... which there aren't any of.
Concealed isn't a game term, which means it uses the standard meaning in English. Tell me, what does concealed mean?
Honestly. Any player or DM who uses such uninformed pedantry to say "Invisibility doesn't make you invisible just because it gives the Invisible condition" really needs to step away from the game.
Even by your own argument, it doesn't make you invisible. At most it makes you concealed, but technically it infers you are concealed, but never actually claims you are concealed. Which I think is two completley different things.
But Concealed means (1) to prevent disclosure or recognition of (2) to place out of sight
The relevant section of the Invisible condition states:
Concealed. You aren't affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect's creature can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.
The statement infers that you are concealed, but doesn't actually state that you are. The important part is that it says you aren't affect by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect's creature can somehow see you.
At one point the book talks about finding concealed doors and specifically points out that you use the Search action to do so. Which furthers my point, Perception is used to find concealed things. Thus, even if you are concealed, perception is the default means to finding that thing. Presumably being a person standing out in the open, your DC would be 0, as it requires no skill to see you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So Perception basically allows you to notice (see?) things Concealed. The Hide action clarifies that someone who succeeds at the perception check ends the condition.
The invisible spell grants you the Invisible Condition. The invisible condition at most makes you concealed (at least seems just suggest that as it doesn't actually ever say you are concealed.) it does not state that Perception ends the Condition, but it also doesn't state you can't be seen anywhere in the description of the Invisible condition or the Invisible spell.
So let's say someone has a passive perception of like 30 so they have no need to actively roll to notice someone.
By my reading of the Perception skill it allows you to notice someone who is concealed. Though I don't believe it explicitly states whether or not you only notice them but don't see them.
Concealed is not a game term so presumably if you succeed at perception you can see a concealed character unless they are behind total cover. As you are behind total cover or in an area of heavy obscurement with the invisible spell, it seems that someone who notices you can see you, thus while the condition itself doesn't end, it's two main options cease to function against someone with a passive perception of 30.
But you also don't automatically roll a stealth check. Which may itself become moot because unless you can't be seen it doesn't matter.
So, is the invisible spell missing a section that says you are in a heavily obscured area? (That use to be part of the condition) Or have I vastly misinterpreted something?
Someone make this make sense to me with the rules themselves. I think I know how it's supposed to function but I can't really get there from the rules as far as I know them from online sources.
There are two threads that went into this, and neither clarified the rule because arguments got adversarial. I am going to give you the RAI interpretation as I understand from reading all the rules from the book itself. This interpretation below is meant to be in good faith (sincere attempt to understand what the author is trying to say):
No. The Invisibility spell is pretty much the same as the 2014 version, but it changes the word invisible to the Invisible condition and removes the line about equipment since it was moved to the condition itself. The spell doesn't require a Perception check because the Invisible condition granted by the spell is magical in nature as per the Magical Effect description on page 371 of the 2024 PHB:
Now, as you've read, the Invisible condition grants you this benefit:
This was written this way because the condition is also used for the Hide [Action], so the Invisibility Spell is supposed to tell us how to negate or break the condition. Meanwhile, Perception says "using a combination of senses, notice something that's easy to miss". WotC had in mind the dictionary definition of the word "Invisible" when they wrote the rules, which means you're not actually transparent. The reason the spell doesn't require a Perception check is because you're supposed to be unable to be perceived by the senses due to a Magical Effect, unlike the Hide [Action]. A creature can still know the general location of where you are and attempt to attack you using the Unseen attackers rule on page 26, but you cannot be targeted by sight unless the creature can somehow see you (which was left ambiguous so it can apply based on the circumstances). The listed special senses in page 19 are Blindsight, Darkvision, Tremorsense; out of these, only Blindsight and Truesight specify that they can see into the Invisible condition, while Tremorsense can cheat it's way through it. Obviously, the See Invisibility spell works too, and it specifically states "For the duration, you see creatures and objects that have the Invisible condition as if they were visible, and you can see into the Ethereal Plane", which does imply magical invisibility does exist and can affect creatures and objects.
