13
\$\begingroup\$

In the game I was running last night the bad guy cast invisibility on herself. The players managed to work out which 5' square she was in and among other things one of the players tried to use the spell Command to command her to approach.

I made an on-the-spot ruling to allow it (she made the save anyway) but I couldn't find anything in the rules to say definitely whether:

  1. The spell works as usual
  2. The spell works but has a 50% miss chance as per an attack
  3. The spell fails

If it was an AoE spell that would be simple (the spell works).

If it was a ranged touch or touch spell that would be simple (50% miss chance).

But the range is close and the target is one living creature. Does not being able to see the creature despite knowing roughly where it is prevent spell casting on them entirely?

\$\endgroup\$
0

4 Answers 4

19
\$\begingroup\$

From the Magic section

Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

You cannot see the target therefore they cannot be targeted by the spell using sight. If the player was within 5 feet, they could try to touch the target.

To explain why this touch will cause an AOO and why normal touch spells do not provoke attacks of opportunity:

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

The spell in question is not a touch spell, so you are not normally considered to be armed (Unless you have a natural weapon or improved unarmed strike)

Although, if it was just normal invisibility, actually taking that AOO would break the spell, which is also useful.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ Seconds out, round 2. I throw flour over my invisible opponent. Can I now see my target or not? Round 3, my opponent is wearing a burqa. Round 4, full plate. Round 5, carrying a really big shield. Round 6, standing behind a really big shield they aren't touching. And so on until bored of RAW questions ;-) \$\endgroup\$ Commented Dec 19, 2014 at 1:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @SteveJessop 2 - depends on DM, probably Yes. 3,4,5 - Yes. If you can see their clothing/armour, that counts as seeing them. 6 - If any part of them is visible, yes. If they are completely hidden, no. \$\endgroup\$
    – Adeptus
    Commented Dec 19, 2014 at 5:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ This interests me as from a very literal reading of "You must be able to see or touch the target" I would argue that being able to touch the target is enough, short of actually touching them so that the target need only be theoretically touchable, not actually touched by the caster. This would then not cause an AOO. \$\endgroup\$
    – Vality
    Commented Dec 19, 2014 at 6:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Adeptus Technically not for invisibility. It lets you pinpoint the creature by the hole in the 'flour cloud', but flour that touches a creature turns invisible. You might be able to argue a readied action because you can 'see their outline', but its a fairly weak argument. "Throwing a bag of powder into a square is an attack against AC 5, and momentarily reveals if there is an invisible creature there." - can't quote the page, quoting a quote \$\endgroup\$
    – Mourdos
    Commented Dec 23, 2014 at 10:47
4
\$\begingroup\$

PFSRD:

Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

By this rule, if you can't see the target, you must touch the target to be able to target them, even if the spell you are casting does not normally require touch. You can target them, just only by touch. (A better option in this case is typically to use area spells if possible.)

This came up in a game I was observing last weekend, only there it was that the caster had been blinded and couldn't remove the condition mid-combat, so was targeting his spells via touch (after we looked the rules up).

\$\endgroup\$
0
3
\$\begingroup\$

Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target.

From Magic section of SRD. So unless your caster was able to actually touch opponent, he couldn't target his spell properly.

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

From the magic section:

Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

From the Invisibility condition:

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

So I would rule that they cannot be targetted.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ "You must be able to see or touch the target" and "invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt". So they can be targeted by touch, but not at range. \$\endgroup\$
    – Adeptus
    Commented Dec 19, 2014 at 5:21

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .