PDA

View Full Version : Improved Trip + Sneak Attack



ocato
2007-09-11, 02:58 PM
So, I've been doing some research on a somewhat goofy character idea. This isn't t3h l33ts so please don't give me the business. It's meant for an urban campaign so 4 legged enemies are probably not a huge threat.

Pretty much my idea was a ranged trip rogue. Combat Expertise and Improved Trip, Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Whip dagger, and quick draw are the feats I have in mind now (L6 human is as far as I built him). Here's some of the basic stuff, 36 point buy

STR 16
DEX 16 (L4 stat bump)
CON 14
INT 14
WIS 10
CHA 12

BAB +4. So my trip attempts would be +11, which isn't horrible. I trip you from range with my whip dagger, you fall prone, then my Improved Trip attack is a sneak attack (mighty whip dagger suggested). Wham, free sneak attack in regular combat. The quick draw is so that I can switch to my short sword and combat expertise my way out of sticky situations quickly, shifting from a ranged tripper to a semi-standard rogue. Of course tumbling back and tripping some more is feasible.

Here's my question: When Johnny Trip'd is getting up and I get an attack of opportunity, does that also use sneak attack? It seems kind of hazy, but someone will probably chime in immediately as this forum is pretty good about this kind of stuff.

Again, I know this isn't the absolute best rogue interpretation ever, but I think I might have fun with it. The +4 to trip I get from Improved trip will catch me up to fighters who will have 2 more BaB and average at 2-3 more STR at L6 (the raging barbarians I might fight will be a bit different). This is also assuming no magical items, because I have as much of a chance of having one as they might. I think rolling even against bigshot melee'rs for trip isn't bad, and lesser STR-jockeys will definately be in a jam. I figure at L10 I'll take the 'special ability' to add 2 strength damage to my sneak attacks, making subsequent trips easier and easier. I'd consider a feat that let you trip with DEX (if such a feat exists) but it seems that keeping a decent strength may be better for this character in that it saves me the trouble of getting weapon finesse and lets me get a little more damage in. I may consider that route anyway, but it'd probably require either some heavy flaw'ing or 2 fighter levels (and thus less sneak attack :smallfrown: )

I've rambled on enough.

Iku Rex
2007-09-11, 03:10 PM
Big problem: You can't sneak attack someone just because they're prone.

(Also, 3.5 whips don't have to be "mighty" - you get full Str to damage from a regular whip.)

ocato
2007-09-11, 03:15 PM
whoa... didn't prone used to deny dex?

Iku Rex
2007-09-11, 03:18 PM
No.

filler

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-09-11, 03:24 PM
However, a Prone character does take a -4 penalty to AC against melee attacks. Against Ranged attacks it is a +4 bonus, instead.

Vasdenjas
2007-09-11, 03:26 PM
Since Whip-dagger is an exotic weapon, you may want to look at Exotic Weapon Master, from Complete Warrior. It seems that the whip-dagger (which is from what book? I only saw a reference to it in a dungeon magazine) has a 15' reach, threatens that area as well (very cool, but you should have Combat Reflexes to take advantage of this), however, using it provokes an AoO, per a ranged weapon.

You may be able to offset this with the EWM's stunt 'Close Quarters Ranged Combat', and then take the 'Trip Attack' stunt for a bonus +2 on your trips.

As for getting your sneak attack, I'd focus on Tumble, and get into flanking position, or focus on Bluff, and get Improved Feint.

Just a few thoughts.

Karsh
2007-09-11, 03:26 PM
I don't know if a whip dagger is any different, but another big snag is that while you have 15ft. reach with a whip, you don't actually threaten any of those squares.

EDIT: Arms & Equipment Guide is 3.0 anyways, but yeah, the Whip Dagger is treated like a ranged weapon, meaning that you threaten exactly zero squares.

Truwar
2007-09-11, 03:30 PM
A ring of blinking is about the only way to regularly sneak attack with ranged weapons.

