Darkness+Devil's Sight is killing my campaign

[KarinsDad]

FYI, what you are talking about here is not "all according to the rules". You cannot become flatfooted in the middle of combat. Flatfooted only exists at the beginning of combat (as per the DMG).

Sorry, my terminology error due to our DM asking us for our flatfooted AC in the middle of combat.

If you cannot see your opponent and he fires a missile weapon at you, you are denied your Dexterity bonus to AC. This is basically the same as being flatfooted (with the exception that you can still make Attacks of Opportunity in the middle of combat when denied your Dexterity bonus to AC as opposed to really being flatfooted at the beginning of combat and you cannot even make AoOs).

Additionally, not only do you lose your Dexterity bonus, the archer is at +2 to hit you. So, your effective AC is 2 worse than it would be against an opponent whom you can see, but whom you are flatfooted against in the beginning of the combat.

The point I was trying to make is that your effective AC can be worse than normal flatfooted if archers you cannot see (or you do not see right away) attack you in the middle of combat.

Yes, surprise rounds suck, but, they don't happen in the middle of combat.

I didn't say that surprise rounds happen in the middle of combat. I incorrectly said that we became flatfooted in the middle of combat if we could not see our attacker.

What I meant by that is that we lose our Dexterity bonus to AC and our attacker is at +2 to hit as well. For all intents and purposes, it's the same as being ambushed in the middle of combat.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

KarinsDad -

Did you then immediately see those archers? Or did they magically fade back into cover?

Was the DM using the Sniping rules? If so, it's practically impossible for any low-level archer to Snipe a similar-level character who has even a moderate Wis bonus or Spot roll.

 

[KarinsDad]

At 15th level (the party level in your example), the warlock is getting off 1 eldritch blast or invocation while each fighter is getting off three arrows, assuming they aren't using rapid shot. The warlock could arguably quicken one eldritch blast and thus get off two per round (what's the minimum level he can take quicken SLA?), but how does that damage output compare to 2 archers launching 6-8 arrows per round? Or 6-8 flaming/shocking/whatever arrows per round?

The fighters have maybe a 50% chance to hit with their best arrows. Assuming say 15 points of damage per arrow (D8 + 3 mighty + D6 flaming +3 magic +1 point blank), that is 50% + 25% + 5% chance to hit times 15 points per arrow = 12 points of damage per archer per round or 24 points of damage (increased to 26 points for criticals on average). The Warlock is hitting for 28 points of damage 95% of the time (maybe +16 to hit versus touch ACs often 15 or lower) or 26+ points of damage (increased to 29 points for criticals on average).

The fighters would have to have a 60% chance to hit to beat the average damage and this assumes that the Warlock doesn’t have other invocations or magic working in his favor.

A 60% hit chance at level 15 means that the archers are at +24 and their opponents ACs are only 33. 33 is not that high of a normal AC for level 15. Chances are that the archers have less than a 60% chance to hit on their best shots.

And we are still talking TWO Archers here for one Warlock.

And with Rapid Shot, these odds are virtually identical (40% + 40% chance to hit times 15 points per arrow = 12 points of damage per archer per round or 24 points of damage (increased to 26 points for criticals on average)).

Granted, in your example the warlock beats the sorceror into unconciousness before the sorc acts in round 1, but how often is that going to happen?

Maybe one combat in five or six.

If the Warlock increases the threat range of his EB (and what Warlock will not do this by 15th level), that's basically a 10% chance at double damage on round one alone. The other aspect of this is that the PC Warlock is going to pick on the guy in no armor (possibly casting spells), but the NPC Sorcerer might not be concentrating on a guy in armor on the other side.

I am not saying that the Warlock will always beat the Sorcerer in round one, but assuming he can beat the Sorcerer's Initiative 50% of the time, the Sorcerer is over half damaged before he can even act in round one half of the time.

I'm not so sure the warlock is as unbalanced as you might think.

I'm not so sure either, but it looks that way on the surface.

My initial reaction was, "Wow, that class is really overpowered." Then I read some discussion on their powers and have rethought that initial response. But I still haven't decided; I need to do some more looking into the balance issues.

I haven't carefully looked at him, but what I did see so far SHOUTS imbalance.

 

[ragboy]

KarinsDad -

Did you then immediately see those archers? Or did they magically fade back into cover?

Was the DM using the Sniping rules? If so, it's practically impossible for any low-level archer to Snipe a similar-level character who has even a moderate Wis bonus or Spot roll.

