Level Up (A5E) Blind fighting the blind

[Anonymous3]

Hey guys,
I just wanted to make sure that advantage/disadvantage stacking and cancellation are slightly different in A5e.

A5e vs O5e advantage:

O5e:
If multiple situations affect a roll and each one grants advantage or imposes disadvantage on it, you don't roll more than one additional d20. If two favorable situations grant advantage, for example, you still roll only one additional d20.

If circumstances cause a roll to have both advantage and disadvantage, you are considered to have neither of them, and you roll one d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantage and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, you have neither advantage nor disadvantage.

A5e:
When you have both advantage and disadvantage (regardless of from how many sources), they cancel each other out and you roll normally.

A5e vs O5e invisible:

O5e:
Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have advantage.

A5e:
Attack rolls against an invisible creature are made with disadvantage.
An invisible creature makes attack rolls with advantage.

We have a scenario where two blind characters fighting in melee: In O5e both would have disadvantage because they are blinded but because each one is fighting a creature who cannot see them they each get advantage and therefore these cancel each other out. You now have an absurd situation where two blind characters attack each other in the same way that two character with their full senses in tact.

Has this changed in A5e? My reading of it suggests that it hasn't.

In my games I always just ran it that both attacked with disadvantaged.

 

[TheSword]

With one exception. Don’t the characters need to identify where the foe is first, otherwise they’re attacking an empty space?

 

[Anonymous3]

Is this a requirement in O5e? I will edit to clarify melee combat.

 

[Anonymous3]

Just found additional wording for A5e under Unseen Attackers and Targets:

In situations where your target is unseen by you and you are unseen by your target (such as if both you and your target are invisible, or if you are fighting in magical darkness), all attack rolls are made at disadvantage .

I think this solved my problem and therefore A5e runs this situation differently (and correctly) from O5e.

 

[Distracted DM]

Just found additional wording for A5e under Unseen Attackers and Targets:

I think this solved my problem and therefore A5e runs this situation differently (and correctly) from O5e.

Funny, am I wrong or does 5eRevised have invisible vs invisible attack at disadvantage as well now?

 

[Distracted DM]

With one exception. Don’t the characters need to identify where the foe is first, otherwise they’re attacking an empty space?

This part has always been a head-scratcher for me, 5e or A5E. Don't creatures know where others are by sound via passive perception unless the other creatures are actively Hiding? I wonder if I got this from an episode of Dragon Talk or something.

 

[Anonymous3]

This part has always been a head-scratcher for me, 5e or A5E. Don't creatures know where others are by sound via passive perception unless the other creatures are actively Hiding? I wonder if I got this from an episode of Dragon Talk or something.

Agreed.
To my knowledge being "invisible" is not sufficient to gain the hidden condition. The character has to be unseen and be actively hiding (hide action) to achieve this. Being invisible provides the benefit of not requiring an object to hide behind in order to use the hide action.

The scenario I painted of two blind character fighting in melee assumes they are aware of each other and doesn't discuss how they were able to find each other in the first place . Here, in the former no passive perception would be required, in the latter it would as they try to find each other as long as they are actively hiding.

 

[Selganor]

Even though most people don't play it that way (and then complain that invisibility is too powerful) unless an invisible being actively "hides" you still know which space they are in and can attack then with the listed "invisible" modifiers.

Invisibility (or darkness/heavy smoke/...) is still great for all the "a target that you can see"-effects that it completely blocks.

 

[Anonymous3]

Have I got it wrong?

Even though most people don't play it that way (and then complain that invisibility is too powerful) unless an invisible being actively "hides" you still know which space they are in and can attack then with the listed "invisible" modifiers.

Invisibility (or darkness/heavy smoke/...) is still great for all the "a target that you can see"-effects that it completely blocks.

 

[Selganor]

Oops... my post could be read like that. That wasn't my intention.

I just couldn't keep myself from writing things in a different way (with some comments on other people misinterpreting the rules)