Invisibility and moving through enemies.


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 279 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hello board! came up today, looked for a while, couldn't find a real thread on it:

Situation:
Im invisible. I move. (for intents of this consider every stealth to beat any perception to detect)
An enemy goes to move through the square I am now in (coincidence).

At some point, he tries to enter my square this is where I butted heads with GM.

from the GMs perspective, although he(the enemy) failed to detect me via normal means, he knows me to be in that square because he cannot enter or end his turn there. So because of mechanics, the enemy can deduce an opponent is nearby because god stops him or tells him he cannot end his turn there.

What I have seen many times in the past, and also what I attempted to do, which was silently let him slip through, forgoing any attack of opportunity so he had no reason to suspect. The response to that was, 'there is no rule that lets you let an enemy pass through your square' which is, technically correct. However, 'there is also no rule that allows for' what the GM claimed either.(which was you "sense" invisible creatures when you try to enter their square, when sensing invisible creatures is explicity what perception is for.)

Is there anything to this? Or is it just another table variance discussion? It seems unlikely that due to a mechanical hole, you can pinpoint invisible creatures without a perception check.

To me, the GMs adjudication implies the creatures involved to have a somewhat '4th wall' understanding of the game's mechanics.

"Gee steve, I can't end mah turn here....must be an divisible guy"
Whack.


It's very metagamey on the GMs part.

The reasonable answer is, the square is a 5ft x 5ft area, the enemy tries to walk through and you let him.

For game mechanics he can't end his turn in your square, but he also shouldn't know where you are and probably just shouldn't be allowed to end his turn in your square.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

When this happens I allow the invisible player to take a 5' step if they don't want to take the attack of opportunity.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

From the combat section of Special Movement.

PRD wrote:
Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space: Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it's not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there's a legal position that's closer.


Walking around an area to try to bump into and find an invisible foe is a tactic I've seen used quite a few times. It's really not that unreasonable of an idea if you already suspect an invisible creature is in the area.

If the GM is using this tactic with a savvy foe, they should do their best to keep their GM knowledge separate from the creature's. I've seen GMs ask that the character remove their mini from the board and secretly mark their location on a piece of paper. They then move the monster around and the player informs the GM if they've bumped into them.

A way to partially defeat this tactic is for the invisible person to ready an action to move out of the way if the foe tries to enter their square, which will often allow them to avoid detection unless the foe does a lot of backtracking.


This is my personal take.

If the is a non-stressful situation, like sneaking into a building, you can simply let them slip past you. A stealth check vs their perception and that's it.

If you're in a more stressful situation, such as a heated combat, it would be much more difficult. It's one thing for a walking person to just go past you. It's another for somebody who suddenly pivoted and rushed ten feet to the side to crash right into you. I would probably allow a roll in that case. Maybe a reflex save to move out of the way in time? Maybe a percentage die? Some sort of chance of things occurring.

However, for your DM to say "He can't mechanically end his square there so he knows there is an invisible enemy there" is IMHO wrong and very metagamey.

Your DM did not handle it very well. However, there are no hard rules to handle this particular situation, so you should expect some table variance.


Bad call by the GM. That sounds like the sort of incident that happens when the game is turning into a GM v players game, which is usually a bad sign. I suggest that as a group you talk through how you can play the game together and what your gripes are. Typically it involves the players not being cheesy and the GM being impartial or even pro-player.

The Tarrasque's reference is well found.

Sovereign Court

There may be more information needed.

If this is a combat situation where everyone is going in initiative, and of course where everyone is doing their actions within the same 6 seconds, I don't think there is a problem. You were in the square and he got too close and was able to detect you. Probably bumped into you when he was trying to move into/through the space.

If this was a series of actions outside of initiative then I think that it should have been a bit more free form. You mention you are trying your best to avoid detection and if there is a guy moving and he will potentially move into you, you get to sidestep.


The_Tarrasque wrote:

From the combat section of Special Movement.

PRD wrote:
Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space: Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it's not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there's a legal position that's closer.

I can't believe I have been playing as long as I have and I never saw that rule before.

Thanks. <thumbs up>


OilHorse wrote:

There may be more information needed.

If this is a combat situation where everyone is going in initiative, and of course where everyone is doing their actions within the same 6 seconds, I don't think there is a problem. You were in the square and he got too close and was able to detect you. Probably bumped into you when he was trying to move into/through the space.

If this was a series of actions outside of initiative then I think that it should have been a bit more free form. You mention you are trying your best to avoid detection and if there is a guy moving and he will potentially move into you, you get to sidestep.

My problem with the accidental bumping is, touching something is part of perception. If you fail your perception, you fail to touch me, as per the skill.


Byakko wrote:

Walking around an area to try to bump into and find an invisible foe is a tactic I've seen used quite a few times. It's really not that unreasonable of an idea if you already suspect an invisible creature is in the area.

If the GM is using this tactic with a savvy foe, they should do their best to keep their GM knowledge separate from the creature's. I've seen GMs ask that the character remove their mini from the board and secretly mark their location on a piece of paper. They then move the monster around and the player informs the GM if they've bumped into them.