Keld Denar
2007-09-11, 03:33 PM
Also....opposed trip checks do not use BAB. Opposed Grapple checks do, opposed Sunder checks do, opposed Bullrush attempts do, opposed Trip checks do NOT. Therefore, you actually have more of an advantage over full BAB fighters, but no more advantage than over 2/3 BAB clerics or rogues. Trip is unique like that, and its both a blessing and a curse. On one hand, it levels the playing field vs full BAB characters, but on the other hand, it levels the playing field with full BAB characters. The d20 looms heavily over the head of a tripper, because often times the difference between check bonuses of the tripper and the trippy is only 2-4. Therefore, depending on your respective rolls, there is about a 40% chance that you fail, and about a 17ish% chance that you either have to drop your weapon or fall prone instead. Statistically that isn't so bad, but it will happen about once a combat, which leaves you as a plain rogue with a short sword and a bunch of unused feats very quickly.

Also, you don't threaten with a whip, so you can't claim AoOs when whip tripped opponents stand up.

Also, being prone doesn't make you lose your dex. Sorry.

ocato
2007-09-11, 03:36 PM
Meh, this is why I posted it-- to double check it. I'll try something else. Thanks.

EndgamerAzari
2007-09-11, 03:44 PM
Also....opposed trip checks do not use BAB.

No, but you have to actually hit the guy before you can make a trip attempt. Granted, it's a touch attack, but still.... thought I'd just point that out.

TimeWizard
2007-09-11, 03:44 PM
There's a feat from Cwar (?) that lets you attack while getting up from prone. It's called Prone Attack (hardy har har).

Keld Denar
2007-09-11, 03:45 PM
If you wanted to do something somewhat similar in flavor, you could try a bard/marshall/rogue. Bards get proficiency with whips and inspire greatness adds to ability checks (trip is a str check). Marshalls Motivate Str and Art of War allow you to use double your cha score instead of your str score, so you wouldn't need as much str. Rogue would give you all the other roguey stuff you want to do. With Imp Trip and a 20 Cha (not hard to get by level 6) you could be looking at about a +14 trip check (+16 with inspire greatness) which is pretty decent. You could also get the +1 hit major marshal aura which would give you a better chance to hit with the touch attack. Could be an interesting idea. You'd also have to rely on your allies to do most of the smacking once you've downed your foe though. Still, not a bad idea for a support character.

Keld Denar
2007-09-11, 03:47 PM
No, but you have to actually hit the guy before you can make a trip attempt. Granted, it's a touch attack, but still.... thought I'd just point that out.

I said OPPOSED check, not attack roll. I'm well aware of the flow of a trip sequence, and I'm pretty sure the OP is as well.

EndgamerAzari
2007-09-11, 03:51 PM
Sorry. I just wanted to make sure that was clear. I meant no offense.

Zherog
2007-09-11, 03:55 PM
There's a feat from Cwar (?) that lets you attack while getting up from prone. It's called Prone Attack (hardy har har).

Well, more correctly it lets you get up if you make a successful attack while prone. It also removes the penalties for attacking while prone.

Person_Man
2007-09-11, 04:09 PM
Meh, this is why I posted it-- to double check it. I'll try something else. Thanks.

Perhaps this list will be helpful:

Easy ways to qualify for Sneak Attack reliably:

1) Win Initiative
2) Flank
Have a friend.
Summon a monster (from a friend or a wand).
Train dogs and/or mounts to fight (cheap and easily replaced).
Island of Blades stance from ToB
3) Greater Invisibility
4) Ring of Blinking + Ghost Touch weapon Pierce Magical Concealment feat
5) Have an friend or summoned ally Grapple your target
6) Invisible Blade PrC + Surprising Riposte feat (Drow of the Underdark)
7) Sleep (or anything else that makes an enemy helpless)
8) Armor Lock spell (1st level, Complete Scoundrel)
9) Hold Person (or anything that Paralyzes)
10) Stunning Fist (or anything that Stuns)
11) Fear effects (Fear effects stack, and a Cowering enemy loses their Dex bonus).

There are many others. Really, there's no reason you shouldn't qualify for Sneak Attack every round, unless your enemy is immune to it. Even if your entire party is composed of jerks who don't work with you, a Sneak Attacker has many other means at their disposal.

Kaelik
2007-09-11, 05:09 PM
4) Ring of Blinking + Ghost Touch weapon or Pierce Magical Concealment feat

I don't know about this one. If you have a ghost touch weapon, then isn't the weapon actually fully there? So they can see it and react appropriately.

