What are the rules for natural invisability?
Page 255 and 256 in the Monster Manual for those who want to take a look...
It is listed as an extraordinary ability for the Wo'W (Will O' Wisp)
Correct me if I am interperating this incorrectly please.
Logic string to follow:
- The Wo'W has the ability to turn off it's lights and become invisible.
- *Important one* - It can do this on purpose and at will.
- Therefore the Wo'W while attacking can be completely invisible(per Improved Invisibility) and only a magic spell like Glitterdust or Detect Evil makes it visible to its opponents.
---------------------------------------------------------------
How is that? Is it right? Is it how the rest of you play a Will O' Wisp?
The only reason why I bring up this question is that one of my players found it unfair that the Wisp did not become visible after attacking. I also wondered due to the fact that the CR for these guys was pretty low for such cool abilities, which led me to question my interperatation.
They have already faced off against several of these guys and the last thing I want to do is not give out the right ammount of treasure and XP for a monsters challenge.
Help please, all thoughts and opinions welcome.
-Roth
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
The only reason why I bring up this question is that one of my players found it unfair that the Wisp did not become visible after attacking. I also wondered due to the fact that the CR for these guys was pretty low for such cool abilities, which led me to question my interperatation.
I don't have the books in front of me but as I recall, will o' wisps have next to nothing for hit points (less than 20, I believe). There are numerous ways to overcome these little buggers and the first method I recommend is area-affecting spells. Even low-level ones like burning hands can cause serious harm to these creatures and all you need to know is the APPROXIMATE location. When the creature attacks, it makes its location abundantly clear and so targetting the square it is in should not be terribly hard for the melee types. 50% miss chance can certainly be rough, but one lucky hit with a 2-hander and some Power Attack should almost certainly obliterate the wisp.
Then of course, there's the obvious solution of see invisibility if your casters are prepared. A few magic missiles should do the trick once you've spotted it.
Edit: I find it amusing that the word 'B U G G E R S' is censored. The obscured word you see above was NOT as offensive as the filters make it seem.
will o wisp stats:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/willOWisp.htm
they are invisible when they attack but their attack isn't, it's lightening. you can see lightening.
their ability to turn invisible may be able to be dispelled because it says as invisible spell in the description (some may argue natural abilities can't be dispelled)
Actually, the will-o'-wisp is immune to most spells/spell-like abilities that allow spell resistance (except magic missile and maze). They are indeed tough to fight (with an AC of 29, and 40 hp). However, their natural invisibility is not quite as good as greater invisibility. It emulates invisibility, and so stops if the creature does anything (such as attack) that would cause invisibility to fail. Their only attack is a melee touch attack, and they don't (normally) have Spring Attack. So, even though they can attack and immediately become invisible again, they cannot do so without either provoking an AoO (by attacking and moving away) or attacking and staying right next to their target.
Area effect spells won't help; wisps are immune to most magic. (That'll teach you to post without the book in front of you, Fatespinner!)
And yes, a wisp's natural invisibility means that it remains invisible even after attacking. Faerie fire, glitterdust, see invisibility, invisibility purge...any of these low-level spells will be of great help against wisps.
Drall Vekk: A wisp's natural invisibility is an Extraordinary ability; that means it cannot be dispelled. Whether it is "natural" or not isn't the point.
Erian_7: A wisp's natural invisibility doesn't emulate the spell. It is a condition whose effects are identical to the spell's effects. It doesn't go away when the wisp attacks (or does anything else that would cause an invisibility spell to end), because invisibility is the wisp's natural condition.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Area effect spells won't help; wisps are immune to most magic. (That'll teach you to post without the book in front of you, Fatespinner!)
Fair enough. I was unaware of that fact. My apologies.
And yes, a wisp's natural invisibility means that it remains invisible even after attacking. Faerie fire, glitterdust, see invisibility, invisibility purge...any of these low-level spells will be of great help against wisps.
I disagree with you on this point, otherwise it would state that the effect is similar to greater invisibility. Attacks would disrupt the invisibility, if only temporarily, imo.
