If you any your players mind houseruling it, then by all means. I personally wouldn't force the issue if they don't want to disallow it.
Invisibility can be defeated by many means - its not a game breaker.
Remember, even if the caster is invisible if he casts a spell with a verbal component that's a DC 0 Perception check (+1 per 10 feet) to spot the square. Or a DC 10 to hear them walking (or an apposed Move Silently check).
50% miss chance to attack into a square. Heck,Mirror Image is worst when it comes to miss chances and the caster doesn't loose images when they attack.
Cleric, Invisibility Purge at level 2.
Flour on the ground...dirt, dust, snow, and other Environmental factors allows you to see where they are stepping. Granted any smart mage would be flying...but that's besides the point.
Other abilities like Scent can be helpful. Summoning creatures with Scent, Tremorscense, and Blindscense can find them.
Area-effect spells...
There are so many counters I wouldn't worry about it. Besides, it unnerves your players when they hear something... "You hear footsteps in the room," when in fact they are hearing an echo.
I suspect you're overt thinking it. Invisible gives a significant bonus to stealth, but it's on a timer. Rogues can use decent stealth, assuming they put the points in it, all day long. I say it's a non issue and to not worry about it.
The real issue to me is how much it steps on the rogue's toes.
But it doesn't really step on the rogue's toes. What's he going to do with invisibility? Sneak attack? Disable a trap? Flank somebody? Listen in on a private conversation? Scout? A rogue can do all of those things better, and can probably even hide better than the spellcaster within a few levels due to the opposed ability checks mentioned earlier.
Note also in the LotR that the ring making Frodo or Bilbo invisible was the most minor of its powers - not enough to tip Gandalf off that it was one of the great rings. Many, many tales involve invisibility, and it is never considered earthshaking, just an impressive magic trick. I could see it being a third level spell, maybe fourth at the outside, but the number of caveats given keep it low level. That, and it is a staple of spellcasting - something the players really want to be able to do. If it is a problem, there are plenty of ways around it, as with any spell.
The real issue to me is how much it steps on the rogue's toes.
No it doesn't. Any class that is good at stealth can do it a lot. Invis can only be cast so many times per day, and and stealth(nonmagical) is not defeated by see invis, true seeing, possibly detect magic, detect evil, and so on. It not like the caster is going to take the forward position and scout ahead either which is the primary reason for the stealth classes to use it other than setting up ambushes.
If the caster is going to use invis to try to peak ahead, for the sake of argument, then it means the sneakster has no cover, and could not have hidden anyway. If I were the caster I would cast it on the sneaky guy anyway rather than go ahead of the party, which is what I think would happen in most people's games.
edit: I did not see CW's post until after I posted this but someone else might need to read it.
It all depends on how "magic" the world is. Given the other abilities a PF wizard has, it fits. Basically I'd rescale all of the abilities of casters but that's not the topic.
If you were playing a DC Super Heroes game, turning invisible might be the only think you can do and you could be in the justice league.
Yeah, but you don't have to spend slots on it and you compare yourself to ordinary humans, not demons and dragons - my point is, PF has not the setting of DC or Marvel, do not apply their rules on it
In Lord of the Rings, Invisibility was an effect of a major artifact and it was amazing.
Magic in LotR is quite different to PF magic - how many of it is acutally used? We know about some huge acts in the past, like the creation of mordor (the mountains are not rectangle-chaped by chance) but magic is kinda rare (or subtle like elven magic: cloaking robes, intelligent ropes and lembas)
I've never understood why, all the way back, that invisibility was made so easy to obtain? What is even the point of stealth and perception when people and creatures are vanishing or turning invisible all the time.
Yeah, true. Invisibility outshines stealth which is even kinda crappy without regard invisibility if you apply the rules...
Maybe one could add something like "epic skills", like actually allowing characters with good stealth to become invisible (I mean, a lev 20 character is supposed to be godlike) or giving a rogue feats like that (bards and rangers won't be happy about that)
Maybe one could add something like "epic skills", like actually allowing characters with good stealth to become invisible (I mean, a lev 20 character is supposed to be godlike) or giving a rogue feats like that (bards and rangers won't be happy about that)
It's called hide in plain sight and that plus a decent stealth roll is superior to invisibility.
Remember, even if the caster is invisible if he casts a spell with a verbal component that's a DC 0 Perception check (+1 per 10 feet) to spot the square. Or a DC 10 to hear them walking (or an apposed Move Silently check).
