cragger
2007-09-12, 11:36 PM
Hello,
I finally decided to sign up to the freindliest RPG forum out there!
I have a general question, but the specifics are quite pertinent. This question comes from a one-on-one player-versus-player gladiatorial arena style deathmatch. The question involves two player characters fighting wach other. The game is 3.5 using all "Complete" and "Compedium" supplements. Players are playing on a standard battle grid with 1 inch squares, and can see the position of their opponent.
ok, the question:
Player A casts darkness and silence targeting himself, each with a radius of 20 feet. Player A has the feat "Sunlight Eyes" from the Complete Mage, and a second level [light] spell prepared to allow him to see through 20 feet of magical darkness.
Player B wants to lob a ranged touch spell at player A.
Now, the rules for magical darkness cover melee combat quite well. Were A to get B into the radius of effect, A would be at quite the disadvantage. Since B has no way to see through magical darkness and no extrasensory perception such as tremorsense, B would be blinded and deafened. Blinded combatants cannot determine the square in which their opponent is located, and must choose a square to attack. Failure does not reveal if the miss was due to an incorrect choice of square or due to failure due to concealment. Were the correct square attacked, B would still suffer the 50% concealment miss chance, but would know the location of his opponent until they move.
But B says, "Forget that, Searing Light!"
B chooses the square at the center of the radius of effect, rolls the ranged touch, succeeds against the opponent's AC, then succeeds against concealment. A is dead... The crowd would go wild, if they knew... oh well.
So, does magical darkness and silence impose any penalty at all against ranged attacks besides the 50% miss chance due to total concealment?
Any and all help in the matter would be much appreciated. I believe that it has something to do with line-of-effect versus line-of-sight, but then concealment is defined as when you have line of effect but not sight... grrrr
I finally decided to sign up to the freindliest RPG forum out there!
I have a general question, but the specifics are quite pertinent. This question comes from a one-on-one player-versus-player gladiatorial arena style deathmatch. The question involves two player characters fighting wach other. The game is 3.5 using all "Complete" and "Compedium" supplements. Players are playing on a standard battle grid with 1 inch squares, and can see the position of their opponent.
ok, the question:
Player A casts darkness and silence targeting himself, each with a radius of 20 feet. Player A has the feat "Sunlight Eyes" from the Complete Mage, and a second level [light] spell prepared to allow him to see through 20 feet of magical darkness.
Player B wants to lob a ranged touch spell at player A.
Now, the rules for magical darkness cover melee combat quite well. Were A to get B into the radius of effect, A would be at quite the disadvantage. Since B has no way to see through magical darkness and no extrasensory perception such as tremorsense, B would be blinded and deafened. Blinded combatants cannot determine the square in which their opponent is located, and must choose a square to attack. Failure does not reveal if the miss was due to an incorrect choice of square or due to failure due to concealment. Were the correct square attacked, B would still suffer the 50% concealment miss chance, but would know the location of his opponent until they move.
But B says, "Forget that, Searing Light!"
B chooses the square at the center of the radius of effect, rolls the ranged touch, succeeds against the opponent's AC, then succeeds against concealment. A is dead... The crowd would go wild, if they knew... oh well.
So, does magical darkness and silence impose any penalty at all against ranged attacks besides the 50% miss chance due to total concealment?
Any and all help in the matter would be much appreciated. I believe that it has something to do with line-of-effect versus line-of-sight, but then concealment is defined as when you have line of effect but not sight... grrrr