5th dnd – Does the Invisible Servant spell end if I move away from it?

I think all three scenarios are possible. To argue this, I would rely on the similarity between the range limit in the text and the range limit of the spell. If you treat the command as a cantrip, all three scenarios are possible. When casting a spell, you must be at hand to cast it, but not for the duration of the spell. Not even for periods of concentration like the wise council, answer:

You do not need to be in the field of view or in the scope to maintain
to focus on a spell, unless the description of the spell or another game
feature says otherwise.

I make the connection with the scope of the spell because I think the purpose of the rule is to prevent someone from throwing it at range and then affecting something that would not be within the scope of the original cast. With 1 hour of time and a 15-foot movement, the servants can get away from you in an area where you may not be able to get close to the initial distribution. But in none of your three scenarios do you do such a thing. So, from the point of view of the rule (which I suppose), your scenarios are acceptable.

In addition, I see that the three scenarios are possible because the spell does not specify otherwise with an exact reading and the spells never do more than they say it.

g suite – Invisible files taking up space on Google Drive?

As you can see on the screenshot, My Drive does not contain any files.

My record

But the quota of My Drive is 4.7 GB used.

When I click Settings-> Show Memory Occupying Items, the web page returns an empty result that takes up 4.7 GB of memory.

Reproduce: Download files to My Drive, and then move them to one of the team's drives. But I can not reproduce each time.

This status lasted several hours. Maybe not the problem of the backend cache?

I've also re-checked the differences between the files transferred from My Drive and the files uploaded directly to Team Drive. Nothing useful information.

Why are invisible files taking My Drive storage?

pathfinder – What effects would invisible or illusory sacred symbols have on the choice of an ecclesiastic?

If an ecclesiastic decided to keep his sacred symbol invisible, would that affect his uses? Such as the ability to channel, cast spells with a divine accent, and possibly prepare spells (this one depends on the DM).

What effects would an illusion spell on? Would it depend on the god? Would it depend on what it looks like (whether it looks like bad or vice versa)?

unit – How to make TextMesh Pro invisible from the camera?

One way to do this is to use CanvasGroup on the gameObject of TMP or its parent and play with its alpha value. Once the distance between the camera and the text object is exceeded, set the alpha value to 0 and the text becomes invisible.

To further improve this, you can use your own script that allows you to gradually integrate and delete the alpha value. Which means you just said this script to FadeIn or FadeOut the Canvas group containing the TMP text.

You can optionally disable the gameObject (not the script) if it is in FadeOut mode and reaches 0 alpha.

To improve performance, you can use something that checks the distance only at higher intervals and / or preferably only when the camera has been moved (or the text gameObject). It is not necessary to run an update method about 60 times per second for each text gameObject. It can be reduced to about 2 times per second with a single method call, using a list of references to which text objects subscribe automatically when creating and unsubscribe during the destruction.

dnd 5e – Is a perception check against an invisible target done with a disadvantage?

I have long assumed that this kind of perception check would be done with Disadvantage due to the inability to see the creature invisible, but after further investigation of the rules, I can not find any evidence that this is the case and I & # 39; We had trouble finding questions on this pile that clearly deal with this case. Many answers presuppose that the audit is done with a disadvantage, without proving or questioning it, without asking whether this is the case.

To criticize nothing, FYI, because it is not the purpose of this answer.

Here's why I believe the check is not done with Disadvantage.

the Invisible condition does not expressly state that it confers a disadvantage to the perception checks

  • An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special meaning. In order to hide, the creature is heavily obscured. The position of the creature can be detected by the noise or tracks it leaves.
  • The attack rolls against the creature have a disadvantage and the creature's attack rolls have an advantage.

Invisible, PHB, pg. 291

You may be wondering, dear reader, if the bold part (underscores are underlined) about the invisible creature counting as "very obscure" should prove that this check must absolutely be done with Disadvantage. After all, Heavy occultation says that creatures have a disadvantage on perception tests, right?

The rules regarding heavy obscuration do not say that they confer a disadvantage to perception checks

In a slightly obscure arealike a dim light, thick fog or moderate foliage, the creatures have a disadvantage on the wisdom controls (perception) which depend on the sight.

A very dark area– like darkness, opaque fog or dense foliage – completely blocks vision. A creature in a very dark area actually suffers from the blind condition (see the appendix). A very darkened area does not blind you, but you are actually blinded when you try to see something that is obscured.

Light and vision, PHB, pg. 183


A blind creature is described as an automatic failure of any control that requires vision; but he makes no mention of the drawback checks on the ability that simply use the vision (Search hearing, smell, etc. in addition to the vision):

  • A blind creature can not see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight.
  • The attack rolls against the creature have an advantage and the creature's attack rolls have a disadvantage.

Blinded, PHB, pg. 290

And just to be sure to leave nothing to chance, the Perception competence does not expressly call Disadvantage on checks that require multiple meanings but for which only one meaning is functional:

Verifying your wisdom (perception) allows you to spot, hear or detect the presence of something. It measures your general awareness of your environment and the liveliness of your senses.