A way to partially defeat this tactic is for the invisible person to ready an action to move out of the way if the foe tries to enter their square, which will often allow them to avoid detection unless the foe does a lot of backtracking.

Saying this tactic works is directly at odds with the perception skill, and other feats out there such as equipment trick (scabbard) which lets you, as a move action, swing your scabbard into an adjacent square in order to detect invisible enemies.


Perception does not necessarily involve touching - you can spot invisible creatures without moving from your space!

Why is walking around an area with your arms spread out not a valid method of detecting invisible things in the room. Go and play Blind Mans Buff and tell me it isn't. You get an attack of opportunity and the searcher still takes their miss chance of they have an action left to attack.You can even ready a move if you really want to stay out of sight. If a player was say pressing themselves against the wall give them a chance to avoid the searcher.

It doesn't invalidate the scabbard combat trick as that allows you to Attack without miss chance, not move from your square or provoke an attack of opportunity.

Sovereign Court

SGriffit wrote:
OilHorse wrote:

There may be more information needed.

If this is a combat situation where everyone is going in initiative, and of course where everyone is doing their actions within the same 6 seconds, I don't think there is a problem. You were in the square and he got too close and was able to detect you. Probably bumped into you when he was trying to move into/through the space.

If this was a series of actions outside of initiative then I think that it should have been a bit more free form. You mention you are trying your best to avoid detection and if there is a guy moving and he will potentially move into you, you get to sidestep.

My problem with the accidental bumping is, touching something is part of perception. If you fail your perception, you fail to touch me, as per the skill.

Meh. Visual and Auditory stimuli are the most prevalent senses used when trying to "perceive" an invisible person. Most uses of perception don't need touch at all. Invisible things can be noticed with no touch involved, most common is that there is a faintly detected outline (thematic and not rules).

You obviously take an opposing view because you are caught and don't like it. By coincidentally, by your own admission, walking through the same square as you are in, and I assume that this is a combat situation, the mechanics side with the idea that he cannot because you have blocked him. You obviously didn't want to, but in the chaos of battle you didn't expect someone to go the way that this guy did.

In the end, the DM did follow the rules enough, and if he wishes he can add a bonus to perception to make it so the you are not auto-success on checks. In your favour you are still are granted full benefits of your invisibility (concealment and offensive/defensive bonuses).


"The Sword wrote:


Perception does not necessarily involve touching - you can spot invisible creatures without moving from your space!
OilHorse wrote:


Meh. Visual and Auditory stimuli are the most prevalent senses used when trying to "perceive" an invisible person. Most uses of perception don't need touch at all.

<Tweet!> Affirming the consequent, five yards, replay the down.

Less tersely, you don't need to touch things to use the Perception skill, but Perception is the skill that covers finding things by touching them just as it covers finding things by looking for them, finding things by listening for them, or finding things by smelling them.

From the SRD:

Quote:
Your senses allow you to notice fine details and alert you to danger. Perception covers all five senses, including sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell.

I want to know what color the dragon way up there is? Roll Perception to see it.

I want to know what those people are talking about? Roll Perception to eavesdrop.
I want to know whether this meat is spoiled? Roll Perception to smell it.

And, I want to feel around and see if there's an invisible enemy in this square? Roll Perception to find out.


Consider perhaps another Perception vs Stealth check (or compare the previous roll against the Stealth but with new drms applied) ... he would have bumped into your otherwise silent unmoving self but you elected to move within the space with him nearly about to crash into you ... you move in very close proximity which in turn forces the renewed/additional Perception check with appropriate drms to the check. We also hope there is no Gelatinous Cube involved :p The same might work in or out of combat with different mods applied since in combat you might have to move suddenly to avoid a body(ies) or weapon(s).


The Sword wrote:

Perception does not necessarily involve touching - you can spot invisible creatures without moving from your space!

Why is walking around an area with your arms spread out not a valid method of detecting invisible things in the room. Go and play Blind Mans Buff and tell me it isn't. You get an attack of opportunity and the searcher still takes their miss chance of they have an action left to attack.You can even ready a move if you really want to stay out of sight. If a player was say pressing themselves against the wall give them a chance to avoid the searcher.

It doesn't invalidate the scabbard combat trick as that allows you to Attack without miss chance, not move from your square or provoke an attack of opportunity.

The obvious flaw in that method is I am not a stationary object and can move in opposition of your silly hand waiving. Also, keep in mind, I was one of 5 PCs, he was moving to engage another enemy, not searching for an invisible opponent.

Waiving your hands as per the rules is a perception check. Opposed by my stealth. If you fail...you dont perceive me. I dont see how you can say you fail all the other senses except touch.


The rules for perception are not the only rules in the book. You're conveniently ignoring the other rules regarding being able to pass though or occupy the same squares as other creatures.

It's also common sense (although admittedly not spelled out terribly well in the rules) that being invisible should only make it harder to be detected by visual means, not other tactics such as by scent or by touch.

Finally, Pathfinder is a turn-based combat system, and isn't going to match reality perfectly in most situations. While it would make sense just to step out of the way if you were not in combat rounds, you are essentially stuck in your square while in combat barring things that specifically move you.

