Thank you. Very weird that Larian artificially made this spell worse than original. Especially taking how the rest of the game makes 5e rules easier, not harder.
why is it weird. its explained and clear that its not balanced without a real DM working against it and trying stuff to stop you. this check is in the game because the AI of enemies you fight is no DM. they dont work intentionally against greater invisibility so this is the mechanic that does in the base game.
still good mod, thanks for the work even tho i wont use it : )
edit: larian probably wanted invisibility and greater invisibility not to be a pure offsensive spell. more like a utility / stealth spell like pass without trace. like with invisibility you can avoid fights or ambushes, or steal stuff even when people would see you. so it got its uses, but i agree that greater invisibility should (from the 2 invisibilities) be more of a offensive option for everyone. in the base game its only really useable on high dex/stealth chars. for rogues or something like a trickery cleric, or shadow monk or ranger its already really good in fights too (more than useable lets say, obviously other stuff is stronger lol). casters on the other hand lose out a bit, sure.
This spell is not necessarily "worse" than tabletop, it's just different.
It's worse than tabletop because you need to pass stealth checks to keep it active.
It's better than tabletop because it makes you completely invisible and unattackable and in some cases prevents you from even entering combat, rather than being able to still be seen and "attacked with disadvantage".
I wrote a decent write up of the skill after testing it here. TL;DR, you can easily get 10-20 actions worth of attacks from invisibility with a little investment into stealth with >95% chance to keep invisibility after each action.
Thanks for this writeup - really helpful at showing the power of this spell when specced for it! Unfortunately, I really do feel like it is necessary to keep the stealth check in BG3 because unlike in tabletop, if you're invisible, enemies have no other senses in order to find you or investigate really. Personally though, I think if the DC started at 10 it would make it much more viable as a spell - and doesn't meaningfully change how powerful it is when specced into, but lowers the barrier. You could reasonably get 1 or 2 actions off for free then without investing significantly.
Yeah, the problem with this "philosophy" posted in your Reddit thread is that people want to use Greater Invisibility on their own casters, dude. Yes, this makes Rogues broken, but Rogues are already insanely powerful in the PHB. People want to roll with advantage playing their sorcerer who doesn't have stealth proficiency, not be forced into a support role for the Rogue. This suggested way to play only serves to pigeonhole builds into *more* cheese, not less.
yeah, while i understand it's possible to play around this nerf, it only serves to make the spell feel like a further boost to stealth characters rather than it's own thing, it was a badly thought out nerf, specially when being invisible in the 1st place somehow doesn't convey any bonuses to stealth checks(???)
players should NOT need Pass Without a Trace to make GI usable specially since it's yet another concentration spell AND not available to the classes that can cast GI(outside of college of lore bards but even then, both are concentration so no go)
That's not how NPC's will try to fight you against invis in D&D though. First they actually would have to use their action to try to spot where you are (meaning no attack for that that round). But even if they succeed - that will not break your Greater Invisibility. Simply will tells NPC location on where invisible person is. That means that invisible persona STILL will have an advantage on attack rolls, which is most important. And where NPCs can try to attack you there - they will have both disadvantage on attack roll, AND on top of that flat D20 check on where they miss you on not (10+).
More importantly game actually have a mechanic that shows where person last position was before it went invisible. So, what NPCs spot check should do - is update that position to your actual current location, where they succeed. But NOT break your invisibility.
What Redwyrm is saying here is 100% correct. Larian being (once again) hacks and not bothering to code something properly doesn't mean that you should just accept a broken and shoddy implementation of what is meant to be a powerful spell, within its limitations. Also, Silence, people.
the idea of what they had in mind is not THAT bad despite the implementation sucking, if they had at least given GI a stealth check bonus tied to itself suddenly it would.. work by itself while keeping their intent of being progressively more likely for invisibility to break as you did actions
again, as i keep saying, the spell as it is in PnP RAW, is strong as s#*!, even with a DM actively trying to fight against it, it's REALLY strong both in and outside of combat
it makes sense Larian would try to change it so it still functions as an improvement to invisibility, tho they fucked up by not adding a stealth bonus to the spell itself, requiring players to invest into stealth checks to make GI worth a damn
the Problem is, Larian did a really, and I mean REALLY bad job with (Greater) Invisibility and See Invisibility. 1. You don't use Stealth Checks to not be seen by SI. 2. SI doesn't "break" I and GI, it just ignores it. 3. If someone makes the save against SI, they just stay invisible for eternity (some enemies simply stay invisible and don't have to make a save after every action)
The developers of Solasta, who are a far smaller team than Larian, actually managed to do this properly. Don't understand why Larian decided to go against the 5e rules and implemented their own invisibility-rules....
when being invisible in the 1st place somehow doesn't convey any bonuses to stealth checks(???)
