The Invisibility spell (PHB, p. 254) says:

A creature you touch becomes invisible until the spell ends. Anything the target is wearing or carrying is invisible as long as it is on the target's person. The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell.

And the spell Steel Wind Strike (XGE, p. 166) says:

You flourish the weapon used in the casting and then vanish to strike like the wind. Choose up to five creatures you can see within range. Make a melee spell attack against each target. On a hit, a target takes 6d10 force damage.

If a spellcaster under the effect of an Invisibility spell casts Steel Wind Strike, would they have advantage on all five melee spell attacks, or only on the first one?


Either the first one, or none of them.

Take eldritch blast as precedent, as the wording is similar. Eldritch blast calls for ranged spell attacks against multiple targets, specifically making "a separate attack roll for each beam" (PHB p.237), similar enough to steel wind strike's "make a melee spell attack against each target."

The Sage Advice Compendium reads as follows, in response to a question asking whether the beams from eldritch blast are simultaneous:

Even though the duration of each of these spells is instantaneous, you choose the targets and resolve the attacks consecutively, not all at once. If you want, you can declare all your targets before making any attacks, but you would still roll separately for each attack (and damage, if appropriate).

SA-C p.12

Thus, since each attack happens in series, and invisibility ends either when you attack or cast a spell, there are two distinct points when the invisibility could end. If "casting a spell" is considered to occur when you begin casting a spell, then you become visible before any attacks are made. Otherwise, it will last until the first attack breaks invisibility, and that one attack will be made with advantage.

So the issue rests on when the character is considered to have cast a spell. I'm not aware of an official ruling that would make this determination, but if one exists, it will be the determining factor.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I've deleted my answer because yours is better. I forgot that there was a Sage Advice ruling the specifically calls out attacks being resolved sequentially. \$\endgroup\$ – Ryan C. Thompson Jan 27 at 20:47

I am on the opposite opinion as steel wind requires on to flourish the weapon which a flourish is intended to be seen for intimidation. It is a spinning, or working of the weapon. I don't feeling you can use steel wind while invisible or you leave our the key ingredient of the spell.

| improve this answer | |
New contributor
Rich Barnett is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to our stack! Please take the tour to learn more about how we operate here and you can also visit the help center for more information \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Oct 20 at 17:52
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ If you can support your opinion with analysis of rules, that would vastly improve your answer. Unlike a forum, we need to back up our answers here and not just present an opinion. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch Oct 20 at 17:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.