This should be the RAI interpretation in play when you take into consideration the Spell description, Perception, the Invisible Condition and the Magical Effect rules. Now, some rules literalists may disagree with all of this because it's not written on the Invisible condition itself like in 2014--therefore their "I can still see you" claims--but the intention is for the spell to function the same as in 2014.
I'm more focused on the rule itself. I think we all know Invisible is supposed to be something, but the way the rules are written at best the invisible condition makes you concealed, which passive perception seems to be able to find things Concealed.
I don't think there is a general rule that allows perception to see the invisible condition (i.e. end its concealed nature). That is a rule specific to hiding. Therefore, I suspect you can't use perception to defeat the spell.
The book defines Perception as "Using a combination of senses...notice something that is easy to miss." and more specifically Passive perception as noticing ones surroundings without making a perception check. So the general rule is passive perception is always happening. And it is also what allows you to target an invisible creature in 2014, as you know where invisible creatures are because of sounds and other contextual clues (presumably the same here).
Like I don't know if I could figure out how invisibility is supposed to work if I just picked up the PHB for the first time. But as far as I can tell perception doesn't say you can see the person you perceived.
That is probably true. I was just trying to figure out how logically the designers wanted it to work. I feel like anyway to make sense of invisibility as a spell causes issues with Hide. Then making sense of Hide causes issues with Invisibility and how are you concealed if you are standing by yourself in the middle of a field after walking out from behind a tree.
Like @kenclary said, Perception is specific to Hiding because it is written as such on it's rules, but also because you're using normal means to gain the condition while the Invisibility spell is magical in nature.
From what I have read in terms of comments and quotations, the Invisible spell doesn't say anything about being unseen. It doesn't say anything about being difficult to see. The spell itself only appears to give the creature the invisible condition. The invisible condition mentions "if a creature can somehow see you". However, the invisible spell doesn't mention anything about being difficult to see or considered heavily obscured or anything at all except the word "invisible" in the spell name and the condition.
However, they use the invisible condition for both the invisibility spell (where presumably magic is making the creature impossible to be seen without special senses - but which the spell fails to mention) and hidden where the creature still has the effects of the invisible condition but there isn't actually anything in hiding preventing them from being seen.
If the invisible condition caused creatures to become impossible to see without special senses then a creature affected by an invisibility spell and a hidden creature could walk in front of another creature without being seen. In the case of hidden, the invisibility condition can be lost by a creature finding the hidden creature. However, I haven't seen the details on what "finding" is described as. In addition, many creatures have a low perception and thus passive perception, they won't notice a rogue who makes a stealth check of 20 (which with expertise, high dex, and reliable talent is somewhat trivial) ... but this means that the creature will not see the rogue hiding in plain sight 10' away if they have the "invisible condition". In order for that to work as one might expect, the rules have to rely on the DM saying "Well hiding isn't possible if you can be clearly seen" ... which, in my opinion, should be in the rules and not rely on a DM ruling to make their rules work.
Anyway, I'll be interested to see the rules and read them myself in a few days. Hopefully, if these rules are issues then they will be less reluctant to issue errata to fix them.
It seems to me the only reason the Hide action mentions perception at all is because it ends the condition. But even if it didn't mention perception, perception would still work to nullify the 2nd and third points of the condition. (the condition itself just wouldn't end) The action doesn't need to mention perception, because passive perception is always active in the game.
It wouldn't. The invisible condition doesn't say it can be negated with Perception, and the Invisibility spell says it ends when duration is over, when you attack, deal damage or cast a spell. If the spell doesn't say it uses perception to break it then it doesn't. Like I mentioned before, the "somehow can see you" part of the Invisible condition is meant to be vague so that whatever feature triggers it specifies how it ends. Back during playtest, the Invisible condition used to have a line that specified that you needed magic or a special sense to negate it, but then WotC realized that also gave Hide magical invisibility so they removed it after the playtests were over.
Edit: for your example, page 19 also specifically mentions the DM decides when the circumstances for Hiding are appropriate. So if you walk in the middle of the day in front of an enemy from a hiding position the enemy WILL see you if the DM says so.
So this is likely going to rehash some of what was said, but I'm going to try to condense the interaction here. Going to paraphrase a bit so I don't have to type every last word out, but the relevant text will be included.
