Bats and Thunderstones [Archive] - Wizards Community

Bats and Thunderstones [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Zinger2099
11-26-07, 03:16 PM What happens to a bat that has been subject to deafness from a Thunderstone? Is the bat blinded? For that matter, how does a Thunderstone or similar deafness effect creatures with blindsense? How would a swarm of bats react to a Thunderstone?
ravenshrike
11-26-07, 03:35 PM Since sonar works off of a completely different freq than the thunderstone, they wouldn't be blinded. Same reason why regular noise doesn't blind bats in the real world
PenderGrass
11-26-07, 04:31 PM Since sonar works off of a completely different freq than the thunderstone....
Really?

I didn't catch that memo/report about frequencies that are produced by a thunderstone. Do you have a link?

:dragon:
*****
weasel0
11-26-07, 06:01 PM By RAW, deaf is deaf is deaf. The books don't specify bats use only "other frequncies". Now granted they hear other sounds we don't but they still hear sounds we do. The point of the thunderstone is just a sudden blast of sound that assults the hearing. Bats should be MORE suseptible to these attacks as their hearing is more acute.
But the answer is no. They are not blinded. Bats actually have just as good sight as humans... if not better. Now if the cave is pitch black then yes it "blinds" them because they're temporarily deaf, but they still can use their eyes just like everyone else.
mvincent
11-26-07, 06:09 PM sonar works off of a completely different freq than the thunderstoneEr... no. Loud noises don't deafen in a specific range... they damage hearing in all ranges.
ravenshrike
11-26-07, 06:11 PM Really?

I didn't catch that memo/report about frequencies that are produced by a thunderstone. Do you have a link?

:dragon:
*****

Simple, certain frequencies of sound outside human hearing can induce other physical effects. Since none of those effects are present with a thunderstone one can reliably assume that those frequencies are not present. Which means it's primarily set up to operate within the frequencies of human hearing.
Toki_Wartooth
11-26-07, 06:29 PM Simple, certain frequencies of sound outside human hearing can induce other physical effects. Since none of those effects are present with a thunderstone one can reliably assume that those frequencies are not present. Which means it's primarily set up to operate within the frequencies of human hearing.I'm calling BS on this one. You're full o' 'it. Sudden, loud noises damage the ear, affecting *all* hearing. Do you have any medical studies that show otherwise?
Marcus Majarra
11-26-07, 07:24 PM Medical studies aside, nothing in the bat's description indicates that it requires the ability to hear to use its blindsense. So, technically, denying it the ability to hear doesn't deny it its blindsense.
mvincent
11-26-07, 07:45 PM Medical studies aside, nothing in the bat's description indicates that it requires the ability to hear to use its blindsense. So, technically, denying it the ability to hear doesn't deny it its blindsense.Hey now... let's not take common sense entirely out of the game. DM's are still good for something.

It doesn't require a GED to know that D&D gave bats blindsense to represent their echolocation ability. The rules for Blindsight And Blindsense (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#blindsightAndBlinds ense) even say:
"Such sense may include sensitivity to vibrations, acute scent, keen hearing, or echolocation."
and
"Deafening attacks thwart blindsight if it relies on hearing."
PenderGrass
11-26-07, 08:13 PM Simple, certain frequencies of sound outside human hearing can induce other physical effects. Since none of those effects are present with a thunderstone one can reliably assume that those frequencies are not present. Which means it's primarily set up to operate within the frequencies of human hearing.
You miss the point.

As in, where on Earth (and in this reality) did someone get a thunderstone to do sound frequency studies?

You may be able to conjecture from one side of the forum to the other, but I am 100% sure that there are no "thunderstones" that you can point at, do studies from, or make claims of frequency output.

Thunderstones don't exist.

Therefore, your claims of knowing the exact frequencies that a thunderstone emits is complete conjecture and no more or less "correct" than anyone else that bothers to postulate about them here - especially since nothing in the RAW that I know of indicates any sort of frequency output for a thunderstone.

So, all of your conjecturing involves several assumptions - huge assumptions, I should say as well - not the least of which is the actual mechanics and physics of a make-believe item. Include that you are thinking that the humans in D&D are the same as you and I (which, clearly they are not - since they shoot fireballs, heal people with spells, have skill points, etc.) and already you have two strikes against any sort of basis for making your argument. Finally, you are attempting to convince people that penalties for being deafened are purely restricted to the consequences of frequencies emitted by this make-believe item on the make-believe hearing of some make-believe people.

That is pretty much strike three.

Now, back to the actual game, nothing in the SRD for thunderstones or bats indicates that they are given special treatment for any outcome (I will double-check the actual books at the soonest opportunity, just to be sure) - EDIT: other than the excellent advice that is given by mvincent above regarding keeping to common sense.