Must be a strict interpretation of this line from Attack Modifiers:

Attacker Is... Melee Ranged
Invisible +2* +2*

* The defender loses any Dexterity bonus to AC. This bonus doesn’t apply if the target is blinded.

http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/combatModifiers.html

Does a concealed attacker = an invisible attacker? Not sure if I've ever had to make that distinction before...

 

[KarinsDad]

KarinsDad -

Did you then immediately see those archers? Or did they magically fade back into cover?

Was the DM using the Sniping rules? If so, it's practically impossible for any low-level archer to Snipe a similar-level character who has even a moderate Wis bonus or Spot roll.

You mean the kobolds with the 60 foot darkvision (that they didn't need because we had torch and lamp light) that were shooting at us in the large underground mines? No, I did not immediately see those archers.

Nor did I immediately see the Rogue archers firing at us from the dark sewer spillage tunnel while we fought their allies on the beach.


Sure, if it is only concealment, they tend to only get one "ambush" shot at you. But even then, they can move back further into concealment and come back at you from another angle (requiring another Spot roll).

 

[Thanee]

Perhaps. But assuming a party of 4 15th level NPCs versus a party of 4 15th level PCs where one of them is a Warlock, not even using any of his other powers, a Warlock could easily take out virtually any single arcane caster NPC on the other side in 2 rounds (in round one if he gets surprise and his initiative roll is higher than his target).

I think you quite heavily underestimate the power of a 15th level arcane spellcaster there.

You would think, but you'd be surprised what can happen "according to the initiative rules".

Do you mean, that your DM is not fair with those rules?
Otherwise I really have no idea what you mean.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

The fighters have maybe a 50% chance to hit with their best arrows.

Wow, you must play a different edition than I do... fighters hit only 50% with their *best* attack in your games?

15th level sorcerers have only about 50 hit points!?

Did they never hear of Con bonuses (from spells or items) and temporary hit points (empowered False Life)?

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

Must be a strict interpretation of this line from Attack Modifiers:

Attacker Is... Melee Ranged
Invisible +2* +2*

* The defender loses any Dexterity bonus to AC. This bonus doesn’t apply if the target is blinded.

http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/combatModifiers.html

Does a concealed attacker = an invisible attacker? Not sure if I've ever had to make that distinction before...

There really is no difference between total concealment and invisibility for an attacker.

"Invisible: Visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents’ Dexterity bonuses to AC (if any)."

Nothing states that invisible means that you must be under the influence of a spell or power.

A character in the dark is "Visually undetectable". A character in total concealment is "Visually undetectable".


Even without total concealment, you won't necessarily see an opponent until you make a Spot roll (or he shoots you or something) and if you cannot see your opponent, you are denied your Dexterity bonus to AC (minimally).

For example from the SRD:

"A creature with blindsense is still denied its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against attacks from creatures it cannot see."

"Blinded: The character cannot see. He takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any)"

"In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded. In addition to the obvious effects, a blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat (all opponents have total concealment), loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, takes a –2 penalty to AC"


Since the attack modifier rules for blindness and invisibilty are effectively the same (one is +2 to hit and the other is -2 to AC), it seems that if you do not see an attacker, it's tough to react. Granted, a DM could rule that you see the arrow for the split second that it comes into the light (and hence he does not get the +2 to hit), but if he would rule that for a character you cannot see in the darkness, why would he rule that way for an invisible character that is standing in bright light and firing an arrow at you?

In any case, this is how our DM is running it. It appears to be what was intended.

 

[Quidam]

Sniping

Was the DM using the Sniping rules? If so, it's practically impossible for any low-level archer to Snipe a similar-level character who has even a moderate Wis bonus or Spot roll.

I recall reading the Sniping rules in the PHB but can't seem to dig them up in the SRD. Would someone do me the kindness of either linking me to them or quoting them?

IIRC, when sniped against, the defender get's a +20 bonus to the Spot check. Yet if the attacker has total concealment, they get a bonus to their Hide checks:

An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Hide checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Hide checks when not moving (even though opponents can’t see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual clues).

While the SRD says "invisible", I would equate that with "has total concealment". So if they Snipe you and don't move, the bonus to their Hide check should more than balance the bonus to the defender's Spot check that's the result of being Sniped.

 

[Quidam]

Found the Reference

I recall reading the Sniping rules in the PHB but can't seem to dig them up in the SRD. Would someone do me the kindness of either linking me to them or quoting them?

I found the reference- it's under the Hide skill description.

Sniping: If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a –20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot.