# Dealing with Greater Invisibility



## AnthonyRoberson (Apr 19, 2007)

Does anyone have any special tricks for dealing with characters that cast Greater Invisibility at every opportunity?  It does get tiresome...


----------



## hong (Apr 19, 2007)

Ban it.


----------



## Michael Silverbane (Apr 19, 2007)

1.  _See invisibility_, _invisibility purge_, etc.
2.  More encounters per day.
3.  Creatures with Scent, Blindsense, and Blindsight.
4.  _Greater invisibility_.
5.  Ambushes.
6.  Area effect attacks and spells.

Later
silver


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 19, 2007)

Challenges that have scent, tremorsense, blindsight, blindsense, the ability to cast glitterdust, etc...


----------



## James McMurray (Apr 19, 2007)

Invisibility causes cancer.


----------



## Gerion of Mercadia (Apr 19, 2007)

7. Make the guy glow based on his alignment (maybe)
8. Detect Magic (still has concealment - but see 6)
9. Remove invisible PC from battle grid if party cannot see invisible creatures (can cause friendly fire accidents)
10. AntiMagic field.
11. Dispelling
12. Summon Monster (that can do any of 1-11)

Will keep thinking.


----------



## AnthonyRoberson (Apr 19, 2007)

Thanks for all the suggestions gents!  Keep 'em coming!


----------



## StreamOfTheSky (Apr 19, 2007)

13. glitterdust / faerie fire (I see that was already mentioned...)
14. Clarity of Vision (skill trick)
15. Do him one better and go ethereal!
16. Surround the NPC(s) inside a wall spell for protection and to block line of effect.  If he tries to get in or destroy the wall, you'll likely know where from or which direction.
17. Not sure, but running around w/ a Greater globe of invulnerability till you get lucky?
18. layer the ground w/ caltrops, broken glass, or sand so you can hear/see where he is (worthless on flying PC)
19. Win initiative.  Either a) cause a _slow_ effect on him, so he can't both move and cast; or b) place a "targeting aid" on him.  Examples - Spiritual Weapon, continuous bleeding damage (like the Invisible Blade class feature, among other sources).
20. Use that new 5th level cone spell from Complete Mage that bars a school or subschool from working in its effect area.
21. run away and come back (it's only 1 round/level duration!)

Edit: The spell is actually an emanation from the caster and 4th level.  It's called Otiluke's Suppressing Field


----------



## BlueBlackRed (Apr 19, 2007)

Use it against them, all of the time.
Then take their ideas on how to fight it and use that against them.


----------



## Victim (Apr 19, 2007)

NPCs might want a potion to handle it, just as PCs often prepare.


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 19, 2007)

A bucket of paint?


----------



## hong (Apr 19, 2007)

Ban it!


----------



## Gerion of Mercadia (Apr 19, 2007)

> A bucket of paint?




If it glows or gives off light - yep.  Also might make it leave tracks....


22. Flood room waist high with fog spell.


----------



## Egres (Apr 19, 2007)

A 20 DC listen check is enough to pinpoint a caster in the midst of battle, if he's not very far away.


----------



## hong (Apr 19, 2007)

Ban eeet!!!1


----------



## billd91 (Apr 19, 2007)

Characters that use the same tactics all the time will build up a reputation for it. Any one actually gunning for them who can be expected to do a little research and planning can be expected to have a reasonable counter to it (including many of the ones mentioned in this thread).
So, for sophisticated enemies, feel free to plan on countering the PCs tactics. It's fair if they're reasonably well known around town.


----------



## Ltheb Silverfrond (Apr 19, 2007)

Invisibility on a large battle mat, where 5' accuracy matters, is a nightmare.

I think the easiest way to make Greater Invis. less ridiculous is to limit players to in character information. Someone already suggested removing the invisible offender from the battle mat. Go one step further: Make them tell you in secret where they going/what they are doing. If they inform the other players where they are, equate that to them drawing attention to them selves, and allow the enemy to pinpoint them as well. (unless they use some special means to keep such information secret) When the fighter tramples them during a well-planned charge, or the wizard barbecues them with a fireball, they might start thinking about limiting their use of the spell.


----------



## Dinkeldog (Apr 19, 2007)

Please don't post the same comment three times.  We read it the first two times.  Really.  I promise.


----------



## Ogrork the Mighty (Apr 19, 2007)

I like that the duration is only 1 round per level but I would like it more if the target briefly "shimmered" when attacking, moving, or spellcasting so there would be a better chance of detection.

One of the big problems (IMO) with D&D now is that what might not be broken when used on occasion can be quite broken when used all the time (i.e., when it is regularly used by PCs). At least with monsters/NPCs the ability/power doesn't come into play except on occasion, but with PCs it comes into play almost all the time.


----------



## javcs (Apr 20, 2007)

Summon Swarm (of bats, so blindsense); then, once it starts doing it's feeding on somebody (aka screams or grunts of pain are heard), drop area control (so the invisible guy can't get out) and/or area blasting.


