Can spells that target foes be used on invisible targets that have been pin-pointed?, lets say a caster with the scent ability, starts his turn 5ft away from an invisible creature (Auto pin-point), takes a 5ft step away (To avoid AoO), and casts, say Hold Person on the pin pointed creature.
What happens with the save? does miss chance still come into it at all?
Nope. If you don't have line of sight you must touch the creature to affect it with a target spell. As far as I know, only blindsight bypasses this restriction.
From the "Aiming a Spell" rules: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
Ravingdork, it is always nice to have someone with your knowledge of the rules around.
Fair enough, I'd read that part in the rules too, I was just unsure what, specifically 'see' means, for example, if a creature is invisible but covered by glitter dust is it still unable to be targeted by spells?
Glitter dust reads "visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell" Although it doesn't actually say it negates the effect of invisibility
But I guess this is a tangent to the scenario I presented above, here the target at least has some visual cues as to there where abouts.
My line of thinking is, just as a spell caster can cast a spell at a living creature subject to mirror image (as long as it doesn't require an attack roll it still hits the target no matter) why not be able to target a creature you know is there, in a square you know they're in.
As a DM it's something I'd house rule on but I'd like to know what others think
I would certainly allow someone to target a glitterdusted invisible creature.
How about this scenario, use a Dirty Trick to kick mud at someone, mud sticks to them and shows where they are, then cast a spell targeting them?
I would say no, as dirty trick cannot reveal invisible creatures.
You can place flour on an object to keep visual track of it, but mud wouldn't work on a creature? After the invisibility effect is cast, for the duration, everything else on or picked up by the creature is visible unless tucked away, so why not?
I never said that mud wouldn't work, just that dirty trick wouldn't.
If there is enough mud on the creature that his total concealment is effectively negated, I would likely rule that it could be targeted.
Glitterdust doesn't remove his total concealment either, but I agree with you that I'd let my players target him with spells, what I'm getting at is that invisibility and concealment are only means to avoid enemies knowing which square to target in the first place. And that the spells have a way of 'finding' the appropriate target once you cast them into the correct place, as in the case of the Mirror Image example.
Here's an idea,
New spell
Name: Pollock's Fury
Area of Effect, pain falls from 10 ft above the area designated and sticks to everything it touches, possible colours include bright orange, yellow, and Hot pink. The paint does not blind or unduly confuse those affected or in any way hinder them other than to visually colour them. The paint wares of in 1d4 minutes or by full immersion in water or a similar liquid.
Save: None (Its a Conjuration spell after all) Spell Resistance: None
Now if I was the wizard and wanted to make my own spells, THIS would be on the list haha. And it probably wouldn't be very high level
Glitterdust doesn't remove his total concealment either
Huh? I thought the spell specifically said that it did. On further inspection, I can only find "outlines creatures" which may well do the same thing. Still not as clear as I originally thought.
...remember glitterdust is magic (and fills an area) - dirty trick / kicking mud is not. If normal mud made an invisible character visible, then there should be special rules for whenever an invisible character moves in difficult terrain, gets rained on, etc.
Do we both agree that after you turn invisible, anything you pick up, or that sticks to you, that you do not conceal behind robes, clothing etc, is still visible?
Because that's what the spell description says
Now how would dirty trick/mud kick or something similar, say, throwing flour on the target NOT work to visual identify their location?
I'm not saying it makes them visible, just like having scent and being 5ft away doesn't make them visible, nor does Glitterdust, none of these things actually make them visible OR negate the 50% miss chance, it just allows you to target your attacks that will suffer that 50% miss chance
On a strange note, Faerie Fire specifically says it negates the 50% miss chance, while Glitterdust does not, but both impose a Stealth penalty, which would negate the bonus from being invisible (at least partially), and allow for Perception checks to pin-point invisible foes.
I would simply have throwing mud NOT be a dirty trick. I would use the established rules for throwing things on invisible targets with the express purpose of revealing them. I've noted said rule below: