DC to Pinpoint Invisible Creature


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 181 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

69 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 7 people marked this as a favorite.

This has cone up several times, and no answer has been given. I know how I think it works, but that won't settle any debates. As always the actual FAQ question will be at the bottom of this post.

The rules state the following.

Quote:

A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check.

This just gives us the knowledge that the invisible creature is somewhere in the area.

The rules then go on to tell us how to find the actual square the creature is in instead of just knowing it is around.

Quote:

It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check.

So now we know it is a base DC of 40 to find the square before any other modifiers come into play.

However it doesn't end there.

Invisibility table wrote:


Not moving +20

That pushed the base DC up to 60 if they are not moving.

Once again this tale is still not over. If you are using stealth you also get to add your stealth roll to either the +40 or +60 DC

Invisibility table wrote:


Using Stealth Stealth check +20

So the DC is either 40+stealth or 60+stealth.

The above is not counting other modifiers that can give a penalty to the perception DC such as being in combat or moving at full speed.

FAQ Question:
Does the DC of pinpointing an invisible opponent start at a base of 40 or 60(standing still) and then also add stealth if someone uses stealth?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

if the invisible creature is not actively hiding than its a dc 20 check so any one with +20 in perception can just auto see them if they are actively hiding the dc is their hide check lets say the invisible creature rolled 35 post modifiers(dex, skill ranks ect.) and then adds the +20 from invisibility the dc to see is 55 so while unlikely to happen something with +55 in perception would see them and this gets easier with any added seances such as sent and some times they just auto pin point with things like life sense, tremor sense ect.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
if the invisible creature is not actively hiding than its a dc 20 check so any one with +20 in perception can just auto see them if they are actively hiding the dc is their hide check lets say the invisible creature rolled 35 post modifiers(dex, skill ranks ect.) and then adds the +20 from invisibility the dc to see is 55 so while unlikely to happen something with +55 in perception would see them and this gets easier with any added seances such as sent and some times they just auto pin point with things like life sense, tremor sense ect.

If it is invisible and withing 30 feet the DC 20 only notices they are in the area. They still can not be seen. You dont even know what square they are in.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Isn't the real question whether you still add an additional 20 to the stealth check on top of the base 40, or is the +20 added to stealth the same 20 that you start with to notice an invisible creature?

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The pinpoint is to ignore the 50% miss chance. That's the only time you'd add the other +20.

It's essentially a way of saying, "Yes you can pretty much tell where they are for the most part but there's still a good chance of missing them."


3 people marked this as a favorite.
invisibility wrote:

Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance).

...
If a character tries to attack an invisible creature whose location he has not pinpointed, have the player choose the space where the character will direct the attack. If the invisible creature is there, conduct the attack normally. If the enemy's not there, roll the miss chance as if it were there and tell him that the character has missed, regardless of the result. That way the player doesn't know whether the attack missed because the enemy's not there or because you successfully rolled the miss chance.

The pinpoint is to enable you to target the correct square. Nothing about pinpointing removes the 50% miss chance.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It could be even worse than that though, check out the stealth rules:

stealth wrote:
Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.

I think this must be a restating of the rules otherwise you'll end up with a DC well over 100 before adding stealth. It strongly supports the conclusion that noticing an invisible sneak is really, really hard.

Base DC20, +20 to pinpoint,+20 not moving, +stealth check +20 = DC to pinpoint a stationary invisible sneak (or 80+stealth).

Also worth noting that all of those modifiers apply to the base DC20 just to get a hunch that someone is there. So the DC to just get a hunch that the sneak is within 30' is 60+stealth check.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think a lot of those things are just repeating the same thing, rather than all adding them together.

Stealth wrote:
Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.
Invisibility spell wrote:
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.

These are clearly the same thing.

Further, I think the rules suggest two separate DCs for detecting an invisible creature: one for when the creature is "just there", and one for when it's actually trying to hide with Stealth.

Glossary > Invisibility wrote:


A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check.

(...)

Invisible creature is... Perception DC Modifier
(...)
Not moving +20
Using Stealth Stealth check +20

So here again we see: noticing the existence of an invisible creature that's not actively trying to hide is DC 20 if it's mobile, or 20+20=40 if it's not moving. That's when a creature is not using Stealth, because then we use the other entry in the table, where it lists a new DC, not a modifier to the original DC. And the new DC is a Stealth check +20.

