If my (greater) invisible assassin is shooting invisible arrows (that is, arrows that have had separate invisibility spells cast on them) at a target, do the arrows become visible upon impact?
Invisibility says the target becomes visible whenever it makes an attack, but arrows can't make attacks, only characters can. There's also the question of the arrows destruction. Do the pieces of a broken or destroyed item become visible? I suppose the assassin could use durable arrows if they do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shot would be the same as dropped in my book.
Items dropped or put down by an invisible creature become visible
There's no real rules support for handling invisible weapons. By RAW I guess they'd stay invisible until the duration ran out, because they do not in themselves make attacks. (Exception for Intelligent Magic Item that can cast attack spells.)
But there's no RAW game benefit to them being invisible - it isn't mechanically harder to dodge a blow from an invisible sword than a visible one if the guy wielding it is visible.
As far as I can tell, the arrows would stay invisible. I don't think this would have any mechanical effect in the game, but I think they stay invisible.
I don't see any rules concerning the condition of an item affecting invisibility, so I think as long as it is still and arrow (with the broken condition) your all good.
Reminds me of the PS2 game Baulders Gate. There were these large stone golems on one of the final boards that wielded invisible polearms. It might have been a graphics glitch, but I thought the idea of using an invisible weapon was pretty cool, and could get real nasty with things like a chain devils chains...
Bad guy looks down, then around. "Hmmm, must have been my imagination."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shot would be the same as dropped in my book.
Items dropped or put down by an invisible creature become visible
That only applies when the shooter is invisible. The arrow itself, has had a separate instance of invisibility cast upon it; it doesn't matter who does or does not have possession of it.
There's no real rules support for handling invisible weapons.
I'm not too concerned about that. The GM can figure out how he wants to run invisible weapons in his game. I just want to know if the arrow will become visible after being fired, after embedding itself into a creature.
Bad guy looks down, then around. "Hmmm, must have been my imagination."
lol.Fortunately, Pathfinder is not a video game like Skyrim, where that can actually happen.
Shot would be the same as dropped in my book.
Items dropped or put down by an invisible creature become visibleThat only applies when the shooter is invisible. The arrow itself, has had a separate instance of invisibility cast upon it; it doesn't matter who does or does not have possession of it.
Ah, missed that part in your initial question. Sorry, yes the arrow would stay invisible until the spell ran out.
Anything that leaves your body area becomes visible, whether dropped, shot, or thrown.If my (greater) invisible assassin is shooting invisible arrows (that is, arrows that have had separate invisibility spells cast on them) at a target, do the arrows become visible upon impact?
Invisibility says the target becomes visible whenever it makes an attack, but arrows can't make attacks, only characters can. There's also the question of the arrows destruction. Do the pieces of a broken or destroyed item become visible? I suppose the assassin could use durable arrows if they do.
As was pointed out to me, he was talking about the situation where the arrow itself had a separate invisibility effect cast upon it as an object.
Picking it up or putting it down by a creature (invisible or not) would not change the object's invisibility effect.
|
If I remember by RAW (and I probably don't) correctly, invisibility is a glamer, therefore when interacted with (aka touched aka ohgoditsintheboneITSINTHEBONEAAAAAARGH!) it stops working or offers a will save or something.
Glamers offer a will save to recognize that there is an illusion, but they do *not* become translucent/non-functioning when the save is made (that's for figments and phantasms), and invisibility doesn't have a disbelief save anyway (even if it did, that would do nothing). If you use disguise self and someone saves, they know only that you are disguised, not what you normally look like. This is sort-of the counter-balance to the requirement that glamers operate on an existing object/creature rather than making an image out of nothing.
That said, the invisible arrows may or may not turn visible depending on HOW they're invisible. If it's an active spell it may/may-not end depending on whether the DM feels that a destroyed object continues to have the magical effect work upon it (I would rule it does, and the arrow remains invisible). On the other hand, an enchanted arrow (i.e. a magic item) would cease being a magic item if destroyed and thus would lose the invisibility on a hit (50/50 on a miss).
(If anyone is wondering, assume the assassin did it in the hopes it would delay the target's allies' ability to ascertain the direction of the shot.)
The perception rules are pretty clear on how they interact with invisible opponents, so that becomes the relevant dynamic mechanically. I'd be inclined to suggesting the arrow becomes invisible as soon as it leaves touch with the owner(from reading how objects interact with invisible creatures and the spell invisibility), but whether this happens then or upon being hit doesn't matter much besides fluff.
To clarify, even casting an additional illusion upon the arrows would render them visible as soon as a creature attacked with them. As a side note greater invisibility cannot target objects.
|
(If anyone is wondering, assume the assassin did it in the hopes it would delay the target's allies' ability to ascertain the direction of the shot.)
If that was the only reason the assassin did it then I'd call it a wasted effort. I'd use the same rules for darkness in this situation
If a blinded creature is struck by an unseen foe, the blinded character pinpoints the location of the creature that struck him (until the unseen creature moves, of course). The only exception is if the unseen creature has a reach greater than 5 feet (in which case the blinded character knows the location of the unseen opponent, but has not pinpointed him) or uses a ranged attack (in which case the blinded character knows the general direction of the foe, but not his location).
Obviously it doesn't apply verbatim, but it's pretty much the exact same situation.
Nevertheless, it could make it harder to quickly identify the nature of the attack, buying the assassin time to escape, or take more shots.
Nevertheless, it could make it harder to quickly identify the nature of the attack, buying the assassin time to escape, or take more shots.
Even if the arrows are made invisible using permanency it is still a stretch that this would provide any additional benefit. Reading the condition invisibility:
If an invisible creature strikes a character, the character struck knows the location of the creature that struck him (until, of course, the invisible creature moves). The only exception is if the invisible creature has a reach greater than 5 feet. In this case, the struck character knows the general location of the creature but has not pinpointed the exact location.
Perhaps a DM could be even more vague when it comes to "general location" but if this level of detail becomes necessary it is very likely the creature getting shot with arrows can see invisible objects anyway, that or this assassin is way over spending on those arrows, although as a calling card it has some charm.