How a DM can counter cheesy PC tactics w/o using cheesy DM tactics.
- Thread starter FlimFlam
- Start date
IceBear
Explorer
kreynolds said:
Is it really based just on vibration. The Blindsight description mentions either vibration, sound, smell, echo location, or a combination to allow you to see with Blindsight. If you tried pulling that on a player he might say he's using echolocation.
All this said, I don't have the spell handy so I haven't read the description and maybe they've limited to vibration there. I like the idea of it not being accurate enough to sneak attack with and I am going to house rule that way.
IceBear
Darklone
Registered User
Huhm, well, many advices already said...
But this blindsight is a perfect example why adding more and more and more spells could get out of hand.
Not cheesy counters: As mentioned, area of effect spells. Having an enemy who casts web at the rogue should not be out of hand. Sleep perhaps? Fairy fire?
Always remember it's really easy to aim into the darkness with an area spell if you see the borders moving.
If you're in higher levels... Prepare for devils and demons. They see perfect in that darkness and may even use the same tactic against your other party members.
The ruling that blindsight is not good enough to allow sneak attacks would be fine IMHO. 50% displacement with two lvl2 spells isn't out of hand either.
But this blindsight is a perfect example why adding more and more and more spells could get out of hand.
Not cheesy counters: As mentioned, area of effect spells. Having an enemy who casts web at the rogue should not be out of hand. Sleep perhaps? Fairy fire?
Always remember it's really easy to aim into the darkness with an area spell if you see the borders moving.
If you're in higher levels... Prepare for devils and demons. They see perfect in that darkness and may even use the same tactic against your other party members.
The ruling that blindsight is not good enough to allow sneak attacks would be fine IMHO. 50% displacement with two lvl2 spells isn't out of hand either.
Re
Against normal foes, I don't see why it wouldn't work a great deal of the time. Most foes have no means to counter.
The darkness does ruin most of your targettable spells as well and your DM shouldn't have much trouble countering it when enemy casters are involved.
They might also dispel the thiefs blindsight and leave the darkness up, summon some ally or summon monster devils and let them work the thief.
If your DM wanted to be really mean and pay you back he could do the following:
1. Powerful priest or caster enemy.
2. You unleash darkness.
3. Caster also has blindsight available as spell. If it is that effective for you guys, no reason why it wouldn't be effective for the enemy.
4. Cast a globe of force around the thief and the enemy caster inside. (You guys won't know what is going on as not much passes between a force globe and yourself.
5. Targetted dispel on the rogue.
6. Enemy caster either kills the thief or summons a devil of some kind to kill the rogue.
An arcane caster can set up your rogue for death using the above tactic very easily. A priest on the other hand would not be able to cast the wall of force, but could just as easily use a hold spell or a wall of stone or iron.
Melee classes on the other hand have little means of countering such a tactic. They are doomed unless they have a magic item or innate ability such as a feat or special ability.
Against normal foes, I don't see why it wouldn't work a great deal of the time. Most foes have no means to counter.
The darkness does ruin most of your targettable spells as well and your DM shouldn't have much trouble countering it when enemy casters are involved.
They might also dispel the thiefs blindsight and leave the darkness up, summon some ally or summon monster devils and let them work the thief.
If your DM wanted to be really mean and pay you back he could do the following:
1. Powerful priest or caster enemy.
2. You unleash darkness.
3. Caster also has blindsight available as spell. If it is that effective for you guys, no reason why it wouldn't be effective for the enemy.
4. Cast a globe of force around the thief and the enemy caster inside. (You guys won't know what is going on as not much passes between a force globe and yourself.
5. Targetted dispel on the rogue.
6. Enemy caster either kills the thief or summons a devil of some kind to kill the rogue.
An arcane caster can set up your rogue for death using the above tactic very easily. A priest on the other hand would not be able to cast the wall of force, but could just as easily use a hold spell or a wall of stone or iron.
Melee classes on the other hand have little means of countering such a tactic. They are doomed unless they have a magic item or innate ability such as a feat or special ability.
Doesn't seem bad to me...