TL;DR - an invisible creature not trying to stealth takes a DC 20 or 40 Perception check to spot, depending on whether it's moving or not. If the creature is actually trying to hide, the DC is [stealth check]+20 for mobile, or [stealth check]+40 for immobile.


Ascalaphus wrote:

I think a lot of those things are just repeating the same thing, rather than all adding them together.

Stealth wrote:
Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.
Invisibility spell wrote:
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.

These are clearly the same thing.

Further, I think the rules suggest two separate DCs for detecting an invisible creature: one for when the creature is "just there", and one for when it's actually trying to hide with Stealth.

Glossary > Invisibility wrote:


A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check.

(...)

Invisible creature is... Perception DC Modifier
(...)
Not moving +20
Using Stealth Stealth check +20

So here again we see: noticing the existence of an invisible creature that's not actively trying to hide is DC 20 if it's mobile, or 20+20=40 if it's not moving. That's when a creature is not using Stealth, because then we use the other entry in the table, where it lists a new DC, not a modifier to the original DC. And the new DC is a Stealth check +20.

TL;DR - an invisible creature not trying to stealth takes a DC 20 or 40 Perception check to spot, depending on whether it's moving or not. If the creature is actually trying to hide, the DC is [stealth check]+20 for mobile, or [stealth check]+40 for immobile.

I agree with you on the invisibility/stealth rules but I don't think you can possibly be right on the rest.

invisibility wrote:


A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check.

Setting the base DC for an active invisible creature.

invisibility wrote:
It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check.

increasing the difficulty to pinpoint.

Quote:
There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.

Leading on to a table clearly headed 'perception DC modifier' - I really can't see anything to infer, imply or indicate any intent other than it all adds together.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Isn't the real question whether you still add an additional 20 to the stealth check on top of the base 40, or is the +20 added to stealth the same 20 that you start with to notice an invisible creature?

No. You get an additional +20 for not moving. The +20 for pinpointing is an entirely different thing.


dragonhunterq wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

I think a lot of those things are just repeating the same thing, rather than all adding them together.

Stealth wrote:
Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.
Invisibility spell wrote:
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.

These are clearly the same thing.

Further, I think the rules suggest two separate DCs for detecting an invisible creature: one for when the creature is "just there", and one for when it's actually trying to hide with Stealth.

Glossary > Invisibility wrote:


A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check.

(...)

Invisible creature is... Perception DC Modifier
(...)
Not moving +20
Using Stealth Stealth check +20

So here again we see: noticing the existence of an invisible creature that's not actively trying to hide is DC 20 if it's mobile, or 20+20=40 if it's not moving. That's when a creature is not using Stealth, because then we use the other entry in the table, where it lists a new DC, not a modifier to the original DC. And the new DC is a Stealth check +20.

TL;DR - an invisible creature not trying to stealth takes a DC 20 or 40 Perception check to spot, depending on whether it's moving or not. If the creature is actually trying to hide, the DC is [stealth check]+20 for mobile, or [stealth check]+40 for immobile.

I agree with you on the invisibility/stealth rules but I don't think you can possibly be right on the rest.

invisibility wrote:


A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check.

Setting the base DC for an active invisible creature.

invisibility wrote:
It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an
...

That is incorrect. The DC to notice, and DC to pinpoint(locate exact square) are different.

On top of that the +20 for not moving is extra.

I also know this because 3.5 had almost the exact same wording, and their "rules of the game" articles had the same numbers I used, but since PF is not 3.5 I can't use 3.5 as absolute proof.

The PDT could rule differently, but if so they need to state it since the words are almost identical.

3.5 post. Use the search feature on your browser and look for "Invisible
Thing"

They use the word "locate" and define it with "pinpoint" by saying you know "you know exactly where the invisible thing is".

If you compare the "Spot DC to Notice" and the "Spot DC to Locate", you will see that they are 20 apart for. The error in the chart is that they have 30 and 50 instead of 40 and 60.

PS: In any event if anyone reading this agrees with me or not the FAQ button needs to be pressed so this can be answered. It has been ongoing question for years now.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.

