Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Arcturus_Rugend" data-source="post: 843257" data-attributes="member: 11104">AuraSeer& drnuncheon: The problem I have is that the RAW equates not being able to see your opponent but being able to strike him with being able to see your opponent but not strike him. The two are clearly not the same. Being able to strike someone whether or not you can see them (as is the case with someone attacking an effectively invisible opponent) provides a chance for you to swing and connect by accident, but being able to see someone and not able to strike them (as is the case for the blinker who goes ethereal before his attack) will never allow you to hit them. I can understand everyone's inclusion of adding timing into the argument, but whether or not this should affect the combat mix with respect to blinking is clearly subjective, as the rules give no clear reason as to how often the blinker phases in and out or how much control over the timing of the phase he has. That is why the 20% miss chance rule on the part of the attacking blinker seems rather arbitrary, as no explanation of why or how it works is given.</blockquote>