Verifications of wisdom, PHB, pg. 178

The rules for perceptual hidden creatures mention a visual impairment such as a faint light or fog, but not invisibility.

What can you see? One of the main factors in determining whether you can find a creature or a hidden object is the quality of your vision in an area that may be slightly or heavily obscured, as explained in Chapter 8.

Hidden, PHB, pg. 177

I want to make a comment about this especially because detecting an invisible creature is not just about seeing it, but also about detecting evidence of that. Things like footprints or disturbed dust on the floor. Elements that would necessarily be more difficult to detect in a dark room or in the dark than under bright light. And of course, there is also the problem of trying to hear or feel an Invisible + Hidden creature, neither of which is weakened by vision.

The rules for Hidden call out Invisibility as a way to guarantee the option to hide, but do not cite any benefit to the check

You can not hide from a creature who can see you clearly and if you make noise (like shouting a warning or flipping a vase), you give your position. An invisible creature can not be seen, so she can always try to hide. Signs of his passing could nevertheless be noticed and he must still remain silent.

Hidden, PHB, pg. 177

I mean, it's really weird, right, if an invisible creature does not really disadvantage attempts to detect it? If the specter of these perception checks is really just the binary of

  • Make the check without inconvenience, or
  • Automatic failure of verification, due to effects like Pass without trace and or Silence, suppressing both auditory and other tertiary effects that could leave traces, leaving only the [in-]ability to actually see the Invisible target

But if there is evidence that definitely refutes this reading, I have not found it.

Addendum: the creature is still "invisible" and still gives Disadvantage / Advantage rolls to the attack

For this to not be undone, none of this allows a creature to "see" an invisible creature. As far as I know, this has not been violated by my understanding of the rules. The only thing that has happened is that the location of the invisible creature has been detected (or not detected) based on the results of the perception check.

dnd 5th – Do perception checks to locate invisible / hidden creatures fail?

The perception of locating a hidden creature is not just about finding them visually. You must also hear them (they must still breathe, they may flinch or hit something) or see evidence of their presence (perhaps a footprint on the ground or a place where the dust has been disturbed?). Keep in mind that abilities checks are meant to be abstractions of a character trying to do something. You can tell your DM "I do not make noise", but if your character is breathing too loud or if the room acoustics is insufficient just right (From a dietary point of view: you have gone past your stealth control), you still risk being detected.

So, if the NPCs enter this room and are not already aware of the PCs' presence, then their passive perception will be used to try to detect the game. If they are already aware of the holiday (for example, if they see them running in the room before entering or suspect that someone is in the room), they will perform a active control of perception.

dnd 5th – What are the implications for the automatic concealment of invisible things?

This question was inspired by a comment on this question.

Normally, when a "thing" (in general, creature, but that type in my games does not always mean as much as it should in RAW) becomes invisible, whoever knows of where it is ( or square, with a grid system) because of noise, footprints, I never satisfied with that, but the comment that inspired this question is as follows:

"The DM could decide that you are automatically hidden when it's invisible, but
should not, because it is horribly unbalanced "

And I'm not 100% sure that's true.

Hypotheses that I will do:

  1. Becoming invisible makes you hide immediately and automatically
  2. Anyone who moves while invisible is usually going to be silent because it prevents the point from becoming invisible, then shouts and stomps
  3. Attack, speak, cast a spell, run (IE: use your action to move), etc. will always give the location

Assuming the above What are the effects of balancing to make hidden the default state for invisible creatures?

3rd besm – Can you add your bonus to the increased awareness attribute to your attack combat value over hidden or invisible targets?

Thanks for contributing a response to the Games Stack Exchange role-playing games!

  • Please make sure to respond to the question. Provide details and share your research!

But to avoid

  • Ask for help, clarification, or answer other answers.
  • Make statements based on opinions; save them with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.

To learn more, read our tips for writing good answers.

5th dnd – Could a warlock use the summoning of the One with Shadows warlock to become invisible, then move while remaining invisible?

The movement breaks the invisibility of "One With Shadows".

The Eldritch summon "One With Shadows" says:

When in an area of ​​dim light or in the dark, you can use your action to become invisible until you move or take an action or a reaction.

The accent is mine.

If you move, whether it's your turn or out of combat, the invisibility ends.

3.5nd dnd – Can you prepare an attack against an invisible enemy that you do not know about?

Our group entered a seemingly empty room. My PC correctly assumed that invisible opponents were in the room, so he prepared an action: "If I am attacked, I hit the attacker." Then an opponent attacked it, becoming visible.

Does the PC have the right to attack the opponent before the opponent's attack hits home?

My logical problem is that the attacker only becomes visible when attacking the PC. The prepared action interrupts the attack: the attacker can even be killed without completing his attack. In this case: why would it become visible?