FIghting what you can't see (blind, invisible, and hidden)

[Felon]

The party had a run-in with some flameskulls last session. Now, for those who don't know, flameskulls rank among this edition's more jaw-droppingly "what the..?" monsters. High initiative, high speed, high stealth, and a high-damage bomb that each can drop once per encounter with a high chance of hitting makes for an over-the-top alpha striker. But none of that actually was the problem. It was what they have left once they've used up the big blast: an at-will ranged attack that blinds (save ends).

We had to familiarize ourselves quickly with the rules for fighting invisible foes. The PHB2 has some errata that, irksomely enough, redirects the reader back to the PHB. The way we read it, you can locate an invisible creature with a perception check opposed by the creature's stealth check. Now, if you're blinded, every creature is effectively invisible, so we just used passive stealth, since having roll stealth constantly would be tedious. Seemed pretty reasonable until the DM observed that the blind condition also imposes a -10 on perception checks. This made for perception checks that would fail even on a 20. So, being blind means you really want to have a clsoe attack on-hand or you're fairly hosed. At least the party's invoker got some payback by blinding them with his attack (not an at-will, let it be noted).

DId we msis a beat on how we applied the rules?

 

[ForbidenMaster]

[...]

DId we msis a beat on how we applied the rules?

Yes.

First: your opponent being blinded (the condition) does not automatically make you hidden (the status) or invisible (the status). You must still roll a stealth check vs your opponents passive perception to become hidden and invisible. You must do this at the end of a move action. If during the move action you use to become hidden you moved more than 2 squares you take a -5 to the check. If you ran then the penalty is -10. If for some reason (such as you attacked) you become unhidden you must make another stealth check. If you are hidden and move more than 2 squares you must make another stealth check with a-5 penalty to the attack, -10 if you ran.

Simply: even when facing blind opponents you arent always hidden and must keep rolling stealth checks if you want to attack and then hide from your foes.

Second: You only need to roll a perception check to find a hidden enemy. If an enemy is not hidden from you then you know exactly which square it is in even if you cannot see it. So lets say that the flameskull moved and then attacked, making it not hidden at the end of its turn, everyone knows where it is until the flameskull can take another move to hide. You still take a -5 to melee and ranged attacks for total concealment, but at least you know which square to attack.

Now lets say that the flameskull is hidden. As you pointed out, one can make a perception check as a minor action to try and find where the flameskull is instead of having to guess which square to attack. The key here is that the DC for the perception check is whatever the flameskull got for its stealth check when it became hidden. So if the flameskull got a 25 when it moved and became hidden, 25 is the DC for the perception check until the flameskull takes another move action to become/stay hidden.

You should only be rolling stealth checks when the flamescull moves (aprox. once a round) with a DC equal to the passive perception checks of the party members, and you should only be rolling perception check when the PCs decide to use a minor action to try and find the flameskull when it is hidden with a DC equal to the stealth check the flameskull used to become hidden in the first place. So at max you are looking at one extra die roll per turn with set DCs. It is not something that you should just handwave to passive as it simply does not work and is not that big of a hassle.

EDIT: fixed spelling/grammar

 

[Felon]

Interesting. The gang will need to marinate on this one. Thanks.

 

[keterys]

For clarity, since it threw me off, normal flameskulls don't blind. Apparently blackfire flameskulls do.

At any rate, the way it should work is the flameskulls choose to stealth as part of their movement and roll against your passive perceptions. If that succeeds, you can try to use active perception on your turn as a minor action, against the stealth check they already got...

So passive stealth is probably not the right answer here.

 

[eamon]

But if I understand correctly, the -10 penalty to perception checks imposed by blindness still applies.

(In-game, this could be rationalized by noting that orientation is much easier when you can see, and you might notice small hints of movement of visible items affected by the invisible creature - things that differentiate blindness from mere invisibility).

 

[ForbidenMaster]

But if I understand correctly, the -10 penalty to perception checks imposed by blindness still applies.

Yes.

 

[sfedi]

But if I understand correctly, the -10 penalty to perception checks imposed by blindness still applies.

Yes, but don't apply it.

It only makes sense for things that you would normally have to check for perception and don't rely on sight only.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Is passive perception a "perception check?"

 

[webrunner]

Invisibility is defined as:

• You can’t be seen by normal forms of vision.
• You have combat advantage against any enemy that can’t see you.
• You don’t provoke opportunity attacks from enemies that can’t see you.


Note that the second two definitions are specifically defined as part of combat advantage and opportunity attacks as being not-seen. If those two lines did not exist, the rules would function exactly the same.

Therefore, invisibility is just a status that makes you unable to to be seen.

Blindness:
You grant combat advantage. - By definition you would if this rule wasn't included, because everything that you can't see has combat advantage against you.
You can’t see any target (your targets have total concealment).
You take a -10 penalty to Perception checks. - this is a specific rule to perception checks.
You can’t flank an enemy. (Irrelevant to our discussion)

You do NOT need to roll perception to find an invisible target. You know which square they are in, but take -5 to hit them.

Functionally, except with rules which specificity interact with the 'invisible' status effect, and the last two effects of being blinded, being blinded is the same as facing a room full of invisible targets.

Where this changes is if the invisible target rolls stealth (which they can, because they are concealed by being invisible). By successfully rolling stealth against your passive perception (which is -10 due to being blinded) then they become "Hidden" to you. You now no longer know which square they are in: You can't see, or hear them.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

it is easier to spot an invisible target than to spot someone when you are blind:

reason:
You can usually see footsteps on the ground. On some grounds (deep snow) i would not allow you to become hidden at all. (Though you are still invisible and get the defense bonus.)

If you are blinded, you really have no means to get indirect clues other than noises.