Thus, you would need a specific rule to allow you to dodge their movement. I actually gave an example of one earlier available to everyone: use a ready action to move out of their way.

---

As an aside, I do feel the GM may have run this incorrectly if the monster had no awareness of your character lurking around invisible, yet still decided to hunt you out by conveniently wandering into your square. But this is more an issue of the GM playing monsters realistically, rather than a fault with the actual tactic.


Byakko wrote:

The rules for perception are not the only rules in the book. You're conveniently ignoring the other rules regarding being able to pass though or occupy the same squares as other creatures.

It's also common sense (although admittedly not spelled out terribly well in the rules) that being invisible should only make it harder to be detected by visual means, not other tactics such as by scent or by touch.

Finally, Pathfinder is a turn-based combat system, and isn't going to match reality perfectly in most situations. While it would make sense just to step out of the way if you were not in combat rounds, you are essentially stuck in your square while in combat barring things that specifically move you.

Thus, you would need a specific rule to allow you to dodge their movement. I actually gave an example of one earlier available to everyone: use a ready action to move out of their way.

---

As an aside, I do feel the GM may have run this incorrectly if the monster had no awareness of your character lurking around invisible, yet still decided to hunt you out by conveniently wandering into your square. But this is more an issue of the GM playing monsters realistically, rather than a fault with the actual tactic.

Im not ignoring the rule, I fully understand the rule stated. We just understand it differently.

I understand it to mean
You cannot legally chose that square as a square to move in. (The monster is not aware of this, as it would mean the creatures involved have an understanding of the games mechanics.) So the creature in question chooses a different LEGAL square. He wasnt bounced from that square by an invisible force, he never tried to move into it. (The rules to support this have been linked above)

You understand it to mean
I tried to enter the square and was stopped somehow... clearly there is a creature there.

That by my understanding, is textbook meta-gaming.

Also, you do realize you just said "if something is invisible, its only harder to see, not touch"...


That is the case. If something is invisible it only affects sight, not smell, touch, hearing or taste (Eurggh!)

Perception covers all five senses but it doesn't mean all five senses are used in every perception test. Touch also isn't always about reaching out and feeling something with your hands. It can mean sensing the breeze across your face or tremors in the ground.

I agree if the opponent isn't actually searching that is different. Maybe a reflex save or acrobatics to dodge out of the way. Or a second stealth check to avoid the passer by.

To me just ruling the opponent can't enter your square is a bit wierd. They either pass by unhindered or they don't and they spot you. Can't really have it both ways.


A few things,

Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

Easily within the description of illusion (glamer) to mask all senses, yes I know scent exists and has rules for interacting with invisibility.

Also under invisibilty, I found my final most obvious piece of rules support. The spell itself speaks for me.

"..Of course, the subject is not magically silenced, and certain other conditions can render the recipient detectable (such as swimming in water or stepping in a puddle). If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving. The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions."

Under the spell it is my choice if you are foe or ally, giving yet another example of why you can let someone walk through you, as it is your choice if they are your enemy.


The Sword wrote:

Perception does not necessarily involve touching - you can spot invisible creatures without moving from your space!

Why is walking around an area with your arms spread out not a valid method of detecting invisible things in the room. Go and play Blind Mans Buff and tell me it isn't. You get an attack of opportunity and the searcher still takes their miss chance of they have an action left to attack.You can even ready a move if you really want to stay out of sight. If a player was say pressing themselves against the wall give them a chance to avoid the searcher.

It doesn't invalidate the scabbard combat trick as that allows you to Attack without miss chance, not move from your square or provoke an attack of opportunity.

There are already rules to detect invisible creatures. Bumping into the creature by walking around negates pinpointing the invisible creature by by groping around as a standard action.


SGriffit wrote:


I understand it to mean
You cannot legally chose that square as a square to move in. (The monster is not aware of this, as it would mean the creatures involved have an understanding of the games mechanics.) So the creature in question chooses a different LEGAL square. He wasnt bounced from that square by an invisible force, he never tried to move into it. (The rules to support this have been linked above)

You understand it to mean
I tried to enter the square and was stopped somehow... clearly there is a creature there.

That by my understanding, is textbook meta-gaming.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how your logic follows.

If a creature bumps into something invisible, there's nothing meta-gamey about the creature realizing (in-character) that there's something there. They may not know exactly what they stumbled into (or even if it's a threat), but they're certainly going to realize something is there.

Wait, are you saying that a creature can't even attempt to enter a square he believes to be empty... if something invisible happens to be there? Do we really need a rule stating that creatures can attempt to move where they think they'll be able to move? C'mon... lol

The_tarrasque wrote:
There are already rules to detect invisible creatures. Bumping into the creature by walking around negates pinpointing the invisible creature by by groping around as a standard action.

There's more than one way to uncover where an invisible creature is. Groping around may require a standard action, but on the plus side, it doesn't appear to provoke an attack of opportunity. This particular option actually seems rather redundant, in any case, as you can accomplish the same thing by simply attacking into the square (it's a 50% miss chance either way).

Sovereign Court

SGriffit wrote:

A few things,

Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

Easily within the description of illusion (glamer) to mask all senses, yes I know scent exists and has rules for interacting with invisibility.

