Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Arcade 03-21-07, 11:31 AM	Blind Fight lets you keep your dex bonus against invisible opponents and negate the +2 bonus to attack. The question is, do you need to be aware that you're fighting an invisible opponent? Let's take a few examples: 1. The party is fighting a group of ogres. The Ogre chief sitting in the next room has his sorcerer ally cast Greater Invisibility on him. None of the characters notice the ogre chief coming and the ogre goes and smacks down the lead fighter with blindfighting. Should the fighter get the benefit of blind fighting on this first attack or not? 2. The party is fighting a lich who runs down the hall and around the corner. Once out of sight, it casts greater invisibility. When the lead character with blind fighting comes around the corner and the lich tries to use its paralyzing touch, does the character get to use its blind fighting benefit against that attack? 3. If number 2 is no, ignore this example. Take the above situation again, except the party doesn't know what they're fighting. The lead fighter loses its Dex bonus in a surprise round because he's flat-footed, but does the invisible opponent still get the +2 to attack? 4. If number 2 is no, ignore this. the party is fighting a shadowdancer who is flitting in and out of shadows, sneak attacking the party. How is this different than being invisible? If it's not, then does the blind fight effectively negate the sneak attack? Many more corner cases like this come up. Thanks!
Draxo 03-21-07, 11:33 AM	As far as i'm aware; 1, No, i dont think so. He's flat footed and not in combat ith the chief. 2, I think he does, if combat has already started with that opponent. I'd say its a DM rule call for the particular situation.
Vegepygmy 03-21-07, 11:55 AM	The question is, do you need to be aware that you're fighting an invisible opponent?No. 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. No
Vegepygmy 03-21-07, 11:59 AM	1, No, i dont think so. He's flat footed and not in combat ith the chief.Flat-footedness is irrelevant, and I don't know how "smacks down" can be understood as anything but being in melee combat with someone.
Mirtek 03-21-07, 01:00 PM	No. 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. No Agreed on all points. Also: 4. Yes, in this case blind fight negates the sneak attacks
laughinggranny 03-21-07, 05:26 PM	does this mean that an invisible attacker cant catch somone with the blind fight feat flat footed without a ranged attack? It dosent make sense that you cant be caught flat footed by a invisible aponenent.
Egres 03-21-07, 05:34 PM	does this mean that an invisible attacker cant catch somone with the blind fight feat flat footed without a ranged attack? It dosent make sense that you cant be caught flat footed by a invisible aponenent. Even with Blind Fight you can still get caught flat-footed: you simply don't lose your Dex bonus to AC.
SALDAR 03-21-07, 05:59 PM	does this mean that an invisible attacker cant catch somone with the blind fight feat flat footed without a ranged attack? Simple answer, an invisible attacker can catch someone with BF flat footed. Long answer: You are discussing two seperate conditions, flat footed and an invisible opponent. Any time you are flat footed you lose your dex bonus to AC. When an invisible opponent attacks in melee you lose you dex bonus to AC and he gets a +2 on the attack. Being flat footed has nothing to do with your opponent being invisible and vice versa. Blind Fight eliminates the bonuses an invisible melee opponent gets, you lose dex bonus to AC and attacker gets a +2 on the attack. BF does not eliminate the flat footed condition, lose your dex bonus to AC. If you are flat footed and your melee opponent is invisible and you do not have BF you lose your dex bonus to AC (both conditions apply and overlap) and the opponent gets a +2 to attacks for being invisible. If you are flat footed and your opponent is invisible and you do have BF then you only lose your dex bonus to AC for being flat footed. Other abilities, such as uncanny dodge, allows you to keep your dex bonus to AC when flat footed, but BF is not such an ability.
kelvinaw273 03-21-07, 09:18 PM	1. The party is fighting a group of ogres. The Ogre chief sitting in the next room has his sorcerer ally cast Greater Invisibility on him. None of the characters notice the ogre chief coming and the ogre goes and smacks down the lead fighter with blindfighting. Should the fighter get the benefit of blind fighting on this first attack or not? If he does not know there is anything to fight, he can't blind-fight. If he has blindsight or blindsense even to a 5' radius he would get some warning, but if he has no special senses and he fails his spot or listen checks, he is sunk. Edit: If he is already fighting, then it's a harder check. I would still say no under the circumstances though. 2. The party is fighting a lich who runs down the hall and around the corner. Once out of sight, it casts greater invisibility. When the lead character with blind fighting comes around the corner and the lich tries to use its paralyzing touch, does the character get to use its blind fighting benefit against that attack? If the character is expecting combat, I would say yes. He knows Lich's have magic powers, so he is presumably "ready for anything". 3. If number 2 is no, ignore this example. Take the above situation again, except the party doesn't know what they're fighting. The lead fighter loses its Dex bonus in a surprise round because he's flat-footed, but does the invisible opponent still get the +2 to attack? Yes. He's not expecting the fight. 4. If number 2 is no, ignore this. the party is fighting a shadowdancer who is flitting in and out of shadows, sneak attacking the party. How is this different than being invisible? If it's not, then does the blind fight effectively negate the sneak attack? No, they are different: Blind fight works on an oponant you know is there but you cannot see - you are alert for them. A rogue does not automatically sneak attack anyone whose back is to them, if they are expecting an attack and can thus employ their dex bonus, the rogue will only get a sneak attack from flanking.
