Displacement and sneak attacks?

[Fist]

If displacement gives you the benefits of full concealment (with the drawback of being vulnerable to targeting spells),
then would one's opponent lose their dex modifier?

I know there is no precedent for this, but think about it. Could you effectively dodge a blow that would truly be coming in two feet away?

 

[Caliban]

If displacement gives you the benefits of full concealment (with the drawback of being vulnerable to targeting spells),
then would one's opponent lose their dex modifier?

Nope.

I know there is no precedent for this, but think about it. Could you effectively dodge a blow that would truly be coming in two feet away?

Yes. You know it's coming. You may not know exactly where it's going to hit, but you can jump back out of the way. Also, the guy aiming the blow see's his own limbs as displaced, so it's probably harder to aim your shots. They cancel out.

And the deciding factor is that the spell does not specify that opponents lose their Dex bonus, therefore they do not.

 

[James McMurray]

Just get blink instead, the ring is severely underpriced when bought by a rogue.

 

[Fist]

I figured that would be the typical response.

And because of that, I haven't taken it up with my DM.

It was just food for forum.

 

[Crothian]

Or even an Improved Blinking item.

 

[Thanee]

That brings up the point, why does Blink actually work this way?

I mean, ok, it specifically says so in the spell description, but apart from that (and especially when using ranged attacks while blinking)?

Just because the guy is blinking, you can't follow his movement, or what?

Bye
Thanee

 

[dcollins]

Just because the guy is blinking, you can't follow his movement, or what?

Historically, blinking entailed reappearing in random (nearby) locations -- not merely fading from sight while staying in the same place (or moving in a straight line). The AD&D 1st Ed. spell would have you roll a d8 and be moved 2 ft. away in that indicated direction.

I notice that the current spell description doesn't make this clear at all (or have a roll for movement). Further, blink dogs have a separate dimension door ability which they didn't use to have (i.e., usable offensively), so maybe blink is actually meant to be changed in this regard. I guess you could consider that the ability allows you to dodge (duck and weave) in ways an opponent can't predict.

 

[Fist]

It was the spell, Blink, that got me to post the original question in the first place.

If rapidly appearing and disappearing can deny one's dex mod because of its randomness, then an evershifting image of oneself should do the same (I assume the image shifts like mirror image, or else one could soon predict your location).

Again I know it doesn't say so in the spell description and can see the possible balance issue if it did.

On the other side:
If you're wondering why blink denies the dex bonus, think about trying to follow one's movement under a strobe light (very difficult).

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I think the logic of blink denying the opponent their dex bonus is that a blinking character is immaterial 50% of the time so the normal rules of fighting don't apply to him. He can go immaterial when you try to block his blow but become material right before the blow would strike. He can lunge forward to take advantage of an opening knowing that he would normally be vulnerable but that he'll be immaterial by the time you respond. He can step through pillars and obstacles rather than around them. Plus, he's not just immaterial half the time, he's invisible during that time as well so you can't see what he's doing in order to prepare a defense.

I don't think that rationale explains blink's properties fully but it is a start. . . .

 

[dcollins]

I'm not so willing to sign on to that because the blinking is supposed to occur "at random" (per current rules), not at the will of the user. To emphasize this, for example, 1st Ed. also had you roll dice to see when in the round it occurred...