----------



## shilsen (Apr 20, 2007)

Ogrork the Mighty said:
			
		

> I like that the duration is only 1 round per level but I would like it more if the target briefly "shimmered" when attacking, moving, or spellcasting so there would be a better chance of detection.




Detection is actually a lot easier when the target attacks. If you're attacked in melee by an invisible attacker, you automatically pinpoint its location (until it moves). If it casts a spell with a verbal component, you only need a DC 20 Listen check (increased by distance) to pinpoint its location.


----------



## frankthedm (Apr 20, 2007)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Detection is actually a lot easier when the target attacks. If you're attacked in melee by an invisible attacker, you automatically pinpoint its location (until it moves). If it casts a spell with a verbal component, you only need a DC 20 Listen check (increased by distance) to pinpoint its location.



 People talking is DC0, and _"To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice."_ People usually don't talk in a Strong voice unless presenting speach so DC-5 sounds better IMHO {thus DC 15 to pinpoint]


----------



## frankthedm (Apr 20, 2007)

shilsen said:
			
		

> Detection is actually a lot easier when the target attacks. If you're attacked in melee by an invisible attacker, you automatically pinpoint its location (until it moves). If it casts a spell with a verbal component, you only need a DC 20 Listen check (increased by distance) to pinpoint its location.



 People talking is DC0, and _"To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice."_ People usually don't talk in a Strong voice unless speaking to a large crowd. so DC-5 sounds better IMHO {thus DC 15 to pinpoint].


----------



## shilsen (Apr 20, 2007)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> People talking is DC0, and _"To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice."_ People usually don't talk in a Strong voice unless speaking to a large crowd. so DC-5 sounds better IMHO {thus DC 15 to pinpoint].



 Keep your voice down. I heard you the first time 

And that's a reasonable interpretation.


----------



## Khelvan (Apr 20, 2007)

Wands of see Invisibility + UMD or  a friendly caster.
My Party never went without one or two of these, why shouldnt your Monster do the same?
Cheap and good way to keep Invisibility in Line.


----------



## Raspen (Apr 20, 2007)

i played an epic warloc that could do what you are saying is a problum its funny but what stoped me from useing it was EGO... no one ever seen me do that realy cool thing no one ever knew i was in that realy exciting battle no one ever carred about my guy i was a ghost that helped out. and that upset me enought to pick a diffrent invocation.


----------



## SlagMortar (Apr 20, 2007)

> I think the easiest way to make Greater Invis. less ridiculous is to limit players to in character information. Someone already suggested removing the invisible offender from the battle mat. Go one step further: Make them tell you in secret where they going/what they are doing. If they inform the other players where they are, equate that to them drawing attention to them selves, and allow the enemy to pinpoint them as well. (unless they use some special means to keep such information secret) When the fighter tramples them during a well-planned charge, or the wizard barbecues them with a fireball, they might start thinking about limiting their use of the spell.



That's a good reason for the wizard to constantly cast the 0th level message spell or the psionic power mindlink - the tactical radios of D&D.

23.  Have a very high spot check.  Invisibility gives a +20 bonus to hide checks.  Wizard likely has about +4 for hide.  If he moves more than half speed he gets a -5 penalty.   For example, Vrocks (CR 9) have a +24 spot.
24.  Creatures without scent can train dogs, wolves, or other creatures with scent.


----------



## Nail (Apr 20, 2007)

Much will depend on how the DMN runs invisibility (or "greater").  If you don't allow the enemies to know where the Invisible creature is (via reactive -i.e free action - Listen and Spot checks), invisibility is over-powered.

Could you give us an example of its "over use" in your game?


----------



## pawsplay (Apr 22, 2007)

Glitterdust
Fireball
Evard's Black Tentacles
Wall of Fire
Fire Shield
Readying an action


----------



## Athla (Feb 28, 2018)

*Why is invisibility on a battlemap a nightmare? Isn't it really NBD?*



Ltheb Silverfrond said:


> Invisibility on a large battle mat, where 5' accuracy matters, is a nightmare.
> 
> I think the easiest way to make Greater Invis. less ridiculous is to limit players to in character information. Someone already suggested removing the invisible offender from the battle mat. Go one step further: Make them tell you in secret where they going/what they are doing. If they inform the other players where they are, equate that to them drawing attention to them selves, and allow the enemy to pinpoint them as well. (unless they use some special means to keep such information secret) When the fighter tramples them during a well-planned charge, or the wizard barbecues them with a fireball, they might start thinking about limiting their use of the spell.




How is invisibility on a Battlemat a nightmare if they aren't using Stealth every round?

Per the answer below - doesn't everyone know where on the battlemap the invisible character always is *unless* they use Hide/Stealth to be silent? 
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/95147/how-does-invisibility-work-in-combat/95150


----------



## Greenfield (Feb 28, 2018)

I had a player who we occasionally called Jeckyl, since every action his character declared was followed with "and hide".  He had a very questionable Hide check in the +35 range at level 11.  Don't ask me how.

Stealth like that is in many ways worse than Invisibility, since Invisibility can be detected by a number of magical means.