It is the rule. I argued against it for a long time myself until I realized I just didnt like it, and it was messing up my ability to be objective.


Mark Thomas 66 wrote:

The pinpoint is to ignore the 50% miss chance. That's the only time you'd add the other +20.

It's essentially a way of saying, "Yes you can pretty much tell where they are for the most part but there's still a good chance of missing them."

That is not correct. If someone is invisible you dont get to ignore the 50% chance even if you know what square they are in. That additional 20 is to pinpoint the square.


wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.
It is the rule. I argued against it for a long time myself until I realized I just didnt like it, and it was messing up my ability to be objective.

so a 2nd level spell is effectively giving you a +60 to your perception check that doesn't seem right


Lady-J wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.
It is the rule. I argued against it for a long time myself until I realized I just didnt like it, and it was messing up my ability to be objective.
so a 2nd level spell is effectively giving you a +60 to your perception check that doesn't seem right

A lot of thing about he game are not right, such as protection from evil completely blocking much higher level spells.

I don't really like it either, but that does not change the current state of things.

PS: I think you mean a +60 being required as a perception check. Even a +40 is high if someone is not standing still.


Please press the FAQ button while the PDT is around to answer questions. We might finally get an answer to this one.

Liberty's Edge

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

FAQued. I think I know how it meant to work, but seeing the variety of the replies, it is clearly not clear. :-)


I'm hoping they errata it so the +60 becomes a +40. I understand the intent of the "20 to notice" rule, but most people seem to not even know it exist so I would just drop it, and just have it be a +20 for to pinpoint, and +40 vs creatures who are not moving.


wraithstrike wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.
It is the rule. I argued against it for a long time myself until I realized I just didnt like it, and it was messing up my ability to be objective.
so a 2nd level spell is effectively giving you a +60 to your perception check that doesn't seem right

A lot of thing about he game are not right, such as protection from evil completely blocking much higher level spells.

I don't really like it either, but that does not change the current state of things.

PS: I think you mean a +60 being required as a perception check. Even a +40 is high if someone is not standing still.

see invisibility effectively gives the person +60 perception as getting the +60 functions the same as the spell


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lady-J wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.
It is the rule. I argued against it for a long time myself until I realized I just didnt like it, and it was messing up my ability to be objective.
so a 2nd level spell is effectively giving you a +60 to your perception check that doesn't seem right

A lot of thing about he game are not right, such as protection from evil completely blocking much higher level spells.

I don't really like it either, but that does not change the current state of things.

PS: I think you mean a +60 being required as a perception check. Even a +40 is high if someone is not standing still.

see invisibility effectively gives the person +60 perception as getting the +60 functions the same as the spell

Only against invisibility though.

Doesn't help with the ranger with a +25 stealth in the bushes. It's a very specific +60.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Is the question about the intent of the rule? Because the rule itself seems pretty clear, 20 to notice +20 to pinpoint. An additional +20 if not moving. It's a pretty lousy rule, IMO, but it's what happens when you completely ignore the listen/move silently half of perception when you're copy/pasting the 3.5 rules.


yes, this is why the invisible wizard is the better sneak choice than the non-invisible rogue. You don't really beat invisibility through mundane means. You use see invisibility or the like to beat invisibility.


Lady-J wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Lady-J wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Mark Thomas 66 wrote:
The +60 is ridiculous and stretching the intent of the rule.
It is the rule. I argued against it for a long time myself until I realized I just didnt like it, and it was messing up my ability to be objective.
so a 2nd level spell is effectively giving you a +60 to your perception check that doesn't seem right

A lot of thing about he game are not right, such as protection from evil completely blocking much higher level spells.

I don't really like it either, but that does not change the current state of things.

PS: I think you mean a +60 being required as a perception check. Even a +40 is high if someone is not standing still.

see invisibility effectively gives the person +60 perception as getting the +60 functions the same as the spell

Not really. It just negates invisibility. There is no number matching, and I am not nitpicking because having a spell that counters another spell is not same as having a very high modifier in this case.


Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Is the question about the intent of the rule? Because the rule itself seems pretty clear, 20 to notice +20 to pinpoint. An additional +20 if not moving. It's a pretty lousy rule, IMO, but it's what happens when you completely ignore the listen/move silently half of perception when you're copy/pasting the 3.5 rules.