And Blinking does cause concealment, but it also causes you to not be present in that plane part of the time. Pierce Magical Concealment would not allow you to hit every time, but instead you would still miss 20% of the time.

ocato
2007-09-11, 05:51 PM
I honestly find it a little questionable that whips are ranged weapons instead of reach weapons, as I thought. I mean, reach weapons reach, ranged weapons involve a projectile. And why can't you sneak attack someone laying on their back all surprised and tripped and such? Oh well, can't fight the system. It would've been a neat idea I thought. :smalltongue:

Iku Rex
2007-09-11, 06:28 PM
I honestly find it a little questionable that whips are ranged weapons instead of reach weapons, as I thought.They're not ranged weapons anymore. You still don't threaten. As far as I can see you can still flank though - it only requires that "your opponent is threatened by a character or creature friendly to you on the opponent’s opposite border or opposite corner" when you're making a melee attack.

A whip deals nonlethal damage. It deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher. The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don’t threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes).

Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.

You can make trip attacks with a whip. If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop the whip to avoid being tripped.

When using a whip, you get a +2 bonus on opposed attack rolls made to disarm an opponent (including the roll to keep from being disarmed if the attack fails).

You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a whip sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon for you.

Converting the whip dagger to 3.5 it would look something like this (mostly copy-paste):


A character who takes the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (whip) feat is also proficient in the whip-dagger. Unlike standard whips, the whip-dagger’s ability to deal damage is unhindered by armor bonuses and natural armor bonuses. The whip-dagger is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don’t threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes).

Using a whip-dagger provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.

You can make trip attacks with a whip-dagger. If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop the whip-dagger to avoid being tripped.

When using a whip-dagger, you get a +2 bonus on opposed attack rolls made to disarm an opponent (including the roll to keep from being disarmed if the attack fails).

You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a whip-dagger sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon for you.
Based on the 3.5 changes to the whip the 3.5 whip-dagger would be a one-handed melee weapon (increased one size category, like the whip) cost 25 gp (same), deal 1d8 damage (once size increase from 1d6 - the whip went from 1d2 to 1d3), have a crit range of 19–20/×2 (same), a reach of 15 ft. (same), weigh 3 lb. (same, could be a little higher but seems reasonable) and deal slashing damage (same).

Mojo_Rat
2007-09-11, 09:28 PM
Pretty sure Blink does not help with sneak attacks. It gives concealment but no where are you invisible. Also Ghost touch weapons I am pretty sure do not help you attack fromt he Ethereal plane. One could even argue blink /prevents/ sneak attack. I cannot remember if the blinking persons miss chance is a concealment bonus for the target or not.

Glyphic
2007-09-11, 09:32 PM
From the SRD...


...While blinking, you take only half damage from area attacks (but full damage from those that extend onto the Ethereal Plane). You strike as an invisible creature (with a +2 bonus on attack rolls), denying your target any Dexterity bonus to AC...

Mojo_Rat
2007-09-11, 09:39 PM
really? Wow I dont ever remember seeing hat in the PHB (will read it there later). I always pictured people as knowing exactly where a blinking person is it was just hard to hit them. I had assumed since when they did attack they were perfectly visible that the concealment was treated the same as Displacement.

Oh well seems i was wrong :)

Human Paragon 3
2007-09-11, 09:58 PM
Perhaps this list will be helpful:
SNIP
11) Fear effects (Fear effects stack, and a Cowering enemy loses their Dex bonus).

SNIP

So here's a question... intimidate checks can cause an enemy to become "shaken." Does that mean that multiple successful intimidate checks will eventually cause an enemy to become cowering and hence vulnerable to sneak attacks? And if so, how many checks are necessary?

Benejeseret
2007-09-11, 10:09 PM
Person_Man, I am always impressed with your saged advice, but this time I have to question your implementation of sneak attack/Blink

First off, when a rogue blinks does the enemy count as having concealment? In your interpretation, yes, in the case of pierce magical concealment.

But I have the following issues:

1. Ghost Touched weapons work against incorpreal creatures and can be used by incorpreal creatures BUT during blink you are NOT incopreal, you are on the etherreal plane. This is important as:

"Incorporeal creatures are present on the same plane as the characters" - d20org

But during blink this simply is not the case.

2. Pierce magical concealment lets you disregard a Miss Chance that results from a spell or spell-like abilities.....and the examples it gives are all magic that grants concealment as the name implies. The description is a lot more generic than I think the name implies. The name implies CONCEALMENT.

