SlipEternal's page

Seeking will deal with the displacement, but for mirror image you want the Truthful property. Unfortunately that's melee only, so you'd need to convince your GM to allow it.

Good idea! But, the DM said no.

If you want strictly RAW then most of what has been said in this thread doesn’t even have a chance to apply. Joesi actually provided the strict RAW on the situation. A blind creature cannot make a ranged attack by strict RAW. Ranged attacks require line of sight to perform, and blindness has this rule: “All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail.” Ranged attacks requiring line of sight makes them “activities that rely on vision” and as per blindness, automatically fail. Most DMs run various houserules for blindness and ranged attacks to give the parties dedicated archer at least a slim chance of doing something if blinded. Closing your eyes just before you shoot is willingly accepting the blinded condition and as a result the shot automatically misses. Veering doesn’t affect the shot because there is nolonger a miss chance it just misses period.

My DM found the appropriate rules. The Environment rules describe how ranged attacks while Blind work:

All opponents have total concealment from a blinded creature, so the blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat. A blinded creature must first pinpoint the location of an opponent in order to attack the right square; if the blinded creature launches an attack without pinpointing its foe, it attacks a random square within its reach. For ranged attacks or spells against a foe whose location is not pinpointed, roll to determine which adjacent square the blinded creature is facing; its attack is directed at the closest target that lies in that direction.

If your DM thinks that closing your eyes immediately before firing somehow negates the fact that you have already pinpointed your target, that would certainly stymie your ability significantly since you will be firing at a random target in a potentially random direction, but you can still do it!

This is going to sound a bit dumb, but by the RAW can ranged attacks even be made without line of sight though? The combat rules state that ranged attacks require line of sight. The Seeking enhancement implies that ranged attacks can be made to empty squares, however that may still be by having line of sight of the square. I know the total concealment section talks about attacking squares, but aside from not specifying that ranged can do this (which I know is kind of silly to require specifying), it seems logical that it would still mean seeing the square that one wants to attack into when it's a ranged attack.

Logically/realistically speaking (instead of the silly previous paragraph of going by a strict literal RAW) aiming at the square/target then closing eyes and firing without changing aim would have the same effect as not closing ones eyes, meaning that it should have a chance of hitting an image. and if they close their eyes before they aim then they wouldn't be able to aim at the right square/target that they would want to.

Because of these reasons, I'd say that it would not work with a seeking ranged attack. You'd have to be in melee using a Heartseeker weapon instead.

From what I've read, real-world blindfolded archery is very difficult to get bullseyes, but fairly easy to come close. In fact, I've seen a couple of young archers being idiots and playing around with blindfolds. They usually hit the target first try even when blindfolded. Nowhere near the bullseye, but often on target. I realize my personal experiences may not translate on the whole, and I have very little experience with this. But these experiences seem to imply that in the real world, even though blind archery is more difficult to be accurate, it is not that much harder from sighted archery to be in the ballpark. A five-foot square is fairly easy to target, even when blindfolded, especially for an experienced archer.

Of course, Pathfinder is a system of rules, not a perfect representation of reality, so point taken nonetheless.

Seeking will not counteract the miss chance from blind firing. If you close your eyes you suffer a 50% miss chance not because the target is concealed but because YOU CANNOT SEE. Just because you aimed before you closed your eyes doesn’t mean you are still aiming at the same spot when you release. You cannot aim the weapon at a specific square while blind, because of this seeking will NOT apply. Firing blind is the same as accidentally firing through a square containing an invisible foe, which seeking explicitly calls out will NOT trigger the effect.

That could be a good way to rule it. Do you have a source that indicates that firing blind is the same as accidentally firing through a square? Or that the square targeted is somehow random? Seeking specifies it negates any miss chance. It does not say it will veer towards a square you do not target. And the discussions that it is impossible to target a square you cannot see may apply. Does anyone have a rules reference they could point me to? Or like others have said, is this strictly up to the DM, and no explicit rules say one way or another?

I am trying to get a better understanding of the interactions of these four effects, because it seems strange how it works. My character is a Divine Hunter Paladin. The enemies are under the effects of Mirror Image and Displacement. If I use Divine Bond to add the Seeking special property to my bow, I gain the following benefit:

A seeking weapon veers toward its target, negating any miss chances that would otherwise apply, such as from concealment. The wielder still has to aim the weapon at the right square. Arrows mistakenly shot into an empty space, for example, do not veer and hit invisible enemies, even if they are nearby.

This seems like it would ignore the miss chance from Displacement, but I would still need to contend with the Mirror Image.

On the other hand, the last two sentences of Mirror Image says:

An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled. If you are invisible or the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect (although the normal miss chances still apply).

So, if I see what square the enemy is in, then close my eyes before firing my bow, I wind up with no miss chance (the Seeking property takes care of that), and I don't have to worry about mirror images? I can shoot better by blinding myself than I can when I can see? Something seems off about that.