Vegepygmy 03-22-07, 11:59 AM	If he does not know there is anything to fight, he can't blind-fight.I find no support at all in the rules for your statement. Care to back it up with a cite?
Gorlick_Da_Consumer 03-22-07, 12:59 PM	I find no support at all in the rules for your statement. Care to back it up with a cite? its perty simple, if you dont know to be looking for an invisable beast, you dont get a bonus. if you dont know your hunting a wererat, you aint going to kill every one u find in a dungon. so blindfight works in situations were your readying yourself for something u cant see. so if your flat footed (lose your dex bonus because your not prepared for/ expecting combat) you dont get a bonus if you did then people would take expertise and walk around with a +5 to their AC -5 to their melee they arint using and thus makeing flat footed irrelivent.
Thyrwyn 03-22-07, 02:19 PM	its perty simple, if you dont know to be looking for an invisable beast, you dont get a bonus.There is nothing in the Blind-Fight feat that specifies that awareness is necessary for the feat to deny opponents any melee combat advantage they may gain from being invisible. If you have the feat and are in melee combat with an invisible opponent then a) they do not gain the +2 to hit they would normally gain, and b) their being invisible does not cause you to lose your dex bonus to AC. The feat does not protect you from other circumstances or conditions that may cause b), such as being flat-footed.
Thyrwyn 03-22-07, 03:24 PM	Here we go: I found the exact citation I was looking for. Basically, all of the above situations listed in the original post are alike in that: a) The defender (with Blind-Fight) is already in combat. b) The opponent is invisble, and c) The defender is unaware of the opponent. There are two possible advantages the attacker could get: 1) +2 from being invisble, and 2) defender loses dex bonus to AC Since Blind-Fight is not dependent on awareness, no invisible (melee) attacker will ever get advantage 1). So we are left with advantage 2). Advantage 2) could also be gained if the defender were flat-footed. However, you cannot be flat-footed after your 1st action. Condition a) negates this possibility. Which leaves conditions b) and c). The Blind-fight feat protects against condition b), the confusion comes from condition c). Exactly what advantage is gained if the defender is unaware of the attacker? Here is the answer (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ask/20070201a):Q:Dear Sage, If a rogue has successfully hidden behind some bushes and fires an arrow at a target less than 30 feet away from her, does she deal sneak attack damage? --Todd A: Yes. The rules don’t come right out and say this, but a character who has successfully hidden from an opponent is considered invisible for the purpose of rendering that foe flat-footed, and thus deals sneak attack damage.emphasis mine. Now the Sage mispoke, since being invisible does not render your foe flat-footed, it just denies them their Dex bonus to AC (as we have been exploring at length). Therefore: Condition c) has the effect of making the attacker effectively invisible (again). As stated earlier, this is negated by the Blind-Fight feat.
WuJen3 03-22-07, 04:18 PM	Ok then heres my question.Can't the fighter with BF be flanked?I read the feat and I didn't see that he or she can't be.
kelvinaw273 03-22-07, 07:59 PM	I find no support at all in the rules for your statement. Care to back it up with a cite? I thought it was such a no-brainer it didn't need it. If you are not on guard for something, you are flat-footed. As Blind Fight grants you no ability to detect invisible creatures beyond those you already possess, you are pretty stuffed if you don't have a clue they are there. When they strike, it is their surprise round. End of debate.