Again....blink is not concealment. You are physically not on the plane of existance during a missed strike. In the ethereal plane you can see the material plane and so concealment (visual) is not the issue.

3. If your DM rules that blink IS a form of concealment so be it, but I think that would be the houserule and not the other way round. In that case, then until you sink 2 feats into pierce magic concealment your rogue can never get sneak attacks during blink as:

"A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach." - d20org

ie. Blink means you are treated like invisible thus dex denied. BUT, if the enemy is concealed it does not matter if you are truly invisible....still no sneak attack.

One could not claim it is not conealment prior to P.M.C. feat and then that it is so that P.M.C. applies.

4. If you do get the above houserule that Blink=concealment then Improved Precise Shot is a better feat for ranged rogues as it is also allows all concealment (except total) to be ignored plus ignores cover and grapple to boot.



If you can redirect and better argue RAW, then please correnct me. I usually play rogues and would love for your interpretation to be right....I just do not believe it is.

Stormcrow
2007-09-11, 10:57 PM
I'd be trying to enchant the whip to paralyze, daze, hold etc on contact. That way the contact of the trip attempt would deny the dex bonus.

Person_Man
2007-09-12, 12:26 AM
On the Ring of Blinking:



When activated (a standard action) a Ring of Blinking (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rings.htm#blinking) makes the wearer blink, as per the Blink (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blink.htm) spell for 7 rounds (since the ring has a Caster Level of 7 in order to make the ring).

What does the Blink spell do? This:


You “blink” back and forth between the Material Plane and the Ethereal Plane. You look as though you’re winking in and out of reality very quickly and at random.

Blinking has several effects, as follows.

Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesn’t help opponents, since you’re ethereal and not merely invisible. If the attack is capable of striking ethereal creatures, the miss chance is only 20% (for concealment).

If the attacker can see invisible creatures, the miss chance is also only 20%. (For an attacker who can both see and strike ethereal creatures, there is no miss chance.) Likewise, your own attacks have a 20% miss chance, since you sometimes go ethereal just as you are about to strike.

Any individually targeted spell has a 50% chance to fail against you while you’re blinking unless your attacker can target invisible, ethereal creatures. Your own spells have a 20% chance to activate just as you go ethereal, in which case they typically do not affect the Material Plane.

While blinking, you take only half damage from area attacks (but full damage from those that extend onto the Ethereal Plane). You strike as an invisible creature (with a +2 bonus on attack rolls), denying your target any Dexterity bonus to AC.

You take only half damage from falling, since you fall only while you are material.

While blinking, you can step through (but not see through) solid objects. For each 5 feet of solid material you walk through, there is a 50% chance that you become material. If this occurs, you are shunted off to the nearest open space and take 1d6 points of damage per 5 feet so traveled. You can move at only three-quarters speed (because movement on the Ethereal Plane is at half speed, and you spend about half your time there and half your time material.)

Since you spend about half your time on the Ethereal Plane, you can see and even attack ethereal creatures. You interact with ethereal creatures roughly the same way you interact with material ones.

An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down. As an incorporeal creature, you can move through solid objects, including living creatures.

An ethereal creature can see and hear the Material Plane, but everything looks gray and insubstantial. Sight and hearing on the Material Plane are limited to 60 feet.

Force effects and abjurations affect you normally. Their effects extend onto the Ethereal Plane from the Material Plane, but not vice versa. An ethereal creature can’t attack material creatures, and spells you cast while ethereal affect only other ethereal things. Certain material creatures or objects have attacks or effects that work on the Ethereal Plane. Treat other ethereal creatures and objects as material.[/B]

You take only half damage from falling, since you fall only while you are material.

While blinking, you can step through (but not see through) solid objects. For each 5 feet of solid material you walk through, there is a 50% chance that you become material. If this occurs, you are shunted off to the nearest open space and take 1d6 points of damage per 5 feet so traveled. You can move at only three-quarters speed (because movement on the Ethereal Plane is at half speed, and you spend about half your time there and half your time material.)

Since you spend about half your time on the Ethereal Plane, you can see and even attack ethereal creatures. You interact with ethereal creatures roughly the same way you interact with material ones.

An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down. As an incorporeal creature, you can move through solid objects, including living creatures.

So, the Ring of Blinking explicitly allows you to strike as an invisible creature (with a +2 bonus on attack rolls), denying your target any Dexterity bonus to AC. Thus, while Blinking, your enemies always qualify for Sneak Attack, unless they can See Invisibility or have True Sight.