:dragon:
*****
Marcus Majarra
11-26-07, 08:44 PM Hey now... let's not take common sense entirely out of the game. DM's are still good for something.
That's what Rule Zero is there for. And while I have nothing against Rule Zero, I prefer to stick within the scope of the RAW on this forum.
mvincent
11-26-07, 10:53 PM I prefer to stick within the scope of the RAW on this forum.Indeed, I gave RAW (for those disinclined to common sense). While one could interpret the deafening caveat listed under the Blindsight/Blindsense rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#blindsightAndBlinds ense) as applying only to Blindsight, I do not believe that is the only RAW interpretation.

Regardless, the writer's intent seems to follow my interpretation. If desired, I can provide examples where RAI beats RAW.

On a related note: if a party was skillful enough to blind a dragon, get it in a silenced area, then hit it with perfume bombs, would you say that technically it would still not be denied it's blindsense ability (because the rules don't cover this situation)?
Marcus Majarra
11-26-07, 11:49 PM On a related note: if a party was skillful enough to blind a dragon, get it in a silenced area, then hit it with perfume bombs, would you say that technically it would still not be denied it's blindsense ability (because the rules don't cover this situation)?
Techncially, that would be as correct as the monk not being proficient with unarmed strikes.

Yes, I am intentionally avoiding an actual answer as to how I would rule it, personally.
PenderGrass
11-27-07, 01:44 AM Since the DMG, page 290, second column, Blindsight And Blindsense, 4th bullet point:
*Deafening attacks thwart blindsight if it relies on hearing (as a bat's echolocation ability does)*.
*Notice that even the link mvincent only has a partial quote and that is why it is always better to look at the book than an online source.

Granted, the bat doesn't have blindsight, but it does have echolocation that depends on hearing (and it is named specifically under the section).

All of this, combined with the RAW for adjudicating (see the DMG, page 6), should allow a DM to use his common sense to make a fair and just ruling.

:dragon:
*****
Zinger2099
11-27-07, 08:21 AM Thank you very much for all your answers guys. You've more then answered my question about wether or not Thunderstones hamper blindsight and blindsense for creatures that use them relating to sound.

That being said, the most important answer I recieved is this one:

But the answer is no. They are not blinded. Bats actually have just as good sight as humans... if not better. Now if the cave is pitch black then yes it "blinds" them because they're temporarily deaf, but they still can use their eyes just like everyone else.

