How do you handle being blinded?

[wayne62682]

This came up last night in a game; how do you handle things when one PC is blinded, but nobody else is (or alternatively, when something is invisible to at least one PC, but not all of them)?

The rules for targeting what you can't see are confusing and seem WAY too harsh - you need to make a Perception check to see if you can locate the thing (and it has to make a stealth check - I guess only for people who can't see it) but you have a -10 penalty to the check, so it pretty much means you're never going to find it (especially since most creatures that can blind and/or go invisible easily have very high Stealth bonuses), and when that happens you have to pick a square, but you can't do that reliably because as a player you can see the map so you know exactly what square the creature is in, even if your character can't see him (granted you have a penalty anyways, but I've been called for metagaming because of this). What normally seems to end up happening is the blind character is out of the fight, and that's no fun at all. When fighting a creature that can go invisible easily this really adds to the grind.

Can another PC yell "He's 10 feet north of you!" and have this serve as enough information for the blinded PC to move up and take a swing (or fire off a shot), albeit with the penalty for blinded? My DM says that if you're blinded you have no sense of direction so you wouldn't know where "north" is.

How do you handle these kind of situations in your games?

 

[Hereticus]

In my opinion, the in-game penalties for being blind are not severe enough.

Try closing your eyes and performing a task, such as touching a pet cat who does not want to be touched.

 

[OchreJelly]

Flipped over, this is also the same issue where an enemy is invisible or hidden and one party member perceives it and the others don't. I don't know if there's anything explicitly mentioned in the rules about allowing allies to inform you which square the target is.

In our group, for ease of play, I allow allies to use a free action to inform their friends where the hidden enemy is so they can target the hidden enemy's square. If no one in the party perceives the enemy I keep him off the tactical map. This also applies to the bad guys too! And the same resolution would be use for the blinded condition. It may not seem the most realistic, but keep in mind the blinded creature is still -5 to ranged or melee attacks due to eveyone having total concealment to him.

If you use this, it may slightly devalue perception (or stealth for that matter) when only one person in the party feels they need to be "the perception monkey". Of course, that PC could also become the one who gets blinded

 

[Flipguarder]

What do you think about letting someone as a minor action explain to their ally the direction and distance to an enemy. And then the blind person has to make a perception check as a minor action to determine which square the ally was speaking of. THEN he can make the attack at a -5 penalty. The same rules would apply for a invisible target that one of the party members can see.

 

[DracoSuave]

Not to mention, unless the enemy makes a Stealth check to begin with, you still can hear him and know exactly where he is, altho you're at a disadvantage to hit him.

 

[eriktheguy]

The current condition is set up the way it is because:
It is balanced, blindness gives you some static penalties but still lets you find your opponents, so you don't lose all your actions while blind.

It is easy on book keeping. You do not need to make checks to see if you trip, attack an ally etc.

If you want to change blindness in your campaign to make its effects worse you can, but be aware of the balance issues, as powers that cause blindness will be made better.

 

[wayne62682]

Not to mention, unless the enemy makes a Stealth check to begin with, you still can hear him and know exactly where he is, altho you're at a disadvantage to hit him.

Wait wait... I'm confused here. If the creature isn't actively trying to not let you hear it (say, it's fighting your allies) then you don't have to roll the perception check and can freely move and attack it, albeit with the hefty penalty? My DM has always ruled the check happened automatically and if you failed you had no idea where the creature was, and therefore couldn't act.

IMO a creature that's actively engaged in combat is not going to be worrying about being stealthy. If that's the case then my DM has just been playing it wrong.

 

[Kralin Thornberry]

I had it come up, and this is what I did:

Had the character make a -10 perception check to see if the character could "find" his desired target (even though the player could see it).

The player failed his check (and the creature and party members that had been near had all moved). He couldn't find the "target", but I gave the player the option of still attacking. He asked "who do I get to attack?" I told him to roll a d8 (there were only 4 open squares around him that could hold a "target"). The number he generated would determine which square was hit. The player did continue the attack, even though he knew that he had better odds of hitting a fellow PC (which he did, with a crit none-the-less).

 

[Piratecat]

I scream, clutch my eyes, trip over the table and run into a wall. I also never invite back that player who insisted on showing off his "Lye-Soaker 3000."

...what?

 

[Chimera]

I use my friend, the Close Burst: All Enemies in Burst.

Only four of us there last night (of 8). Three of us blinded at once.

My Bard stepped forward one square, said "they were here, here and here a moment ago, so Close Blast 3." Got 'em all, too. GM opened his mouth when I moved forward, but when I pointed out where they were before and announced the blast, he let it go.

Too bad I couldn't see the Wizard to use my Ode to Sacrifice. After all, it doesn't say the ally has to be willing.