I’m trying to figure out a ruling for something one of my players wants to do. They’re invisible, but they took a couple of seemingly non-attack actions that my gut says should break inviz.

Specifically, they dumped out a flask of oil, and then used a tinderbox to light it on fire. Using a tinderbox isn’t an attack, nor is emptying a flask, although they are actions , and the result of lighting something on fire both seems like an attack and something that would dispell inviz.

I know that as DM I can rule it however I want, but I’m fairly inexperienced and I don’t wanna go nerfing one of my players tools just because it feels yucky to me personally without understanding the implications.

Is this an attack or is there another justification for breaking inviz that is there some RAW clause I didn’t see? Or should this be allowed?

  • PeriodicallyPedanticOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Unfortunately they’re thinking so far outside the box that I’m having difficulty balancing encounters 😭

    One player can two shot a fire giant from a safe distance, yet a decent sized pack of giant rats would probably fuck up the whole party.

    • JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      33 minutes ago

      Difficulty balancing encounters

      They’re being creative because they want to be powerful. They want that “wow that’s clever and highly effective, you’re so smart here’s a one-shot” moment. So, let them. Balance be damned. Let them wipe out entire encounters if they’re clever enough. Or, throw in a fluffer enemy or two that can either get “one-shot” at any moment or be a nuisance for the entire encounter

      Edit: If you like friendly competition (and you should probably check with your group too) you can turn combat encounters into puzzles where you’re basically trying to stump each other on how to handle a situation. Try to think tactics instead of numbers