This right here is the real kicker to me. Any kind of invisibility should ideally give anywhere between +5 to +20 to Stealth just on its own. Honestly just giving it a +4+1d16 every round might be appropriate; that way, invisibility would give fluctuating bonus between 5 to 20 each round, counteracting the tests imposed.
I think it'd make invisibility better for everyone, without making it completely trivialize.. everything, honestly. Everything.
Also, I can't be the only one bothered by the fact that going into Stealth breaks Invisibility, right?
I do have an idea on how to make the spell more balanced, though no idea if it is possible to do ib BG3.
When cast, seperate effect that gives the target Advantage on attacks and Disadvantage on getting attacked and the Invisible condition/effect. When the target performs an attack it loses the Invisible condition until the start of its next turn. Thereby making it targetable by enemies if it performs a hostile action during its turn but not if it remains hidden.
Sad that Greater Invisibility is useless for non-stealth builds as is, and too good with this mod. And also kinda shitty that warlocks did not get their best defensive spell in Shadow of Moil.
i assume the way GI ended up how it is was both due to larian's balance concerns AND technical limitations
but yes, afaik in 5e pnp, an invisible creature, even if detected should remain invisible and retain their advantage on outoging attack rolls/disadvantage for incoming attack rolls until the invisibility is dispelled/ends(assuming they arent fighting something with some sort of blindsense feature within range of them), and GI should not be dispelled by failing a stealth check, it should only give away your position
if larian had separated the hiding part of invisibility and the advantage part, making those stealth checks only give away the character's position(that is, no longer be hidden) while retaining the other bonuses it would be way better while not being as overpowered as this mod(which again is a simple tweak) makes it... giving everyone an active action to search for invisible creatures would help too
plus it remains a concentration spell and the game has no shortage of AoE attacks that could bypass that disadvantage
maybe someone with scripting experience will find a way to implement all this.. or maybe larian will
It's obvious that the way these 2 games handle Greater Invisibility is the absolute best way to do it.
In the original games, when you cast Greater Invisibility you turn invisible, as it is here. However, if you do perform an action that would reveal a normal invisibility, the spell remains active but you become partially visible. What does that do?
Well, first, creatures can attack you now, as they sort of know where you are, but they have a -4 malus (in BG3 that would be disadvantage).
Second, spellcasters can't target you with spells, because you're still partially invisible. However, any AoE spells will affect you as normal. But more importantly, they know where you are! Sort of, even if they can't specifically target you. So at least they know where to throw their AoE spells. And you can get attacked as normal, just with a penalty.
Any detect invisibility/see invisibility removes that partial invisibility of course. Hell, they could keep the stealth check if they want, but please don't dispel the whole effect just because you failed the stealth check. They hear you, but they still can't technically see you! So... partial invisibility.
tl;dr Larian should have played BG1/BG2 more. It's the exact fix this spell needs.
But kudos for attempting that TKDancer. Right now it's clearly OP, but well, it is what it is.
They could also have taken a look at Solasta. In terms of following and implementing 5e rules in regards of spells, and certain features, Solasta did a FAR superior job. As someone with TTRPG Experience, and other DnD-related CRPGs, a lot of mechanics in BG3 are just disappointing.
If I never played a TTRPG or any DnD-related CRPG, BG3 would be a great experience. But like that, it's only good.
This is close to how it's done in 5e, IMO they should handle it like 5e does. Unless you take the hide action (and don't do anything to end it) you can still be targeted normally, as you are still moving around and making noise/attacking etc so enemies generally know where you are. However, being invisible means that anyone targeting you does so with disadvantage and you have advantage on your own attack rolls.
is this mod behavior or vanilla behavior wrt to invisibility? cause i didnt touch anything that should affect that
are you sure you aren't using your reaction on something else? cause there are things that can eat your reaction besides AoO(i.e using counterspell)
edit: it seems some reactions('interrupts') cant be used while invisible but i think it only applies to normal level 2 invisibility not greater invisibility, again, are you sure you didnt already use your reaction for that turn?