It's a DC 0 to hear someone casting a spell with a verbal component, but it's always a +20 to the DC to pinpoint a square. In this case, making it a DC 20. If you don't pinpoint the square, at best you can get a general direction.
If the Wizard is moving at full-speed it's a DC 10 to hear him (DC 30 to pinpoint). It's a DC 15 if the Wizard is moving at half-speed or less. If the Wizard makes a Stealh check, he gets a +20 to his check. (+40 if he's standing perfectly still.) Again, add another +20 to the DC to pinpoint.
For example, if the Wizard were to make a Stealth check, and gets a 15, (reasonable considering many Wizards have a decent Dex for AC purposes, don't wear armor, and often get as many 6-8 skill points per level) if he were to get a 15, that would be a DC 35 to notice him, and a DC 55 to pinpoint. +1 per 10 feet.
On the other hand, a Rogue could reasonably get 20-30 on Stealth checks all day long and not have to use spell slots.
Also, the DC to notice an invisible creature within 30ft is a flat DC 20. This is just a "hunch that 'something's there'" and as such, I wouldn't even give a direction.
most fiends can detect you invisible. invisibility does not bypass spells like alarm. invisibility is perfectly fine, now if you are thinking of a uber powerful invisibility spell I would most likely suggest something like this:
Perfect Vanish
School Illusion; Level sorcerer/wizard 9
Casting Time 1 swift action
Components S
Range personal
Target caster
Duration 1 hr/level, or until dismissed
Saving Throw Fortitude negates (harmless); Spell Resistance no
with a swift motion you become utterly invisible, remaining so until desired. the invisible caster can use any actions while invisible, creatures with blind-sight or tremor sense could locate the caster and possibly attack him, but not end the effect. perfect vanish masks one's odor making you invisible even from scent. invisibility purge can temporarily suppress the effect but the caster can resume his invisibility the next round as a swift action.
P.S.
BTW, the effect of the One Ring, which provides invisibility, as portrayed by PJ's film version resembles more "etheral jaunt"
Marvel Universe's Sue Storm not only become invisible but she also can project a "force field" the rough equivalent of a wall of force or a globe of invulnerability (at will if you mind)
The D&D/PF universe is a high magic world where any adventurer seeing some "floating object" or hearing some minor unerring sound should slap out his nearest magic detection device/spell, I don't know any fighter who would not pick blind-fight at the earliest most convenient opportunity, and now that wizards can do cantrips at will, detect magic is a must! Hell, I could even visualize the druid's animal companion or witch's familiar getting startled as soon as some "invisible" sneaky wizard get close enough.
If you were playing a DC Super Heroes game, turning invisible might be the only think you can do and you could be in the justice league.
In the DC universe being a good detective(Question) or really good with a bow(Green Arrow) is reason enough to be in the JLA. Are you going to ban skills too? How about weapons?
I really don't like invisibility. Invisibility should be a major power for an amazing wizard.
But it isn't. Wizards can do a lot of stuff that is a lot more powerful.
If you were playing a DC Super Heroes game, turning invisible might be the only think you can do and you could be in the justice league.
Bad analogy. Justice League isn't really picky. They let guys in who will be useless if wood/the colour yellow is around.
No wonder that invisibility will be a sure way in.
In fact, your usual high-level PF wizard wouldn't dream of getting into that crowd of losers.
One of the biggest insults to offer an archmage is "you're justice league material".
Sure, the justice league version of the Invisible Man probably can do it at will (and the greater version, not the regular PF invis), but he'd be a one-trick pony.
Imagine someone who can turn invisible, stop time, turn into a dragon (or a great number of other creatures), kill someone by speaking a single word, call up an archangel (or something evil of similar power) to do his bidding, enslave the will of others, and do all the other fun stuff archwizards do.
They don't join a league of superheroes. They ARE a league of superheroes.
In Lord of the Rings, Invisibility was an effect of a major artifact and it was amazing.
Sure, sure. It also had a magical horn that would summon your friends in time to give you a proper burial. And you get to call yourself one of the greatest wizards in the whole world with the light spell.
So, another bad example. That same wizard we talked about earlier - who took a minute to eliminate the Justice League, all their enemies, and had a couple of rounds to spare to take over that universe - would walk in on act one, be bored by the talk about the magical rings, idly wonder what's so great about a bunch of magic rings, would port to Mordor (one might not just walk into Mordor, but teleporting is another matter) kill Sauron (anyone who thinks you have to toss that ring into the fire from where it is forged doesn't know about high-level magic), obliterate the orc horde (child's play), and then tell the rest of the free races that total obedience is a small price to pay for security by - and from - a spellcaster who can beat up your gods without breaking a sweat.
