Controlling a Square and Invisibility

[doktorstick]

First, do you allow characters to open doors and move through them diagonally provided adequate space?

Imagine a 5-ft. wide hallway with a character standing in the middle of it (no diagonals past him). He is aware of an invisible opponent because the fella he was fighting disappeared. The invisible creature needs to get past the guard.

In our session last night, we ruled that there was a 50% chance (using the miss chance rules) that the guarding character would accidentally "touch" the invisible opponent thereby getting an AoO for having a character enter his square. Why did we rule this way?

• Normally, two creatures cannot occupy the same square. Bull rush and grappling are two examples to the rule.
• There should be some benefit for being invisible.
• There should be some benefit for controlling the square.
• The invisible creature wanted to get away, not fight (and lose the invisibility).
• The invisible creature tried to move past, but the guard is on the defense and is actively defending the square.
• The miss chance was used because it simulates the chance of hitting an invisible opponent if the correct square is guessed. Or in this case, "noticing" by touching the invisible character.
• Provided the notice succeeds, the invisible character is pinpointed and the guard makes an AoO without a further miss chance roll.

Thanks for any input.
/ds

 

[Wormwood]

From a purely rules standpoint, I'd still require a Tumble roll (and a Spo/Listen Check).

 

[Hypersmurf]

There is no rule precluding AoOs for any degree of concealment, as there is for cover.

There are rules for how you resolve an attack on an invisible opponent - you choose the square into which you make your attack, then roll a 50% miss chance. If you choose the correct square and beat the miss chance, you have the opportunity to make an attack roll as normal.

Beyond that, it depends on your interpretation of AoOs.

Some people view AoOs as "Ha! He's dropped his guard! I'll get him!" Others see it as "Oops, I should have blocked that one... ow."

I direct your attention to PHB p123, "Attack Rolls" :

An attack roll represents your attempts to strike your opponent, including feints and wild swings. It does not represent a single swing of the sword. Rather, it simply indicates whether, over several attempts, you managed to connect solidly.

Now, obviously, this is only true of melee weapons, not ranged weapons, because you only cross one arrow off your quiver each time you make a ranged attack roll. This helps explain why AoOs can only be made with melee weapons.

An AoO is not an extra swing of your sword. It's simply one of those "several attempts" you always make while in combat, that ordinarily would have missed... except that because the opponent's guard has lapsed, it has a chance to connect solidly.

Thus, if someone drinks a potion beside you while they're invisible, they are not on their guard, and there is a chance that a swing of your sword may connect. This chance is represented by a/ a decision on the part of the player to use an AoO, b/ the choice of square into which the AoO will be made, c/ the 50% miss chance, and finally, d/ the attack roll.

If the character is entirely unaware of any invisible creatures in the area, one might, perhaps, consider him flat-footed against that creature, precluding AoOs (unless the character has Combat Reflexes). However, if he knows there are invisible creatures about (DC 20 Spot Check, perhaps, or a Listen check, or the fact that he saw the rogue put on a ring and disappear), nothing in the rules prevents him from making an AoO if an invisible creature provokes one.

Of course, if you choose to interpret an AoO as "I see an opening! I'll attack again!", then invisibility will prevent them... but then you have to come up with a mechanic for whether you can make an AoO on someone with nine-tenths concealment, etc, etc.

I feel that p123 gives an elegant enough explanation of the melee attack roll to explain how AoOs work and why ranged weapons don't get them, but others feel otherwise.

Thus, in your case, I'd rule that the opponent provokes an AoO for leaving the square prior to entering the character's square (or, if it was a 5' step, for entering the character's square). As a DM, I would inform the player that he had the option of expending his AoO for the round - it's unnecessary to tell him what has provoked the opportunity. If the player elects to take the AoO, he picks a square and rolls a miss chance.

As a warning - this thread has the potential to go on for at least four pages, now

-Hyp.

 

[Darklone]

Heeheeeheee!

Ok. PC is standing in door, saw invis opponent vanishing... and knows the guy wants to get past him.

I'd say two attacks. One AoO, one readied attack, both with 50% miss chance.

The readied attack includes wild swinging at the passage and the AoO includes the opening the invis guy gives by moving past the guarding PC.

How many pages to go, Hyp?

 

[dshai527]

I agree with Hypersmurf. Being invisible doesn't save you from attacks of opportunity if your opponent is aware of you. Also if the fighter backs up one 5 ft step so that his threat range is the doorway he will know exactly which square to use his AOO in so all he has to deal with is the 50% miss chance. Of course all this is moot if the invisible person has a good tumble skill then the fighter is better off standing in the doorway himself to make the tumble DC higher.