Natural Invisibility

[reefwood]

I was wondering if there was any official, consistent ruling on the finer details of the extraordinary ability called "Natural Invisibility"? Or why it isn't defined in the back of the Bestiary with all the other special monster abilities?

It seems to me that if a creature is invisible - not because of magic but simply existing naturally in that state for whatever reason - that it doesn't have to worry about being seen, except for abilities that allow others to see through invisibility (i.e. see invisibility) or efforts that reveal its position (i.e. covering it in flour). The naturally invisible creature won't suddenly become unnaturally visible just because it attacks.

However, I have seen some debate about this on the boards and wonder if it simply arises because of poor, inconsistent wording. These are the two creatures I was able to find with this extraordinary ability:

Quote:

Extraordinary Abilities (Ex): Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical. They are, however, not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training. Effects or areas that suppress or negate magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities.

Quote:

Invisible Stalker

Natural Invisibility (Ex) This ability is constant—an invisible stalker remains invisible at all times, even when attacking. As this ability is inherent, it is not subject to the invisibility purge spell. Against foes that cannot pinpoint it, the invisible stalker gains a +20 bonus on Stealth checks when moving, or +40 when standing still—these bonuses are not included in the statistics above.

It looks like this creature cannot become visible on its own even if it wants to be seen, and the entry mentions that it remains invisible even when attacking, but that seems like somewhat redundant wording because if it invisible at all times, then why/how would it become visible when it attacks (or does anything else)? I'm guessing this redundant wording exists because the invisibility spell ends when you attack, and people may believe that this ability has similar restriction because they create the same effect: invisibility. But this "natural invisibility" isn't a spell, let alone that spell, and it's not even magical. Still, I understand why the redundant wording was included. Then, it gets redundant again by stating that the invisibility purge spell doesn't affect this ability, but neither would any other any other effects or areas that suppress or negate magic because "natural invisibility" is an extraordinary ability, so it isn't unique to this ability or that spell. Finally, it gives a little bit of info about bonuses from invisibility but not all the bonuses (which are listed all together in the back of the Core Rulebook).

Anyway, this is an extraordinary ability that makes you invisible, and then, the entry highlights pieces of info about extraordinary abilities and about invisibility. Granted, they are important pieces of info, but they are also incomplete, so it seems like some confusion may arise from the fact that it only highlights these pieces. People may think that only these pieces of (Ex) and invisibility apply (or that it is somehow connected to the invisibility spell or functions like it in other ways), when if fact, I'm pretty sure that everything about (Ex) and invisibility should apply to "Natural Invisibility" but that nothing specific to the invisibility spell (i.e. gear becomes invisible, duration, ends with attack, etc.) should apply.

.
.
.

Quote:

Will-o'-Wisp

Natural Invisibility (Ex) Will-o'-wisps have the ability to extinguish their natural glow as a move action, effectively becoming invisible, as per the spell.

This entry is shorter and seems simpler, but adds a couple more doses of potential confusion.

This creature can be seen because it has a natural glow. A move action removes that glow, but for how long? And what is required to resume the glow? Does the glow automatically resume at the start of its next turn? Or does the glow remain extinguished until an effort is made to resume it? Is the effort to resume the glow also a move action?

This entry refers to a spell that is not actually named. There is no spell called invisible, but most can probably agree that it refers to invisibility. I think this "as per the spell" reference was simply meant to indicate that you get the same result as the spell - invisibility - as in, you are invisible, so looks up the Invisibility section the back of the Core Rulebook. However, others seem to believe it has the same restriction as the invisibility spell...so they think that attacking makes you visible. But does this also mean that this creature can pick up gear, extinguish its glow, and then the gear becomes invisible too? Or that there is a duration (and if so, what is the duration)? And if this functions like a spell, the argument could be made that it can be negated in the same way... but as an (Ex), negation should not be possible. Or if the only similarity to the spell is that it becomes visible when attacking, then why do the other restrictions/benefits (duration, negation, invisible gear) not apply?

Anyway, I would think that "Natural Invisibility" for the invisible stalker and will-o-wisp should function the same, except it is constant for one and requires a move action for the other... but is there an official ruling yet?

.
.
.

Quote:

Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells. See Table: Special Ability Types for a summary of the types of special abilities.

Quote:

Pixie

Invisibility (Su) A pixie remains invisible even when it attacks. This ability is constant, but the pixie can suppress or resume it as a free action.