Many of the suggestions made in this discussion presume that the opponents know of the player character's style in advance.  That is, the monsters enjoy some form of the mystical and legendary "Telepathy With DM".  A truly fearsome power, to be sure.

To help manage things, use a handful of coins.  Each one represents a place where the character might be.  Only you and the player know whether he/she is the penny, the nickel, the dime, the quarter etc.  Rather than the player moving his/her mini, they tell you via a note where they're moving. You move the coins.  All of them.  That way the others don't know which one is their ally.

If the player points to where the character is going so others can see, the Invisibility fails immediately.  They blew their cover.

Now consider the bad-guy tactics.  Many a group I know of has a simple policy:  Start a battle with an area Dispel or Greater Dispel.  It's not targeting the specific PC, it's a general shot at de-buffing the party.  and Invisibility is definitely a buff.

Targeting the PC, or having the entire world specially prepped for that tactic is kind of cheap and cheesy.  It's you saying that the character isn't allowed to use a class ability that they worked for and earned.

On the other hand, running a world where people know that Invisibility can happen?  That's being a good DM.  So the invisible Rogue might be able to pilfer from local stores, but when facing an enemy in the field they should be prepared for people who can See Invisible and/or throw Glitterdust.

Related issues:  It was pointed out that Greater Creation can turn a single gold piece into several cubic feet of gold coins.  Gold, by the way, weighs a shade over a half ton per cubic foot, or in game terms about 60,000 gp per caster level.  (50 per pound times 1206 pounds per cubic foot).  

To prevent people from taking advantage of this major abuse, we made a house rule:  Faerie Gold (as we came to call it) wasn't unheard of.  That is, the PCs aren't the first people in the world to think of it.  The house rule was that it was effectively dispelled by contact with cold iron.  So many shop keepers, and anyone who dealt with high end items, had a small plate of cold iron bolted or embedded in their counter.  All coins were drawn across it as they were counted, so Faerie Gold would be revealed and the counterfeiters caught.

This wasn't the DM picking on a particular character, it was just the NPCs of the world adjusting to the fact that they live in a world where there's magic, and this kind of thing is possible.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Feb 28, 2018)

AnthonyRoberson said:


> Does anyone have any special tricks for dealing with characters that cast Greater Invisibility at every opportunity?  It does get tiresome...



It's really not a big deal. They're spending a high-level spell slot, and an entire standard action, to... not actually accomplish very much.

Invisibility is great for solo monsters, because of the 50% miss chance. It's situationally useful if you put it on the rogue, since they get to sneak attack without worrying about a flanking buddy. Aside from that, it just means the enemy will choose a different target, which it will then proceed to attack without any penalty whatsoever. One character being invisible does not significantly reduce the damage that the party takes every round.


----------



## Greenfield (Feb 28, 2018)

Saelorn said:


> It's really not a big deal. They're spending a high-level spell slot, and an entire standard action, to... not actually accomplish very much.
> 
> Invisibility is great for solo monsters, because of the 50% miss chance. It's situationally useful if you put it on the rogue, since they get to sneak attack without worrying about a flanking buddy. Aside from that, it just means the enemy will choose a different target, which it will then proceed to attack without any penalty whatsoever. One character being invisible does not significantly reduce the damage that the party takes every round.




Tempted to quote Luke Skywalker about "Everything you just said...". 

Invisibility gives a lot more than a 50% miss chance.  Unless the monster have "Telepathy with DM", they actually have no chance of hitting an invisible opponent at all, unless said opponent is immobile or an idiot.

To have any chance of hitting the opponent has to know where to aim, as in, which square is the foe in.  Even in close melee a Greater Invisible opponent can take a full round attack, then step five feet, and his foe has to guess at which square to target.  If the target is a Medium creature the Invisible person has eight squares they could be in (counting the options of staying in the same place or stepping back one way or the other).

If the Improved Invisible attacker is an archer they get nine squares they can land in.
If it's a caster who's flying, they can be in any of 27 squares.  

Casters in general can be anywhere within movement rate, since they can take a full move after casting.  They're all but invulnerable.

And if the monster is able to guess which square they're in?  Now they get a 50% miss chance. 

Meanwhile the opponent is denied Dex to AC and is pretty much a sitting duck.

If the opponent can make the right Listen/Perception roll (and beat the attacker's Move Silent/Stealth check), they may be able to identify their square.  May.

If there's a general melee going on, the sound of that battle and the distractions of trying to keep track of everyone make that Listen/Perception all but impossible.  Remember that those rolls are made at a -5 penalty if the listener is distracted.

Now if the monster can see the marker you place on the battlemat for the invisible character, that's a whole new ball game.  That's "Telepathy with DM", and it's unstoppable.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Feb 28, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> Invisibility gives a lot more than a 50% miss chance.



All of the stuff I didn't bother to quote is redundant, because your first sentence essentially boils down to "not worth the effort of attacking".

Let's say the wizard casts Greater Invisibility on the archer, so the archer is now flying and invisible up in one corner of the room. Great. As a monster, I will now ignore that archer, and thrown all of my attacks against... the cleric, or the wizard, or anyone _other_ than the archer. 