I agree. A related issue is that an invisible person inside the room gets a higher check vs perception than someone who is not even in the rule due to hide and move silently being combined.

Someone on the other side of the wall should technically be invisible, but by the rules you can hear them. The rules really should have separated sound and sight more instead of giving it a passing mention.

PS: The intent seems to be there. They got rid of "listen" to make things easier, but it made them worse in my opinion.


wraithstrike wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Is the question about the intent of the rule? Because the rule itself seems pretty clear, 20 to notice +20 to pinpoint. An additional +20 if not moving. It's a pretty lousy rule, IMO, but it's what happens when you completely ignore the listen/move silently half of perception when you're copy/pasting the 3.5 rules.

I agree. A related issue is that an invisible person inside the room gets a higher check vs perception than someone who is not even in the rule due to hide and move silently being combined.

Someone on the other side of the wall should technically be invisible, but by the rules you can hear them. The rules really should have separated sound and sight more instead of giving it a passing mention.

PS: The intent seems to be there. They got rid of "listen" to make things easier, but it made them worse in my opinion.

Of course, officially, invisibility gives you the same bonuses even if you are on the other side of a wall.

Even if you aren't in line of sight to start with, invisibility still makes you harder to perceive.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:


FAQ Question:
Does the DC of pinpointing an invisible opponent start at a base of 40 or 60(standing still) and then also add stealth if someone uses stealth?

I'm going with - the question makes no sense.

The perception DC to know if someone is in the room is 20. This never goes up.

The perception DC to pinpoint someone's location in the room is 40. This never goes up.

The perception check to notice someone in the room who is using the stealth skill is an opposed roll and the person using stealth gets a +40 to the roll or +20 if moving.

The last portion replaces the first two - which are only for un-opposed checks. This is like using Sense Motive to notice a spy - the DC is fine for 'scanning regular people' but if someone else is a spy and using bluff or disguise it turns into an opposed roll and the 'base DC' no longer applies.


Ckorik wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


FAQ Question:
Does the DC of pinpointing an invisible opponent start at a base of 40 or 60(standing still) and then also add stealth if someone uses stealth?

I'm going with - the question makes no sense.

The perception DC to know if someone is in the room is 20. This never goes up.

The perception DC to pinpoint someone's location in the room is 40. This never goes up.

This isn't true, those are the base DC's they are modified by the actions the invisible person is doing. If they are standing still, it's a +20 to the check. Pinpointing is just +20 to knowing someone is there. If someone is standing still it's a DC 40 to know they are there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


FAQ Question:
Does the DC of pinpointing an invisible opponent start at a base of 40 or 60(standing still) and then also add stealth if someone uses stealth?

I'm going with - the question makes no sense.

The perception DC to know if someone is in the room is 20. This never goes up.

The perception DC to pinpoint someone's location in the room is 40. This never goes up.

The perception check to notice someone in the room who is using the stealth skill is an opposed roll and the person using stealth gets a +40 to the roll or +20 if moving.

The last portion replaces the first two - which are only for un-opposed checks. This is like using Sense Motive to notice a spy - the DC is fine for 'scanning regular people' but if someone else is a spy and using bluff or disguise it turns into an opposed roll and the 'base DC' no longer applies.

1) You're saying the bonus for not moving only applies if the invisible creature is using stealth? I'm not at all sure that's true. Nor how you come to that conclusion.

2) Does that opposed check when the invisible creature is using stealth only allow notice? Or can you pinpoint - with an extra +20 to Stealth?

Which, by the way, brings us right to the numbers used in wraithstrike's FAQ question. Even if you quibble with his use of "base DC".


thejeff wrote:

1) You're saying the bonus for not moving only applies if the invisible creature is using stealth? I'm not at all sure that's true. Nor how you come to that conclusion.

2) Does that opposed check when the invisible creature is using stealth only allow notice? Or can you pinpoint - with an extra +20 to Stealth?

Which, by the way, brings us right to the numbers used in wraithstrike's FAQ question. Even if you quibble with his use of "base DC".

1) Yes - I'm saying that - the invisibility spell specifically states:

Quote:
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.