Also under invisibilty, I found my final most obvious piece of rules support. The spell itself speaks for me.

"..Of course, the subject is not magically silenced, and certain other conditions can render the recipient detectable (such as swimming in water or stepping in a puddle). If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving. The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions."

Under the spell it is my choice if you are foe or ally, giving yet another example of why you can let someone walk through you, as it is your choice if they are your enemy.

One of your biggest complaints is about how the opposed view to yours is meta-gamey, and yet you include the bold as a part of how you think you are in the right.

That view is meta-gamey in every sense.

Having a guy bump into your PC and then realizing that there is an invisible opponent there is far less meta-gamey in comparison.

The more you argue it the more you seem to be petulant that you got caught while invisible in the way you did.

Again, in my view, I don't think that the DM did anything wrong, you are just sore.

If going invisible and running around a battle area is a tactic you plan on using, and you think the DM will be acting on metagame information, I think it best that you take the advice offered earlier and draw a copy of the map on a sheet of grid paper and use it under the supervision of a fellow player to pin point where your PC is moving.


The rules don't often make sense. They are there for game balance.
The rule only says that you can not end movement in an occupied square.
It does not automatically let you know that someone is there.

Can a GM assume that the character bumped into the invisible creature and could not stay there? Sure

A GM could also say you don't know the creature is there and you progress is halted "because the book said so".

If one wants claim auto-detection of a creature they need to provide some rules. Otherwise stand an FAQ because right now, as far as the rules go, nothing is supporting it.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber

Did you ready an action to perform some Acrobatics to get out of the moving creature's way? That's the skill that lets you pass through another creature's space. That use is during movement.

If you didn't, you are asking for a free (re)action.

Find a standard ceiling tile. That's 4ft x 2ft. Imagine an armed and armored warrior moving through a row barely wider than that (5ft). A creature who is standing in that corridor, presumably trying to be quiet is kind of... big. Sure, the warrior might not collide with an invisible cat, but a human? Just like an invisible wall, you're an obstacle.

Sorry, but the GM has this right. The moment you start readying actions to evade detection is the moment you start getting them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Orfamay Quest wrote:


And, I want to feel around and see if there's an invisible enemy in this square? Roll Perception to find out.

Actually, that's not a Perception check:

PRD wrote:
A creature can grope about to find an invisible creature. A character can make a touch attack with his hands or a weapon into two adjacent 5-foot squares using a standard action. If an invisible target is in the designated area, there is a 50% miss chance on the touch attack. If successful, the groping character deals no damage but has successfully pinpointed the invisible creature's current location.


Anguish wrote:

Did you ready an action to perform some Acrobatics to get out of the moving creature's way? That's the skill that lets you pass through another creature's space. That use is during movement.

If you didn't, you are asking for a free (re)action.

Find a standard ceiling tile. That's 4ft x 2ft. Imagine an armed and armored warrior moving through a row barely wider than that (5ft). A creature who is standing in that corridor, presumably trying to be quiet is kind of... big. Sure, the warrior might not collide with an invisible cat, but a human? Just like an invisible wall, you're an obstacle.

Sorry, but the GM has this right. The moment you start readying actions to evade detection is the moment you start getting them.

That is not what the post is about unless I misread it.

There is a rule in the book that if you end your movement in an occupied square you must end up in the last square that was not occupied.

Some are saying that an invisible creature in this occupied square is automatically detected.

The other side is saying that you have to stop in the last legal square, but you don't automatically know that a creature is the reason why.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Byakko wrote:
SGriffit wrote:


I understand it to mean
You cannot legally chose that square as a square to move in. (The monster is not aware of this, as it would mean the creatures involved have an understanding of the games mechanics.) So the creature in question chooses a different LEGAL square. He wasnt bounced from that square by an invisible force, he never tried to move into it. (The rules to support this have been linked above)

You understand it to mean
I tried to enter the square and was stopped somehow... clearly there is a creature there.

That by my understanding, is textbook meta-gaming.

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how your logic follows.

If a creature bumps into something invisible, there's nothing meta-gamey about the creature realizing (in-character) that there's something there. They may not know exactly what they stumbled into (or even if it's a threat), but they're certainly going to realize something is there.

Wait, are you saying that a creature can't even attempt to enter a square he believes to be empty... if something invisible happens to be there? Do we really need a rule stating that creatures can attempt to move where they think they'll be able to move? C'mon... lol

The_tarrasque wrote:
There are already rules to detect invisible creatures. Bumping into the creature by walking around negates pinpointing the invisible creature by by groping around as a standard action.
There's more than one way to uncover where an invisible creature is. Groping around may require a standard action, but on the plus side, it doesn't appear to provoke an attack of opportunity. This particular option actually seems rather redundant, in any case, as you can accomplish the same thing by simply attacking into the square (it's a 50% miss chance either way).

You can grope in 2 squares with a single action.

PRD wrote:


A creature can grope about to find an invisible creature. A character can make a touch attack with his hands or a weapon into two adjacent 5-foot squares using a standard action.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
wraithstrike wrote:

The rules don't often make sense. They are there for game balance.

