[SP] Patch 6: Invisibility and Stealing

[War Maiden]

Before I post this in my 'Suggestions and Feedback' Thread as a bug, I want to ask the 5e experts if this scenario is applicable or if it is an actual 'bug'.

Alright, so as a few of you know, I am doing a Potential Romance / Play-through in a Duo with Wyll, in Patch 6. (It will be a continuation of my 'Off-Topic' Thread there from Patch 5.)

So I had Wyll touch me with his Invisibility spell. Invisible as a spell means as long as you do no 'hostile' actions, you will never be discovered, is this true or not? I have walked invisible, in BG3, in the vision cones and have not been discovered in Patch 6, however I ask this because 'stealing' from a merchant is not considered a 'hostile' action, thus, I should be able to do it with impunity, theoretically. However, in BG3, sometimes if I fail the roll I get caught by him (him being Arron in the Druid Grove) - which makes no sense because I am invisible hence there is nothing for him to see or detect to 'catch me in the act'. If at nothing else he should feel weird as if something messed with him (a spirit or some other non-corporeal thing) and left it at that.

Thoughts?

[Wraith]

invisible doesn't mean intangible.
if you fail the roll just imagine him feeling your hands rolling around in his bag/pockets/anywhere he keep his loot.

I mean even a random bag next to him moving around will trigger suspicion lol

[alex]

Being "Invisible" and being "Unseen" in 5e are two different things, which creates a lot of really stupid situations to occur with Invisibility if you use RAW. This is one of those things. It is possible for an NPC to know where you are despite being Invisible, which they would if they caught you actively pickpocketing from them.

Most DM's wouldn't allow this to happen, of course (or rather would probably have the NPC make a perception check or something). But if Larian is just implementing Invisibility RAW them it makes sense, unfortunately.

[❌ Peath]

Being invisible doesn't mean you're undetectable. It means just that, you're invisible.

You rolling stealth, doesn't also apply to your invisiblity only - you still leave shadow, you still make noise and leave tracks (unless you have also cast Pass without a Trace).

And your roll is being compared to the Perception roll of the NPC.
You can still be detected while being invisible - it's a nice boon but not godsend.
Also, stealing is a hostile action :)

[Brady4444]

Keep in mind also that Faerun is a world where people know about magic, even if it isn't commonplace per se. So it could be that some merchants are aware of what to watch out for regarding invisible thieves. This would make them harder to steal from I imagine.

[Beta Ray Shill]

Originally posted by War Maiden:

Alright, so as a few of you know, I am doing a Potential Romance / Play-through in a Duo with Wyll. So I had Wyll touch me with his Invisibility spell.

War Maiden, War Maiden... I feel Wyll is being a creep here, 5e-style. He needs to go as a romance option. Trying to 'touch' you indeed, with an invisibility spell of all things - it's about as sleazy as it gets.

In other words, it was basically just an excuse to touch you - he wasn't high enough level at this point to even cast invisibility.

The fact that he'd even try something like this - it makes me sick. A dirt bird, as we say in Ireland. Stay clear of Wyll and his 'invisibility' spells.

Just trying to look out for you, that's all.

[War Maiden]

Originally posted by Wraith:

invisible doesn't mean intangible.
if you fail the roll just imagine him feeling your hands rolling around in his bag/pockets/anywhere he keep his loot.

I mean even a random bag next to him moving around will trigger suspicion lol

Trigger suspicion yes, but they still cannot see the target, or 'capture' them in a scene.

Originally posted by Alex:

Being "Invisible" and being "Unseen" in 5e are two different things, which creates a lot of really stupid situations to occur with Invisibility if you use RAW. This is one of those things. It is possible for an NPC to know where you are despite being Invisible, which they would if they caught you actively pickpocketing from them.

Most DM's wouldn't allow this to happen, of course (or rather would probably have the NPC make a perception check or something). But if Larian is just implementing Invisibility RAW them it makes sense, unfortunately.

Well, knowing where one is, despite being 'invisible' is ridiculous. One cannot be 'identified' if not 'identifiable' or 'Locatable'.

Originally posted by Peath:

Being invisible doesn't mean you're undetectable. It means just that, you're invisible.

You rolling stealth, doesn't also apply to your invisiblity only - you still leave shadow, you still make noise and leave tracks (unless you have also cast Pass without a Trace).