Stealth is an opposed skill roll - there is no 'base DC' - it even lists this under the perception skill:

Quote:
Notice a creature using Stealth Opposed by Stealth

Under the CRB definition for invisibility it says:

Quote:

It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.

Invisible creature is... Perception DC Modifier
In combat or speaking –20
Moving at half speed –5
Moving at full speed –10
Running or charging –20
Not moving +20
Using Stealth Stealth check +20
Some distance away +1 per 10 feet
Behind an obstacle (door) +5
Behind an obstacle (stone wall) +15

So in three places for 'stealth check' it lists the opposed roll and no set DC.

2)Pinpoint is always +20. Note the above table I quoted where it lists 'Stealth check +20' - for an invisible creature using stealth - they already add the +20 or +40 modifier to the check.

End result:

Not using stealth:
Perception 20 to notice
Perception 40 to pinpoint
Add/remove modifiers depending on distance/actions of the creature as with all perception checks.

Using stealth:
Stealth check +20 if moving to notice
Stealth check +40 if standing still to notice
+20 to above to pinpoint
Add/remove modifiers as needed for distance/actions of the creature as with all perception checks.


The original post is correct, based on my reading of the rules and how I GM stealth.

I do have a question though, curious how you play it:

If a (n)PC is standing still and invisible, and casts a spell using the silence metamagic feat, whilst otherwise remaining still, do they get the +20DC for 'not moving'?


Yossarian wrote:

The original post is correct, based on my reading of the rules and how I GM stealth.

I do have a question though, curious how you play it:

If a (n)PC is standing still and invisible, and casts a spell using the silence metamagic feat, whilst otherwise remaining still, do they get the +20DC for 'not moving'?

Yes - although FAQ's and such would also state that a spellcraft check identifies the spell cast regardless - as it was not hidden due to the 'obvious manifestations' that occur when a spell is cast. RAW there is no penalty for the silence meta - although normal perception modifiers apply.


Ckorik wrote:

2)Pinpoint is always +20. Note the above table I quoted where it lists 'Stealth check +20' - for an invisible creature using stealth - they already add the +20 or +40 modifier to the check.

End result:

Not using stealth:
Perception 20 to notice
Perception 40 to pinpoint
Add/remove modifiers depending on distance/actions of the creature as with all perception checks.

Using stealth:
Stealth check +20 if moving to notice
Stealth check +40 if standing still to notice
+20 to above to pinpoint
Add/remove modifiers as needed for distance/actions of the creature as with all perception checks.

This is correct.


Ckorik wrote:
thejeff wrote:

1) You're saying the bonus for not moving only applies if the invisible creature is using stealth? I'm not at all sure that's true. Nor how you come to that conclusion.

2) Does that opposed check when the invisible creature is using stealth only allow notice? Or can you pinpoint - with an extra +20 to Stealth?

Which, by the way, brings us right to the numbers used in wraithstrike's FAQ question. Even if you quibble with his use of "base DC".

1) Yes - I'm saying that - the invisibility spell specifically states:

Quote:
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.
Except the Invisibility special ability states
Quote:
A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something’s there” but can’t see it or target it accurately with an attack. It’s practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature’s location with a Perception check.

And that very table that gives Stealth +20 gives Not Moving +20, which implies that Not Moving applies to any attempt to perceive invisible creatures. Alternately the "active invisible creature" wording could imply that Not Moving creatures can't be noticed at all.


thejeff wrote:

Except the Invisibility special ability states

Quote:
A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something’s there” but can’t see it or target it accurately with an attack. It’s practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature’s location with a Perception check.

And that very table that gives Stealth +20 gives Not Moving +20, which implies that Not Moving applies to any attempt to perceive invisible creatures. Alternately the "active invisible creature" wording could imply that Not Moving creatures can't be noticed at all.

That's because there are different tables all over the place that try to clarify the same thing, when in reality the fact that they are spread all over the place just makes the entire thing messy. (This is where I chime in and say - YES I want Pathfinder 2.0 - with 2.0 meaning clean up the damn CRB which right now you won't because you link to pages throughout your damn product which was a horrible idea and now you are stuck)

/cough - where was I?

The easiest way to handle invisibility is to treat it as any other perception roll and use the following chart:

Chart of invis modifiers

Quote:

A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that "something's there" but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack. It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.
Invisible creature is... Perception DC Modifier
In combat or speaking –20
Moving at half speed –5
Moving at full speed –10
Running or charging –20
Not moving +20
Using Stealth Stealth check +20
Some distance away +1 per 10 feet
Behind an obstacle (door) +5
Behind an obstacle (stone wall) +15

To answer your statement:

Not Moving(+20)/Not using stealth:Perception DC 20
Not Moving(+20)/Using stealth:Perception DC = Stealth check +40 (20 not moving +20 stealth check)

Add 20 to above DC's to pinpoint. You should now see where the 20 to notice from the Perception table is from and the +40 when standing still from Invisibility is from. Note further that the spell says 'if moving the stealth bonus is +20' - and with the above table we note that 'using stealth' is 'Stealth +20' - so the movement modifiers don't apply to the perception DC if using stealth - which actually is logical because movement actually affects the stealth roll itself so they are already accounted for in the stealth check (which itself can be modified by feats or rogue talents that let you move full speed with no penalty).


I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.


Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

That's brilliant. Close your eyes and you negate +40 stealth. Rules legal too!


thejeff wrote:

Even if you aren't in line of sight to start with, invisibility still makes you harder to perceive.

This is the question I would like to see answered definitely. I recall there was a similar thread several months ago and the PDT never told us whether the DC to perceive an invisible person walking behind a closed door was the same as if the door was open.


Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

my level 8 rogue would love those rules they make that dc on a 1


Ckorik wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

That's brilliant. Close your eyes and you negate +40 stealth. Rules legal too!

You didn't need those eyes to see, anyway.

The Exchange

Im confused, please faq this


Ckorik wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

That's brilliant. Close your eyes and you negate +40 stealth. Rules legal too!

Sadly no, strictly by the rules being invisible makes your harder to find even if the person trying to find you is blind. It's a blanket increase to perception check DCs/bonus to stealth checks, not just visual ones.

Lady-J wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

my level 8 rogue would love those rules they make that dc on a 1

They usually do in my games around that level.

Keep in mind that using the blinded rules, the invisible creature can still use stealth to boost the DC, and that even if you do pinpoint them you still have to deal with the 50% Miss Chance and are denied Dex to AC on top of a -2 penalty to AC.


Ninja in the Rye wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

That's brilliant. Close your eyes and you negate +40 stealth. Rules legal too!

Sadly no, strictly by the rules being invisible makes your harder to find even if the person trying to find you is blind. It's a blanket increase to perception check DCs/bonus to stealth checks, not just visual ones.

Lady-J wrote:
Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I do this every time I read a thread when Invisibility is brought up, but I'd just like to say that when I GM I ignore almost everything about invisibility in the rule books and use the rules for the blinded condition as my base to govern perception checks against invisible creatures. The perception DC to become aware of them is +4, and I run it that pinpointing still requires beating the DC by 20 (so a difficult but possible +24). This makes it a bit harder than it was in 3.5 using Listen Vs move silently, but not as insanely impossible as it is in PF.

It's an example of how mangled these rules became in the transfer from 3.5 that it's now much easier to notice the presence of another creature while blinded than it is to notice a creature that is invisible.

my level 8 rogue would love those rules they make that dc

They usually do in my games around that level.

Keep in mind that using the blinded rules, the invisible creature can still use stealth to boost the DC, and that even if you do pinpoint them you still have to deal with the 50% Miss Chance and are denied Dex to AC on top of a -2 penalty to AC.

rogues have uncanny dodge so no losing dex


Ninja in the Rye wrote:


Sadly no, strictly by the rules being invisible makes your harder to find even if the person trying to find you is blind. It's a blanket increase to perception check DCs/bonus to stealth checks, not just visual ones.

That's not true.

Quote:
The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.
Quote:


Invisible creatures leave tracks. They can be tracked normally. Footprints in sand, mud, or other soft surfaces can give enemies clues to an invisible creature's location.

An invisible creature in the water displaces water, revealing its location. The invisible creature, however, is still hard to see and benefits from concealment.

A creature with the scent ability can detect an invisible creature as it would a visible one.

