Ranged Attacks without line of sight?

[Jeffrey Fox]

Ok, so I was running a PFS game yesterday when a couple goblins with bows got glitterdusted and blinded. The caster moved away from the square he was in. On the goblins turn I was going to have them shoot into the square he left but it was point out to me that blind creatures can't make ranged attacks. So because they couldn't shoot I just shrugged and switched to melee weapons, but the rule had me thinking. Here's the rule.

PRD wrote:

Ranged Attacks: With a ranged weapon, you can shoot or throw at any target that is within the weapon's maximum range and in line of sight. The maximum range for a thrown weapon is five range increments. For projectile weapons, it is 10 range increments. Some ranged weapons have shorter maximum ranges, as specified in their descriptions.

So does this mean that even if an archer has line of effect to someone in a deeper darkness spell he can't shoot him even if he can pin point what square he is in?

Because he wouldn't be able to see the square to target it?

How would these rules interact with something like a 10' high, 5' thick wall with an alchemist on one side and a target on the other. Would he be able to legally lob a splash weapon over the wall?

Obviously I'm looking for help on the RAW implications are as for home games I can always go with what is cinematic and fair.

Thanks.

[Howie23]

Per the text you cited, you must have line of sight to make a ranged attack. Line of sight is broken by concealment. A blind creature fails any activity that relies upon sight. So, yes, a blind creature or one without line if sight automatically fails a ranged attack.

Regarding the lobbed splash weapon: PF does not have an indirect fire option. By RAW, you must have line of sight to your target. With a splash weapon, the weapon could target a square to which it has line of sight, and the splash may hit a target to which the splash has line of effect from that location.

Note: the line of sight rules in PF are not spelled out well.

[HaraldKlak]

If we use these rules, we get a different conclusion:

Total Concealment wrote:

If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can't attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.

Nothing in the total concealment section differantiates between melee and ranged.

[Howie23]

Both rules apply. As you've cited, you can attack a square. As the ranged attack rule stes, you need line of site. Ranged attacks have an additional requirement than melee attacks. This additional requirement doesn't go away.

[shadowmage75]

being blind does not cripple your ability to draw a string back and unleash an arrow. How effective you are relies on many other impinging components.

you know where the quiver is. you know where your weapon is. you just don't know what you're aiming at anymore.

[Nefreet]

Interesting. I always went with the choice to target a square (like if your target was hiding in an obscuring mist). I guess if you don't have line of sight to said square, you can't target it either?

[Rerednaw]

So this rule means a seeking enchantment invalid? You ignore the miss chance but the enchantment does not allow you to make attacks against foes you cannot see or does it?

[Chris Mortika]

Rerendnaw, that seems to be an accurate ruling.

I expect the rules for ranged weapons will be revised.

[Howie23]

"Seeking: Only ranged weapons can have the seeking ability. The 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."

If you have line of sight to the square, you can attack the square. If line of sight is lost (multiple squares of obscuring mist, for example), you're out of luck. If the target is concealed, but you have line of sight to the square, seeking voids the miss chance.

Note: I still see a disconnect in the rules re: line of sight to target, but I think the intent with respect to squares to which there is line of sight is clear, even if the (hoped for) target of the attack is concealed.

[Karal mithrilaxe]

hmm a zen archer can shoot a mob he cant even see--to include shooting around corners

Trick Shot (Su): At 11th level, a zen archer may hit targets that he might otherwise miss. By spending 1 point from his ki pool as a swift action, the zen archer can ignore concealment. By spending 2 points, he can ignore total concealment or cover. By spending 3 points, he can ignore total cover, even firing arrows around corners. The arrow must still be able to reach the target; a target inside a closed building with no open doors or windows cannot be attacked. These effects last for 1 round. This ability replaces diamond body.

[Karal mithrilaxe]

so I would imagine seeking arrows do the same. you paid for the magic after all. so you would not need to see the enemy. that is the definition of total concealment