An alternate interpretation might be that the seeking property treats mirror images as a miss chance (example: 7 images means there is an 87.5% miss chance), and therefore ignores mirror images. But, the effects of displacement and invisibility are explicitly called "miss chances", making me think that is a game mechanic rather than any arbitrary random mechanic that might cause an attacker to miss some percent of the time. This seems more consistent with logic (blinding yourself doesn't make you better at shooting a bow), but less balanced overall.

I could not find these specific interactions discussed elsewhere.

Very well-thought-out response

I appreciate your response. It is clearly well thought out and went into a lot of detail addressing all of my questions! I did not quote the entire post, as it was very long, but I would like to respond to it.

I deliberately did not include the discussion about regular invisibility because that spell is difficult to adjudicate. You mention that it can be addressed "quickly", but I disagree. Here is the part of the Invisibility spell that really confounds your point on the subject:

Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character’s perceptions.

So, if I decide that the person I am stealing from is not a friend nor a foe, just a target for theft, then they are? If I decide it, then that is my perception, right? Basically, I can decide not to break my invisibility when targeting a creature simply by deciding the target is not a foe? Example: I want to steal the wizard's headband of vast intellect. So, I decide, "You know, he's not a bad guy! I bet if that silly headband weren't clouding his judgment, he would stop attacking us. I'll help my friend here from the detrimental effects of that headband." And all of a sudden, he is not a foe anymore! He is a treasured ally, whom I am saving from the clutches of the vile headband. Now, I am using a beneficial effect on the target (in my perception)!

These types of arguments are beyond the scope of this thread, and I tried to deliberately avoid the discussion. You could easily say that is a garbage argument, and I would not entirely disagree. In general, it is fairly clear who is friend and who is foe, and mental gymnastics to switch it up is not in the spirit of the game. But, I did not want to have such debates, which is why I excluded that topic from the discussion.

Next, I have a small nitpick about treating Ranged Legerdemain as if it were a supernatural ability that produces a Mage Hand effect. I think that is a dangerous idea. Ranged Legerdemain does not mention the ability to move items within its range, and treating it as Mage Hand may be conferring abilities it does not possess. If the Disable Device skill or the Sleight of Hand skill offer ways that an item can move within the range of the effect, then by all means, I agree Ranged Legerdemain can move items. But, saying it grants telekinesis up to 5 lbs within range gives it more utility than the ability is supposed to confer. If you want Mage Hand, cast Mage Hand. If you want Ranged Legerdemain, that appears to be a completely different ability.

In fact, thinking more about it, I am unconvinced you can bring the item to you using Ranged Legerdemain at all. You could make a Sleight of Hand check to take the item from the target, but once it is taken, I think it is just lying unattended in their square. You can then make a Sleight of Hand check to hide the item, and that use may allow the item to move, but probably not 30 feet.

Additional problems using Mage Hand as the template for Ranged Legerdemain is that currently, the supernatural ability is just augmenting skills. This means if you are attacked while using Ranged Legerdemain for an action that takes multiple rounds, you can continue the action without any trouble. But, if it is instead just the Mage Hand spell (which requires concentration), then you need to make concentration checks. Additionally, you mention the Mage Hand spell is targeted while Ranged Legerdemain is not. Ranged Legerdemain is just an expanded use of two skills (allowing them to be used at 30 feet). I think it is a mistake to treat Ranged Legerdemain as the Mage Hand spell.

Response to questions 2 & 3

Your responses to these questions make a lot of sense! Thank you! I realize, though, that I did not ask the question I really intended. I was questioning specifically the part of Take an Item Unnoticed referenced here:

If you try to take something from a creature, you must make a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check. The opponent makes a Perception check to detect the attempt, opposed by the Sleight of Hand check result you achieved when you tried to grab the item. An opponent who succeeds on this check notices the attempt, regardless of whether you got the item. You cannot use this skill to take an object from another creature during combat if the creature is aware of your presence.

*emphasis mine

Later, you explain that Sleight of Hand cannot be used during combat, but the quote above says that it can so long as the creature is unaware of my presence. Question #3 was related to the situation when you fail against a target in combat. Now, the target is aware that something was taken, but I was not sure if they are "aware of my presence".

When discussing combat awareness and thievery with a friend, my friend said, "Once they are aware a thief is about, they are automatically more on alert, making sleight of hand in combat impossible." This is what led to my thought of using that defensively (question 4), and just calling out "Thief!" to try to make everyone aware of the presence of any possible thieves in combat, protecting us for the duration from any would-be thieves. But, I did word that question rather poorly.

It makes sense that a combat maneuver could be used in combat, even if the target is aware of your presence. But, it does not explain when a target is or is not aware of my presence, especially if a Sleight of Hand check is perceived by the opponent.