But there's that annoying 20% miss chance. How do we deal with that? Well, there are two ways. The easy way is to take a Ghost Touch weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#ghostTouchWeapon). It's a +1 weapon enhancement. What does it do?


A ghost touch weapon deals damage normally against incorporeal creatures, regardless of its bonus. (An incorporeal creature’s 50% chance to avoid damage does not apply to attacks with ghost touch weapons.) The weapon can be picked up and moved by an incorporeal creature at any time. A manifesting ghost can wield the weapon against corporeal foes. Essentially, a ghost touch weapon counts as either corporeal or incorporeal at any given time, whichever is more beneficial to the wielder.

A Ghost Touch weapon counts as corporeal even when you're incorporeal if its beneficial to you. Thus you do not suffer the 20% miss chance. But you're still Invisible, thus your enemy still suffers a 50% miss chance against you, and you still deny them their Dex bonus.

To belabor the point, as the description of Blink makes clear, "An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down." A Ghost Touch weapon counts as a corporeal attack, but has no effect on your the invisibility also granted by your ethereal state.

If for some reason you don't agree with the rules as written for whatever reason, you can take the Pierce Magical Concealment feat from Complete Arcane. It specifically allows you to ignore the miss chance from any magical spell or effect. The feat even lists helpful examples, including Invisibility and Ghostform (which makes you incorporeal). Thus you still count as incorporeal and invisible while you blink, but wouldn't suffer any miss chance from it or any other magical effect.

On Fear:

Multiple Demoralize effects, like all Fear effects, stack by default (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm).


Fear effects are cumulative. A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.

A panicked enemy who cannot flee cowers (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#cowering).

However, you'd be retarded to Demoralize an opponent, since it only lasts one round. And using any fear effect to qualify for Sneak Attack is usually inefficient, since your enemy must fail so many Saves, and then you have to corner them.

But, it can be quite useful when used properly. Enemies who fail two Saves become Frightened and run away, ensuring your safety and giving you AoO at the enemy. Plus its quite easy to generate lots of fear effects via various magic items, spells, prestige classes, or the Frightful Presence feat (Draconomicon).

Feralgeist
2007-09-12, 01:20 AM
Just be a lasher.

Kaelik
2007-09-12, 01:26 AM
Person Man. What I am saying is that if your weapon is corporeal but on the ethereal plane it does not strike material targets. If it is corporeal and on the material plane while you hold it, then they can see your weapon, and defend against it. Blinking does not make you invisible, it allows you to attack as if invisible because you are on another plane most of the time.

If your weapon is always on this plane, that doesn't really help. You're weapon being plainly visible would negate that benefit.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-09-12, 01:36 AM
On the Ring of Blinking:

...

So, the Ring of Blinking explicitly allows you to strike as an invisible creature (with a +2 bonus on attack rolls), denying your target any Dexterity bonus to AC. Thus, while Blinking, your enemies always qualify for Sneak Attack, unless they can See Invisibility or have True Sight.


Absolutely.


To belabor the point, as the description of Blink makes clear, "An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down." A Ghost Touch weapon counts as a corporeal attack, but has no effect on your the invisibility also granted by your ethereal state.

If for some reason you don't agree with the rules as written for whatever reason...


It is not that simple.

The DMG description of The Planes actually agrees with the description found in Blink.


... A traveler on the Ethereal Plane is invisible, incorporeal, and utterly silent to someone on the Material Plane. ...

But that is about the only place where being ethereal is equated with being incorporeal.

In the description of the Ethereal Jaunt spell "incorporeal" has been changed to "insubstantial".


... An ethereal creature is invisible, insubstantial, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down, albeit at half normal speed. ...

And the Glossary also uses "insubstantial.


... Ethereal creatures are invisible, inaudible, insubstantial, and scentless to creatures on the Material Plane. ...

The Glossary description for Incorporeality tells us that Incorporeal creatures are on the same plane as those they are incorporeal to.


Incorporeal creatures are present on the same plane as the characters...

The Ghost's Manifest ability supports this distinction.


... A manifested ghost remains partially on the Ethereal Plane, where is it not incorporeal. ...

etc.


So as we can see it is very difficult to agree with the RAW no matter what we believe, unless perhaps some of us are Ettins or similar.