This is another creature that has an invisibility ability. I'm just pointing out that I am aware of this creature too, but the ability has a different name, it is a supernatural ability (instead of extraordinary), and it has a clearly defined activation/deactivation, so I don't know if it serves as much of a basis for "Natural Invisibility" but I have seem some of the boards try to bring it into the debate.

[Josh M Foster]

Natural Invisibility works as described in each entry. You are correct that everything that goes along with the spell is not necessarily true - but, and I see the confusion, it sometimes is.

An invisible stalker is invisible all the time, no matter what it does. The entry says "constant." Ergo the creature itself can't even become visible.

The Will 'o Wisp can switch between the two states, but treats it as the spell. Because the entry references the spell, the baggage the comes along with that spell (except being subject to antimagic) applies. If a Will o Wisp attacks it becomes visible. As the ability is extraordinary, though, it has no caster level and no max duration. It just lasts until the creature does something that would end an invisibility spell.

The Pixie is a nice mix between the two, save the magic countermeasures now function (except counterspelling). The pixie decides if it is invisible or not as a free action. It can jump between the two states as often as it wants on its turn. Attacking does not drop the effect, as the effect specifies this. The duration, again, is infinite.

Don't get confused when the names are the same, the abilities are different if the individual entries are different.

[Abraham spalding]

There isn't a consistent ruling on it because it is different for every monster.

The invisible stalker literally cannot become visible -- it has no choice in the matter and will always be invisible.

The Will'o'wisp however is different -- it too can remain invisible even in an anti-magic field however it works like the spell does, meaning that if it attacks it reveals its position again. It also has to spend effort making itself invisible too.

The pixie is magical however, and can't maintain its invisibility in an antimagic field. Its invisibility however doesn't function like the spell in some ways (those noted) and as a supernatural ability it doesn't provoke when it uses it (and can do so as a free action).

[reefwood]

I can agree that one of the mistakes may have been to give the same name to different abilities that have the same effect but don't function the same.

I can also see how the will-o'-wisp ability works like the invisibility spell, so that it becomes visible when it attacks.

The reason I am curious about duration is because I am wondering if there is a rule on that somewhere (i.e. extraordinary abilities that function like spells have a constant/infinite duration), or if the lack of duration is just an assumption that simply making the most sense.

If extraordinary abilities that function like spells have a constant/infinite duration, why would attacking end that duration? I guess if there is a rule on this somewhere, I'm curious to see if this particular rule sheds anymore light on this topic.

Or if this thought about no max duration is simply an assumption, then how is the assumption that "attacking does not end invisibility for a naturally invisible creature" any different? The "Natural Invisibility" entry does say "as per the spell," but breaking it down like this, it seems like people are picking and choosing which parts of the spell apply.

Now don't get me wrong, I think the no max duration is correct. I'm just trying to figure out if that is a rule or simply left to common sense because I know you can't have a rule for every possible situation.

And going back to picking and choosing...what about gear? If the glowing will-o'-wisp has a sheet tossed onto it (or even flour), and it turns invisible as per the spell, does its gear (sheet or flour) also become invisible? Because doing so would also be in line with "as per the spell."

[RogueMonkeyChief]

Natural invisibility has an entry in the universal monster rules in the Bestiary 2.

[Josh M Foster]

The sheet would become invisible. The ability works as the spell. The duration is a function either of the ability being stated as constant (whether or not it can be turned off) or lacking a caster level because it is (ex). The Will o Wisp works like an invisible rogue with a very, very high caster level invisibility on him, consider it infinite caster level. The rogue's invisibility lasts forever, or until he attacks. That's the Will o Wisp. It can use a move action to turn invisible forever, as it has no caster level, so no limit on its duration. If it attacks, though, it's visible and has to use another move action.

If you threw a sheet on it, the sheet would be visible until it took a move action to make it invisible.

[Abraham spalding]

For the will'o'wisp there is no assumption of unending invisibility -- since it functions like the spell. However since it is minutes per level(hit dice) and he can renew it at will (as a move action) it can become functionally unlimited in duration.

If you want a fluff reason consider that the Will'o'wisp might have to gather up that electricity that glows when it discharges -- it can't work up the power without letting its glow come back.

[reefwood]

RogueMonkeyChief wrote:

Natural invisibility has an entry in the universal monster rules in the Bestiary 2.