Honestly, I probably wasn't going to attack the archer anyway. It was like a 25% chance. As long as there are visible targets which are still up, the fact that I now have three target options instead of four is not that big of a deal. If I kill all of the other PCs, or if the only visible target is the tank, then that starts to matter... but it's highly unlikely that it will ever get to that point.

The only really relevant bit is that I lose my Dex bonus to AC against that one target, which can be a big deal _if_ they're a rogue. If not, then +2 to the attack roll is comparable to Cat's Grace, which is hardly worth a level 4 spell slot _and_ the wizard's standard action.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 1, 2018)

Okay, I can see your point.

Suppose my Wiz casts the GI on the big great-weapon fighter?

If the monster's AC drops without their DEX then that's an invitation for the fighter to Power attack.

The normal weakness of the two-handed weapon is that it denies the fighter a shield.  They dish out a lot of damage but they take a lot of damage.  It's a trade off.

If he isn't taking damage though then you can expect him to deal 50+ points of damage a round by 11th level, and saty in there doing exactly that until the target is a lump of bloody hamburger.

Or maybe the caster throws it on himself and then peppers with Scorching Ray.  At level 11 that's 12 dice, no Save, or 42 points per round.  A couple rounds of that can ruin your whole day.

The Rogue would get two attacks dealing a D6 + Str + magic for a short sword, plus six D6 sneak (21 points on average) for a total of 26 or so per hit.  Figure 1.5 hits that's 39 points per round.

The archer?  Presume Point Blank Shot and a magic bow?  Maybe a Mighty for a few points more?  He's doing a D8 +5 or so per hit.  Lowest DPS in the party, when you come right down to it.

Since the Wiz (in theory) has an Intelligence score, and shouldn't be afraid to use it, why would he/she give this buff sell to the Archer?  Archer is already safest, in that he/she can stay outside of melee range, and any charge or ranged attack the foe tries will draw AoO rom all the close in damage machines.  

Sorry, that's sort of nit-picking.  The point is that if the monster is going to actually win/survive this fight it can't afford to just write off any attacker. It needs to beat them all, or drive them off.


----------



## smetzger (Mar 1, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> Invisibility gives a lot more than a 50% miss chance.  Unless the monster have "Telepathy with DM", they actually have no chance of hitting an invisible opponent at all, unless said opponent is immobile or an idiot.




That's just plain not true. 

It is only a DC 20 Spot check to pinpoint them


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Mar 1, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> If the monster's AC drops without their DEX then that's an invitation for the fighter to Power attack.



In my experience, I've never seen a monster worth fearing that actually got more than +4 from its Dex. Most big scary monsters just have +30 natural armor, or whatever. Creatures with high Dex tend to be small and annoying, although exceptions may certainly exist. YMMV on that.



Greenfield said:


> The normal weakness of the two-handed weapon is that it denies the fighter a shield.  They dish out a lot of damage but they take a lot of damage.  It's a trade off.



It really depends on what level you're playing at. When you get above level 10 or so, an optimized shield-using fighter is a non-entity on the battlefield; they simply _aren't_ going to be dealing any meaningful damage, so there's no real point in attacking them. An optimized power attacker is a glass cannon, sure, but not significantly more-so than a sorcerer or rogue.

As a monster, you're taking massive damage from everyone except the tank and (possibly) the healer. Choosing to attack the sorcerer instead of the barbarian is not going to change your fate significantly.



Greenfield said:


> Or maybe the caster throws it on himself and then peppers with Scorching Ray.  At level 11 that's 12 dice, no Save, or 42 points per round.  A couple rounds of that can ruin your whole day.



Again, that's great if you're a lone spellcaster and you need to hold off an entire enemy party by yourself. Unless you would otherwise be the target, though, you've sacrificed between 25% and 50% of the standard actions you will have in this entire combat in order to increase the accuracy of your touch attacks. Generally speaking, you'll be more effective if you spend that first round casting _fireball_ instead of _greater invisibility_.



Greenfield said:


> Sorry, that's sort of nit-picking.  The point is that if the monster is going to actually win/survive this fight it can't afford to just write off any attacker. It needs to beat them all, or drive them off.



If a monster is actually going to _win_ against a high-level party, then that monster probably has some way of defeating invisibility already. Big scary monsters and campaign-ending Big Bads tend to have _true seeing_. Mid-level boss monsters have tremorsense.

In all my years of playing high-level Pathfinder games, I have never seen a _difficult_ encounter become trivialized due to invisibility. What I have seen is always-invisible characters getting squashed because they're used to going unnoticed, and then a powerful enemy sees them and immediately murders them because they were relying on invisibility for their defense.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 1, 2018)

smetzger said:


> That's just plain not true.
> 
> It is only a DC 20 Spot check to pinpoint them




That's just plain not true (to quote somebody or other).

The DC 20 check is to notice that there's an Invisible being somewhere in the area.  It doesn't pinpoint anything.



			
				Player's Handbook Page 83 said:
			
		

> A Spot check result higher than 20 generally lets you become
> aware of an invisible creature near you, though you can’t actually see it.