Luckily the FAQ has cleared up that the RAI is that Ethereal creatures are not Incorporeal and thus not able to strike at creatures on the material plane with Ghost Touch weapons.


What’s the difference between ethereal and incorporeal? I understand that an ethereal creature is on another plane, but the plane is in the same place as the
Material Plane.

Incorporeal has a very specific definition in D&D. An incorporeal creature is a creature present on the Material Plane, but insubstantial and incapable of being touched by nonmagical matter or energy. It is visible to viewers, although it typically appears translucent. Shadows, spectres, and wraiths are incorporeal.
An ethereal creature is a creature that exists on the ethereal Plane (a transitive plane described in the Dungeon Master’s Guide and Manual of the Planes). In fact, you could simply replace the term “ethereal creature” with “creature on the Ethereal Plane” and the meaning would remain exactly the same. An ethereal creature can see into the Material Plane (although the Material Plane appears muted and indistinct), but the reverse isn’t true—an ethereal creature is totally invisible to creatures on the Material Plane. Ethereal creatures can’t affect the Material Plane, and thus they move easily through creatures
and objects on the Material Plane.


Can ghost touch weapons affect ethereal creatures?

No. An ethereal creature, while insubstantial, is not strictly
defined as an “incorporeal” creature and thus it can’t be
affected by a ghost touch weapon wielded by a material
opponent.

There are many other FAQ entries. (pp. 96, 98, 99.)

Person_Man
2007-09-12, 08:28 AM
Stuff

OK, so are you saying that because of the clarification in definition of etherealness, a Ghost Touch weapon no longer negates the 20% miss chance from a Blink spell? Or perhaps it never did, and I was just confusing a confusing issue even further?

Well, that's news to me. OK everyone, point conceded. I guess you need to invest in Pierce Magical Concealment (a great feat anyway) in order for the combo to work. Man, the Rogues in my campaign world are going to be pissed.

Funkyodor
2007-09-12, 09:17 AM
It's all about inferred meaning. Since it specifies a 20% miss chance for people attacking the blinking person as a concealment effect (only if they have a way to see or strike ethereal objects), then goes on to reference other 20% miss chances you can interpret it as a concealment effect. Or you can take the point of view that the 20% miss chance that the blinking person encounters when attacking is just a miss chance and is not specifically referenced as a concealment effect applied to the individual the blinking person wants to attack.

Either way you can get around this by having a weapon able to effect objects on the Prime Material from either the Prime Material or Ethereal Plane (sorry but as mentioned, Ghost Touch does incorporeal / matereal interaction, no reference to the Ethereal)... Uh... I can't think of one, but maybe a house rule weapon enhancement using the Ghost Touch weapon parameters as a base line and use its enhancement cost.

Ooo, OOoo. Tangent thought. Rope of Entanglement! Nice Cheap (Edit: Crap, not as cheap as I remembered) way of getting a grapple so you can Sneak Attack away when by yourself. And if you 'kill' the rope? Who Cares, it's only a glorified slinky.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-09-12, 09:19 AM
OK, so are you saying that because of the clarification in definition of etherealness, a Ghost Touch weapon no longer negates the 20% miss chance from a Blink spell? Or perhaps it never did, and I was just confusing a confusing issue even further?

It never did, but some designer(s) was(were) either unaware of this or momentarily confused. It is definitely something that should have been cleared up in the errata.

Perhaps the Rules Compendium will shed light on this or perhaps it will be ignored again along with all the other self contradicting rules and misunderstandings, who knows.



Well, that's news to me. OK everyone, point conceded. I guess you need to invest in Pierce Magical Concealment (a great feat anyway) in order for the combo to work. Man, the Rogues in my campaign world are going to be pissed.

I am afraid they will be even more agitated when you tell them that Pierce Magical Concealment does not help either, since Blink does not create a concealment effect.


Would a sneak attack work on a creature affected by the blink spell?

Yes. Blink doesn’t provide concealment, so sneak attack functions normally against a target affected by that spell (though such attacks would have a 50% miss chance, as normal for the spell).

Iku Rex
2007-09-12, 09:28 AM
I am afraid they will be even more agitated when you tell them that Pierce Magical Concealment does not help either, since Blink does not create a concealment effect.It's not that simple.


Your fierce contempt for magic allows you to disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities such as darkness, blur, invisibility, obscuring mist, ghostform (see page 109), and spells when used to create concealment effects (such as a wizard using permanent image to fill a corridor with illusory fire and smoke).The only potential unclarity is if blink "grants" your opponents a miss chance, but given the examples listed I'd say the feat ought to work. Sure, you can't normally attack the material plane from the ethereal plane, but a character with this feat doesn't like magic, so that's ok. :smallsigh:

(Those feats are really, really silly.)

Benejeseret
2007-09-12, 09:38 AM
Ya, as a rogue the first time I read about the blink/ghosttouch combo I was really excited....too bad I am also a wee bit of a rules lawyer (stupid lawful allignment).

If however someone in your (assuming your the DM) games insists on the combo, then turn the combo right back at them

1. Give a ghost a ghost touch weapon.
2. Do not manifest the ghost, let it stay in the ethereal plane 100%
3. Have the fully ethereal ghost carve the rogue/PC a new one while being 100% immune to everything but Force effects/abjurations/gaze effects before the rogue even knowns it is there
4. Even better have the ethereal ghost 'grab' the rogue's ghosttouch weapon and stab him with it so he has nothing at all to fight back with.

5. Or if you're really nasty....give the BBEG barbarian a ring/scroll of ethereal juant and the pierce magical concealment feat. Also give him a Brooch of Shielding so he is immune to magic missles for awhile.

The BBEG floats around the battle ethereal while smashing the PC's to pulp.

All hail the DM's power

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-09-12, 09:42 AM
It's not that simple.

But it really is.

It looks like you are reading it to disregard ANY miss chance created by spells and spell-like abilities?

However, that is not what the feat says. It says you may disregard any miss chance from a list of spells and spell-like abilities (which does not include blink) and from spells that "create concealment effects" (which still does not include blink).

Later the spell again reiterates that you have gained an ability to ignore concealment, not strike into the ethereal plane.


Your ability to ignore the miss chance granted by magical concealment...


(Those feats are really, really silly.)

They do seem just a little weird.....

Person_Man
2007-09-12, 10:00 AM
But it really is.

It looks like you are reading it to disregard ANY miss chance created by spells and spell-like abilities?

However, that is not what the feat says. It says you may disregard any miss chance from a list of spells and spell-like abilities (which does not include blink) and from spells that "create concealment effects" (which still does not include blink).

To quote the first half of the feat:

Your fierce contempt for magic allows you to disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities such as darkness, blur, invisibility, obscuring mist, ghostform, and spells when used to create concealment effects.

When we get into a rules argument, you're usually right. But it appears the feat allows you to disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities, and then it lists examples of spells with a miss chance. Blur is a spell that grants a miss chance to the user, and the Pierce Magical Concealment should allow you to disregard that miss chance.

Iku Rex
2007-09-12, 10:08 AM
It looks like you are reading it to disregard ANY miss chance created by spells and spell-like abilities?I am reading it to "disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities". Which is what the feat says.


However, that is not what the feat says. It says you may disregard any miss chance from a list of spells and spell-like abilities (which does not include blink) and from spells that "create concealment effects" (which still does not include blink).That's not true. Again, you "disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities" and then it lists several example of spells that "grant" a miss chance. It makes no sense to treat those examples as an exclusive list.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-09-12, 11:58 AM
When we get into a rules argument, you're usually right. But it appears the feat allows you to disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities, and then it lists examples of spells with a miss chance. Blur is a spell that grants a miss chance to the user, and the Pierce Magical Concealment should allow you to disregard that miss chance.


That's not true. Again, you "disregard the miss chance granted by spells or spell-like abilities" and then it lists several example of spells that "grant" a miss chance. It makes no sense to treat those examples as an exclusive list.

The list of examples are not just any list. It is a list of spells that provide a concealment effect. Spells that does not provide a concealment effect, such as Blink, are not mentioned.

This could of course be a coincidence, even considering the name of the feat, but the second part of the feat description (the one none of you commented on) makes it clear that you have gained the ability to pierce magical concealment not Pierce Magical Miss Chances and Ignore (Certain) Planar Boundaries.

