How to beat glitterdust?

[Julius]

Glitterdust. I hate that spell. My party uses it to blind golems (no SR), reveal invisible foes, and otherwise ruin my day as a GM.

I think I have a solution: Ready an action to cast invisibility if glitterdust is cast. Would this work? My logic is that the outlining only affects things that are already invisible, and a casting AFTER the dust goes off would cause any magical dust flecks to disappear with the caster.

Would this work? What are some other ways to beat this spell?

[Deepblue706]

Have foes that don't rely on sight. Like, a giant magic bat. Like, Zuubat. It can hide in the darkness and stuff, and fly around other neato stuff. And stuff.

[TheOOB]

Have a foe counterspell it

[Seatbelt]

Do you have any idea how hard it is to get glitter off of stuff? house rule that any character who interacts (like, via hitting with a sword, or looting a corpse or gets hit by a touch spell from) something under the effects of a Glitterdust spell gets covered in glitter, and looks like a fruit for 1D4 days.

(where fruit means silly, and not like grapes)

[Jasdoif]

I think I have a solution: Ready an action to cast invisibility if glitterdust is cast. Would this work? My logic is that the outlining only affects things that are already invisible, and a casting AFTER the dust goes off would cause any magical dust flecks to disappear with the caster.

The spell description says the dust covers everything in the area, and continues to sparkle until it fades, at the end of the spell's duration. So that won't work with the rules as they're written. Of course, since you're the GM, anything that you decide will work, will work.

You could blind the PCs yourself, using glitterdust on them for sheer irony. Or use synesthete to negate the blind penalty. Or use monsters with blindsight or tremorsense. Or give monsters blindsight or tremorsense. And so on.

[The_Werebear]

Grimlocks.

They are in MM1. Look into them.

[Kantolin]

Have a good will save?

[Tokiko Mima]

I would try using something the handicaps the players even more, like fog cloud with a web spell cast when the players come inside, or any of the higher level cloud spells. A good illusion spell might be fun to trick them.

Also, consider incorporeal undead, like Wraiths: they can slide into a nearby wall, walk underground to appear behind a PC, all without having to pass through the Glitterdust.

[purple gelatinous cube o' Doom]

Find any and every monster you can think of that has tremorsense.

[Tokiko Mima]

Glitterdust. I hate that spell. My party uses it to blind golems (no SR), reveal invisible foes, and otherwise ruin my day as a GM.

I think I have a solution: Ready an action to cast invisibility if glitterdust is cast. Would this work? My logic is that the outlining only affects things that are already invisible, and a casting AFTER the dust goes off would cause any magical dust flecks to disappear with the caster.

Would this work? What are some other ways to beat this spell?

You're the GM. It will work if you say it does, however I would rule no.

I assume the golden particles kept falling for the duration, so anyone in the area got coated the moment they stepped inside, and once they left the area of effect, the particles disappear.

If you want to specifically beat the spell, there's always good old Anti-Magic Field combined with good old Hide/Move Silently stealth.

[Quirinus_Obsidian]

Have a foe counterspell it

Worked for me on several occasions. DM tries to Glitterdust my Half-Fey Sorceress... uuuh yah. Suuuure. Ready an action to counterspell... Vaarsuvius said it her/himself: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0166.html that couterspelling is one of the least-used ways to couteract a spellcaster. That and a charging Monk with SR, 2 Weapon Fighting and 2 Weapon pouce.

[daggaz]

Two words: Land Sharks. Or, in another word: Bulettes. Trust me, they won't even waste time thinking about casting Glitterdust.

Plus all the other tremorsense monsters out there. And counterspelling, which is much easier for a DM when their group consistently uses the same tactics over and over and over again..

[Saph]

I think I have a solution: Ready an action to cast invisibility if glitterdust is cast. Would this work? My logic is that the outlining only affects things that are already invisible, and a casting AFTER the dust goes off would cause any magical dust flecks to disappear with the caster.