Interestingly enough. Invisible Enemies never triggered an Opportunity attack when going away. However, it was triggered by my Polearm Expert when an Invisible Enemy entered her range. I guess it's a bug and oversight of Larian, but it could potentially be a feature? So maybe that helps you on your search.
Unfortunately, I really do feel like it is necessary to keep the stealth check in BG3 because unlike in tabletop, if you're invisible, enemies have no other senses in order to find you or investigate really. Personally though, I think if the DC started at 10 it would make it much more viable as a spell - and doesn't meaningfully change how powerful it is when specced into, but lowers the barrier. You could reasonably get 1 or 2 actions off for free then without investing significantly.
Any chance you could look into implementing it with a lower DC range?
as i note in the description i do understand that this spell NEEDS a nerf of some kind i just think Larian's nerf was awful
rather than a stealth check it should've been a concentration check or a check against our spellcasting stat, ideally without constantly going up
so until they figure out a better nerf that doesnt make the spell near useless to regular spellcasters i made this in like 5 minutes for people who would like it, initially i wanted to tweak the check but i could not for the life of me find the check being made ("GreaterInvisibilityCheck_InvisSpellOrRoll()") so i went with just removing it altogether, maybe someone else will find it
maybe once i properly wake up i'll make a couple different versions with shortened duration for people who want a slightly more balanced spell? idk
The way Larian implemented it, I'd argue See Invisibility needs a buff in terms of DC, but also, See Invisibility needs a buff to be viable. I even think See Invisibility is underpowered, since some Enemies simply succeed in their save and stay invisible for eternity and still attacking you every round. (without making a save again)
25 comments
this check is in the game because the AI of enemies you fight is no DM. they dont work intentionally against greater invisibility so this is the mechanic that does in the base game.
still good mod, thanks for the work even tho i wont use it : )
edit: larian probably wanted invisibility and greater invisibility not to be a pure offsensive spell. more like a utility / stealth spell like pass without trace. like with invisibility you can avoid fights or ambushes, or steal stuff even when people would see you. so it got its uses, but i agree that greater invisibility should (from the 2 invisibilities) be more of a offensive option for everyone. in the base game its only really useable on high dex/stealth chars. for rogues or something like a trickery cleric, or shadow monk or ranger its already really good in fights too (more than useable lets say, obviously other stuff is stronger lol). casters on the other hand lose out a bit, sure.
So yeah it's clearly unbalanced in the shitty direction. Lvl4 spells should be impactful.
It's worse than tabletop because you need to pass stealth checks to keep it active.
It's better than tabletop because it makes you completely invisible and unattackable and in some cases prevents you from even entering combat, rather than being able to still be seen and "attacked with disadvantage".
I wrote a decent write up of the skill after testing it here. TL;DR, you can easily get 10-20 actions worth of attacks from invisibility with a little investment into stealth with >95% chance to keep invisibility after each action.
players should NOT need Pass Without a Trace to make GI usable specially since it's yet another concentration spell AND not available to the classes that can cast GI(outside of college of lore bards but even then, both are concentration so no go)
More importantly game actually have a mechanic that shows where person last position was before it went invisible. So, what NPCs spot check should do - is update that position to your actual current location, where they succeed. But NOT break your invisibility.
again, as i keep saying, the spell as it is in PnP RAW, is strong as s#*!, even with a DM actively trying to fight against it, it's REALLY strong both in and outside of combat
it makes sense Larian would try to change it so it still functions as an improvement to invisibility, tho they fucked up by not adding a stealth bonus to the spell itself, requiring players to invest into stealth checks to make GI worth a damn
the Problem is, Larian did a really, and I mean REALLY bad job with (Greater) Invisibility and See Invisibility.