A creature with the Blind-Fight feat has a better chance to hit an invisible creature. Roll the miss chance twice, and he misses only if both rolls indicate a miss. (Alternatively, make one 25% miss chance roll rather than two 50% miss chance rolls.)

A creature with blindsight can attack (and otherwise interact with) creatures regardless of invisibility.

An invisible burning torch still gives off light, as does an invisible object with a light or similar spell cast upon it.

The correct statement is : Invisibility gives you a huge bonus on stealth rolls against all forms of detection unless you are blind - why?

That's a FAQ question there.

The Exchange

Lets look at this pragmatically

If someone rolls a perception check and gets 20+ they would be alerted to the presence of an ACTIVE (as in not stationary, or sneaking) invisible creature somewhere nearby. As invisibility gives you a +20 stealth when moving it would seem logical that this allows you to locate the actual square the creature is in.

If someone rolls a perception check and gets 40+ they can then locate a stationary invisible creature that is not trying to stealth.

If an invisible creature is also trying to move(or stand still) stealthily then the DC for locating the correct square is their Stealth check +20 (if moving) or +40 (if remaining still).

So to Recap, if you want to locate where a creature is you need to meet the following DCs.

NOT Sneaking, and Moving around= DC 20
NOT Sneaking, and Standing Still= DC 40
Sneaking and Moving around= DC Stealth+20
Sneaking and Standing Still= DC Stealth+40


Locating as in knowing someone is there somewhere, YES.
locating as in knowing the square then no, the DC's are 20 higher.


Ckorik wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Except the Invisibility special ability states

Quote:
A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something’s there” but can’t see it or target it accurately with an attack. It’s practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature’s location with a Perception check.

And that very table that gives Stealth +20 gives Not Moving +20, which implies that Not Moving applies to any attempt to perceive invisible creatures. Alternately the "active invisible creature" wording could imply that Not Moving creatures can't be noticed at all.

That's because there are different tables all over the place that try to clarify the same thing, when in reality the fact that they are spread all over the place just makes the entire thing messy. (This is where I chime in and say - YES I want Pathfinder 2.0 - with 2.0 meaning clean up the damn CRB which right now you won't because you link to pages throughout your damn product which was a horrible idea and now you are stuck)

/cough - where was I?

The easiest way to handle invisibility is to treat it as any other perception roll and use the following chart:

Chart of invis modifiers

Quote:

A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that "something's there" but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack. It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.
Invisible

...

You do know that the DC to notice, and the DC to pinpoint are not the same so I was correct by what I said above.

It is 20 to notice, and +20 to point point. =40

If the person is not moving that is another +20 =60

If they are using stealth then you add that in. The +20 to pinpoint and the +20 for standing still stack. They do not overlap.

Pinpoint=I know you are in that square.

Notice=You are somewhere within 30 feet.


wraithstrike wrote:

If they are using stealth then you add that in. The +20 to pinpoint and the +20 for standing still stack. They do not overlap.

Pinpoint=I know you are in that square.

Notice=You are somewhere within 30 feet.

Yup - my quibble is that the DC to notice (20) is based on the creature *not* using stealth at all. Anytime they use stealth it's an opposed roll, so hitting 20 isn't an automatic 'I know something is there' when stealth is involved.

I still think it's a good point that being blind only involves a -4 to perception - with invisibility going out of it's way to note it doesn't help sound, scent, or other issues I don't understand why it has such vastly higher modifiers. I also think the following:

Behind an obstacle (door) +5
Behind an obstacle (stone wall) +15

are worthy of a FAQ - as to why invisibility gives any bonus to those situations which don't rely on sight at all - it is nonsensical - I just think the poinpoint part of the question isn't the main problem with invisibility and how perception works.


And that's why I love the spell Glitterdust so much. Invisibility rules are pretty hard to digest.


William Werminster wrote:
And that's why I love the spell Glitterdust so much. Invisibility rules are pretty hard to digest.

Always keep Glitterdust memorized if on your spell list.

It's useful even if you don't need to reveal invisible opponents.

As a will-based save that is effective against mindless creatures and even golems, it is viable control spell even at high level.

1 to 50 of 181 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / DC to Pinpoint Invisible Creature All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.