Blinkin' Glitterdust

[Matt Fischer]

Last session I learned Blink is one of the most horrible spells to adjucate. I have a question:
The bad guys are blinking. The good guys cast Glitterdust (an area effect spell). Blink normally halves damage from area affect spells. It also gives individual spells and attacks directed at the blinker a 50% miss chance. None of this, however, says what Blink does vs. a spell like Glitterdust which does not do damage, per se, but gives penalties. It stands to reason that if the Blinker is phased out when the attack hits, that the magic won't reach him--except for the fact that spells like Fireball do half damage. One guy suggested halving the penalties bestowed by glitterdust. This made no real sense to me. Are all the blinkers blind in one eye? It also seems like a setup for trouble with other spells. I opted to use a 50% miss chance even though the spell has an area effect. But I am curious to know how others would rule on the matter.

 

[Crothian]

I see no reason why the spell wouldn't work if you fail your save. It's a duration spell so you will blink into it. The Glitterdust would then blink out with you.

So, I'd rule the spell effects the Blinking person as normal.

 

[Henrix]

The blinding effect of the Glitterdust would probably extend to the ethereal plane, as those thereon are able to see the material plane.
So I don't think the Blink would do any good against it.

 

[twjensen]

three in favor, none opposed

I'd say it has full effect. The glitterdust will last long enough that the bad guys will blink their way to blindness (if they fail their saves.)

 

[mtbdm]

more points to ponder

Response to the above arguments:

-OK, but the blinding effect is not the part that has a duration (the settled dust does)--otherwise you'd have to save again every round to see if you go blind.

-I'm not aware of any rule that says visual spells extend into the etherial plane. It is still a separate plane. It normally takes a special ability on the part of a creature to have a visual attack cross that barrier (else why make distinction between attacks that do and attacks that don't?)

-And, finally, the bad guys MIGHT blink back into any spell. That's why a 50% miss chance makes sense. They might, they might not. But in that case, I don't see why area effects cause half damage.

 

[shilsen]

I'd give it a 50% miss chance, just like you did. The blinding ability comes from the settling dust (as mtbdm pointed out), so there's a 50% chance that you're not materially present when it descends on you.

 

[hong]

I'd give it a 50% miss chance, just like you did. The blinding ability comes from the settling dust (as mtbdm pointed out), so there's a 50% chance that you're not materially present when it descends on you.

If you're still around to take half damage from an instantaneous effect like a fireball, I'd say you're still around to get a golden shower from glitterdust. Maybe only half as much gold as from a regular golden shower, but it would have the same effect.

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Id just give it a 50% miss chance as to wether or not the spell affected the blinking bad guys...

if it did - it would take full effect.

 

[Forrester]

Here's another good question:

Assume the bad guys are glittering. Technically, they are glittering in the Ethereal plane, not in the Prime.

I *think* this means that the Glitterdust doesn't do anything to stop the pseudo-invisibility that the bad guys get from Blinking. Meaning that except for (maybe) being blinded, they can continue to sneak-attack away.

Imagine a similar situation: The bad guys all get hit with large bags of flour. This generally foils invisibility . . . but it won't foil Blinking.


By the way, I'd give the Blinkers a +4 to the Glitterdust save vs. Blindness because they're only around part of the time, and leave it at that.

 

[Vhane]

Use of glitterdust had nothing to do with wanting to negate the pseudo-invisability, it was done in order to blind.