| Warder1 |
As the GM, I am not enjoying running combats with invisible creatures. My players are also not enjoying it. Am I doing something wrong? Or is there other advice to make the combats more enjoyable to both run and/or experience as a player?
Note: Seeing invisibility might be ok, but more on that later, as my party doesn't have anything to do that.
Sample combat:
The group of players is a fighter, a monk, a cleric, and an investigator.
They are up against a will-o'-wisp, who starts invisible.
Round 1
Will-o'-wisp start by making a melee attack to shock (Action 1). Then uses the "Go Dark" ability to become invisible (Action 2). Then moves to a different location (next to player 4). (Action 3)
So enemy became visible -> hidden -> invisible.
Player 1 uses seek with action 1. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 1 uses seek again with the second action. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 1 picks a random square to swing at, and misses.
(Why seek a third time if you can't point out and it will become invisible again?)
Player 2 uses seek with action 1. They do beat the required DC with the perception roll.
*Note: The enemy is now hidden to you, rather than undetected.
Player 2 "points out" the location to everyone else.
Player 2 moves over to the enemy, ends turn.
Player 3 moves over to the enemy.
Player 3 attacks. Fails the DC 11 flat check.
Player 3 attacks. Succeeds the flat check. Fails to hit AC.
Player 4 casts a spell. Oops, they are immune to magic.
Player 4 moves.
Round 2
Enemy does the exact same thing: shock -> Go dark -> moves next to player 1.
*Everyone in combat gets a chance to hit the hidden creature as it is trying to move. 2 people roll flat checks. 1 misses. One succeeds, but misses AC.
Player 1 uses seek with action 1. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 1 uses seek again with the second action. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 1 picks a random square to swing at, and misses.
Player 2 uses seek with action 1. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 2 uses seek again with the second action. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 2 picks a random square to swing at, and misses.
Player 3 uses seek with action 1. They do not beat the required DC with the perception roll.
Player 3 uses seek again with the second action. They beat the DC.
Player 3 "points out" to the other people in the group.
Player 4 moves (Action 1)
Player 4 melee swings, misses on flat DC check
Player 4 swings, misses on AC check.
Round 3
Enemy does the exact same thing: shock -> Go dark -> moves next to player 4 again.
*Only player 1 and 4 can react. Player 4 doesn't have one, player 1 does, swings, and misses on flat check*
Player 1 and sees it.
Player 1 "points out" to the other people in the group.
Player 1 moves next to it
...
*more things happen - the enemy is eventually defeated*
...
Analysis
The first player AFTER the wisp always must seek. Because they are invisible, their stealth is naturally high. So often the first player after will spend their entire round either seeking or swinging wildly because seeks failed.
The second player after the enemy: 50% of the time will seek, the other 50% of the time knows where it is from player 1. Even if they "know where it is" they must move to be near it (1 action), and take 2 swings. Half the time it will fail.
Third player will often know where it is. If they do not, they must seek. If they do, they face the same DC 11 flat check to miss with attacks. So often will miss on one due to flat check, and the other is 50% chance of hitting (roughly)
Fourth player will almost always know where it is, but must move -> attack -> attack
Note: Will o' wisp is especially annoying due to magic immunity.
So what does that tell us?
1. First player will often not get the chance to do anything in combat besides "look for stuff" (fairly boring)
2. Second player, half the time will look for stuff (fairly boring), and the other half will get to do two attacks, one which will miss because the creature is hidden (failing a DC 11 flat check? Annoying), and the other will miss 50% of the time just due to AC mechanics.
3. Third player will often get to hit, but will likely get only one hit (move, attack, attack, with one missing to flat check and one 50% chance to miss due to AC)
4. Fourth player (cleric) gets to do nothing against will-o'-wisp (or against other creatures, 50% chance to blow a spell slot on DC11 flat check miss).
Which means on average there is one hit per round. So this will last 5-6 rounds.
Note:
Yes, meta-gaming it is smart to have the caster(s) do the seeking (since their melee is bad at best), or have the best perception go first. Better odds of people with the ability to do something meaningful have more opportunities, but that seems awfully mechanically exploitative at best.
The other possibility is somehow having the group get the ability to see invisible things. Does that make the combat too easy? I assume the invisibility adds to the challenge rating (would will-o'-wisp still be 6 if it couldn't be invisible? Highly unlikely). So if everyone can see it now, the group makes one or two round(s) of attacks and combat is over.
Or maybe only one person can see the invisible creature. Cool, now they don't spam the seek action but still have to spend an action to make it hidden to everyone, and then you still have the same annoyance of having half of your player's attacks / spell slots just miss to the flat check since they are still hidden (except to the one player who can see it).
Am I missing something obvious? Do some GMs handle invisibility differently? Is there anything that can be done to make combats with invisible creatures more fun but also not too easy?
Any advice is appreciated, thanks!