I've never understood why, all the way back, that invisibility was made so easy to obtain?
Because it's not a big deal. It's just invisibility. Might be a big deal in worlds where a few cantrips make you a superhero or god, but compared to all the other stuff spellcasters can do (like completely alter reality - I can't believe I didn't think of Wish/Miracle), it's not a big deal.
What is even the point of stealth and perception when people and creatures are vanishing or turning invisible all the time.
The point is that a lot of those invisibility counter-measures don't work against good old stealth. And stealth costs nothing but some training and works all the time, not minutes at a time.
Are there monsters that require invisibility to beat at their CR?
The now renamed Stalker is very sad. He's so shy and now everyone can see him. Poor Regular Stalker.
Oh, wait, you mean what monsters can only be beaten with invisibility. There aren't that many monsters that need anything to beat. That's why invisibility is an option, not something every character gets. Because you don't need it to beat anything.
But, like a lot of other things, It's helpful.
Does this change the game much or does it just make rogues better?
A lot of rogues use invisibility, actually.
Invisibility is good and powerful, jumping on to the ethereal as a ninja is better.
You could re-work your world so that the simple spell invisibility and its connected spells were never researched.
He already changed his mind. He stated it earlier in the thread.
Invisibility doesn't screw over rogues. It screws over fighter-types who can't defend against it without help from spellcasters.
|
Invisibility actually helps rogues. A lot.
Because if your wizard has any sense, who will he make invisible? Himself? Or the person who actually gets better at everything when he's invisible? Chances are, he'll cast it on the rogue. Invisible rogues and fighters are more frightening than invisible wizards, generally speaking.
But it really does hurt fighting-types who can't See Invisible, because See Invisible is a self-only spell.
Invisibility actually helps rogues. A lot.
Because if your wizard has any sense, who will he make invisible? Himself? Or the person who actually gets better at everything when he's invisible? Chances are, he'll cast it on the rogue. Invisible rogues and fighters are more frightening than invisible wizards, generally speaking.
But it really does hurt fighting-types who can't See Invisible, because See Invisible is a self-only spell.
Oops. I cast this on the entire party once when being attacked by invisible enemies.
Fair enough, I'll probably leave it alone.
You don't have to. Your hands are already elbow-deep in tinkering with arcane magic. (no negativity on this comment here)
Invisibility is comparable with the power to fly in a fantasy setting. Both are world-altering abilities that circumvent most medieval lines of defenses and don't mesh really well with low-magic settings. We are forced to conclude that if fly and invisibility are that common (or merely uncommon abilities), then counter-measures need to be just as common for the rest of the world to work.
I don't know if you are still considering playing (or actually playing) an E6 campaign but in this case, both fly and invisibility spells only become available at level 5, which already make it a rare instance in world where most of the demographics don't go past level 2 or 3. Proportionally, that makes it a level 7th or 8th spell in a regular game.
Another option is to remove invisibility and leave greater invisibility as is. It would make it less available at lower level and deal with this messy "invisibility police" clause of basic invisibility.
'findel
another suggestion if you don't like spells that work better than skills:
let every magical effect fail a certain % of the time, if my players okay it, every round has a 1/30 chance to have a global antimagic field.
Flying wizard fall, invisible wizard get in trouble even warriors notice that their weapons don't hurt as much.
It might not be for everyone, but it makes people think twice before doing everything with magic.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
True story: PC witch gets surprise round greater dispel magic'd, lots of permanent spells stripped off, by a kelvezu demon (3.5, CR 16ish assassin type demon). He was pissed: "but how'd she sneak up on me? I have true seeing up!"
Me: "True seeing beats her invisibility, but your +12 Perception didn't beat her +42 Stealth. Go figure."
But the demon doesn't have invisibility against her, and thus doesn't get the bonus to Stealth from being invisible. Um, what?Assuming that you were using passive Perception (22 Perception) from her, and assuming that the Stealth roll factored in Invisibility (22 Stealth without Invisibility), she should have spotted the demon.
Unless that +12 Perception WAS her passive Perception.
If I remember right, that demon has something like +33 hide and move silently. If +12 was their total skill modifier, they would never have a chance to spot it.