Blink-No more denying dex?


Combat & Magic


After reading Alpha 3, I noted that Blink now omits the descriptor that the target of a blinking attacker is denied their Dex bonus to AC. Was this purposeful?


cathat89 wrote:
After reading Alpha 3, I noted that Blink now omits the descriptor that the target of a blinking attacker is denied their Dex bonus to AC. Was this purposeful?

I'm pretty sure it was. Welcome to Nerf Country, where we don't need any blinkin' rogues. ;-)

Sovereign Court

and i love it

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Genuinely not sure, could a rogue sneak attack while blinking before? When they are blinking they have a miss chance on their own attacks as well, correct? Doesn't that kill any sneak attack chance?

This rule doesn't seem like a huge deal to me, when you are blinking you aren't truly invisible, they know where you are so they can be on guard for you. You just are much harder to hit because while they might no where you are, you might not be solid(or visable) in that specific instant they swing their weapon at you.

-Tarlane


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Subscriber
Tarlane wrote:

Genuinely not sure, could a rogue sneak attack while blinking before? When they are blinking they have a miss chance on their own attacks as well, correct? Doesn't that kill any sneak attack chance?

This rule doesn't seem like a huge deal to me, when you are blinking you aren't truly invisible, they know where you are so they can be on guard for you. You just are much harder to hit because while they might no where you are, you might not be solid(or visable) in that specific instant they swing their weapon at you.

-Tarlane

Well, the original 3.5 spell stated explicitly that you strike as an invisible creature denying your opponent his Dex. Under the rules for sneak attack the 3.5 rules stated you couldn't sneak attack a creature with concealment, but the blink spell doesn't provide concealment.

So, by 3.5 rules you can sneak attack using Blink.
By Pathfinder rules you cannot.


I don't understand how you can attack with an invisible creature's bonuses, and be targeted as an invisible ethereal creature, but not be treated as invisible. It's a split between the purpose of the spell (as per description) and the rules of it.

If this is the case, how can an Arcane Trickster deliver ranged sneak attacks (if they are a 3rd level caster or below-I understand that Greater Invisibility is the cure-all here)?


cathat89 wrote:


If this is the case, how can an Arcane Trickster deliver ranged sneak attacks (if they are a 3rd level caster or below-I understand that Greater Invisibility is the cure-all here)?

Glitterdust? Blindness? Invisibility? Just plain old hiding?


hogarth wrote:
cathat89 wrote:


If this is the case, how can an Arcane Trickster deliver ranged sneak attacks (if they are a 3rd level caster or below-I understand that Greater Invisibility is the cure-all here)?
Glitterdust? Blindness? Invisibility? Just plain old hiding?

All good options-what holds up more than 1 round? Most creatures I use Glitterdust on can make the Will save. Is there an effective sniping rule that would allow me to attack and hide again?

Scarab Sages

hogarth wrote:
All good options-what holds up more than 1 round? Most creatures I use Glitterdust on can make the Will save. Is there an effective sniping rule that would allow me to attack and hide again?

I think that's kind of the point. A rogue with a wand of blink who uses it constantly to sneak attack any and everything every single combat breaks the game. I speak from experience. I love this rules change. Shuts a loophole I've seen destroy the fun of an entire party.


Speaking from the other side, I'm at a loss of how to be a ray specialist and actually get the sneak attack damage for the rays. I can see the abuse from a Wand of Blink, and I can definitely see the issue being huge at higher levels, but it comes up again at 4th level with Greater Invisibility.

I'm honestly content if I simply have some semi-reliable way to deny an opponent their Dex. It doesn't have to be foolproof-Blink offers a % chance of missing, and other spells offer Will saves. I just want to actually run the character.


Actually, WotC's Rules Compendium clarified something (don't have the book at my side to cite the page number, but it's there) for any sort of precision damage (this includes sneak attack, a scout's skirmish, a duelist's precise strike, etc: That it can only apply if the conditions for delivering the strike are *optimal*, and any attack that has a miss chance or a penalty to the attack roll disqualifies the damage.

So, if blinking yields a miss chance for both the attacker and defender, then sneak attack damage does not apply, because the attack is not "optimal". Likewise with conditions like Darkness, where both combatants have miss chances, or using Combat Expertise, which gives the rogue a penalty to his attack roll, etc.

So the wand of blink would be junk for a rogue, if you bring the rulings up to the Rules Compendium clarifications.


Aha! So that's what they changed! I must have read through blink a dozen times before giving up and thinking they must have made some minor change that doesn't matter. This change does matter, although I'm not sure it is for the good or not. Blink was admittedly far better for rogues than any other character, but I'm not sure it was overpowered. As written now though, I imagine it will be used even more infrequently than before however. Why let the rogue sneak attack stuff when you can just fireball the enemies or haste EVERYONE?

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

airwalkrr wrote:
Aha! So that's what they changed! I must have read through blink a dozen times before giving up and thinking they must have made some minor change that doesn't matter. This change does matter, although I'm not sure it is for the good or not. Blink was admittedly far better for rogues than any other character, but I'm not sure it was overpowered. As written now though, I imagine it will be used even more infrequently than before however. Why let the rogue sneak attack stuff when you can just fireball the enemies or haste EVERYONE?

Keep in mind blink is a personal spell, so the wizard wasn't going to be casting it on the rogue unless the wizard was the rogue.


Russ Taylor wrote:
Keep in mind blink is a personal spell, so the wizard wasn't going to be casting it on the rogue unless the wizard was the rogue.

There's a Ring of Blinking, of course.


airwalkrr wrote:
Aha! So that's what they changed! I must have read through blink a dozen times before giving up and thinking they must have made some minor change that doesn't matter. This change does matter, although I'm not sure it is for the good or not. Blink was admittedly far better for rogues than any other character, but I'm not sure it was overpowered. As written now though, I imagine it will be used even more infrequently than before however. Why let the rogue sneak attack stuff when you can just fireball the enemies or haste EVERYONE?

no, it wasn't overpowered. Pathfinder rpg magic is very sad.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 3 / Combat & Magic / Blink-No more denying dex? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Combat & Magic