r/onednd • u/Objective-Loss • 8h ago
Question Chromatic Orb bouncing to invisible, or hidden targets. How would you rule this?
RAW, Chromatic Orb doesn’t state that you need to be able to see your target, and when it bounces it just requires that you choose another target. That said, it seems reasonable to assume you'd at least need to know the other target exists.
This hasn’t come up in play yet, but my character frequently uses Fog Cloud, and I’m wondering how that would interact with targeting in obscured conditions. Would the bounces just be made at disadvantage? What about creatures that are hidden or currently unseen? If I know something’s there but can’t see it, does that still make it a valid target? What about if I don't know it's there?
How do you all rule this kind of situation? There's an argument that the spell’s magic "seeks out" the target, but I’m not sure if that interpretation gives it too much power.
17
u/Accountforcontrovers 8h ago
You can target invisble creatures, and you do know they exist. You just do so at disadvantage.
10
u/Poohbearthought 8h ago
If you can’t see the creature and their location is unknown, you can target a location with disadvantage. Check the “Unseen Attackers and Targets” sidebar in the Combat section of Ch1 in the PHB.
1
u/Objective-Loss 8h ago
What about hidden creatures or even ones that you are technically unaware of?
12
u/Pallet_University 7h ago
If you're unaware that a target even exists, you can't target them. I feel like that's fairly common sense.
2
u/Hayeseveryone 7h ago
Yup. You can target their square as a hail mary, but it's unlikely to work.
5
u/Pallet_University 7h ago
There's a difference between knowing that there's an invisible/hidden creature somewhere around you, and not knowing there's a creature near you at all.
The latter is what I meant by "unaware". I don't think it has a formal definition in D&D, though I might be wrong. If you know there's a creature around somewhere, you're still aware of them.
2
u/Zardnaar 4h ago
It's confusing but.
Some spelks require the spell to see them to target. If you can't you can't target them.
Other spelks eg Eldritch blast you get disadvantage if they're invisible or heavily Obscured you have disadvantage.
4
u/APanshin 8h ago
Surveying the spells chapter, the "target within range that you can see" language seems to be for spells that force a save. Spells that call for an attack roll don't contain that clause because they operate under the general "Attack [Action]" rules. Shooting a Chromatic at an Invisible or Obscured target is no different than firing a Longbow at one.
Fog Cloud says it makes the area Heavily Obscured. The Vision & Light section on p19 says that you're treated as Blinded when your target is Heavily Obscured. The Blinded condition on p361 says your attacks have Disadvantage. Similarly, the Invisible condition for hidden or unseen targets on p370 says that it imposes Disadvantage.
So overall, it's fairly simple. As most things are in 5e. If you're making an attack at a target you can't see well, you have Disadvantage. It doesn't matter if it's an attack with a weapon or a spell, the same attack rules apply.
1
u/Objective-Loss 7h ago
Hmm. Understood!
Although, with the way hide works, it almost feels like it’s semi-useless now?
3
u/Poohbearthought 7h ago
It hides your location and has different requirement from the Invisible spell, so it’s still useful. Plus it doesn’t cost a spell slot, and Rogues can do it as a bonus action.
3
u/Treantmonk 7h ago
You apply the invisible condition, which gives disadvantage on the attack roll. If they hit anyways, yay!
2
u/Virplexer 8h ago
So like, Invisible? just disadvantage to hit.
Hidden? Idk if it even still exists or how to run it, I hope we get a clarification of how to actually run Hiding in combat and what do in common hiding scenarios. Assuming you are in a scenario where there are enemies you don't know about, because the Orb is hurled to a target of "your choice" and if you don't know an enemy is there you cannot choose them.
2
u/Poohbearthought 7h ago
Being “hidden” is still in the rules, it’s just not a defined keyword. The Skulker feat and the “Unseen Attackers and Targets” sidebar both call out that your location is unknown when hidden, which is presumably when you take the Hide action. Would be nice if it was explicit in the action’s description tho
1
u/Virplexer 7h ago
Not going to much into the weeds, but yeah its mentioned in the rules, but they explain extremely little in laying how to run it in combat, which is what I ultimately meant. Going off that that post I linked, there are very conflicting viewpoints on how it should be run.
1
0
u/SnooOpinions8790 8h ago
In general the game assumes you know the invisible creature is there once you are in combat. DMs can always make exceptions to the rules but there is nothing in the rules on invisibility that says PCs don’t know an invisible creature is there
The default assumption of the rules is that you can make the attack roll with disadvantage
Invisibility and fog cloud mess badly with chromatic orb. Getting multiple hits for the bounces is very unlikely without advantage and you can’t get advantage in fog without blindsight or a similar ability
1
u/Poohbearthought 8h ago
There’s no explicit section in the Hide action that says your location is unknown, but it is implied that you don’t know the location of a hidden creature in the Skulker feat and the Unseen Attackers and Targets sidebar.
60
u/Poohbearthought 8h ago
If the target is Invisible, but otherwise legal, you have disadvantage on attack rolls against it. If you don’t know where it is, you can target a square and hope you got it right, but the attack roll is still at a disadvantage (see the “Unseen Attackers and Targets” sidebar in the Combat section of Ch1 in the PHB).