Would this work? What are some other ways to beat this spell?

Rules aren't clear on this issue. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. But there are better alternatives. Glitterdust is a very powerful spell, probably the best of the 2nd-level wizard/sorcerer list. However, there are lots of ways to beat it. Here are some of them:

- Blindsight
- Tremorsense
- Lifesense
- Mastery-type abilities

(these all negate blinding completely, making glitterdust useless)

- Blindsense
- Scent

(these partially negate blinding)

There are also lots of tactical situations that make glitterdust less useful, such as:

- Monsters are flanking PCs
- PCs are flanking monster
- Monster is grappling a PC (this is a big one, the glitterdust won't affect the monster and may really hurt the PC)
- Tight conditions (hard to place the burst)
- Monsters can withdraw around the corner or whatever (wait for Glitterdust to end)
- Monster can burrow (go underground, wait for Glitterdust to end)
- Monster can swim (as above)
- Monster can fly (as above)

You get the idea. Glitterdust is a great spell, but it can be easily countered.

Or you could just say that every golem in your game has tremorsense - the wizards build it in for an extra 5,000 gold or whatever. Remember, there's nothing to stop you customising monsters, and if the PCs are winning every encounter with a single spell, that's what you should be doing. You have to strike a balance - spells like Glitterdust should be good enough that PCs have an incentive to use them, but not so good that they can be guaranteed to beat every encounter.

- Saph

[Emperor Tippy]

Glitter Dust isn't so great because it blinds its target its the invisibility negation that is what makes it so good.

[Clementx]

Your entire battle should not hinge on the creatures being invisible. Glitterdust should be able to neutralize permanently invisible/illusion-spamming creatures, but you as the DM shouldn't rely on that single ability to challenge your players. A Vrock could care less if you Glitterdusted it, for example. Invisibility's biggest punch is that surprise round- afterwards, it is less of a deal. Make sure your encounters can actually do something after the surprise round.

And all your encounters should not consist of golems, since the only option you have to magically affect them involves no-SR spells. If it is a minotaur that is trying to kill them, chances are others spells would get cast. It's like complaining that all your players use is fire spells when they constantly fight White Dragons.

[its_all_ogre]

as for the golems, one would asume they are immune to blinding on the not being alive and using eyes?
same goes for corporeal undead?

[Clementx]

as for the golems, one would asume they are immune to blinding on the not being alive and using eyes?
same goes for corporeal undead?

Golems and other nonbiologicals are only immune to effects that call for Fort saves that don't also work on objects. Glitterdust is a Will save. It doesn't get in your eyes, it short-circuits your visual centers, and if you process visual data, you have those. Or something.

[The_Werebear]

I just noticed this.

Vorpal
This potent and feared ability allows the weapon to sever the heads of those it strikes. Upon a roll of natural 20 (followed by a successful roll to confirm the critical hit), the weapon severs the opponent’s head (if it has one) from its body. Some creatures, such as many aberrations and all oozes, have no heads. Others, such as golems and undead creatures other than vampires, are not affected by the loss of their heads. Most other creatures, however, die when their heads are cut off. A vorpal weapon must be a slashing weapon. (If you roll this property randomly for an inappropriate weapon, reroll.)

Emphasis mine.

Now, according to this, cutting off a zombie's head will not affect it any way but asthecially, and possibly dealing some damage. This means, By RAW, it is not blinded by the loss of it's head. However, it is perfectly possible to blind an undead creature with Glitterdust. Moreso, it is entirely possible to blind it with Glitterdust after you sever the head.

Interesting, no?

[Ramza00]

For the invisibles, have a multiclass rouge/wizard so you also have a good hide skill after your invisibility is removed by glitterdust (able learner, collar of umbral metamorpsis, unseen seer, arcane trickster, spellwarp sniper, daggerspell mage can help)

Superior Invisibility also gets rid of glitterdust (8th lvl spell) but is countered by one and only one thing True seeing (Clr 5, Drd 7, Knowledge 5, Sor/Wiz 6)

[The Pink Ninja]

Attack them with Cyborg-Dragons until they agree to stop using it...