Good to know. I probably won't buy that book for a while because there are still plenty of monsters in the Bestiary I have yet to use, but I'll take a quick peek the next time I go to the bookstore.

[James Risner]

reefwood wrote:

Natural Invisibility (Ex)

Lots of stuff there, and no clear questions.

I'm answering a couple things that might be the questions.

• Extraordinary abilities are not magical, so Natural Invisibility (Ex) wouldn't be detected by Detect Magic, See Invisibility, or Invisibility Purge.
  
• Extraordinary abilities are Free actions unless otherwise specified, so you can go invis, cast, and move in the same round.
  
• Unless it is incorporeal, flour and other "mundane de-invis" methods will work.
  
• Supernatural abilities are magical, and will become visible in the area of Invisibility Purge/See Invis and other magical de-invis methods. But this may have changed, as in B2 it says even the Su ones don't become visibile with invisibility purge.
  
• Supernatural abilities are a Standard action unless otherwise specified.
  
• Unless it is a Spell Like ability, the duration is not clear. Not clear, would suggest infinite. The abilities suggest infinite as well.
  
• If "as per Invisibility spell" is mentioned, you become visible when attacking unless otherwise specified.

[Abraham spalding]

James Risner wrote:

• Extraordinary abilities are not magical, so Natural Invisibility (Ex) wouldn't be detected by Detect Magic, See Invisibility, or Invisibility Purge.
  
• Extraordinary abilities are Free actions unless otherwise specified, so you can go invis, cast, and move in the same round.
  
• Unless it is incorporeal, flour and other "mundane de-invis" methods will work.
  
• Supernatural abilities are magical, and will become visible in the area of Invisibility Purge/See Invis and other magical de-invis methods. But this may have changed, as in B2 it says even the Su ones don't become visibile with invisibility purge.
  
• Supernatural abilities are a Standard action unless otherwise specified.
  
• Unless it is a Spell Like ability, the duration is not clear. Not clear, would suggest infinite. The abilities suggest infinite as well.
  
• If "as per Invisibility spell" is mentioned, you become visible when attacking unless otherwise specified.

That part bolded is incorrect -- see invisibility doesn't care why you are invisible or how you got that way -- only that you are. As such it can still see you. It should be the same with Invisibility Purge -- as invisibility purge simply states "ALL FORMS of invisibility" and doesn't state it only works on magical invisibility -- I'm going to FAQ that because there should be an Errata to say the opposite of what is in the B2.

On the second line you are incorrect about action type -- there is no definition on the type of action each of the different ability types are by default -- you always have to check and see for each ability. Some are free actions, others are move, while some are standard and a rare few are full round actions -- but there is no "default" for extraordinary.

Everything else I'm good with.

[Brotato]

Abraham spalding wrote:

James Risner wrote:

• Extraordinary abilities are not magical, so Natural Invisibility (Ex) wouldn't be detected by Detect Magic, See Invisibility, or Invisibility Purge.
  
• Extraordinary abilities are Free actions unless otherwise specified, so you can go invis, cast, and move in the same round.
  
• Unless it is incorporeal, flour and other "mundane de-invis" methods will work.
  
• Supernatural abilities are magical, and will become visible in the area of Invisibility Purge/See Invis and other magical de-invis methods. But this may have changed, as in B2 it says even the Su ones don't become visibile with invisibility purge.
  
• Supernatural abilities are a Standard action unless otherwise specified.
  
• Unless it is a Spell Like ability, the duration is not clear. Not clear, would suggest infinite. The abilities suggest infinite as well.
  
• If "as per Invisibility spell" is mentioned, you become visible when attacking unless otherwise specified.

That part bolded is incorrect -- see invisibility doesn't care why you are invisible or how you got that way -- only that you are. As such it can still see you. It should be the same with Invisibility Purge -- as invisibility purge simply states "ALL FORMS of invisibility" and doesn't state it only works on magical invisibility -- I'm going to FAQ that because there should be an Errata to say the opposite of what is in the B2.

On the second line you are incorrect about action type -- there is no definition on the type of action each of the different ability types are by default -- you always have to check and see for each ability. Some are free actions, others are move, while some are standard and a rare few are full round actions -- but there is no "default" for extraordinary.

Everything else I'm good with.

