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?

  • TotallyNotADolphin
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Personally I would allow pouring out oil to not break invis, but depending on the type of enemy, they might get perception checks to see if they can correlate oil pouring to mean someone must be pouring it for the players location. Although if they would throw the oil at something it would be like making a throwing attack with an improvised weapon.

    Using the tinderbox I’d rule as attacking the oil in order to cause fire.

    I feel like those moves equate to item interaction for pouring the oil right where they are, but deliberately lighting something on fire with a tool requires both more focus, intent and deliberate action.