Response to questions 4 & 5

These two questions were worded very poorly, and you gave great responses regardless! I appreciate all of the thought you put into them, and what you say makes a lot of sense (with the exception of Sleight of Hand not being usable in combat).

For question 5, I asked the wrong question. I should have asked, "Should Take Item Unnoticed use of Sleight of Hand be only usable outside of combat?" And it appears from your answer, you believe the answer to be yes, and that in combat, only the Steal combat maneuver should be used. I appreciate your input, and that makes a lot of sense. I think I will suggest that to my group.

There are other threads regarding sleight of hand in combat when invisible, so I apologize for adding to the mix, but this is a unique enough circumstance that I figured it bears mentioning.

Ranged Legerdemain is a supernatural ability that allows sleight of hand at a distance. If I am invisible (let's say it is greater invisibility to remove the discussion of whether invisibility breaks when using Sleight of Hand in combat), what happens to the item stolen?

1. Does it simply appear in my possession?
2. It was not invisible when the spell was cast. Does it require a separate action to conceal it within my clothing to make it invisible? Or is it automatically stuffed in a pocket when it is stolen?
3. Suppose the attempt fails (the item is not stolen) and the opponent's perception check notices the attempt. Is the opponent "aware of my presence"? I am 30 feet away using a supernatural ability (so no verbal or somatic components to give away my position). How can I determine if the opponent is "aware of my presence" to determine if I can try again?
4. What if someone randomly shouts out "Thief!" during combat when I have not attempted to steal anything. Does that preclude my using Sleight of Hand at all in combat? Does everyone become "aware" of my presence, even though the one who screamed out was just guessing? (Is this a good party tactic to prevent the DM from ever using invisible arcane tricksters against the party? We just scream that at the start of combat and then we are all aware of any thief that may be about, and sleight of hand is impossible in combat?)
5. Should Ranged Legerdemain only be used outside of combat? The last thing I want to do is slow down combat to try to adjudicate who is aware of my presence, but if I can steal the enemy wizard's headband of vast intellect right off his head in the middle of combat, that seems like it would be a lot of fun!

These are my main questions. I am obviously not playing an arcane trickster for phenomenal cosmic power. I am playing it for some fun, unique experiences that no other character would even contemplate performing.

Fair enough. What about other transmutation effects? Examples:

Brand - If cast before a polymorph effect, does it disappear? What about if cast after a polymorph effect? Is it suppressed for the duration of the polymorph effect?

Countless Eyes - If cast before a polymorph effect, do your extra eyes disappear? What about if cast after a polymorph effect? Can you be an animal covered in extra eyes?

There are lots of transmutation effects that alter a creature's form in some way. From the response above, I understand that size-alterations are basically moot in conjuction with polymorph effects. But, how do other transmutation effects function? Are they still active? Do they disappear? Does order of spells cast matter? Or do polymorph effects only change the base creature, and any magic exists on top of that?

Does this mean the Isitoq has to be within 60 feet of the creator/master in order for them to see through it or that it has a vision range limit of 60 feet?

It means the latter. The master can see up to 60 feet around the Isitoq. So, if the Isitoq is in the center of a room that is 61 feet in radius, the master would not know the room had walls.

Suppose you are under the effects of a transmutation effect that affects your physical form (Enlarge or Reduce Person, girallon's blessing, etc.) when you receive the benefits of a polymorph effect (such as Beast Shape). How does the latter spell interact with the former?

Some relevant rules are:

Combining Magic Effects

Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect.

and

Same Effect with Differing Results

The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant

Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.

Now, if the spells were cast in reverse order, I would not have any confusion. The first quoted text would apply. A standard transmutation effect can augment your physical form, or whatever form you turn into, but a polymorph effect replaces it rather than augments it, and this is where I am confused. Does it replace even your transmuted augmentations with the spell text? Or does it only replace your base form, and any spell-related augmentations occur on top of that?

Example: You cast Enlarge Person on yourself. Then you cast Beast Shape I on yourself to become a Medium-sized animal. Are you size category Medium or Large?

I suspect it is option 1. There is no cleric class feature called "domain". There is only a class feature called "Domains". I would expect the wording to be more specific if it meant to split a single class feature into multiple class features the way you are describing for options 2 or 3.

Unless the Cleric class features were organized such that each domain was listed as a separate feature, they all fall under the heading of a single class feature, "domains" and the text in Dawnflower Anchorite is simply a typo.

It is not clear from the text of the Polymorph subschool nor from the text of specific spells in the Polymorph subschool whether or not type changes.

For example, if I cast Monstrous Physique, does my type change to Monstrous Humanoid? Am I immune to Hold Person? The spell specifies that you can gain subtypes (such as aquatic and amphibious), but those are very specific. Beyond that, it only says you "assume the form" of the creature of a particular type, but it is very unclear whether or not you gain that type.

Benefit of not gaining the type means spells such as Enlarge Person still work. Drawback is that spells such as Hold Person still work. But, it is not clear which way the rules intended.