3.5: Foresight and invisible attackers

[alanek2002]

Does Foresight Prevent you from loosing your dex bonus against invisible attackers?

Foresight, from the SRD.

This spell grants you a powerful sixth sense in relation to yourself or another. Once foresight is cast, you receive instantaneous warnings of impending danger or harm to the subject of the spell. You are never surprised or flat-footed. In addition, the spell gives you a general idea of what action you might take to best protect yourself and gives you a +2 insight bonus to AC and Reflex saves. This insight bonus is lost whenever you would lose a Dexterity bonus to AC.

However, With an invisible attacker, we have this:

Visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents’ Dexterity bonuses to AC (if any). (See Invisibility, under Special Abilities.)

Which seems to me, sadly, that invisibility Somehow bypassing it.


Thoughts?

[Morcleon]

Does Foresight Prevent you from loosing your dex bonus against invisible attackers?

Foresight, from the SRD.


However, With an invisible attacker, we have this:


Which seems to me, sadly, that invisibility Somehow bypassing it.


Thoughts?

Yes. Specific trumps general. Normally, an invisible (or otherwise undetectable) opponent would ignore your Dex bonus. But foresight means that you're never flat-footed or surprised, so you can never lose your Dex bonus to AC when Foresight is up.

[Crake]

Yes. Specific trumps general. Normally, an invisible (or otherwise undetectable) opponent would ignore your Dex bonus. But foresight means that you're never flat-footed or surprised, so you can never lose your Dex bonus to AC when Foresight is up.

Problem here though, is that flat footed is defined by the system as creatures who are yet to act in combat, and surprised refers to creatures who do not get to act in the surprise round. When you are attacked by an invisible opponent, you are not actually flat footed, you are merely denied dexterity. This is made especially clear by all the descriptions of invisibility (which never once mention your targets being flat footed, merely denied dexterity), and the uncanny dodge ability, which explicitly separates the two, saying that you retain your dex bonus to AC "while flat footed, and against invisible enemies".

The very fact that Foresight says you lose it's bonus to AC and reflex saves whenever you would be denied dexterity very much so means it's possible to lose your dexterity bonus while the spell is up (especially circumstances like being held immobile).

Personally though, I would house rule that foresight works against invisible foes, simply due to the fluff of the way the spell supposedly works.

[ericgrau]

It seems more like the spell gives you warnings ahead of time. So it would work against an ambush not invisibility, because time or forewarning is not a factor in invisibility rendering you flat-footed. If anything foresight might tell you to cast see invisibility.

[Crake]

It seems more like the spell gives you warnings ahead of time. So it would work against an ambush not invisibility, because time or forewarning is not a factor in invisibility rendering you flat-footed. If anything foresight might tell you to cast see invisibility.

Well, if you think about it, you'd know which direction and which part of your body the attack is aiming at, so if foresight tells you that you're about to take a right hook to the face, you'd be able to (at least try and) duck.

[5ColouredWalker]

I side with invisibility trumping. Foresight lets you know you're about to be attacked, you roll initiative, aren't treated as surprised, and then are hit by something you cant see. You're not surprised to be hit, but because you can't see it you can't defend yourself against it properly, and thus are denied Dex to AC.

[Crake]

I side with invisibility trumping. Foresight lets you know you're about to be attacked, you roll initiative, aren't treated as surprised, and then are hit by something you cant see. You're not surprised to be hit, but because you can't see it you can't defend yourself against it properly, and thus are denied Dex to AC.

I suppose it depends on the amount of information you recieve. Considering it actually gives you bonuses to AC and reflex saves, i'd say it's a bit more comprehensive than "you're about to be attacked".

[alanek2002]

No, you can probably see the attacker as they attack... they're still invisible, so it doesn't help much.

[ericgrau]

I suppose it depends on the amount of information you recieve. Considering it actually gives you bonuses to AC and reflex saves, i'd say it's a bit more comprehensive than "you're about to be attacked".

I'm in the boat of Foresight being an amazingly powerful spell that gets underrated or falls victim to overly strict DMs... but I still don't see foreknowledge directly helping you defend yourself against invisible foes. At best "There's something there that you don't see", so it'd keep you from missing out on the surprise round and possibly let you know it's time to cast see invisibility. But I can also understand a DM saying it gives such precise information about dodging that you are not denied dex.

Mainly I think it's simpler and makes more mechanical sense to have the spell give out of character warnings or action suggestions every round to the player. Such as "Invisible melee attacker north of you." And so that would not include any stat bonuses or improved status effects besides the +2s and not being surprised nor flat-footed.

[Crake]

I'm in the boat of Foresight being an amazingly powerful spell that gets underrated or falls victim to overly strict DMs... but I still don't see foreknowledge directly helping you defend yourself against invisible foes. At best "There's something there that you don't see", so it'd keep you from missing out on the surprise round and possibly let you know it's time to cast see invisibility. But I can also understand a DM saying it gives such precise information about dodging that you are not denied dex.

Mainly I think it's simpler and makes more mechanical sense to have the spell give out of character warnings or action suggestions every round to the player. Such as "Invisible melee attacker north of you." And so that would not include any stat bonuses or improved status effects besides the +2s and not being surprised nor flat-footed.

Well, since it gives you information about yourself in the future, not about your surroundings, I think it would make more sense for the information to be along the lines of "you will be struck from the north by an unseen foe". If the enemy has spring attack (or it's a pixie with flyby attack) and he's invisible the whole time, foresight wouldn't be able to tell you where the attacker is on your turn, just where you're going to be hit from in the next round, but that kind of information is unfeasable to give, since the game is dynamic, and the GM can't actually tell the future. Hence why I think it would make sense to not be denied dexterity. If you know where an attack is going to hit, and when, wouldn't it make sense to be able to (at least try) and move out of the way?

I will remind everyone that this is my argument for the way I houserule it, and am in no way implying that this is RAW.