Drall Vekk: A wisp's natural invisibility is an Extraordinary ability; that means it cannot be dispelled. Whether it is "natural" or not isn't the point.
This is true. If an ability is not supernatural or spell-like, a dispel magic or similar effect will have no effect on it.
If the wisp's attack form is a lightning jolt, perhaps protection from energy versus electricity would give you enough of an advantage to win the day. Even lesser versions of the spell might make enough of a difference to make the fight easier for your party.
Two small things drop the CR on a Will-o'-wisp severly, me thinks:
1. Will-o’-wisps usually avoid combat. They prefer to confuse and bewilder adventurers, luring them into morasses or other hazardous places. When they are forced to fight, they loose small electrical shocks, which act as melee touch attacks.
2. A startled or frightened will-o’-wisp can extinguish its glow, effectively becoming invisible as the spell.
These things don't like combat at all, ánd they don't turn invisible to attack, but only to flee. So, of course, you're not forced to follow that, but it's CR might be adjusted for it. Their touch attacks are just a last resort.
Ow, and if you want to wast one, try a shot of Strength draining poison gas. No attack roll needed, it runs on a Fort save, which the Will-o'-wisp lacks almost completely, and it only has 1 Strength. And it's not magical, so no defenses :)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
And yes, a wisp's natural invisibility means that it remains invisible even after attacking. Faerie fire, glitterdust, see invisibility, invisibility purge...any of these low-level spells will be of great help against wisps.I disagree with you on this point, otherwise it would state that the effect is similar to greater invisibility. Attacks would disrupt the invisibility, if only temporarily, imo.
I was in agreement with Vegepygmy's post, particularly because what he says is consistent with what I remember from the Dragon ecology on the creature that was published a year or two ago. However, I looked up the Natural Invisibility ability for both the Invisible Stalker and WoW. What I found makes me think that Fatespinner has it correct - the invisibility goes away when the WoW attacks. I suppose the logic is that after an attack, the WoW glows again, and must extinguish the glow to become invisible.
Here is the Invisible Stalker ability:
Natural Invisibility (Su)
This ability is constant, allowing a stalker to remain invisible even when attacking. This ability is inherent and not subject to the invisibility purge spell.
Here is the WoW ability:
Natural Invisibility (Ex)
A startled or frightened will-o’-wisp can extinguish its glow, effectively becoming invisible as the spell.
Note that the Invisible Stalker expressly states that it remains invisible even when attacking.
Edit: Also note that in Sebastian's dream 4e, abilities with the same names will function in the same manner. Why is the Invisible Stalker abilities supernatural but specifically exempted from dispel/purge whereas the WoW is an exceptional ability that is exempted due to that type of ability - damned if I know. You would think they should either both be supernatural or both be exceptional.
Ah, to dream of a world of consistent templating...sigh...
(at least it's better than the dawn of 3.0 though, when WotC couldn't even manage to consistently organize the chapters in their books. Compare the organization of the various Sword and Fist, Defender's of the Faith, etc. Not one of them has the same layout. Some have feats first, some have prestige classes first, and so on.)
(yes, this is an off-topic rant, but by bundling it with an actual response I am mostly on topic!)
(Why are we paranthesizing?)
I disagree that the wisp becomes visible after attacking. The thing is naturally undetectable to the unaided eye. It's only visible because it glows. If it turns off the glow, it can't be seen. It is an extraordinary ability, and thus there are grounds to say it is significantly different from the spell that it is stated as emulating.
I'd just run it the way the MM describes it and only use the ability if the creature is fleeing. Solves most of the problems then and there.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
I disagree that the wisp becomes visible after attacking. The thing is naturally undetectable to the unaided eye. It's only visible because it glows. If it turns off the glow, it can't be seen. It is an extraordinary ability, and thus there are grounds to say it is significantly different from the spell that it is stated as emulating.
I'd just run it the way the MM describes it and only use the ability if the creature is fleeing. Solves most of the problems then and there.