The rule only says that you can not end movement in an occupied square.
It does not automatically let you know that someone is there.

Can a GM assume that the character bumped into the invisible creature and could not stay there? Sure

A GM could also say you don't know the creature is there and you progress is halted "because the book said so".

If one wants claim auto-detection of a creature they need to provide some rules. Otherwise stand an FAQ because right now, as far as the rules go, nothing is supporting it.

By rule the character know that there is something in the square that made impossible for him to enter it.

He don't know what or who it is, but he can attack the square.

By rules you don't need to know that there is someone/thing in a square, you can attack blindly, hoping for the best.

Combine the two and you get "there is some kind of obstacle in this square, I take a swipe at it."
It is not "auto-detection" of someone invisible.

wraithstrike wrote:


Some are saying that an invisible creature in this occupied square is automatically detected.

The other side is saying that you have to stop in the last legal square, but you don't automatically know that a creature is the reason why.

Not what they are saying Wraith. They are saying that you know that there is a invisible obstacle. You don't know if it is a dragon paw, a invisible wall, a invisible character or some other thing.

you can guess, but you don't know.


Following on from Diego Rossi, if you have no idea what the invisible thing is I would expect the player to role play character knowledge and not metagame. However if the enemy just turned invisible then it is not metagaming to attack the square as it is reasonable to assume the invisible creature is the foe. The same goes for the DM - though if adventurers are invading your lair and you detect something invisible in front of you that isn't normally there expect the resident to lash out violently if in combat!

SGriffit: Please note the "or" in the description of glammers. Those spells can replicate sound, smell, sight and taste and touch but they don't automatically do all five. The fact that you can feel, smell and hear invisible creatures proves this.

Groping into other squares in combat is different to just walking into them. You aren't provoking attacks of opportunity, or using any movement. Granted you may not want to take that Attack of opportunity but that's your choice.

Invisibility is frequently given more power than it deserves for a second level spell. Some people claim it effects your ability to be detected on the other side of a door (because of the all senses part of the glammer description) now we are saying it means you don't take up space. Invisibility does not make you ethereal!


SGriffit wrote:

Hello board! came up today, looked for a while, couldn't find a real thread on it:

Situation:
Im invisible. I move. (for intents of this consider every stealth to beat any perception to detect)
An enemy goes to move through the square I am now in (coincidence).

At some point, he tries to enter my square this is where I butted heads with GM.

from the GMs perspective, although he(the enemy) failed to detect me via normal means, he knows me to be in that square because he cannot enter or end his turn there. So because of mechanics, the enemy can deduce an opponent is nearby because god stops him or tells him he cannot end his turn there.

What I have seen many times in the past, and also what I attempted to do, which was silently let him slip through, forgoing any attack of opportunity so he had no reason to suspect. The response to that was, 'there is no rule that lets you let an enemy pass through your square' which is, technically correct. However, 'there is also no rule that allows for' what the GM claimed either.(which was you "sense" invisible creatures when you try to enter their square, when sensing invisible creatures is explicity what perception is for.)

Is there anything to this? Or is it just another table variance discussion? It seems unlikely that due to a mechanical hole, you can pinpoint invisible creatures without a perception check.

To me, the GMs adjudication implies the creatures involved to have a somewhat '4th wall' understanding of the game's mechanics.

"Gee steve, I can't end mah turn here....must be an divisible guy"
Whack.

Your GM made a bad call, there are rules to move through someones square that he could use as the basis for this. For this scenario Acrobatics seems applicable. (Overrun which would be more applicable if the creature is charging.)

The enemy effectively makes an Acrobatics check with a result of 'it doesn't matter what he rolls, you are not blocking it'.

It doesn't matter that he is not trying to do so, that is the actual effect here and it is based on the rules for trying to move through an enemy's space.

To put this another way: he tries to move through your space and so he has to make an Acrobatics check to successfully do so. You elect to not resist this (drop dex to 1, dont count all of your BAB..however the GM wants to think about it).


The way we play it is quite similar to the option Gauss posted above: the invisible character has the choice to let the mover pass unhindered as if the mover was not an opponent -"Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions."- OilHorse, note that the rule says "character's perceptions" and not "player's perceptions", so I strongly disagree when you say that it is meta-gaming when the character decides to let opponents to pass unhindered on her square.

Remember that being invisible is -normally- a bonus.

The only case we do not play by this RAI is when the opponent finishes its movement on the same square, but for that I liked the option Byakko exposed -to remove temporaly from GMs view the location of the invisible character-, in that case the mover will automatically succeed on knowing there was something invisible on that square.

Anyhow, I think is a good candidate for FAQ.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
Anguish wrote:

Did you ready an action to perform some Acrobatics to get out of the moving creature's way? That's the skill that lets you pass through another creature's space. That use is during movement.

If you didn't, you are asking for a free (re)action.

Find a standard ceiling tile. That's 4ft x 2ft. Imagine an armed and armored warrior moving through a row barely wider than that (5ft). A creature who is standing in that corridor, presumably trying to be quiet is kind of... big. Sure, the warrior might not collide with an invisible cat, but a human? Just like an invisible wall, you're an obstacle.

