Caster is invisible (level 2 invisibility) at 5 ft of martial character. Martial is aware of somebody being invisible in the vicinity.
Caster cast a spell. Does the martial gets an attack of opportunity? My GM argues that that is what happens.
He says that if an attack of opportunity hits a caster while casting, it can disrupt the spell. Then the attack of opportunity comes before the end of the casting but it is called as soon as the caster start casting. He says that as soon as the caster starts casting the offensive spell, he becomes visible.
Is that true? Can I show him rules that say otherwise?
Well, I would say depends if the spell has a verbal component or not. If so, the martial should get a perception check to see which square the spell comes from, than he may make his attack of opportunity at that square he believes the chanting came from. However, the caster gets total concealment against such attack unless the martial guessed the wrong square, which would be a miss anyway. If the attack hits, the caster must make a concentration check in order to cast that spell.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Caster is invisible (level 2 invisibility) at 5 ft of martial character. Martial is aware of somebody being invisible in the vicinity.
Caster cast a spell. Does the martial gets an attack of opportunity? My GM argues that that is what happens.
He says that if an attack of opportunity hits a caster while casting, it can disrupt the spell. Then the attack of opportunity comes before the end of the casting but it is called as soon as the caster start casting. He says that as soon as the caster starts casting the offensive spell, he becomes visible.
Is that true? Can I show him rules that say otherwise?
He's also wrong that the caster becomes visible as soon as he starts casting. He only becomes visible when he attacks someone (directly affects a target). He doesn't choose a target until he completes casting the spell (which is part of the reason why you can cast Summon Monster and choose both the creature and location when the spell completes, not have to choose when it starts).
That's not correct. You threaten anyone within your Reach as long as you can make attacks.
That's not correct. You threaten anyone within your Reach as long as you can make attacks.
Technically, one threatens the square, but I don't think one would be considered threatening the invisible character.
Right, right, you know what I mean.
You still threaten them (that's why you can make attacks against them and use certain special abilities). Nothing about invisibility gives you immunity to being threatened...just immunity to the main drawback of that.
|
The caster becomes visible at the same moment the attack he's making executes, too late for any enemy who can't see invisibility to fact to.
This is like the rule in American Football, 'the ground cannot cause a fumble', because at the instant the runner is down by contact the play is over, and if the ground causes the fumble then the play is already dead because the runner hit the ground.
If the action taken by the invisible person would break the invisibility, then that action has already completed by the time he is visible.
The caster becomes visible at the same moment the attack he's making executes, too late for any enemy who can't see invisibility to fact to.
This is like the rule in American Football, 'the ground cannot cause a fumble', because at the instant the runner is down by contact the play is over, and if the ground causes the fumble then the play is already dead because the runner hit the ground.
If the action taken by the invisible person would break the invisibility, then that action has already completed by the time he is visible.
You lost me at American.
But as a side note isn't the whole "ready an action to attack invisible opponent" trick pretty old by now? Have older generations neglected to pass on the many tricks of D&D? Also why do so many GM's try to make encounters more difficult in the midst of the fight by blatantly cheating? Why can't they wait for the next fight like a normal person?
I can't think of a situation where that makes a difference, but I have a nagging doubt in the back of my mind that I am just forgetting one that exists. Are there any you can think of?Right, right, you know what I mean.
You still threaten them (that's why you can make attacks against them and use certain special abilities). Nothing about invisibility gives you immunity to being threatened...just immunity to the main drawback of that.
I know a few classes and Feats have abilities worded along the lines of "anyone in a square you threaten/choose a square you threaten and you may " but I honestly can't think of any specific ones right now.
I tried searching them up on the SRD but the search function appears to be borked right now.
I don't think you can flank an invisible opponent, or one with total concealment. If two people are in flanking position around an invisible, and one has See Invisibility but the other doesn't, I don't think the invisible is flanked.
The combat chapter uses the phrase "X is threatened by Y" and never explains exactly what that means. It obviously means EITHER "X is in a square threatened by Y" OR "X may provoke an attack of opportunity from Y". I favor the latter.
They can still flank an invisible opponent.
Flanking is a bit nebulous fluff-wise but the general consensus seems to be it's because the guy in the middle has a harder time defending himself from the people on either side, which doesn't change if he's invisible.
Eh, so it goes.
Wait, somebody died? Sad day.
I can't think of a situation where that makes a difference, but I have a nagging doubt in the back of my mind that I am just forgetting one that exists. Are there any you can think of?Right, right, you know what I mean.
You still threaten them (that's why you can make attacks against them and use certain special abilities). Nothing about invisibility gives you immunity to being threatened...just immunity to the main drawback of that.
Here are a couple. For these examples, assume the ally of the character in question has See Invisibility but the character does not.
Cavalier's demanding challenge: "As long as the target is within the threatened area of the cavalier, it takes a –2 penalty to its AC from attacks made by anyone other than the cavalier."
If the cavalier can not threaten invisible creatures, his buddy with See Invisibility can't take advantage of the -2 AC penalty.
Tandem Trip: "Whenever you attempt a trip combat maneuver against an enemy threatened by an ally with this feat, you roll twice and take the better result."
Again, if I don't threaten invisible creatures, my buddy with See Invisibility can't roll twice. Lots of teamwork feats have similar wording.
Here's a more potentially useful example:
Disruptive says: "The DC to cast spells defensively increases by +4 for all enemies that are within your threatened area. This increase to casting spells defensively only applies if you are aware of the enemy's location and are capable of taking an attack of opportunity. If you can only take one attack of opportunity per round and have already used that attack, this increase does not apply."
Clearly, Disruptive does not apply to an invisible spell caster. What's much more interesting is that this text explicitly separates the concept of "in your threatened area" from "capable of taking an AoO". To me, this means that "threatening someone" is a separate condition from "able to make an AoO".
Demanding challenge, as written, would apply to invisible creatures because it depends on being within the threatened area.
A related question:
Does the feat Blind-Fight change anything? (I mean in the same situation as described by the OP)
Nope.
Thats why I'm asking it. As GM I allow it, but it is the RAW thing I'm unsure.