Maybe it HAS to become visible because the light it gives off is where it draws the energy for its electrical touch attacks from! AHA! That is why it only stops glowing when it flees, it is basically 'powering down' its weapons array. :D
I can see where I might have used these monsters incorrectly.
Guilty of not "roleplaying" the monster I think. Our game is very combat oriented, I have to keep throwing things at these guys or they get restless. I really was looking at the WoW as a combat creature, which it really exceles at in truth.
My spell casters and rangers were completely stymied by the Huge touch AC. The brawlers had trouble more with the Natural Invisibility. Two of these monsters had my players tearing their hair out for close to two hours this week.
Next question: Is there a definition of Natural Invisibility anywhere? I have looked fairly hard and can't find a thing.
Keep those thoughts and opinions coming please, I'll have some tough questions to ask on Friday when the group comes together for our next game. Thanks. :-)
-Roth
As far as I recall, unless specifically stated, an extraordinary ability requires a standard action to use. So, to back up the majority of the posters here, I agree that it should function as invisibility (CL = HD, or 9), with the exception that it cannot be dispelled or countered (as per an extraordinary ability).
Glitterdust is your friend, however (no SR, auto -40 to Hide, Fort v. blindness). Especially followed up by magic missile. A saucerer with these spells will have no problem with the little orbs o' tricky doom. (Whatever happened to their beguiling powers?)
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I see that nobody is reading my lenghty rambling posts anymore. :-( I'll make this one short, sweet, and lacking in paranthesis...
Next question: Is there a definition of Natural Invisibility anywhere? I have looked fairly hard and can't find a thing.
No. That's why I posted the ability possessed by the Invisible Stalker and the ability possessed by the WoW. They have the same name, but the IS ability states that it is not dispelled by attacking. The WoW ability makes no such statement.
As far as I recall, unless specifically stated, an extraordinary ability requires a standard action to use.
Nope, an extraordinary ability is "usually not an action because most extraordinary abilities automatically happen in a reactive fashion. Those extraordinary abilities that are actions are standard actions unless otherwise noted." That's why I think the WoW's ability is almost as good as greater invisibility--it could reactively turn invisible again (basically treat it as an Immediate Action). However, as others have said it's only "almost as good" because it specifically references invisibility as the "rule set" for the ability, thus it will definitely reappear if it attacks. I don't see any way to read it otherwise.
I see that nobody is reading my lenghty rambling posts anymore. :-(
Untrue. Besides, you're not really rambling - you have paragraphs (I'm looking at you, Valegrim...).
/off-topic
As far as I recall, unless specifically stated, an extraordinary ability requires a standard action to use.Nope, an extraordinary ability is "usually not an action because most extraordinary abilities automatically happen in a reactive fashion. Those extraordinary abilities that are actions are standard actions unless otherwise noted." That's why I think the WoW's ability is almost as good as greater invisibility--it could reactively turn invisible again (basically treat it as an Immediate Action).
I have to disagree here. Your quote is correct, but the WoW's natural invisibility is used when it extinguishes its glow. Extinguishing is pretty clearly an action, IMO, so it should take the WoW a standard action to activate the ability.
TK
Director of Narrative
|
I see that nobody is reading my lenghty rambling posts anymore. :-( I'll make this one short, sweet, and lacking in paranthesis...
No. That's why I posted the ability possessed by the Invisible Stalker and the ability possessed by the WoW. They have the same name, but the IS ability states that it is not dispelled by attacking. The WoW ability makes no such statement.Next question: Is there a definition of Natural Invisibility anywhere? I have looked fairly hard and can't find a thing.
I'm listening Sebastian. I immediately thought of a pixie when this topic came up, so I like your IS comparison. Going with that, a pixie's natural invisibility allows it to attack and remain invisble. So far we have two natually invisble critters that don't reveal themselves and one that were not sure of because it didn't specifically say. Can anyone think of any other naturally invisible critters?
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I'm listening Sebastian. I immediately thought of a pixie when this topic came up, so I like your IS comparison. Going with that, a pixie's natural invisibility allows it to attack and remain invisble. So far we have two natually invisble critters that don't reveal themselves and one that were not sure of because it didn't specifically say. Can anyone think of any other naturally invisible critters?
