How are attacks that hit invisible creatures acting as cover resolved?











up vote
7
down vote

favorite












| Y | - | C | - | T |



Y = You

C = Invisible Creature

T = Target



The DM rules that C provides half cover for T. The table uses the optional rules for hitting cover:




If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




Y tries casting fire bolt on T and does not hit T, but is high enough to exceed the AC of C (who is invisible).



How is the attack against the invisible creature resolved?




  • Does the attack roll get disadvantage against the invisible creature
    (because of the invisible condition)?


  • Or, does the fire bolt simply hit the invisible creature per the
    text of the optional rule for hitting cover?


  • Or am I missing something else entirely?



It seems to me like the second reading (simply hits the invisible creature), would make it easier to hit the creature than by targeting it directly which seems very odd to me.










share|improve this question
























  • Interesting question, but is it me or the title and the text ask two different questions? Do you want to know how the rule is supposed to work (Does it hit or not) or if the optional rule mathematically makes the invisible creature easier to hit.
    – 3C273
    Nov 16 at 0:22






  • 1




    @3C273 fair point, I changed the title.
    – Rubiksmoose
    Nov 16 at 0:26















up vote
7
down vote

favorite












| Y | - | C | - | T |



Y = You

C = Invisible Creature

T = Target



The DM rules that C provides half cover for T. The table uses the optional rules for hitting cover:




If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




Y tries casting fire bolt on T and does not hit T, but is high enough to exceed the AC of C (who is invisible).



How is the attack against the invisible creature resolved?




  • Does the attack roll get disadvantage against the invisible creature
    (because of the invisible condition)?


  • Or, does the fire bolt simply hit the invisible creature per the
    text of the optional rule for hitting cover?


  • Or am I missing something else entirely?



It seems to me like the second reading (simply hits the invisible creature), would make it easier to hit the creature than by targeting it directly which seems very odd to me.










share|improve this question
























  • Interesting question, but is it me or the title and the text ask two different questions? Do you want to know how the rule is supposed to work (Does it hit or not) or if the optional rule mathematically makes the invisible creature easier to hit.
    – 3C273
    Nov 16 at 0:22






  • 1




    @3C273 fair point, I changed the title.
    – Rubiksmoose
    Nov 16 at 0:26













up vote
7
down vote

favorite









up vote
7
down vote

favorite











| Y | - | C | - | T |



Y = You

C = Invisible Creature

T = Target



The DM rules that C provides half cover for T. The table uses the optional rules for hitting cover:




If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




Y tries casting fire bolt on T and does not hit T, but is high enough to exceed the AC of C (who is invisible).



How is the attack against the invisible creature resolved?




  • Does the attack roll get disadvantage against the invisible creature
    (because of the invisible condition)?


  • Or, does the fire bolt simply hit the invisible creature per the
    text of the optional rule for hitting cover?


  • Or am I missing something else entirely?



It seems to me like the second reading (simply hits the invisible creature), would make it easier to hit the creature than by targeting it directly which seems very odd to me.










share|improve this question















| Y | - | C | - | T |



Y = You

C = Invisible Creature

T = Target



The DM rules that C provides half cover for T. The table uses the optional rules for hitting cover:




If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




Y tries casting fire bolt on T and does not hit T, but is high enough to exceed the AC of C (who is invisible).



How is the attack against the invisible creature resolved?




  • Does the attack roll get disadvantage against the invisible creature
    (because of the invisible condition)?


  • Or, does the fire bolt simply hit the invisible creature per the
    text of the optional rule for hitting cover?


  • Or am I missing something else entirely?



It seems to me like the second reading (simply hits the invisible creature), would make it easier to hit the creature than by targeting it directly which seems very odd to me.







dnd-5e invisibility cover optional-rules






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 16 at 0:24

























asked Nov 16 at 0:12









Rubiksmoose

43.9k6219335




43.9k6219335












  • Interesting question, but is it me or the title and the text ask two different questions? Do you want to know how the rule is supposed to work (Does it hit or not) or if the optional rule mathematically makes the invisible creature easier to hit.
    – 3C273
    Nov 16 at 0:22






  • 1




    @3C273 fair point, I changed the title.
    – Rubiksmoose
    Nov 16 at 0:26


















  • Interesting question, but is it me or the title and the text ask two different questions? Do you want to know how the rule is supposed to work (Does it hit or not) or if the optional rule mathematically makes the invisible creature easier to hit.
    – 3C273
    Nov 16 at 0:22






  • 1




    @3C273 fair point, I changed the title.
    – Rubiksmoose
    Nov 16 at 0:26
















Interesting question, but is it me or the title and the text ask two different questions? Do you want to know how the rule is supposed to work (Does it hit or not) or if the optional rule mathematically makes the invisible creature easier to hit.
– 3C273
Nov 16 at 0:22




Interesting question, but is it me or the title and the text ask two different questions? Do you want to know how the rule is supposed to work (Does it hit or not) or if the optional rule mathematically makes the invisible creature easier to hit.
– 3C273
Nov 16 at 0:22




1




1




@3C273 fair point, I changed the title.
– Rubiksmoose
Nov 16 at 0:26




@3C273 fair point, I changed the title.
– Rubiksmoose
Nov 16 at 0:26










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
10
down vote













The DMG states:




When a ranged attack misses a target that has cover, you can use this optional rule to determine whether the cover was struck by the attack[...] If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




The attack roll is/was made against the target, not the invisible creature providing cover and it's not stated that you have to re-roll an attack to hit the 'covering creature'.



Therefore, the attack would simply hit the invisible creature.






share|improve this answer





















    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "122"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135670%2fhow-are-attacks-that-hit-invisible-creatures-acting-as-cover-resolved%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    10
    down vote













    The DMG states:




    When a ranged attack misses a target that has cover, you can use this optional rule to determine whether the cover was struck by the attack[...] If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




    The attack roll is/was made against the target, not the invisible creature providing cover and it's not stated that you have to re-roll an attack to hit the 'covering creature'.



    Therefore, the attack would simply hit the invisible creature.






    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      10
      down vote













      The DMG states:




      When a ranged attack misses a target that has cover, you can use this optional rule to determine whether the cover was struck by the attack[...] If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




      The attack roll is/was made against the target, not the invisible creature providing cover and it's not stated that you have to re-roll an attack to hit the 'covering creature'.



      Therefore, the attack would simply hit the invisible creature.






      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        10
        down vote










        up vote
        10
        down vote









        The DMG states:




        When a ranged attack misses a target that has cover, you can use this optional rule to determine whether the cover was struck by the attack[...] If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




        The attack roll is/was made against the target, not the invisible creature providing cover and it's not stated that you have to re-roll an attack to hit the 'covering creature'.



        Therefore, the attack would simply hit the invisible creature.






        share|improve this answer












        The DMG states:




        When a ranged attack misses a target that has cover, you can use this optional rule to determine whether the cover was struck by the attack[...] If a creature is providing cover for the missed creature and the attack roll exceeds the AC of the covering creature, the covering creature is hit.




        The attack roll is/was made against the target, not the invisible creature providing cover and it's not stated that you have to re-roll an attack to hit the 'covering creature'.



        Therefore, the attack would simply hit the invisible creature.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Nov 16 at 0:40









        Purple Monkey

        37.2k7150231




        37.2k7150231






























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded



















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135670%2fhow-are-attacks-that-hit-invisible-creatures-acting-as-cover-resolved%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Plaza Victoria

            Puebla de Zaragoza

            Musa