In the entry for natural invisibility in Bestiary 2, it specifically makes mention of not being subject to invisibility purge, however, it makes no mention of see invisibility so that spell should work as normal. The poltergeist entry supports the conclusion that see invis works. It wouldn't make sense for invisibility purge to reveal an invisible stalker, however.

[spalding]

Why wouldn't it? If see invisibility can see it then there is something there to see -- which means that same something would be what invisibility purge would reveal.

After all invisibility purge is quite specific in its generality: all forms of invisibility -- not some, not only magical, not only spells, but all forms of invisibility are suppressed.

Seems pretty simple to me that a higher level spell that calls out specifically that it hits all forms of invisibility should work just as well as a 2nd level spell that does the same for a single person.

[Brotato]

Abraham spalding wrote:

Why wouldn't it? If see invisibility can see it then there is something there to see -- which means that same something would be what invisibility purge would reveal.

After all invisibility purge is quite specific in its generality: all forms of invisibility -- not some, not only magical, not only spells, but all forms of invisibility are suppressed.

Seems pretty simple to me that a higher level spell that calls out specifically that it hits all forms of invisibility should work just as well as a 2nd level spell that does the same for a single person.

And it seems pretty simple to me that Natural Invisibility is an exception to the rule.

Bestiary 2 wrote:

Natural Invisibility (Ex or Su) This ability is constant—

the creature remains invisible at all times, even when
attacking. As this ability is inherent, it is not subject to
the invisibility purge spell.

By RAW, invisibility purge does not work. End of story.

[reefwood]

Brotato wrote:

Abraham spalding wrote:

Why wouldn't it? If see invisibility can see it then there is something there to see -- which means that same something would be what invisibility purge would reveal.

After all invisibility purge is quite specific in its generality: all forms of invisibility -- not some, not only magical, not only spells, but all forms of invisibility are suppressed.

Seems pretty simple to me that a higher level spell that calls out specifically that it hits all forms of invisibility should work just as well as a 2nd level spell that does the same for a single person.

And it seems pretty simple to me that Natural Invisibility is an exception to the rule.

Bestiary 2 wrote:

Natural Invisibility (Ex or Su) This ability is constant—

the creature remains invisible at all times, even when
attacking. As this ability is inherent, it is not subject to
the invisibility purge spell.

By RAW, invisibility purge does not work. End of story.

Plus, "effects or areas that suppress or negate magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities," so the negation of invis purge doesn't affect (Ex) anyway. If invis purge was the exception to the general rule, it would probably say something like, "including extraordinary abilities."

[Abraham spalding]

Specific beats general anyways so I'll in no way try to imply my opinion on the matter is RAW -- or even RAI, just my opinion.

I don't think suppressing invisibility is suppressing magic -- after all invisibility purge specifies it suppresses invisibility -- not magic.

But its something to get into in another thread at another time.

[Magicdealer]

Just as an interesting thought here, it can totally be how the spells work.

See invisibility doesn't affect the creature which is invisible. It allows the person under the spell to make out the invisible creature -- which isn't necessarily the same thing as seeing normally.

Meanwhile, invisibility purge actually affects the creature which is invisible. However, if there is no visible physical form to see, then the invisibility purge would be useless. There's a difference between, say, creating a picture in front of you of what's behind you, and your physical form actually only interacting with light beyond the visible spectrum.

There just might not BE anything to see.

[James Risner]

Abraham spalding wrote:

1) That part bolded is incorrect -- see invisibility doesn't care why you are invisible or how you got that way

On the second line you are incorrect about action type -- there is no definition on the type of action each of the different ability types are by default

1) There is nothing to see, so there is nothing for See Invisibility to negate. If the create is invisible due to being see through, you can't use See Invisibility to see what can't be seen. Natural Invisibility trumps See Invisibility if the invisibility comes from being transparent to light.

2) Core p186 disagrees with you. Specifically I said free action, when the more correct answer is that it isn't an action (so not Free, Swift, Immediate, Standard, nor Full Round action.)

[darth_borehd]

Is there a definitive answer on this now?

[Matthew Downie]

darth_borehd wrote:

Is there a definitive answer on this now?

To which question?

Wisp invisibility works like the spell, so it wears off if the creature attacks.

Stalker invisibility is constant and specifies that it works even against Invisibility Purge. Since it doesn't specify that it works against See Invisible or Glitterdust, those should probably work against it.