You want to "Pinpoint" them?  You need a roll of 40+ if they're stationary.



			
				Player's Handbook page 76 said:
			
		

> Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Hide checks.  if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Hide checks if you’re moving.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 1, 2018)

Saelorn said:


> In my experience, I've never seen a monster worth fearing that actually got more than +4 from its Dex. Most big scary monsters just have +30 natural armor, or whatever. Creatures with high Dex tend to be small and annoying, although exceptions may certainly exist. YMMV on that.



My example premised a monster with a +2 Dex to AC.



> As a monster, you're taking massive damage from everyone except the tank and (possibly) the healer. Choosing to attack the sorcerer instead of the barbarian is not going to change your fate significantly.



In my "Let's run the number" section it became pretty clear that the fighter will do the most damage, with the rogue doing the least.  A Cleric can become as good a fighter as the Fighter, with the right spells.



> Again, that's great if you're a lone spellcaster and you need to hold off an entire enemy party by yourself. Unless you would otherwise be the target, though, you've sacrificed between 25% and 50% of the standard actions you will have in this entire combat in order to increase the accuracy of your touch attacks. Generally speaking, you'll be more effective if you spend that first round casting _fireball_ instead of _greater invisibility_.



It isn't about increasing the accuracy of the touch attacks.  It's about a very squishy caster finishing the battle without being squished.  

Think about it:  Big monster is being hit from all sides, and all of it hurts.  Beating on the fighter just makes him mad.  Beating on the Wiz/Sorc makes him run and hide, or fall down and die.  Fastest way to cut the DPS you're taking is to drop the spell caster.

And Fireball is a great spell, if you're facing a lot of opponents.  At 10th level and up it does 10D6, which averages to 35 points of damage, with a reflex Save for half.  Against a single big-bad, Scorching Ray is more effective.  8 dice, no save at 10th level and 12 dice no save at 11th.  Plus it's a lower level spell, one you're more likely to be able to prepare a bunch of.

If you're worried about Fire Resistance, switch to one of the Orb spells.  Same level, different elements, same bang for the buck.


> If a monster is actually going to _win_ against a high-level party, then that monster probably has some way of defeating invisibility already. Big scary monsters and campaign-ending Big Bads tend to have _true seeing_. Mid-level boss monsters have tremorsense.



The number of monsters with True Seeing is very very small, unless you're looking in a different set of MM books than I am.  And Tremorsense isn't all that common either.  Blindfighting, on the other hand, gives the monster two tries at that 50/50 hit thing.  Again, better bang for the buck.



> In all my years of playing high-level Pathfinder games, I have never seen a _difficult_ encounter become trivialized due to invisibility. What I have seen is always-invisible characters getting squashed because they're used to going unnoticed, and then a powerful enemy sees them and immediately murders them because they were relying on invisibility for their defense.




It doesn't trivialize the encounter, it just tips things substantially in the favor of the party in general, and the GI character in specific.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Mar 1, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> My example premised a monster with a +2 Dex to AC.



In which case the wizard is spending an entire standard action and a level 4 spell slot to grant +2 to hit; i.e. it's not overpowered at all, and it's not even a particularly notable factor when evaluating the effect of the spell.


Greenfield said:


> Think about it:  Big monster is being hit from all sides, and all of it hurts.  Beating on the fighter just makes him mad.  Beating on the Wiz/Sorc makes him run and hide, or fall down and die.  Fastest way to cut the DPS you're taking is to drop the spell caster.



There might be situations where killing the wizard first would absolutely be the highest priority, and where invisibility is the only thing stopping you. Maybe. But like you said, the fighter is the one doing the most damage, and investing slightly more time to kill the more effective combatant is not an _obviously_ bad decision.

The only thing that greater invisibility does, in most cases, is sacrifice the wizard's first turn of combat in order to make the monster switch from attacking its highest-priority target to attacking its second-highest-priority target. It only _matters_ in the rare situation where the disparity in efficacy between two PCs is _greater than_ the efficacy of the wizard's entire action. Whenever that's _not_ the case, the wizard could be more effective by doing something else.


Greenfield said:


> The number of monsters with True Seeing is very very small, unless you're looking in a different set of MM books than I am.  And Tremorsense isn't all that common either.  Blindfighting, on the other hand, gives the monster two tries at that 50/50 hit thing.  Again, better bang for the buck.



Blindfighting only works after you've pinpointed them, and pinpointing them is usually the hard part, unless you're a dragon or otherwise have blindsense. Dragons would do well to invest in the blindfighting feat. 

I can only speak from experience, since I've played more high-level Pathfinder than I've run, but every single boss of every single (high-level) adventure module I've ever played in has had some way to negate invisibility outright. Demons and spellcasters have true seeing. Giant worms and scorpions have tremorsense. Weird one-off monsters have some obscure template tacked on that gives them blindsight or whatever. Just in general, invisibility tends to be super unreliable whenever you _need_ it.

