This is just a probably a question that you have all answered before, but when you end invisibility early due to you attacking, do you get advantage on that attack roll?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM: So, you doomed the world by betting on dinosauer races instead of doing a quest.
Players: But we got money! Now we can do whatever we want.
This is just a probably a question that you have all answered before, but when you end invisibility early due to you attacking, do you get advantage on that attack roll?
It is generally assumed that the answer is 'yes', but it actually depends on whether you become visible before or after you attack, and Invisibility doesn't specify the order. This is also relevant for reactions that are triggered by someone you see taking an action.
This is just a probably a question that you have all answered before, but when you end invisibility early due to you attacking, do you get advantage on that attack roll?
It is generally assumed that the answer is 'yes', but it actually depends on whether you become visible before or after you attack, and Invisibility doesn't specify the order. This is also relevant for reactions that are triggered by someone you see taking an action.
Idk if someone blinked into visibility right in front of me and then attacked, I think I'd be surprised enough to merit advantage
Right. In previous editions the spell was even more picky about intent: the criteria for losing it was harming other creatures, but you could attack unattended objects and cause harm indirectly. For instance, you could cut the supports on a rope bridge and not lose the spell. The 5e version is a lot simpler, though you lose some of the flavor as a result.
Hm. I realize that Invisibility is not ended by offensive actions that do not use attack rolls and also are not casting spells. For example, using a Necklace of Fireballs. This is probably not intended.
I've brought this up in other threads but it most likely isn't. Older editions of D&D used "attack" in the broader sense of "anything that can cause harm". 5e narrowed the definition to "something that uses attack rolls" but didn't update the wording on the spell and related magic items. The invisibility-like features that came after the Player's Handbook close the loophole. e.g. the Fade Away racial feat ends your invisibility if you force a creature to make a saving throw. I think I've seen a different take on that in monster stat blocks where the invisibility ends if it deals damage to a creature.
Hm. I realize that Invisibility is not ended by offensive actions that do not use attack rolls and also are not casting spells. For example, using a Necklace of Fireballs. This is probably not intended.
Also, using the action created by Dragon's Breath, which does meet the letter of the rule, but I don't allow it in my game.
Yes. I ruled that the 'attack' that ends invisibility refers to anything that does damage, rather than the technical term 'attack'.
Does that include passive ongoing effects (if you cast Wall of Fire, then get turned Invisible, does someone walking into the wall break invisibility?). What about active ongoing effects that don't come directly from you (e.g. controlling a Flaming Sphere).
So if a Barbarian with Feral Instinct rolled higher in the initiative order then the creature that is Invisible, that creature is still Invisible? My understanding in 5e is that the attack occurs when initiative is rolled, which means the Invisibility should be gone and the Barbarian doesn't have disadvantage.
So if a Barbarian with Feral Instinct rolled higher in the initiative order then the creature that is Invisible, that creature is still Invisible? My understanding in 5e is that the attack occurs when initiative is rolled, which means the Invisibility should be gone and the Barbarian doesn't have disadvantage.
The attack occurs at the point someone rolls to hit. Feral Instinct doesn't actually give you any information, so you can have the situation of "You win at initiative. You are not aware of any threats or targets." (I assume it's supposed to function as a danger sense of some sort, but what it actually does is sometimes hard to resolve).
So if a Barbarian with Feral Instinct rolled higher in the initiative order then the creature that is Invisible, that creature is still Invisible? My understanding in 5e is that the attack occurs when initiative is rolled, which means the Invisibility should be gone and the Barbarian doesn't have disadvantage.
Rolling for Initiative marks the start of combat. It's not an actual in-character event, it's an out-of-character event to create the turn order for the upcoming fight. An attack doesn't happen until someone... attacks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is just a probably a question that you have all answered before, but when you end invisibility early due to you attacking, do you get advantage on that attack roll?
DM: So, you doomed the world by betting on dinosauer races instead of doing a quest.
Players: But we got money! Now we can do whatever we want.
DM: You are all dead, you can't spend your money!
Players: Oh.
I don’t think the rules are as clear as they should be here... but yes.
Thanks!
DM: So, you doomed the world by betting on dinosauer races instead of doing a quest.
Players: But we got money! Now we can do whatever we want.
DM: You are all dead, you can't spend your money!
Players: Oh.
If you are an unseen attacker, you get advantage on your attack rolls. You are an unseen attacker on the attack that ends your invisibility.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Definitely. That is half the point of using invisibility.
It is generally assumed that the answer is 'yes', but it actually depends on whether you become visible before or after you attack, and Invisibility doesn't specify the order. This is also relevant for reactions that are triggered by someone you see taking an action.
Idk if someone blinked into visibility right in front of me and then attacked, I think I'd be surprised enough to merit advantage
Just to complicate things. What if you attacked and totally missed hitting anything? Would you lose or retain invisibility?
If attacking would end your invisibility, then an unsuccessful attack would end it as surely as a successful attack would.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
The spell specifies ending on attacking, not ending on hitting.
So, it's the thought(intent) that counts then? ;p
Here's what the lead rules designer had to say on the subject:
I like the logic behind that, and considering it's a 2nd level slot and is only good for 1 attack, it's hardly game-breaking. Compare to True Strike.
Right. In previous editions the spell was even more picky about intent: the criteria for losing it was harming other creatures, but you could attack unattended objects and cause harm indirectly. For instance, you could cut the supports on a rope bridge and not lose the spell. The 5e version is a lot simpler, though you lose some of the flavor as a result.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Hm. I realize that Invisibility is not ended by offensive actions that do not use attack rolls and also are not casting spells. For example, using a Necklace of Fireballs. This is probably not intended.
I've brought this up in other threads but it most likely isn't. Older editions of D&D used "attack" in the broader sense of "anything that can cause harm". 5e narrowed the definition to "something that uses attack rolls" but didn't update the wording on the spell and related magic items. The invisibility-like features that came after the Player's Handbook close the loophole. e.g. the Fade Away racial feat ends your invisibility if you force a creature to make a saving throw. I think I've seen a different take on that in monster stat blocks where the invisibility ends if it deals damage to a creature.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Also, using the action created by Dragon's Breath, which does meet the letter of the rule, but I don't allow it in my game.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Yes. I ruled that the 'attack' that ends invisibility refers to anything that does damage, rather than the technical term 'attack'.
Does that include passive ongoing effects (if you cast Wall of Fire, then get turned Invisible, does someone walking into the wall break invisibility?). What about active ongoing effects that don't come directly from you (e.g. controlling a Flaming Sphere).
So if a Barbarian with Feral Instinct rolled higher in the initiative order then the creature that is Invisible, that creature is still Invisible? My understanding in 5e is that the attack occurs when initiative is rolled, which means the Invisibility should be gone and the Barbarian doesn't have disadvantage.
If you want sugar coating, go buy a dessert....
The attack occurs at the point someone rolls to hit. Feral Instinct doesn't actually give you any information, so you can have the situation of "You win at initiative. You are not aware of any threats or targets." (I assume it's supposed to function as a danger sense of some sort, but what it actually does is sometimes hard to resolve).
Rolling for Initiative marks the start of combat. It's not an actual in-character event, it's an out-of-character event to create the turn order for the upcoming fight. An attack doesn't happen until someone... attacks.