Sorry, but the GM has this right. The moment you start readying actions to evade detection is the moment you start getting them.

That is not what the post is about unless I misread it.

There is a rule in the book that if you end your movement in an occupied square you must end up in the last square that was not occupied.

Some are saying that an invisible creature in this occupied square is automatically detected.

The other side is saying that you have to stop in the last legal square, but you don't automatically know that a creature is the reason why.

It's one and the same; if the OP can't/doesn't get out of the way, he's an obstacle. At which point the mover stops. How you could think you might not detect someone you just bumped into, I don't know.

You may have rolled a great Stealth check on your turn, but you couldn't actively react to the physical intrusion. Something changed. Kind of like hiding in the middle of a room in the dark, only someone turns on the lights. "Oh, well, I would've hid behind the couch if I knew they were going to turn on lights!" Yeah, no. Back to readied actions.

You can't Acrobatics or Stealth in reaction to someone looking for you if you haven't readied an action to do so, therefore there's a collision, which is inherently revealing.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Gauss wrote:
The enemy effectively makes an Acrobatics check with a result of 'it doesn't matter what he rolls, you are not blocking it'.

You don't get to voluntarily lower your AC in this game, and CMD is AC for maneuvers, as well as the DC for Acrobatics to move through a square. Doesn't work.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Numarak wrote:
The way we play it is quite similar to the option Gauss posted above: the invisible character has the choice to let the mover pass unhindered as if the mover was not an opponent -"Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions."- OilHorse, note that the rule says "character's perceptions" and not "player's perceptions", so I strongly disagree when you say that it is meta-gaming when the character decides to let opponents to pass unhindered on her square.

Worse, doing it that way is nonsensical. Two allies moving through a square I can imagine; they're cooperating, one deliberately moving to one side while the other moves to the other side (of a square). When one participant can't cooperate, it's not going to work.

Sovereign Court

Numarak wrote:

The way we play it is quite similar to the option Gauss posted above: the invisible character has the choice to let the mover pass unhindered as if the mover was not an opponent -"Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions."- OilHorse, note that the rule says "character's perceptions" and not "player's perceptions", so I strongly disagree when you say that it is meta-gaming when the character decides to let opponents to pass unhindered on her square.

Remember that being invisible is -normally- a bonus.

The only case we do not play by this RAI is when the opponent finishes its movement on the same square, but for that I liked the option Byakko exposed -to remove temporaly from GMs view the location of the invisible character-, in that case the mover will automatically succeed on knowing there was something invisible on that square.

Anyhow, I think is a good candidate for FAQ.

The player determines the PC's manners towards things, so what you are saying is really splitting hairs.

The games allows allies to move through your square freely, but not foes. To actively change your perceptions of a guy who is moving towards you in the middle of combat from foe to friend is thoroughly a metagame decision. The OP did not like when others made statements that he deemed as metagame.

I only point out the hypocrisy of his view in that.

Remember that he keeps all the bonuses of being invisible (concealment etc... ), and will be able to move next action to hide again.

I really see no issue with what happened, and I also agree that the option Byakko presented is a good one, especially when there is an obvious disconnect between player and DM.


There is a precedent for allowing them through your square, you can let allies through and can choose to allow people making an overrun attempt to pass through.


413394 wrote:
...choose to allow people making an overrun attempt to pass through.

This.

My character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc rushes toward me, attempting an Overrun maneuver, to get at the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. I can choose to allow him to pass by me if I don't really like the wizard much.

My invisible character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc is rushing forward to attack the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. He didn't perceive me so he didn't attempt an Overrun maneuver. Because he isn't actively trying to knock me down on his way through my square I somehow cannot manage to get out of the way in time and have to "let" him just bump into me?

Really?


Fried Goblin Surprise wrote:
413394 wrote:
...choose to allow people making an overrun attempt to pass through.

This.

My character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc rushes toward me, attempting an Overrun maneuver, to get at the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. I can choose to allow him to pass by me if I don't really like the wizard much.

My invisible character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc is rushing forward to attack the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. He didn't perceive me so he didn't attempt an Overrun maneuver. Because he isn't actively trying to knock me down on his way through my square I somehow cannot manage to get out of the way in time and have to "let" him just bump into me?

Really?

I think you can clearly allow someone to walk by you without harm. You allow your allies to all the time in fact and you could allow a enemy to as well. But the main question is on if they end their turn in your square. They mechanically can't because it's an illegal move, but meta-game they know that someone is there. So it's kind of a weird place in the rules


pinkycatcher wrote:
I think you can clearly allow someone to walk by you without harm. You allow your allies to all the time in fact and you could allow a enemy to as well. But the main question is on if they end their turn in your square. They mechanically can't because it's an illegal move, but meta-game they know that someone is there. So it's kind of a weird place in the rules

That isn't what a lot of the posters, like Anguish and Oilhorse, are saying though.

They are arguing that you don't get a choice to allow an enemy to pass through your square, at all.

Anguish wrote:
Two allies moving through a square I can imagine; they're cooperating, one deliberately moving to one side while the other moves to the other side (of a square). When one participant can't cooperate, it's not going to work.

and

Oilhorse wrote:
The games allows allies to move through your square freely, but not foes.