Most monsters can't deal with invisibility, sure, but most monsters are chumps and you don't actually need invisibility to beat them. In case where it would be incredibly helpful - against boss monsters - it's unreliable.  That's why it doesn't usually matter if someone opens every fight with greater invisibility: They either didn't need it, because the outcome of the fight was a foregone conclusion; or it would be super useful, and therefore doesn't work. YMMV.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 1, 2018)

So, on the original topic, are you saying that a character who is in love with Greater Invisibility isn't an issue to worry about?

That does seem to be where you're going.  Boss monsters should all be given True Sight, Tremorsense or something similar, and all monsters plan their field tactics around the idea that they're going to die anyway, so what difference does it make if you can take out a medium-to-large damage dealer?

I'm sorry if that comes out as if I'm mocking you, but that does seem to be what your argument boils down to.

When I DM my goal is to challenge the party.  All of the party.  If a PC has some favorite trick that lets him/her glide through without a challenge then I (as DM) am doing something wrong.

I like to recognize that these characters aren't the first ones to ever try these tricks.  I'm not expecting the typical Orc troop to have someone with See Invisible ready to hand to shut this guy down, but if nothing else they may know enough to retreat, to move the battle so their unseen attacker has to move as well.  When he does the Hide bonus from Invisibility drops from +40 to +20.  Still not great, but at least it's possible to spot him.  Particularly if he gets overconfident and neglects to put any effort into Stealth.  Then it's a flat 20 for the Spot/Perception target number.

There's also the option of detect Magic.  I don't typically allow that to bypass Invisibility (it normally tells them that there's magic in the area the first round, how many magic auras in the 2nd round, and their locations the 3rd round).  Instead of giving fixed locations on round 3, I have the image stay fuzzy.  Caster gets an approximate location, but not down to the square.

But even with my house rule, does the Invisible PC have any other magic with them?  If so then that can be located exactly.

Plus side:  I use a Cantrip or 1st level spell to counter a 4th level spell.  Down side, I burn three rounds to do it.  Sort of a fair balance.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Mar 2, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> So, on the original topic, are you saying that a character who is in love with Greater Invisibility isn't an issue to worry about?



Yes.


Greenfield said:


> That does seem to be where you're going.  Boss monsters should all be given True Sight, Tremorsense or something similar, and all monsters plan their field tactics around the idea that they're going to die anyway, so what difference does it make if you can take out a medium-to-large damage dealer?



It's less that boss monsters should be given these abilities, and more that a creature _lacking_ such abilities would never rise to the level of boss. If all it took to kill a scary monster was one PC with a fourth level spell, then that scary monster wasn't actually very scary in the first place.

What you want to do with less powerful monsters is another question. If they're just meaningless chumps, then maybe the only reason they're still around is that nobody has gotten around to killing them yet. There are an awful lot of hydras out there in that swamp, and fighting all of them is a waste of time, which is why there are so many of them (or whatever). There's no particular reason to believe that they _should_ have developed a specific counter against this one mediocre spell. If these are all orcs who are working for the Big Bad, _and_ the Big Bad has some reason to expect that invisibility is a thing they need to be prepared for, then maybe they've been given specific training or a spell scroll or something.


Greenfield said:


> When I DM my goal is to challenge the party.  All of the party.  If a PC has some favorite trick that lets him/her glide through without a challenge then I (as DM) am doing something wrong.



If you're going to meta-game and contrive excuses to foil the PCs specifically, then there's no point in even playing the game. There's no point in making a character if the GM goes out of their way to target your one gimmick. You might as well drop rocks that reduce them down to 1hp, or whatever level of "challenge" you want to provide. 

Your job as the GM is to build the world, and play all of the NPCs. If an NPC has a trick to foil invisibility, then great. Powerful NPCs probably will. Most probably won't, though, simply because high-level magic-users who can cast greater invisibility are supposed to be rare. If a high-level magic-using PC wants to devote a significant chunk of their resources toward casting one particular spell that they find useful, then contriving reasons for it to suddenly _not work_ is just adversarial GMing.


----------



## Dandu (Mar 2, 2018)

Not exactly unreasonable for foes to prepare for invisibility in a world where invisibility exists, and has existed for thousands of years.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Mar 2, 2018)

Dandu said:


> Not exactly unreasonable for foes to prepare for invisibility in a world where invisibility exists, and has existed for thousands of years.



The same could be said for dragons, but if you spend too much time preparing for anything that _might_ show up, you'll never get anything done.


----------



## Dandu (Mar 2, 2018)

Fortunately, Glitterdust is a powerful, versatile second level spell, and if all else fails, I hear flour is a pretty popular item these days for anyone with a millstone or access to trading networks.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 2, 2018)

Saelorn said:


> Yes.



That was all that needed to be said.  You could have left out pretty much everything you've written in this entire thread if you'd just said to the OP "Your problem isn't a problem.  Walk it off."

Sorry, I'm having a really bad day at work.  if I post any more on this today I'll say something that will get me banned.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Mar 2, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> That was all that needed to be said.  You could have left out pretty much everything you've written in this entire thread if you'd just said to the OP "Your problem isn't a problem.  Walk it off."