And your roll is being compared to the Perception roll of the NPC.
You can still be detected while being invisible - it's a nice boon but not godsend.
Also, stealing is a hostile action :)

I think you have that backwards, respectively. Being undetectible typically means, as the definition states, 'Being unable to detect'. Hence if one is 'undetectable' they cannot be noticed by sight. I get that the 'rummaging' might cause 'suspicion' but they should never be able to see and catch me in the act of stealing, hence the bug or potential one I am asking to resolve.

[TheBlueFox]

Invisibility does not mean hidden.

Invisibility ONLY MEANS enemies will have disadvantage when they attack you.

Believe it or not, people still KNOW EXACTLY WHERE YOU ARE if you are invisible in Dungeons and Dragons.

here is exactly what invisibility does:

####################
Invisible

-An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a Special sense. For the Purpose of Hiding, the creature is heavily obscured. The creature’s Location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.

-Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature’s Attack rolls have advantage.
####################

So, Invisibilty does not mean you can't be located, and the things you do don't go Unnoticed.

However, Invisibility ALLOWS YOU TO HIDE, even in bright light, even while people are looking at you, even while you're 5 feet from someone, and REMAIN HIDDEN no matter what the conditions are (Except of course, if they use perception to find you.)

So, hide first.

But no, Using a Slight of hand check shouldn't reveal you

[alex]

Originally posted by War Maiden:

Originally posted by Alex:

Being "Invisible" and being "Unseen" in 5e are two different things, which creates a lot of really stupid situations to occur with Invisibility if you use RAW. This is one of those things. It is possible for an NPC to know where you are despite being Invisible, which they would if they caught you actively pickpocketing from them.

Most DM's wouldn't allow this to happen, of course (or rather would probably have the NPC make a perception check or something). But if Larian is just implementing Invisibility RAW them it makes sense, unfortunately.

Well, knowing where one is, despite being 'invisible' is ridiculous. One cannot be 'identified' if not 'identifiable' or 'Locatable'.

I would generally agree with you, but Invisibility in general is poorly written in RAW, so this is one of those things that just comes with the condition in 5e. On the plus side, if you're invisible and the enemy can see you with Blindsight or something, you still get advantage against them and they have disadvantage against you by RAW, so it gives you some benefits too.

[War Maiden]

So, Fox, if I am reading this right....

You just countered your own post?

"Impossible to see without the aid of magic or a Special sense"
-We went for a steal with Arron, a Druid Merchant, while 'Invisible' and in 'stealth'.

"The creature’s Location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves."

So, If they no 'sense of this, and no 'noise' was made, it should be a cakewalk, yes?

Nobody is trying to attack anyone, as that would constitute a 'Hostile' part that would reveal those is 'Invisible'.0

I am not seeing how this is not a bug.

[TheBlueFox]

Originally posted by War Maiden:

So, Fox, if I am reading this right....

You just countered your own post?

"Impossible to see without the aid of magic or a Special sense"

"The creature’s Location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves."

So, If they no 'sense; of this, and no 'noise' was made, it should be a cakewalk, yes?

Nobody is trying to attack anyone, as that would constitute a 'Hostile' part that would reveal those is 'Invisible'.0

I am not seeing how this is not a bug.

Just because I can't see your physical body doesn't mean I cant see the dust you disturb at your feet, or the leaves brushing out of your way, or the grass you're trampling, or the carpet scuffed below you.

Doesn't mean I can't hear you breathing, or adjusting your weapon, or your cape rustling, or you letting off a fart if that happens, it could!

So no, I didn't contradict anything.

MECHANICALLY, to gain the benefits of being hidden, you have to use the Hide action

[War Maiden]

You are grasping at straws nyao.

[TheBlueFox]

Originally posted by War Maiden:

You are grasping at straws nyao.

These are the rules of Dungeons and dragons as written by the creators of 5th edition. Tell them that

[War Maiden]

I really am not trying to oppose you, Fox. I just want to know if this is a legit Bug that I need to report or not.

[TheBlueFox]

Originally posted by War Maiden:

I really am not trying to oppose you, Fox. I just want to know if this is a legit Bug that I need to report or not.

If the bug is "The Invisible status is going away when I pickpocket" then yes, that's a bug. Pickpocketing is not something that should remove Invisibility as a condition

[War Maiden]

I did use hide and Invisible. Did you not read that?