Level Up (A5E) Sight & Targeting a Spell

Could a blinded creature, or targeting someone in a fog cloud etc. target another creature with a spell like Hold Person?

In 5e, unless a creature is deliberately hiding via using an action to stealth, you can still hear the creature and know its whereabouts to attack it. But A5E's target says a spellcaster must be able to see the creature, or otherwise know its precise location. I am given to believe based on folks' arguments that means that just knowing what 5ft space the creature is in wouldn't be enough to target it with said spell.

Perhaps, "precise location" are for situations where you do not rely on sight to find a target and instead use another means to do so.
In these situations (blind sense, eco-location, maybe smell, blind fighting) I would argue the a "line of sight" has been qualified (therefore, their precise location is known) and the caster can cast Hold Person on the target.

Notably, tremorsense specifically says that it doesn't count as sight.

oh dear

I've seen senses designated as "targeting" or "accurate" in superhero games (Champions and Mutants and Masterminds, respectively) to indicate that they're suitable for use in targeting an opponent with attacks. Normally, that applies to sight by default, but it can be bought with any sense in those games.
I've long thought D&D could benefit from the same just to make it clear whether or not certain other senses could be used for just such a situation. I find it much clearer and more direct than saying whether or not tremorsense counts as a form of "sight".

My understanding (perhaps wrong) is that the wording was changed to accommodate the idea of characters with disabilities. So, for example, if your character cannot see (even if not because they are normally blind), as long as they can otherwise know the precise location of a creature, they can target it.

I don't remember if A5e makes the distinction or if I'm thinking of PF2e, but in some systems, different senses are defined as precise or imprecise, which would help with determining what qualifies. With that in mind, I don't think it has to qualify as sight, it just has to qualify as precise to satisfy the requirements.

Given that you can make a ranged attack roll with disadvantage against an invisible creature or if you are blinded, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to permit it under certain circumstances. First, you need to know which 5'x5' square the target is in (assuming medium size), or a good guess as to their location. Second, you hope that the spell accurately targets them. You could also mistakenly cast the spell at the wrong target under such circumstances - you heard something near you, but maybe it is your ally or another target than the one you wanted.

It is partly a question of player agency. I'd want to take a, "Yes, you can, but ..." sort of approach if the players want to do this. As a DM, I might house rule that you have a 50% miss chance when attempting to target them, assuming that you guessed the right square. If you guessed the wrong square, then you will miss.

Tessarael said:

It is partly a question of player agency. I'd want to take a, "Yes, you can, but ..." sort of approach if the players want to do this. As a DM, I might house rule that you have a 50% miss chance when attempting to target them, assuming that you guessed the right square. If you guessed the wrong square, then you will miss.

Click to expand...

That's a fair house rule- more than generous I think, considering.

Generally speaking it is an accommodation for blind or visually impaired characters that rely on other senses. For them, I just ignore the 'see your target' component, entirely, and go off line of effect and whether they know what square the target is occupying.

For everyone else, if they can target the square I'll give the target advantage on their saving throw against the spell. Easy.