would i be right in saying that it needs to have an inverse in R as well if it is to have one in the quotient?
Interestingly, yes.
If $x+I$ is a unit, there exists $y$ such that $xy-1\in I$ (this is just the translation of what it means to be a unit in $R/I$.)
Then $xy-1=n$ for some nilpotent element, and rearranging we get $xy=n+1$. Since the right hand side is the sum of a nilpotent element and a unit, it is a unit as well. Then you can easily show that $xy$ being a unit in $R$ implies both $x$ and $y$ are units in $R$.
So, this even works if $I$ is merely nil and maybe not nilpotent.
It doesn't work if $I$ is not nil, though. For example, you can look at $R=F[x,y]$ and $I=(xy-1)$. Then $x+I$ is a unit in $R/I$, but not in $R$.
And as you probably already know, if $u$ is a unit of $R$, then $u+I$ is a unit of $I$ for any proper ideal $I$.