Mirror Image Sage Advice

[Snipehunt]

I don't really think it's silly. If you get rid of the 3.0 "Can't be flanked while blind" rule (which is really silly) . . .

Yes, that's my point though. Until then, the Oedipus fighter overcomes a lot of defenses, plus becomes impervious to sneak attacks from flanking - and flanking altogether. Misses 25% of the time, of course . . .

That's a lot of benefit from a rules that were intended to let fighters have a shot against invisilbe people and gaze attacks.

 

[Someone]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mirror Image Sage Advice

So if I'm fifteen feet away from the orc, and I use Spring Attack to close, attack, and move back to where I started, then on his turn, I'm treated as being beside him still while he makes his full attack?

After all, I was beside him when I attacked, and to assume otherwise when he takes his action is a clear violation of the turn based system designed to represent the constant time line...

-Hyp.

Changing grip is also a free action; however, you can´t attack (even once) with a greatsword of a bow and benefit from a buckler. I think the "closing eyes" scenario is similar. Or at least more in line qith the spirit of the rules, but here we´re not talking about common sense.

 

[Someone]

Yes, that's my point though. Until then, the Oedipus fighter overcomes a lot of defenses, plus becomes impervious to sneak attacks from flanking - and flanking altogether. Misses 25% of the time, of course . . .

That's a lot of benefit from a rules that were intended to let fighters have a shot against invisilbe people and gaze attacks.

Benefit? let´s see:

Flanked: flanking opponents have +2 to hit, you´re vulnerable to sneak attacks from flanking opponents.

Blinded: Every opponent have +2 to hit, you are denied your Dex bonus, everyone can sneak attack you, movement costs double (IIRC) and you have a miss chance to hit.

 

[Nail]

.... ergo I am an ocelot" (which I am not)

Oooooo. That's good to know. <jots down that TS is not an ocelot>

 

[TuDogz]

So the upshot is that if a fighter has Great Cleave he has circumvented a single 1st level spell. Not out of line for a 3 feat progression.

And if I am willing to close my eyes briefly I can avoid the confusion of the whirly images. Also, not that bad if the enemy uses readied actions to take advantage of the technique. I would give rogues sneak attack dice and penalize reflex saves since you don't see it coming. I don't see a big problem.

BTW Can't be flanked while blind is ridiculous.

 

[volcivar]

I think you are right someone.

I have seen some folks post that blind characters can't be flanked. Not sure why. Maybe flankers do not get an additional +2 for flanking on top of the +2 for the target being blind.

These seem like similar bonuses that overlap, but do not stack. Bonuses for Flanking come from being distracted by multiple opponents. Bonuses due to blindness come from being distracted by blindness.

In both cases an opening can be taken advantage of since the defender cannot defend him/her -self effectively.

You are correct that a blind character CAN be sneak attacked. ANY time a target is denied thier dex bonus (apart from special abilities) they can be sneak attacked.

2 cents

 

[RigaMortus]

I must have missed the fact that a Blindness negates flanking. Where is this found? Is this in 3.5 somewhere?

 

[LokiDR]

Between uncanny dodge, blind fighting, and a high listen check, it should be possible create a decent blind swordsman. Why? Because that is a staple of fantasy and the game should allow for it.

Should that kind of blind fighter be allowed to trade a 25% miss chance and no AoOs for immunity to flanking, gaze attacks, and a better chance of getting through illusionary deffenses? I think that is perfectly fine trade off.

It is the blinking that gives a problem. If it is a free action, an otherwise sighted person will close their eyes, gain all the advantages for that attack, then open them for the AoOs for the rest of the round. My solution actually has nothing to do with actions, but with the abilities themselves. A simple ruling of "Your eyes wheren't closed long enough for blindfight to kick in. You just used what you remembered." and the stupid blinking trick isn't a problem anymore.

 

[volcivar]

Blindness doesn't negate flanking. ALL attackers get +2 to hit a blind opponent. Not just those on opposite sides.

Please note what flanking does:

1. +2 to hit (opposite attackers)

2. allows sneak attacks to operate (opposite sneak attackers)

Note what blindess does:

1. +2 to hit (all attackers)

2. denies dex bonus which in turn allows sneak attacks (all sneak attackers)

So, in effect, all attackers attack a blind person AS IF THEY WERE FLANKING for the purpose of the +2 to hit and sneak attacks.

Note also that special abilities/feats alter the above somewhat. The above assumes a blinded person with otherwise normal senses.

 

[LokiDR]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Mirror Image Sage Advice

Changing grip is also a free action; however, you can´t attack (even once) with a greatsword of a bow and benefit from a buckler. I think the "closing eyes" scenario is similar. Or at least more in line qith the spirit of the rules, but here we´re not talking about common sense.

No, you can use the buckler and get the AC even after a full attack. Besides the fact that this is the way the rules are written (and FAQ'd) it makes sense in a balance and realism way. Balance wise, you are giving up offense (AoOs) for defense (buckler). People can now grapple or bull rush you without a problem. Realistically, it is makes sense for a person to swing two handed and then present the shield strapped on their arm while holding the weapon in their other hand.