The OP never said that it was a problem. Just that it's "tiresome." They asked for advice on how to handle it.

My advice _is_ to not worry about it, because the _actual_ problem at hand is a matter of perception. You don't _have_ a problem. You _think_ you have a problem, and _that_ is the problem. (Many Pathfinder DMs have the same issue when one character gets a very high AC, and they expect it to cause problems, but it never does.)

Unless the OP actually does have some problem with this spell ruining their game somehow, in which case the standard reminders about Glitterdust and Tremorsense should be sufficient.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 2, 2018)

Translation:  Your problem isn't a problem.  Walk it off.

Heard it before.  I'm sure it's as helpful this time as it was then.


----------



## The Crimson Binome (Mar 2, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> Translation:  Your problem isn't a problem.  Walk it off.



Nowhere did the OP state, or even suggest, that there was any problem associated with this spell other than that they thought it was kind of tiresome. 

Translation: There _isn't_ a problem. That being the case, any over-reaction on your part is likely to cause more harm than good.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 3, 2018)

In other words, it's not a problem, walk it off.

Got it.


----------



## smetzger (Mar 5, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> That's just plain not true (to quote somebody or other).
> 
> The DC 20 check is to notice that there's an Invisible being somewhere in the area.  It doesn't pinpoint anything.
> 
> ...




I stand corrected.  I had assumed that +20 DC for pinpointing was against there hide check, but re-reading it does seam more likely to refer to be additive to the initial DC 20 to notice them within 30 ft. 

So assuming the invisible creature is moving, not hiding and not moving silently, and there is a battle going on.  What is the Spot DC to pinpoint them?  What about the Listen DC?

Spot DC 20(notice) + 20 (pinpoint) + hide check + 1 for every 10ft beyond 30 ft (initial DC 20 is for within 30 ft).  So if they aren't Hiding that's a 0, correct?   So we get 40

What about listen?
Listen DC  0  but with a -5 circumstance penalty for combat  and +1 per 10ft distance
   So effectively DC 5 + 1/10 ft???

What about flying?   What is the Listen DC for a magically flying creature that is not moving silently?


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 5, 2018)

Typically I presume that everyone is "Taking ten" on things like Hide/Move Silent.  That is, unless they're trying to make noise or be otherwise obvious about it they'll put a causal effort into it.

So noticing little things like the shuffle of footsteps where there shouldn't be any, the little differences in the way the air moves dust around an unseen object etc.?  That's the basic DC 20 to know that there's something invisible within 30 feet, but not necessarily *where* within that 30 feet.

Know which square they're in, when moving?  Figure 30-ish unless they're attempting stealth.

Know which square they're in when standing still?  Back to 40 + stealth (where I presume a take 10 on the stealth at a minimum).  

Track them by sound?  I don't know the numbers off hand, but they're in the book.

Now the "Take 10" hing is my own standard, a house rule.  By the same toke, everyone is presumed to be "Taking 10" on their Spot/Listen/Perception rolls as well.

Your mileage may vary, of course. 

Ultimately, unless someone has a +15 or better in their Spot, they won't just casually notice the invisible person stalking them.  They have to look and listen, and have to tell the DM so.  If they don't then there's a -5 modifier that applies for "Distracted" Spot and/or Listen checks, so their casual Take 10 becomes a 5.  +15 or over will notice.  Otherwise, no.


----------



## smetzger (Mar 5, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> Typically I presume that everyone is "Taking ten" on things like Hide/Move Silent.  That is, unless they're trying to make noise or be otherwise obvious about it they'll put a causal effort into it.




Yeah, that's def a house rule.  Thing is moving silently you can only move 1/2 your speed.  

Is my RAW above correct..  Spot Pinpoint DC 40 + 1 for every 10 ft beyond 30 ft?

What about the listen check?  and listen for magical flight?


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 5, 2018)

As for the Spot, don't forget the possibility of cover, and if they are trying to hide you count that as well.  Otherwise, as far as I can tell you're good on the Spot.

I'd have to look in the book for the Listen rules to pinpoint a location.

And as far as I know, magical flight, such as a Fly spell, doesn't inherently make any noise.  No footsteps, no body movements required so even armor clank would be minimal.  You'd be down to listening for the sound of them breathing, which would be absolutely lost during a battle.

So unless they're drawing a weapon or doing some other significant body movement (drawing an arrow, drawing back on a bow, reaching into their pack etc.), I'd treat that as if they were stationary.

Again, that's an opinion, a house rule if you will.  I don't know what the RAW would be, if there is any.
..... 
Took a moment to check the PHB.  It lists the Listen check to hear an Owl gliding in for the kill at DC 30.  So I'd start with that and add Armor Check penalties and maybe add Dex bonus.  Dexterous people just move less clumsily, after all.  Actual Move Silent skill ranks I'd omit unless the invisible person is explicitly trying to remain Silent.

It also mentions that an Invisible attacker gains an automatic +2 to their attack rolls, on top of the enemy being denied their Dexterity bonus.