1. You don't use Stealth Checks to not be seen by SI.
2. SI doesn't "break" I and GI, it just ignores it.
3. If someone makes the save against SI, they just stay invisible for eternity (some enemies simply stay invisible and don't have to make a save after every action)
The developers of Solasta, who are a far smaller team than Larian, actually managed to do this properly. Don't understand why Larian decided to go against the 5e rules and implemented their own invisibility-rules....
I think it'd make invisibility better for everyone, without making it completely trivialize.. everything, honestly. Everything.
Also, I can't be the only one bothered by the fact that going into Stealth breaks Invisibility, right?
When cast, seperate effect that gives the target Advantage on attacks and Disadvantage on getting attacked and the Invisible condition/effect. When the target performs an attack it loses the Invisible condition until the start of its next turn. Thereby making it targetable by enemies if it performs a hostile action during its turn but not if it remains hidden.
Sad that Greater Invisibility is useless for non-stealth builds as is, and too good with this mod. And also kinda shitty that warlocks did not get their best defensive spell in Shadow of Moil.
but yes, afaik in 5e pnp, an invisible creature, even if detected should remain invisible and retain their advantage on outoging attack rolls/disadvantage for incoming attack rolls until the invisibility is dispelled/ends(assuming they arent fighting something with some sort of blindsense feature within range of them), and GI should not be dispelled by failing a stealth check, it should only give away your position
if larian had separated the hiding part of invisibility and the advantage part, making those stealth checks only give away the character's position(that is, no longer be hidden) while retaining the other bonuses it would be way better while not being as overpowered as this mod(which again is a simple tweak) makes it... giving everyone an active action to search for invisible creatures would help too
plus it remains a concentration spell and the game has no shortage of AoE attacks that could bypass that disadvantage
maybe someone with scripting experience will find a way to implement all this.. or maybe larian will
It's obvious that the way these 2 games handle Greater Invisibility is the absolute best way to do it.
In the original games, when you cast Greater Invisibility you turn invisible, as it is here. However, if you do perform an action that would reveal a normal invisibility, the spell remains active but you become partially visible. What does that do?
Well, first, creatures can attack you now, as they sort of know where you are, but they have a -4 malus (in BG3 that would be disadvantage).
Second, spellcasters can't target you with spells, because you're still partially invisible. However, any AoE spells will affect you as normal. But more importantly, they know where you are! Sort of, even if they can't specifically target you. So at least they know where to throw their AoE spells. And you can get attacked as normal, just with a penalty.
Any detect invisibility/see invisibility removes that partial invisibility of course. Hell, they could keep the stealth check if they want, but please don't dispel the whole effect just because you failed the stealth check. They hear you, but they still can't technically see you! So... partial invisibility.
tl;dr Larian should have played BG1/BG2 more. It's the exact fix this spell needs.
But kudos for attempting that TKDancer. Right now it's clearly OP, but well, it is what it is.
In terms of following and implementing 5e rules in regards of spells, and certain features, Solasta did a FAR superior job.
As someone with TTRPG Experience, and other DnD-related CRPGs, a lot of mechanics in BG3 are just disappointing.
If I never played a TTRPG or any DnD-related CRPG, BG3 would be a great experience. But like that, it's only good.
are you sure you aren't using your reaction on something else? cause there are things that can eat your reaction besides AoO(i.e using counterspell)
edit: it seems some reactions('interrupts') cant be used while invisible but i think it only applies to normal level 2 invisibility not greater invisibility, again, are you sure you didnt already use your reaction for that turn?
However, it was triggered by my Polearm Expert when an Invisible Enemy entered her range.
I guess it's a bug and oversight of Larian, but it could potentially be a feature?
So maybe that helps you on your search.
Any chance you could look into implementing it with a lower DC range?
rather than a stealth check it should've been a concentration check or a check against our spellcasting stat, ideally without constantly going up
so until they figure out a better nerf that doesnt make the spell near useless to regular spellcasters i made this in like 5 minutes for people who would like it, initially i wanted to tweak the check but i could not for the life of me find the check being made ("GreaterInvisibilityCheck_InvisSpellOrRoll()") so i went with just removing it altogether, maybe someone else will find it
maybe once i properly wake up i'll make a couple different versions with shortened duration for people who want a slightly more balanced spell? idk
I even think See Invisibility is underpowered, since some Enemies simply succeed in their save and stay invisible for eternity and still attacking you every round. (without making a save again)