Invisibility (Spell): Grants the Invisible condition until the spell ends.
Invisible (Condition): Can't be targeted by anything requiring sight unless you can be seen by the targeter. All you wear and carry are also concealed.
-No, it doesn't explicitly state you are transparent. This seems clearly meant to be inferred by the conditions and the name.
-Unlike what the OP says, the fact that "Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed" means you are. The word also is key here in showing that the target of the condition is, in fact, concealed.
-That you are concealed no matter the conditions and that certain types of sight and spells allow their users to see through the Invisible condition clearly shows that even being within line of sight isn't enough to see something with the Invisible condition unless the circumstances break it (such as line of sight while using the Hide action).
Blindsight and Truesight: Both specify that you can see through Invisibility.
As previous threads have noted, this is a mess. I believe the intent is that the Invisible condition has an additional effect along the lines of:
That's basically the same as 2014, except it allows a hiding character to be found (because the hide action specifies alternative means of seeing them).
A couple of things. (1) The Invisible condition itself does not, the second and third points specifically state that they are nullified if someone can somehow see you. The default way of seeing someone is with perception. So why the condition doesn't end per se, the final two elements of the condition would not function.
(2) It states the DM determines when you can hide, not anything past that point. So the DM should determine that you can hide behind the tree. You then simply move out from the tree. Technically at this point if no one is around the hide condition doesn't break as long as you are silent (so perhaps you have silence on yourself)
Since it doesn't say the DM can determine when hiding is no longer applicable, you can presumably stand in a field and be invisible casting spells all day long.
If someone then walks up and never beats your stealth check, you can presumably just hang out without anyone seeing you.
I don't know if I mentioned it above, but I don't think granting you concealment changes anything because it would still say "you are concealed unless someone can somehow see you" and normally the perception check is used to determine if you can see someone who is concealed.
It is. That's why the Hide action specifies that a Perception check is what has to beat the DC of the Stealth check. Invisibility lists no such condition, but certain senses do specify they can see those with the Invisible condition.
Since nothing about Perception states it can normally see a creature with the Invisible condition, it can't.
- And what score will you beat? You can run as many Perception checks as you want, but you have no score to beat to be able to see someone under the Invisible condition granted by the Invisibility spell, therefore you can't find them using Perception.
- The rule in page 19 for Hiding says the DM determines if the circumstances are applicable, and that is a very broad term that applies to many things and goes both ways. Your character in your example walking out in plain view can be called by the DM as circumstances no longer applicable to hiding.
Since nothing about either Invisible or Concealed state that the creature cannot be seen with normal vision, it can be.
And therefore the DM sets the DC. If no DC is listed for a check, that doesn't mean it's impossible. It could be impossible, it could be automatic, it could be anywhere in between. In general you would figure the DC as the normal for that situation (generally zero if in full view) plus any listed situational modifiers... which there aren't any of.
Concealed isn't a game term, which means it uses the standard meaning in English. Tell me, what does concealed mean?
Honestly. Any player or DM who uses such uninformed pedantry to say "Invisibility doesn't make you invisible just because it gives the Invisible condition" really needs to step away from the game.
Bro, all they're doing is trying to exploit ambiguities, tensions, or contradictions, to look for ammunition for an argument they are are already determined to make, which is that the rules are broken. It's nothing more than adversarial reading of the text for the sake of pedantry. The previous two threads died off because of this.
Even by your own argument, it doesn't make you invisible. At most it makes you concealed, but technically it infers you are concealed, but never actually claims you are concealed. Which I think is two completley different things.
But Concealed means (1) to prevent disclosure or recognition of (2) to place out of sight
The relevant section of the Invisible condition states:
Concealed. You aren't affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect's creature can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.
The statement infers that you are concealed, but doesn't actually state that you are. The important part is that it says you aren't affect by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect's creature can somehow see you.
At one point the book talks about finding concealed doors and specifically points out that you use the Search action to do so. Which furthers my point, Perception is used to find concealed things. Thus, even if you are concealed, perception is the default means to finding that thing. Presumably being a person standing out in the open, your DC would be 0, as it requires no skill to see you.