There is zero mechanical difference between pressing a button to fire a trebuchet at someone, and say, pressing a button that triggers a deadfall. Both involve projectives propelled by kinetic energy; in both cases, this energy was converted from potential energy* (the trebuchet, though a lever, fires in a parabolic arc -- at the end of which, the projectile is falling). Yet it is apparently "obvious" why the former breaks invisibility, but the latter does not. Can anyone provide an objective, physics-based explanation why?
There is no physics-based explanation why. After all, firing a crossbow at someone is also converting potential energy to kinetic energy. So is cutting a bridge rope.
So that tells us that a high level physics explanation of each phenomenon does not determine whether it breaks invisibility.A direct attack breaks invisibility, and the only question is whether or not the statue push qualifies as a direct attack.
...so I've decided to revisit my ruling and ask more knowledgeable ruleslawyers in the online community whether or not dropping an object on someone would end invisibility in Pathfinder.
If it's a PC doing the dropping, yes. Invisibility ends with any attack against a target. Otherwise, maybe not. It depends on the source of the invisibility, the relevant backstory, et cetera.
I'm the DM. I don't have to play by the same rules the players do.
I'm the DM. I don't have to play by the same rules the players do.
Oh my god~
The rules are written for everyone, you are a horrible DM~
You hate your players~
I would never play with you~
You are horrible~
HORRIBLE
Did I miss anything?
I've removed a number of posts in this thread - please keep it on topic and remember that not everybody would make a ruling the same way.
I did my best to wade through as many posts on this thread as I could without my eyes glazing over. Sorry if my two cents has already been cashed in and I didn't notice.
Seems to me that in the case of pushing an object onto adventurers below, there's some significance to the object being pushed. Say you're pushing a large sized gargoyle from 20 feet up on a medium sized character; not a lot of accuracy required there. As such, an attack roll doesn't seem 100% necessary, as it's a difficult task to mess up.
Medium sized gargoyle on medium sized character would a little more difficult. You'd have to get your aim just right. Small sized targets are going to be tough to hit, too - unless the gargoyle is large or huge. It's a judgment call on the GM's part as to whether an attack roll or a save is more appropriate.
That, I feel, is the decider concerning whether invisibility persists. Attack roll ends the spell, save DC fits into the loophole. Whether the invisible creature is dropping boulders, gargoyles, causing avalanches, or the lovely example of cutting down a rope bridge, it's indirect enough as long as the attacks don't require specific aim.
For my purposes I would rule based on what squares the falling object could reasonably cover when the object impacts with the ground (and whatever squishies might be standing on said ground). If the dwarf is in a square that the falling object couldn't possibly miss, take the reflex save and deal with the invisible enemy. If, in order to impact the creature, the object has to be aimed - either because it is too small to cover the target's square if nudged 5 feet in all directions or because the target creature is in a beneficial position towards making the shot difficult, make it an attack roll.
Terrain would play a part in the ruling. If the area is wide open, pushing a large object would always require an attack roll, but if there were walls or other obstructions that prevent the movement the creature could be fairly certain the object will fall true. Think elevator dropped down a shaft with the party at the bottom of the shaft - though I'm not sure what the reflex DC on that would be. I doubt it would miss, though, and is no more intrusive on the spell than cutting down a bridge.
Our group plays it thusly for simplicities sake:
If your invisible and you take any action that:
1) Requires an attack roll of any kind.
2) Causes another being to make a saving throw or ability check.
3) Causes any sort of damage or negative effect on another.
Your invisibility ends.
Examples:
Placing a wall of fire does not end invisibility.
Placing a wall of fire such that opponents are damaged or must make saves does.
Dropping/pushing a large obejct over a ledge does not.
Dropping/pushing a large obejct over a ledge onto someone/a group does.
Casting a Cloudkill into an empty area is ok. If an anyone later moves into the Cloudkill then you are still invisible. Your action did not directly result in one of the conditions above. The person moving into the Cloudkill caused their own condition.
It is a pure game balance ruling, as trying to logic out why an invisibility spell would break on an attack in the first place (as opposed to any rushed or violent movement) is mind numbing. Invisibilty failing when you attack is purely a intent sensitive/conceptual/game balance process to prevent the low level spell from being too powerful but still giving the ability to casters at a relatively low character level.
A very sensible solution.It doesn't make sense, but it solves the problem elegantly.
Though I would alter "attack roll of any kind" to "an attack roll against any opponent".
First, thank you for the kind words.
Second, it is probably better as you phrase it in general public use. Luckily I am the only power gaming rules lawyer at our table so we generaly have few issues with rules arguments in any case and when we do, the ref usually asks me for the right interpretation anyways.
:)
|
Our group plays it thusly for simplicities sake:
If your invisible and you take any action that:
1) Requires an attack roll of any kind.
2) Causes another being to make a saving throw or ability check.
3) Causes any sort of damage or negative effect on another.Your invisibility ends.
Examples:
Placing a wall of fire does not end invisibility.
Placing a wall of fire such that opponents are damaged or must make saves does.Dropping/pushing a large obejct over a ledge does not.
Dropping/pushing a large obejct over a ledge onto someone/a group does.Casting a Cloudkill into an empty area is ok. If an anyone later moves into the Cloudkill then you are still invisible. Your action did not directly result in one of the conditions above. The person moving into the Cloudkill caused their own condition.
It is a pure game balance ruling, as trying to logic out why an invisibility spell would break on an attack in the first place (as opposed to any rushed or violent movement) is mind numbing. Invisibilty failing when you attack is purely a intent sensitive/conceptual/game balance process to prevent the low level spell from being too powerful but still giving the ability to casters at a relatively low character level.
We use the same in all our groups as well. So both the imp and the player would become visable, save version or aimed version.
Did I miss anything?
You pretty much hit every nail on its respective head. ;)