Iku Rex
2007-09-12, 12:38 PM
The list of examples are not just any list. It is a list of spells that provide a concealment effect. Spells that does not provide a concealment effect, such as Blink, are not mentioned.Not true. Ghostform does not provide concealment. Just a miss chance. (And IMO for much the same reason as blink.) The same sentence that lists the examples describes them as spells that grant a miss chance. Not a word about concealment. Don't you think it's strange that the feat description doesn't use the word concealment in that sentence if that's what's intended? Why use the more generic "miss chance"?

This could of course be a coincidence, even considering the name of the feat, but the second part of the feat description (the one none of you commented on) makes it clear that you have gained the ability to pierce magical concealment not Pierce Magical Miss Chances and Ignore (Certain) Planar Boundaries.And the feat does let you pierce magical concealment. Nobody disputes that. There's no contradiction. "Magical concealment" is probably used in contrast to "nonmagical concealment". (AFAIK there's no way to get a non-concealment miss chance without magic.)

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-09-12, 01:30 PM
Not true. Ghostform does not provide concealment. Just a miss chance.

I overlooked that one in my haste. I will concede the point, but the implications I still find ridiculous.


(And IMO for much the same reason as blink.)

I am not near CA at the moment but I assume that Ghostform makes you (sort of) incorporeal and not ethereal while Blink makes you ethereal half the time?



The same sentence that lists the examples describes them as spells that grant a miss chance. Not a word about concealment. Don't you think it's strange that the feat description doesn't use the word concealment in that sentence if that's what's intended? Why use the more generic "miss chance"?

Because almost all spells (save Ghostform) grant a miss chance based on concealment anyway. Blink is an exception, because you it is a watered down Ethereal Jaunt.


And the feat does let you pierce magical concealment. Nobody disputes that. There's no contradiction.

Obviously, but my issue was not with piercing magical concealment, after all that is the feats name. My problem was the implication that the feat would allow you to strike into the ethereal plane, but I can see how you could explain it differently.


"Magical concealment" is probably used in contrast to "nonmagical concealment". (AFAIK there's no way to get a non-concealment miss chance without magic.)


Attacks on Incorporeal creatures are not affected by this feat (although their miss chance is supernatural in nature) and are not addressed by that sentence. If the feat description did not mean magical concealment to be an almost exhaustive term why use it at all? :smallamused:

But I digress, no matter what the RAI are the strict RAW interpretation is that Pierce Magical Concealment ignores any miss chance that comes from a spell effect.

I stand corrected.

Person_Man
2007-09-12, 02:23 PM
I stand corrected.

Well, that's pretty much a first as far as I can tell. I'd also like to say that the rules debates have gotten a lot less vitriolic in the past 6 months or so, partially because many of us look to you and a few other posters as fonts of fair RAW interpretation. So thanks.

Also, I'm just glad the combo works. Rogues need more power, not less.

But clearly Pierce Magical Concealment is a somewhat poorly written feat. Instead of listing examples of spells, they should have just said "You disregard the miss chance provided by magical concealment, psionic concealment, invisibility, etherealness, or incorporeality from any source. This includes the miss chance provided by all spells, spell-like abilities, magic items, psionic powers, psionic items, racial types or subtypes. This feat does not allow you to disregard the miss chance from any non-magical and non-psionic sources, such as that granted by Extraordinary abilities, low light conditions, or naturally created fog." Or if they just intended it to be weaker and bypass just magical concealment, they should have specified so.

Thinker
2007-09-12, 02:26 PM
Well, that's pretty much a first as far as I can tell. I'd also like to say that the rules debates have gotten a lot less vitriolic in the past 6 months or so, partially because many of us look to you and a few other posters as fonts of fair RAW interpretation. So thanks.


I usually look to Fax, Silvanos, Yuki (when he's around), and you. Though I haven't seen Tainsouvra being wrong about anything, either.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-09-12, 04:20 PM
Well, that's pretty much a first as far as I can tell.

Thanks for the note, but I can assure you that it is not the first time, nor will it be the last.


But clearly Pierce Magical Concealment is a somewhat poorly written feat.

It seems to be the standard these days. :smalltongue:

I have this great idea for a feat and I want it to do A, but I do not have time to consider what happens when it meets B, C or D or I do not understand how the rules work or consider how it relates to the other new books.
I will however go ahead and write it up anyway, after all I think I know how I want it to work for A.

Ohhh, and should I realize that it needs to be errata'ed I happen to work for a company that will not pay for correcting the mistakes.