PhaedrusXY 03-22-07, 08:04 PM	I thought it was such a no-brainer it didn't need it. If you are not on guard for something, you are flat-footed. As Blind Fight grants you no ability to detect invisible creatures beyond those you already possess, you are pretty stuffed if you don't have a clue they are there. When they strike, it is their surprise round. End of debate.That has nothing at all to do with the Blind Fight feat. Flat-footed is not the same as "denied dex to AC". They are entirely separate conditions. One of them (denied Dex) happens to be one of the results of the other (Flat-footed), however. I understand that they are confusing. Even the Sage gets them mixed up. Reread the thread. This was discussed fairly well by Thyrwyn. Blind Fight prevents "losing your Dex to AC" due to being attacked by an invisible attacker. It doesn't help with being Flat-footed (or losing your Dex as a result of it) at all.
Centauri 03-22-07, 10:19 PM	As was said, you don't have to "be aware" of an invisible opponent in order for Blind-Fight to work, it just works. I liken it to gun kata (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Kata) in the movie Equilibrium. A student of the gun kata shoots where the opponent is likely to be and doesn't stand where the opponent is likely to shoot. A warrior with Blind-Fight simply moves and strikes in such a way that makes it more difficult for invisible enemies to hit and avoid him. I see no rationale for how this could possibly work, and there doesn't need to be, any more than there is or needs to be a rationale for how magic works. So, an invisible opponent can catch a blind-fighter flat-footed in the suprise round (which an invisible opponent is likely to get, being nearly undetectable) and before the blind-fighter takes his first action in the first round. After that, the blind-fighter is no longer flat-footed and not otherwise denied his Dexterity bonus. Of course, he's still got huge problems, since he's got crumbs-all chance of attacking the square that the invisible opponent occupies. Then you get into questions about whether a melee attack by an invisible opponent gives away the opponent's location, etc.
kelvinaw273 03-23-07, 12:27 AM	So, an invisible opponent can catch a blind-fighter flat-footed in the suprise round (which an invisible opponent is likely to get, being nearly undetectable) and before the blind-fighter takes his first action in the first round. After that, the blind-fighter is no longer flat-footed and not otherwise denied his Dexterity bonus. Of course, he's still got huge problems, since he's got crumbs-all chance of attacking the square that the invisible opponent occupies. Then you get into questions about whether a melee attack by an invisible opponent gives away the opponent's location, etc. That's pretty much what I said, and yes, being hit by someone you cannot see does give away their position IMHO.
antsu 03-23-07, 04:27 AM	As I understand the BF feat works like this: your rely more on your other senses than eyes. You can feel/hear/smell/sense someone near even if you can not see him/her, this does not protect you from ranged attack since your senses work only in close range. Therefore BF protects you from any invisible opponent in melee, even if you dont know of them at the moment but it does not protect you from being flat-footed. In other words when you have BF and are flat-footed you loose you DEX bonus to AC and can be sneak attacked but the invisible attacker do not gain +2 bonus to attack from being invisible. you can be flatfooted only in the beginning of the fight. After the fight has started you are no more flat-footed...
Centauri 03-23-07, 10:15 AM	After the fight has started you are no more flat-footed... Right. I can understand if people are confused by this since not being aware of an invisible person before a fight doesn't seem all that different from not being aware of an invisible person during a fight. One might think that every round should be a "surprise" round when fighting an invisible opponent, since all the invisible opponent has to do is step back, and stay out of the way until the poor fighter has lost all track of him. But the rules just don't work that way. They act in a similar way, by denying the Dexterity bonus to the defender and granting an additional bonus to the invisible attacker. It gets more confusing when a reasonable rationale for the the way Blind-Fight might work clashes with our understanding of how "awareness" works in this game. If you can "sense" them with Blind-Fight, you might suppose that they wouldn't be able to surprise you in the first place. Conversely, if you couldn't sense them enough to avoid the surprise round, how do you even know to "activate" blind-fight? Fortunately, we don't need to have physical reasons for why the rules work, as much as we might like them. They just work.
Leilond 03-23-07, 10:29 AM	I suggest the reading of the "encounter" chapter of the DMG, where it suggest that if someone enter into a already started combat, that one can consider all other "flat-footed" respect to him, if he can arrive unseen and uneared For this reason I always consider "flat-footed" someone that is attacked by an enemy without ANY clue of his presence (no noise, no movement). If you let that work different it is very FUNNY. Confront this situation: I'm a fighter with "blind fight" 1) I turn a corner, an invisible opponent that I'm not aware of, attack me => I lose my DEX bonus because I'm flat-footed 2) I turn a corner during a fight with a visible goblin. An invisible opponent that I'm not aware of attack me => I do not lose my DEX bonus against the invisible opponent because I'm fighting a goblin It look like too silly for me that fighting a goblin help me against every possible invisible opponent out there I don't know if it's by the RAW, but surely in my games you must be "aware of the possible presence of an enemy to use blind fight bonus"
Centauri 03-23-07, 10:43 AM	I suggest the reading of the "encounter" chapter of the DMG, where it suggest that if someone enter into a already started combat, that one can consider all other "flat-footed" respect to him, if he can arrive unseen and uneared. That's a reasonable way of playing it, but the fighting characters are only flat-footed against this undetected opponent for, at most, one action (the newcomer's "surprise round") and one round (until the original fighters act for the first time from the point of view of the new opponent). Once a character has attacked he can't catch his opponents flat-footed again until there's another fight. He might deny them their Dexterity bonus, such as by feinting or attacking from invisibility or hiding, but there is only one surprise round. I can't tell you what the "real" difference is between "flat-footed" and being denied one's Dexterity bonus, but by the rules there is a difference.