The OP also aid that his GM wouldn't allow this.

sgrifit wrote:

from the GMs perspective, although he(the enemy) failed to detect me via normal means, he knows me to be in that square because he cannot enter or end his turn there.


The grid is a mechanic for players; for the characters, there is no grid, and there are no squares. So the mere concept of a character realizing he "can't enter a square" is ridiculous; and I mean that in the truest sense of the word, the GM is worthy of ridicule for his idea. Yes, you absolutely can step aside and let a creature pass by, but that would still count as movement so you only get the +20 bonus to stealth when doing so, rather than +40 for standing still. Additionally, total concealment grants a 50% miss chance so even if you were to stand stock still and the character passed by you, he should have only a 50% chance to bump into you. Thus, your options boil down to this: let the guard pass and get only +20 to stealth against his perception check to notice you, or just stand still and get +40 to stealth but he gets a 50% chance to bump into you anyway. More importantly, fire your GM and get a replacement because he clearly doesn't know how to be a GM.


I guess you guys are also ignoring that touch is covered under perception. So I dont see how he bumps me knowing im there when he failed his perception check, and is not actively searching for me via the method you described.

The rules I see under invisibility say that I can choose to consider him NOT A FOE, meaning I can allow him through.

The rules under perception say in order to use your senses to detect me you roll a perception check.

Your standard action touch thing is legit also, but that requires a touch attack with miss chance. Which was not what the enemy was doing so irrelevant.

So far nothing in the rules supports automatically perceiving creatures you pass through or (try to) end your turn in.

My understanding is the character never tried to move into the illegal square, so he chooses another square, he is not aware he was barred from entering the first square because he never tried to, it is illegal.

Your understanding is the rules bounce him out of the square alerting him to the presense of an invisible enemy.

There are already plenty of rules we have discovered for detecting invisibility. See invisibilty, invis purge, standard action waive with miss chance, perception check, water displacement or the like (as described under the spell invisibility). However, nowhere have I seen anything that says trying illegal movement is a method for detection.

I would love another solution other than find a new GM, as this is a very rare occasions of disagreement between us and he is a great GM. After 41 posts I do believe it to just come down to table variance, you have shown me a few more pieces to solidify my stance that I will show him and see if it changes his mind. If not, oh well, I'll file it under 'barely comes up anyway'


Anguish wrote:
Gauss wrote:
The enemy effectively makes an Acrobatics check with a result of 'it doesn't matter what he rolls, you are not blocking it'.
You don't get to voluntarily lower your AC in this game, and CMD is AC for maneuvers, as well as the DC for Acrobatics to move through a square. Doesn't work.

So if I have a CMD of 30, and a guard tells me to surrender and allow him to tie me up, you would require him to beat my CMD in order to grapple me first even if I say I comply with the command?


Gauss wrote:
SGriffit wrote:

Hello board! came up today, looked for a while, couldn't find a real thread on it:

Situation:
Im invisible. I move. (for intents of this consider every stealth to beat any perception to detect)
An enemy goes to move through the square I am now in (coincidence).

At some point, he tries to enter my square this is where I butted heads with GM.

from the GMs perspective, although he(the enemy) failed to detect me via normal means, he knows me to be in that square because he cannot enter or end his turn there. So because of mechanics, the enemy can deduce an opponent is nearby because god stops him or tells him he cannot end his turn there.

What I have seen many times in the past, and also what I attempted to do, which was silently let him slip through, forgoing any attack of opportunity so he had no reason to suspect. The response to that was, 'there is no rule that lets you let an enemy pass through your square' which is, technically correct. However, 'there is also no rule that allows for' what the GM claimed either.(which was you "sense" invisible creatures when you try to enter their square, when sensing invisible creatures is explicity what perception is for.)

Is there anything to this? Or is it just another table variance discussion? It seems unlikely that due to a mechanical hole, you can pinpoint invisible creatures without a perception check.

To me, the GMs adjudication implies the creatures involved to have a somewhat '4th wall' understanding of the game's mechanics.

"Gee steve, I can't end mah turn here....must be an divisible guy"
Whack.

Your GM made a bad call, there are rules to move through someones square that he could use as the basis for this. For this scenario Acrobatics seems applicable. (Overrun which would be more applicable if the creature is charging.)

The enemy effectively makes an Acrobatics check with a result of 'it doesn't matter what he rolls, you are not blocking it'.

It doesn't matter that he is not trying to do...

This is also what I was thinking, but as a PFS table, I have to try to find as much hard rule support as I can, and have yet to be able to locate willingly getting hit. I know you can willingly fail a save, but have been unable to find something about taking 1 on CMD.


Fried Goblin Surprise wrote:
413394 wrote:
...choose to allow people making an overrun attempt to pass through.

This.

My character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc rushes toward me, attempting an Overrun maneuver, to get at the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. I can choose to allow him to pass by me if I don't really like the wizard much.

My invisible character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc is rushing forward to attack the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. He didn't perceive me so he didn't attempt an Overrun maneuver. Because he isn't actively trying to knock me down on his way through my square I somehow cannot manage to get out of the way in time and have to "let" him just bump into me?

