Invisibility and Glitterdust - am I wrong here?

[2bz2p]

Argument on Facebook pages. Basically, player thinks casting Glitterdust at creatures is not "offensive" and does not end an Invisibility spell on the caster. I say the potential for blindness is an attack and Glitterdust used on creatures IS an attack. Was countered by "just cause I cast a Glitterdust on someone does not mean I immediately assume they are a foe, so invisibility stays." I think if you use the spell it is by its nature an attack (on creatures, not on objects).

Am I out of line here?

[Gisher]

CRB wrote:

Attacks: Some spell descriptions refer to attacking. All offensive combat actions, even those that don't damage opponents, are considered attacks. Attempts to channel energy count as attacks if it would harm any creatures in the area. All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks. Spells that summon monsters or other allies are not attacks because the spells themselves don't harm anyone.

So you are correct.

[Nefreet]

And here I thought, judging by the title, that the argument would be "Glitterdust doesn't reveal Invisible creatures, it just gives them a penalty to their Stealth!"

[Renata Maclean]

Try throwing glitter in their eyes and see if they still think that doesn't qualify as "offensive"

[Gisher]

Renata Maclean wrote:

Try throwing glitter in their eyes and see if they still think that doesn't qualify as "offensive"

I know that this was meant as a joke, but glitter in your eyes can cause serious problems.

[blahpers]

That's a pretty unfortunate and extreme case, but yeah, for those watching at home, don't actually throw glitter into somebody's eyes.

[Rysky]

Glitter Evil.

[Chemlak]

Invisibility wrote:

For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe.

Anyone trying to argue that glitterdust doesn't count as an attack is on a losing proposition.

[Claxon]

Yeah I was going to post what chemlak posted.

Invisibility is very clear about this.

Anything that targets or includes a foe in the area of effect is an attack for the purposes of invisibility.

[Kayerloth]

I think this is a case of if you are not my friend your are my enemy situation. If the creature is not a willing target then you are a lousy friend for using a spell that causes blindness and I would rapidly take your off my "friends list".

[2bz2p]

Thanks - I feel vindicated for speaking out