They can see as well as humans, if not better. I guess they aren't blinded. Nifty.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zinger2099 11-26-07, 03:16 PM	What happens to a bat that has been subject to deafness from a Thunderstone? Is the bat blinded? For that matter, how does a Thunderstone or similar deafness effect creatures with blindsense? How would a swarm of bats react to a Thunderstone?
ravenshrike 11-26-07, 03:35 PM	Since sonar works off of a completely different freq than the thunderstone, they wouldn't be blinded. Same reason why regular noise doesn't blind bats in the real world
PenderGrass 11-26-07, 04:31 PM	Since sonar works off of a completely different freq than the thunderstone.... Really? I didn't catch that memo/report about frequencies that are produced by a thunderstone. Do you have a link? :dragon: *****
weasel0 11-26-07, 06:01 PM	By RAW, deaf is deaf is deaf. The books don't specify bats use only "other frequncies". Now granted they hear other sounds we don't but they still hear sounds we do. The point of the thunderstone is just a sudden blast of sound that assults the hearing. Bats should be MORE suseptible to these attacks as their hearing is more acute. But the answer is no. They are not blinded. Bats actually have just as good sight as humans... if not better. Now if the cave is pitch black then yes it "blinds" them because they're temporarily deaf, but they still can use their eyes just like everyone else.
mvincent 11-26-07, 06:09 PM	sonar works off of a completely different freq than the thunderstoneEr... no. Loud noises don't deafen in a specific range... they damage hearing in all ranges.
ravenshrike 11-26-07, 06:11 PM	Really? I didn't catch that memo/report about frequencies that are produced by a thunderstone. Do you have a link? :dragon: ***** Simple, certain frequencies of sound outside human hearing can induce other physical effects. Since none of those effects are present with a thunderstone one can reliably assume that those frequencies are not present. Which means it's primarily set up to operate within the frequencies of human hearing.
Toki_Wartooth 11-26-07, 06:29 PM	Simple, certain frequencies of sound outside human hearing can induce other physical effects. Since none of those effects are present with a thunderstone one can reliably assume that those frequencies are not present. Which means it's primarily set up to operate within the frequencies of human hearing.I'm calling BS on this one. You're full o' 'it. Sudden, loud noises damage the ear, affecting all hearing. Do you have any medical studies that show otherwise?
Marcus Majarra 11-26-07, 07:24 PM	Medical studies aside, nothing in the bat's description indicates that it requires the ability to hear to use its blindsense. So, technically, denying it the ability to hear doesn't deny it its blindsense.
mvincent 11-26-07, 07:45 PM	Medical studies aside, nothing in the bat's description indicates that it requires the ability to hear to use its blindsense. So, technically, denying it the ability to hear doesn't deny it its blindsense.Hey now... let's not take common sense entirely out of the game. DM's are still good for something. It doesn't require a GED to know that D&D gave bats blindsense to represent their echolocation ability. The rules for Blindsight And Blindsense (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#blindsightAndBlinds ense) even say: "Such sense may include sensitivity to vibrations, acute scent, keen hearing, or echolocation." and "Deafening attacks thwart blindsight if it relies on hearing."
PenderGrass 11-26-07, 08:13 PM	Simple, certain frequencies of sound outside human hearing can induce other physical effects. Since none of those effects are present with a thunderstone one can reliably assume that those frequencies are not present. Which means it's primarily set up to operate within the frequencies of human hearing. You miss the point. As in, where on Earth (and in this reality) did someone get a thunderstone to do sound frequency studies? You may be able to conjecture from one side of the forum to the other, but I am 100% sure that there are no "thunderstones" that you can point at, do studies from, or make claims of frequency output. Thunderstones don't exist. Therefore, your claims of knowing the exact frequencies that a thunderstone emits is complete conjecture and no more or less "correct" than anyone else that bothers to postulate about them here - especially since nothing in the RAW that I know of indicates any sort of frequency output for a thunderstone. So, all of your conjecturing involves several assumptions - huge assumptions, I should say as well - not the least of which is the actual mechanics and physics of a make-believe item. Include that you are thinking that the humans in D&D are the same as you and I (which, clearly they are not - since they shoot fireballs, heal people with spells, have skill points, etc.) and already you have two strikes against any sort of basis for making your argument. Finally, you are attempting to convince people that penalties for being deafened are purely restricted to the consequences of frequencies emitted by this make-believe item on the make-believe hearing of some make-believe people. That is pretty much strike three. Now, back to the actual game, nothing in the SRD for thunderstones or bats indicates that they are given special treatment for any outcome (I will double-check the actual books at the soonest opportunity, just to be sure) - EDIT: other than the excellent advice that is given by mvincent above regarding keeping to common sense. :dragon: *****
Marcus Majarra 11-26-07, 08:44 PM	Hey now... let's not take common sense entirely out of the game. DM's are still good for something. That's what Rule Zero is there for. And while I have nothing against Rule Zero, I prefer to stick within the scope of the RAW on this forum.
mvincent 11-26-07, 10:53 PM	I prefer to stick within the scope of the RAW on this forum.Indeed, I gave RAW (for those disinclined to common sense). While one could interpret the deafening caveat listed under the Blindsight/Blindsense rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#blindsightAndBlinds ense) as applying only to Blindsight, I do not believe that is the only RAW interpretation. Regardless, the writer's intent seems to follow my interpretation. If desired, I can provide examples where RAI beats RAW. On a related note: if a party was skillful enough to blind a dragon, get it in a silenced area, then hit it with perfume bombs, would you say that technically it would still not be denied it's blindsense ability (because the rules don't cover this situation)?
Marcus Majarra 11-26-07, 11:49 PM	On a related note: if a party was skillful enough to blind a dragon, get it in a silenced area, then hit it with perfume bombs, would you say that technically it would still not be denied it's blindsense ability (because the rules don't cover this situation)? Techncially, that would be as correct as the monk not being proficient with unarmed strikes. Yes, I am intentionally avoiding an actual answer as to how I would rule it, personally.
PenderGrass 11-27-07, 01:44 AM	Since the DMG, page 290, second column, Blindsight And Blindsense, 4th bullet point: Deafening attacks thwart blindsight if it relies on hearing (as a bat's echolocation ability does). Notice that even the link mvincent only has a partial quote and that is why it is always better to look at the book than an online source. Granted, the bat doesn't have blindsight, but it does have echolocation that depends on hearing (and it is named specifically under the section). All of this, combined with the RAW for adjudicating (see the DMG, page 6), should allow a DM to use his common sense to make a fair and just ruling. :dragon: ****
Zinger2099 11-27-07, 08:21 AM	Thank you very much for all your answers guys. You've more then answered my question about wether or not Thunderstones hamper blindsight and blindsense for creatures that use them relating to sound. That being said, the most important answer I recieved is this one: But the answer is no. They are not blinded. Bats actually have just as good sight as humans... if not better. Now if the cave is pitch black then yes it "blinds" them because they're temporarily deaf, but they still can use their eyes just like everyone else. They can see as well as humans, if not better. I guess they aren't blinded. Nifty.