Nom 03-25-07, 07:14 AM	I suggest the reading of the "encounter" chapter of the DMG, where it suggest that if someone enter into a already started combat, that one can consider all other "flat-footed" respect to him, if he can arrive unseen and unearedCan you provide a quote for that? The only mention of flat-footed and newcomers I can find is that the newcomers might be caught flat-footed if they weren't expecting combat (DMG pg 24). Aware newcomers get to go "first" in the initiative order, but there's no mention of existing combatants being caught flat-footed. I can't tell you what the "real" difference is between "flat-footed" and being denied one's Dexterity bonus, but by the rules there is a difference.I figure it's "adrenaline". Once your body figures out that something is happening, the "fight or flight" response kicks in and you're in a state of maximal awareness until things calm down again. You can't stay like that forever without completely wrecking your metabolism, although skilled rogues and barbarians seem to pull off something close (see Uncanny Dodge).
ClementWillowbreaker 03-25-07, 02:02 PM	Can you provide a quote for that? He can't, because he is completely wrong, and Nom is right. Newcomers that become aware of an ongoing combat auto-win initiative by 1, and that is it. It even flat-out says that, "there's no way to get an action ahead of everyone else (because the encounter has already started)...this happens whether the other sides are aware of the new side or not" . No surprise round, and everyone has already acted, so no one is flat-footed. The only advantage a creature that sneaks into a combat with invisibility gets is being invisible until after it makes an attack. Blind-fight cancels most of that out when they are within 5ft.
Centauri 03-25-07, 03:49 PM	Aware newcomers get to go "first" in the initiative order, but there's no mention of existing combatants being caught flat-footed. Good call, both you and Clement. I actually looked up the page and you're right. I figure it's "adrenaline". Once your body figures out that something is happening, the "fight or flight" response kicks in and you're in a state of maximal awareness until things calm down again. A fine explanation, though it opens the door for spells like calm emotions to make characters become flat-footed again. You can't stay like that forever without completely wrecking your metabolism, although skilled rogues and barbarians seem to pull off something close (see Uncanny Dodge). Yeah, it's like characters with Uncanny Dodge are constantly on edge. Blind-fight cancels most of that out when they are within 5ft. It's any melee situation, isn't it? An invisible reach weapon or a Large invisible creature still would be denied it's advantage.
ClementWillowbreaker 03-25-07, 04:25 PM	It's any melee situation, isn't it? An invisible reach weapon or a Large invisible creature still would be denied it's advantage. Yeah, any melee situation. When I first wrote that, I was being overly conservative, given that the PHB usually assumes that melee combat only happens at 5ft. But Blind Fight works on all melee attacks. Also, I do believe that the best general rule is that flankers and defenders have to be aware of each other (down to the square). Incidentally, that means you can still flank a creature with Blindsense when it is blinded, because it knows there are two enemies on opposite sides of it, and it has to split its attention. While this means you can't flank a blind character with no special abilities, he is more boned than anyone else. I don't have any problem with a character closing his eyes to defeat flanking, since even with Blind-Fight, he still has a net 25% miss chance, has to guess what square to attack, and is vulnerable to ranged attacks. I would describe it as going all Zen-internal-reaction-style that gives you tunnel-vision, rather than closing your eyes. Improved Uncanny Dodge gives you this benefit all the time without the drawbacks. I think it ends up fair.
antsu 03-26-07, 07:25 AM	Some things that this thread bring up to my mind. Two invisible opponents can not flank you unless you can sense their presense, but why they should need to flank you since they will get bonuses from being invisible anyway... Also consider that how the hell the opponents could properly flank you if they dont see each other. If you would have the Blind Fight feat then they cold flank you (if they manage to do that somehow while not seing each other) but would not get normal bonuses from being invisible...