Really?

This goblin has the right answer.

Sure, sure, there is no RAW for it. But that's why we have GMs.

So now the rules-lawyers (of which I am one) can argue endlessly that the RAW doesn't allow what the OP wants and the OP's GM followed the exact hair-splitting RAW. But the GMs can say "Oh, yeah, it's kind of like the overrun rules but it's even easier to avoid the enemy since, in an actual overrun, the enemy sees you and wants to engage you, while here he doesn't. So yeah, you can avoid him."

That's easy enough for any GM who's stepping out of the rules courtroom and stepping into the role of a a guy who wants the game to make some sense and be fun.

It gets a bit more awkward if the enemy really wants to actually stop in that square, in which case we can invoke the rule quoted before that he stops short - but we don't have to say "It's because he bumped into the invisible guy" or "It's because some mystical metagame force prevented him from moving his last 5 feet." A GM can just say that he didn't move quite as quickly, or he spent the first one second of his round looking around evaluating the battlefield so he only moved for five seconds instead of six, or any number of other simple rationalizations for moving 25' instead of 30' this round that don't include an "auto-detect" of the invisible guy who, in a practical common-sense ruling, wouldn't have been detected even if the enemy ran straight through the square.

This is why we have GMs. Those who wear the mantle should keep this in mind.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The_Tarrasque wrote:

From the combat section of Special Movement.

PRD wrote:
Accidentally Ending Movement in an Illegal Space: Sometimes a character ends its movement while moving through a space where it's not allowed to stop. When that happens, put your miniature in the last legal position you occupied, or the closest legal position, if there's a legal position that's closer.

Who the heck is this imposter???

I am the tarrasque. ME. MEEEEEE!

This wannabe better not me trying to horn in on Mrs. Tarrasque...

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
pinkycatcher wrote:
Fried Goblin Surprise wrote:
413394 wrote:
...choose to allow people making an overrun attempt to pass through.

This.

My character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc rushes toward me, attempting an Overrun maneuver, to get at the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. I can choose to allow him to pass by me if I don't really like the wizard much.

My invisible character is standing in a 5 foot wide hallway and an orc is rushing forward to attack the squishy wizard 10 feet behind me. He didn't perceive me so he didn't attempt an Overrun maneuver. Because he isn't actively trying to knock me down on his way through my square I somehow cannot manage to get out of the way in time and have to "let" him just bump into me?

Really?

I think you can clearly allow someone to walk by you without harm. You allow your allies to all the time in fact and you could allow a enemy to as well. But the main question is on if they end their turn in your square. They mechanically can't because it's an illegal move, but meta-game they know that someone is there. So it's kind of a weird place in the rules

And they and you are squeezed while they are passing in your square.

I had plenty of friends or foes chose that moment to take an AoO as they will get some serious benefit.
5' isn't much when there are two armed and maybe armored guys moving in that square.

PRD wrote:
A creature can squeeze past a creature while moving but it can't end its movement in an occupied square.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
SGriffit wrote:


The rules I see under invisibility say that I can choose to consider him NOT A FOE, meaning I can allow him through.

No, you can't cast a fireball against a bunch of enemies, shout "I am a friend" and remain invisible.

SGriffit wrote:


The rules under perception say in order to use your senses to detect me you roll a perception check.

And they say that perception can be rolled for each new stimulus. You are moving to avoid the guy entering your square? Ne stimulus.

You are standing still and the guy moving can bump against you? Ne stimulus.


SGriffit wrote:

..from the GMs perspective, although he(the enemy) failed to detect me via normal means, he knows me to be in that square because he cannot enter or end his turn there. So because of mechanics, the enemy can deduce an opponent is nearby because god stops him or tells him he cannot end his turn there.

Your GM is incorrect. The only way to know an invisible creature is present is to use Perception to detect them, groping touch attacks, or some spell. However, the oddity of the rules creates meta-game knowledge that is difficult to contend with. The PDT needs to rule on this and decide whether the inability to move into someone's square constitutes pinpointing someone.

My recommendation to you is this. If the situation were reversed, would your GM allow you as a character to do what he had the NPC do? If the answer is yes, then at least you'll know the rule is being applied consistently. If the answer isn no, then you'll need to hope the GM can understand why the situation is unfair.

Personally, I would allow an invisible person to sidestep without detection. If the NPC were attacked by an AoO, then squeezing would apply and the NPC would know someone else was in the square. If the NPC tried to end its turn in your square, I would allow pinpointing simply because the meta-game knowledge is unlearnable. I also think it just makes sense to say you bump into something invisible.

hope that helps.


sgrifit wrote:
This is also what I was thinking, but as a PFS table, I have to try to find as much hard rule support as I can, and have yet to be able to locate willingly getting hit. I know you can willingly fail a save, but have been unable to find something about taking 1 on CMD.

I don't play PFS. One of the reasons I choose not to play PFS is reasons just like this. It is basically pointless to argue anything rules related that is not set in stone. This is very much house rule territory with a sprinkling of RAI.

I wish you had said from the beginning that this was a PFS question, I wouldn't have bothered replying.

1 to 50 of 279 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Invisibility and moving through enemies. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.