Blink, Ghost Touch weapons and Sneak attack

[Hypersmurf]

Caliban is correct in that the spell's description is a result of faulty design or editing concerning using "incorporeal" and "ethereal" interchangably.

That's still making the assumption that it wasn't deliberately intended as a special case for how Blink works.

-Hyp.

 

[Relentless]

It has been my experience that people seldom intend things to be faulty.

Stating that some benefit may be derived from attacking an ethereal creature with a weapon that can hit incorporeal creatures is faulty.

This does not change the text.

This does not change the rule.

The weapon provides the benefit as written.

The rationale, as written, is flawed.

It is as easily an exception to proper editing as it is to rules, though as an editing exception, it has strength in logic.

 

[Caliban]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapons and Sneak att

What?

I know nothing of the sort.

It clearly specifies "Ethereal or Incorporeal" for one, and "Ethereal" for the other.

That's what the spell says, and that's how I run it as a DM.

As always, you're welcome to ignore the text of the spell if you see fit for your campaign.

But since we know that Ethereal and Incorporeal are two different states, and nothing in the spell description suggests that a Ghost Touch weapon qualifies for the "no miss chance" effect with See Invisible, the spell as written does not support it.

-Hyp.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Ghost touch only reduces the miss chance if you can't see them?

Please.

Also, please point out even one weapon that can strike "ethereal" creatures.

Your insistence on only taking the most literal, narrow meaning of the text is ludicrous.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapons and Sneak

That makes no sense whatsoever.

Ghost touch only reduces the miss chance if you can't see them?

No.

Ghost Touch gives a 20% miss chance. See Invisible gives a 20% miss chance. Ghost Touch and See Invisible together give no extra benefit, so you get a 20% miss chance.

As I stated in my first post of the thread.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapons and Sneak

Also, please point out even one weapon that can strike "ethereal" creatures.

The Blast of Force from the Rod of Force in RttToEE - ranged touch attack, Force damage.

Anything else that requires an attack roll and deals Force damage would likewise qualify.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapons and S

No.

Ghost Touch gives a 20% miss chance. See Invisible gives a 20% miss chance. Ghost Touch and See Invisible together give no extra benefit, so you get a 20% miss chance.

As I stated in my first post of the thread.

-Hyp.

How does that make any logical sense? It's completely inconsistent.

You get a 50% miss chance if you can't see or hit them half the time.

If you can see them all the time but not hit them all the time, you only get a 20% miss chance.

If you can hit them, but not see them, you get a 20% miss chance.

If you can see them and hit them, you do not have a miss chance.

That is what it means. Your interpretation of the spell is even more inconsistent with the rest of the rules, and is completely nonsensical.

The part about being able to hit ethereal creatures doesn't make any sense either. What weapon in the core rules can hit ethereal creatures?

And please explain why a Ghost Touch weapon should be able to hit them at all, since your so sure this is the way the spell is "meant" to be written.

 

[Caliban]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapons and S

The Blast of Force from the Rod of Force in RttToEE - ranged touch attack, Force damage.

-Hyp.

And I'm sure they had that in mind when they wrote up the Blink spell.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapons a

That is what it means.

That's not what it says.

The part about being able to hit ethereal creatures doesn't make any sense either. What weapon in the core rules can hit ethereal creatures?

Mordenkainen's Sword.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch weapo

That's not what it says.

Taken in context, that is indeed what it says.

Don't you ever try to think when you read the rules, or do you just blindly follow the text like a computer program?

Try using a little logic here.

Mordenkainen's Sword.

-Hyp.

That's not a weapon, it's a spell effect. Try again.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blink, Ghost Touch w

Taken in context, that is indeed what it says.

Then why do you believe they went to all the trouble of typing out "or incorporeal"? If they believed Ethereal and Incorporeal were identical, it's redundant. If they believe them to be different, but both applicable to all instances of Blink, they should have used the same phrasing for the second condition.

Since they deliberately noted that both were applicable in one instance, and did not do so in the second, it seems obvious to me that both are applicable to the one, and only Ethereal to the other.

That's not a weapon, it's a spell effect. Try again.

Blink makes no mention of weapons. It says "physical attacks". Mordenkainen's Sword is a swordlike plane of force that hits people.

It's applicable, and I see no need to "try again".

-Hyp.