This doesn't seem cheesy to me. You're using a 3rd level and 2nd level spell to support your melee combatant and it is proving very effective against ogres and the like. I would think that if you cast Displacement and Bull's Strength on your tank fighter he'd be very effective too.
This will probably stop being so effective eventually because:
1) You'll end up fighting a group who's familiar with your tactics. They can use various spells or abilities to counter this tactic (Dispel Magic, their own Blindsight, etc). This isn't cheesy, any intelligent group that sees you fight once (or hears that you use this tactic) will be prepared.
2)You'll go up in level and find more and more of your opponents have enhanced senses, blindfighting feat, enhanced mobility (flying would stop this tactic for example). More powerful opponents will be less susceptible to this without the DM only throwing bats and undead at you.
So, in the mean time, you have a tactic that is very effective against a fair number of foes. Enjoy it, it's not going to last forever but the DM shouldn't take special action just because you're doing well. That's what having cool abilities is about.
This doesn't seem cheesy to me. You're using a 3rd level and 2nd level spell to support your melee combatant and it is proving very effective against ogres and the like. I would think that if you cast Displacement and Bull's Strength on your tank fighter he'd be very effective too.
This will probably stop being so effective eventually because:
1) You'll end up fighting a group who's familiar with your tactics. They can use various spells or abilities to counter this tactic (Dispel Magic, their own Blindsight, etc). This isn't cheesy, any intelligent group that sees you fight once (or hears that you use this tactic) will be prepared.
2)You'll go up in level and find more and more of your opponents have enhanced senses, blindfighting feat, enhanced mobility (flying would stop this tactic for example). More powerful opponents will be less susceptible to this without the DM only throwing bats and undead at you.
So, in the mean time, you have a tactic that is very effective against a fair number of foes. Enjoy it, it's not going to last forever but the DM shouldn't take special action just because you're doing well. That's what having cool abilities is about.
0-hr
Starship Cartographer
In the Broken Realms, Blindsight is a low level spell available to Druids, Clerics, Wizards, and Sorcerors. Being so ubiquitous, anyone with an intelligence over 6 should expect to routinely encounter (and counter) this tactic. So it's not cheesy for the bad guys to be ready for this, it's just standard operating procedure.
If you want a less cheesy campaign, just say No to Faerun.
If you want a less cheesy campaign, just say No to Faerun.
I think you're thinking of tremorsense, which can only detect things that touch the ground. Blindsight isn't restricted that way; he can still see flying creatures.kreynolds said:
Anyway, since the Blindsight/Darkness combo seems to come up so often, IMO it indicates that Blindsight is too powerful for a 3rd-level spell. I'd probably put up around 5th level, the same as Spell Resistance, which duplicates another powerful ability that's usually restricted to monsters.
But that's just me. In a campaign where Daylight effects are widespread-- or if such effects become widespread, after this combo becomes common knowledge-- the spell might be fine as it is.
To counter said tactic without being cheesy.
1) I would use vermin, they don't need to see. and are immune to crits.
2) certain baatezu can see in darkness, even deeper darkness. Imagine the rogue's surprise to try and blind fight a devil who parries his thrust and disarms him, then proceeds to have a couple of his friends have their way with him while the rest of the party is ineffective in the deeper darkness.
3) dispel magic is not a cheesy tactic, any mage or cleric will have it in their repertoire of spells
4) traps cannot be seen in darkness, even in blind sight. They do not make any vibrations and echolocation still won't reveal it for what it is until triggered.
1) I would use vermin, they don't need to see. and are immune to crits.
2) certain baatezu can see in darkness, even deeper darkness. Imagine the rogue's surprise to try and blind fight a devil who parries his thrust and disarms him, then proceeds to have a couple of his friends have their way with him while the rest of the party is ineffective in the deeper darkness.
3) dispel magic is not a cheesy tactic, any mage or cleric will have it in their repertoire of spells
4) traps cannot be seen in darkness, even in blind sight. They do not make any vibrations and echolocation still won't reveal it for what it is until triggered.
Similar Threads
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
June 16 2026 -
June 16 2026 -
September 16 2026 
Arcana Unleashed(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.
Replies (243) -
September 16 2026 -
October 1 2026 -
October 6 2026 -
January 1 2027 -
January 1 2027