[TheOOB]

I just noticed this.

Emphasis mine.

Now, according to this, cutting off a zombie's head will not affect it any way but asthecially, and possibly dealing some damage. This means, By RAW, it is not blinded by the loss of it's head. However, it is perfectly possible to blind an undead creature with Glitterdust. Moreso, it is entirely possible to blind it with Glitterdust after you sever the head.

Interesting, no?

The DM bears a right to overide any official ruling when it makes absolutly no sense at all. Blinding headless zombies is bad karma.

[Roderick_BR]

Create Water and Gust of Wind could work, but as it was said, Glitter Dust gets into things, it doesn't float in the air.

Question: Can't a character close his eyes, as if he were avoiding a gaze attack?

[TheOOB]

Question: Can't a character close his eyes, as if he were avoiding a gaze attack?

Technically no they can't, averting or closing your eyes only works for gaze attacks. However I would as a houserule give you a save bonus if you close your eyes during your previous action. Eye lids are translucent so you can still be blinded through them, it's just harder.

[Raum]

Glitterdust. I hate that spell. My party uses it to blind golems (no SR), reveal invisible foes, and otherwise ruin my day as a GM

Glitterdust is a good spell, but if it has that big an affect on your game you may want to consider thinking outside the box so to speak. Don't change or try to negate the spell, change your tactics and adversaries to make it less useful. Land sharks and bulettes have been mentioned already but even goblin rogues striking from hiding will negate half the effect...potentially all of it if you use hit and run tactics to prevent them from seeing more than one or two opponents at a time. Depending on level, a Ring of Spell Turning on a fighter adversary would have an interesting result. And give both fighters and rogues Blindsight, it's a very underutilized feat. The spells Spell Immunity and Spell Turning help also.

Remember, any intelligent adversary who considers the PCs a threat will plan ways to neutralize the threat.

[Roderick_BR]

Ah, that's right. Only special eye protection would really work, like that elm of seeing thing, that covers your whole face.

[PinkysBrain]

Dumb monsters tend to fare poorly against PCs period. It's not like that golem would do any better if your PCs turned invisible.

[Aquillion]

I just noticed this.
Now, according to this, cutting off a zombie's head will not affect it any way but asthecially, and possibly dealing some damage. This means, By RAW, it is not blinded by the loss of it's head. However, it is perfectly possible to blind an undead creature with Glitterdust. Moreso, it is entirely possible to blind it with Glitterdust after you sever the head.

Interesting, no?

Part of the problem here is the briefness of Glitterdust's description of its blinding effect... it doesn't really say how it blinds creatures, it just does. But if you assume (like most people do) that it works by overloading whatever sense the creature is using to see, then it makes sense... If a headless zombie still has the ability to see colors and lights somehow, then glitterdust can overload whatever they're using.

[The_Snark]

Just design encounters that can't be negated through use of Glitterdust. Using monsters with abilities that negate the spell works well, or just monsters with good Will saves. I reccomend Grell, which have blindsense and are generally cool; if you want to stick to more standard things, dragons have blindsense, a breath weapon, and flight. Glitterdust will hinder it but not destroy the encounter.

Creatures with good Will saves are good. And if a spellcaster is blinded by Glitterdust, there's nothing keeping him from using Darkness or some such to even the odds; now nobody can see.

As for negating invisibility, that's not really a bad thing. There's very little PCs can do to fight an invisible opponent if they can't see it. Invisibility should be for getting the drop on them, rather than something that's expected to last more than a round or three.

[Bears With Lasers]

Spell Turning does crap-all against area effects.

[Ethdred]

On reading the OP my immediate reaction was GRIMLOCKS! 'Cos they're cool and blind and don't use invisibility so basically Glitterdust does nothing against them.

The other alternative is to not have your critters so bunched together that an area spell can get more than one of them