----------



## smetzger (Mar 7, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> And as far as I know, magical flight, such as a Fly spell, doesn't inherently make any noise.  No footsteps, no body movements required so even armor clank would be minimal.  You'd be down to listening for the sound of them breathing, which would be absolutely lost during a battle.
> 
> ....Took a moment to check the PHB.  It lists the Listen check to hear an Owl gliding in for the kill at DC 30.




Yeah that diving owl is closest, but Owls are pretty darn small compared to a medium sized creature.

I think I am going to house rule Fly is more wuxia, so there is a fluttering/flapping of clothes (when moving) and its a DC 10+ 1/every 10ft to pinpoint.  Still difficult, but much more doable for a mid-level character.

Yet more issues that I do not believe are covered in RAW...
1) Finding general location of an invisible creature enough to target with an area spell (such as glitterdust which is 10' rad).

2) Dispel Magic - Targeted on the Invisibility Spell.  So, do I need to know where the invisible creature is?  I am not targeting the creature, just the spell.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 7, 2018)

Generally DC 10 skill checks are considered easy.  DC 15 is a common standard for common tasks that aren't in the "casual" range.

I'd probably set the Listen DC at 20 + distance.

Also remember that, per RAW, there's a -10 on the check if there's a battle going on.

And, from the SRD:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> A creature can use hearing to find an invisible creature. A character can make a Listen check for this purpose as a free action each round. A Listen check result at least equal to the invisible creature’s Move Silently check result reveals its presence. (A creature with no ranks in Move Silently makes a Move Silently check as a Dexterity check to which an armor check penalty applies.) A successful check lets a character hear an invisible creature “over there somewhere.” It’s practically impossible to pinpoint the location of an invisible creature. A Listen check that beats the DC by 20 pinpoints the invisible creature’s location.




From the Players Handbook:


			
				PHB Page 309 said:
			
		

> invisible: Visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents’ Dexterity bonus to AC (if any). (Invisibility has no effect against blinded or otherwise nonsighted creatures.) An invisible creature’s location cannot be pinpointed by visual means. It has total concealment; even if an attacker correctly guesses the invisible creature’s location, the attacker has a 50% miss chance in combat.
> An invisible creature gains a +40 bonus on Hide checks if immobile, or a +20 bonus on Hide checks if moving. Locating the square an invisible creature occupies requires a Spot check (DC 40 if the creature is immobile, DC 20 if the creature moved during its last turn), modified by appropriate factors (such as an armor check penalty or a penalty for movement).




There's also quite an extensive section in the DMG, Page 295.  The SRD excerpt I pulled above seems to come from there.


----------



## smetzger (Mar 7, 2018)

SRD said:
			
		

> A creature can use hearing to find an invisible creature. A character can make a Listen check for this purpose as a free action each round. A Listen check result at least equal to the invisible creature’s Move Silently check result reveals its presence. (A creature with no ranks in Move Silently makes a Move Silently check as a Dexterity check to which an armor check penalty applies.) A successful check lets a character hear an invisible creature “over there somewhere.” It’s practically impossible to pinpoint the location of an invisible creature. A Listen check that beats the DC by 20 pinpoints the invisible creature’s location..




Ah... Epic rules...forgot to check there...

So, to pinpoint an invisible creature with Listen...
Move Silently + 20 + 10(if in battle) + 1 per 10ft
If not moving silently then that is a 0.
If flying, well up to DMs purvue on what to add.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 8, 2018)

smetzger said:


> Ah... Epic rules...forgot to check there...



Nothing Epic about it.  Those sources are the Player's Handbook and Dungeon Master's Guide.



smetzger said:


> So, to pinpoint an invisible creature with Listen...
> Move Silently + 20 + 10(if in battle) + 1 per 10ft
> If not moving silently then that is a 0.
> If flying, well up to DMs purvue on what to add.




Almost.

Start with a base Listen DC that's their Move Silent.  If they're talking or fighting, that's a zero.  If they're moving at full speed, drop the DC by 4, but never below zero.  If you make that DC you know you heard something "somewhere over there".  That is, a general direction with a guesstimate on distance, nothing more.

Now add modifiers. 
If there's a lot of background noise, like a noisy bar or a battle, add 10 to the DC.
If they're some distance away, add 1 to the DC per 10 feet.
If they're behind an obstacle like a door add 5 to the DC
If they're behind a more formidable obstacle, like a stone wall the DC goes up by 15

To pinpoint their exact square, add 20 to the DC.


----------



## PurpleDragonKnight (Mar 8, 2018)

set your dog on him: scent


----------



## Dandu (Mar 8, 2018)

Greenfield said:


> In other words, it's not a problem, walk it off.
> 
> Got it.





Greenfield, from accounts of your gaming that you have shared, I am under the impression that you are at least 40 years of age. Is this correct?


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 8, 2018)

Yeah.  I'm in my 60s.

And, as noted last Friday, I was having a really bad day at work.  I said I wanted to drop it for the day because of that, but...


----------



## Dandu (Mar 9, 2018)

No one stopped you but you.


----------



## Greenfield (Mar 10, 2018)

Clearly though, I didn't stop.  Should have, but didn't.


----------