Thank you Daigle! And good point re: the pixie. It seems as though a creature with natural invisibility only stays invisible while attacking if the description in the ability expressly states that fact. The phantom fungus is another good example, that creature's ability is actually called "Greater Invisibility."
It seems fairly clear that when a creature stays invisible while attacking, the ability will expressly state that fact. It won't state it the same way twice, but it will state it.
I have to disagree here. Your quote is correct, but the WoW's natural invisibility is used when it extinguishes its glow. Extinguishing is pretty clearly an action, IMO, so it should take the WoW a standard action to activate the ability.
TK
On what grounds would you classify it as an action, though? The flavor text "a startled or frightened will-o’-wisp can extinguish its glow" sounds like it happens "in a reactive fashion" and there is no other text to indicate otherwise. I'm not saying the opinion is incorrect--indeed there's really not enough info in the WoW stat block to make 100% solid statements.
Ecology of the Will o Wisp dragon#99
...snip...
Whoa, Drall. That right there is a copyright violation. Please do not post whole published articles that are within copyright, no matter how old they may otherwise be.
Beyond that, if you're going to repost a long article (one that is free for public use), FORMAT IT - or better yet, post a link to a web page containing the article. My eyes bleed after looking at something like that.
Thanks to all for a great discussion!
I feel that I did play the monster incorrectly last week and will be awardning my players some extra XP for the "Uber" Will O' Wisps that they faced. :-)
My job as DM is so much easier with you guys (and gals) around.
-Roth
On what grounds would you classify it as an action, though? The flavor text "a startled or frightened will-o’-wisp can extinguish its glow" sounds like it happens "in a reactive fashion" and there is no other text to indicate otherwise. I'm not saying the opinion is incorrect--indeed there's really not enough info in the WoW stat block to make 100% solid statements.
You've got a point there.. *sigh* maybe one for the sage? It's kind of obscure though. I mean, when was the last time anyone other than Rothandalantearic actually used a will o wisp?
Ah well... we'll just have to settle for now with my wisps being ever so slightly weaker than yours due to the extra time mine need to wink out. Doesn't hurt nothing.
I mean, when was the last time anyone other than Rothandalantearic actually used a will o wisp?
About 9 months or so ago, to the great consternation of my party, actually.
I think it's got ER (editing resistance) 20/cold iron, magic, and piercing. Equip yourself appropriately.
You've got a point there.. *sigh* maybe one for the sage? It's kind of obscure though. I mean, when was the last time anyone other than Rothandalantearic actually used a will o wisp?
Ah well... we'll just have to settle for now with my wisps being ever so slightly weaker than yours due to the extra time mine need to wink out. Doesn't hurt nothing.
Yeah, it's a tough call with the limited info. I'd say as long as it's played consistently in a group there's no problem.
Now, on the last time one was used...you've got one Richard Pett to thank for causing many to use one (either recently or in the near future)! You'll find one of the little monsters in a certain Savage Tide adventure he wrote...
|
Director of Narrative
|
I mean, when was the last time anyone other than Rothandalantearic actually used a will o wisp?About 9 months or so ago, to the great consternation of my party, actually.
For the record I had a party "go left" on me just by throwing a few WoWs off in the distance in a gloomy swamp. It was hell trying to get them back into that swamp.
I think it's got ER (editing resistance) 20/cold iron, magic, and piercing. Equip yourself appropriately.*envisions Gary stabbing the screen with a magical cold iron keyboard*
Wouldn't work. "Keyboard" is specifically listed as a bludgeoning weapon. He'd have to use the magical cold iron stylus from his PDA.
Looks like all this talk about a +1 sharpened cold iron keyboard scared the post away by itself.
Actually, Will-o'-wisp's are awesome. Specially if you are a rogue and get polymorphed into one. *good memories*
AC 29, touch attack for 2d8 electric (+sneak attack), perfect fly...