Fighting in the Dark

[DeriusA]

Hi :)

The last time I played with my group they used a combination of the spell "Greater Darkness" and Darkvision (via race and items) to win a combat encounter. That I was perfectly fine with, in principle. However, we had problems with using the correct rules to solve that combat encounter. Namely, I had troubles to play the enemies

The questions that arose:

Those who cannot see are effectively blinded. So far, so clear. The rules state, that a blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat because all opponents have total concealment (from it). That means that a creature that knows where its enemy stands can attack that enemy with a 50% miss chance. But how do I determine whether a blinded creature (that can still hear the moving and fighting enemies) knows where its enemies are? I know that you can use perception to do that. But how exactly does that work? Do I use the rules concerning invisible creatures to solve that? Does blinded mean the enemy is effectively invisible concerning the blind creature?

Invisibility wrote:

A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something’s there” but can’t see it or target it accurately with an attack. It’s practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature’s location with a Perception check.

If those rules are applicable, then the blinded creature could use Perception (a move action) to try to spot enemies in the dark. Am I right?

But what about attacks of opportunity? If an enemy walks right next to the blinded creature the blinded creature usually would get an AoO? Does it still get it? Can it try to hear where the enemy walks around and then hit it? Or does blinded mean that you are not able to use the enemys movement against it?

Attacks of Opportunity - Threatened Squares wrote:

You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.

According to that, you would still threaten squares, even if you are blinded, right?

I hope you can help me. :)

[Diego Rossi]

Being blinded by darkness works as if all the opponents are invisible.

If you are blinded and have no way to "see" the enemy, it has total concealment and can't make an AoO.

You always know the square of an enemy attacking you in melee unless he has reach.

To pinpoint the square of an invisible opponent you need to make a perception check with a Dc of 40, plus the different modifiers. In combat is a -20.

With "Greater Darkness" do you mean Deeper Darkness?
Deeper Darkness can create supernatural darkness and Darkvision is blocked by supernatural darkness.

[Wonderstell]

To add on to what Diego is saying, here's the rules for total concealment.

Quote:

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.

So you still threaten but won't get any AoO.

[AwesomenessDog]

Wonderstell wrote:

To add on to what Diego is saying, here's the rules for total concealment.

Quote:

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.

So you still threaten but won't get any AoO.

Further clarification, you don't "threaten" if you can't make an AoO from cover or concealment, so you can't flank someone who you can't see. You can still attack into a square you normally threaten but currently don't for the above reasons, but if say someone can see in the dark and thus see the enemy, but you can't, just because you set up a flanking position, doesn't mean your ally can use you to benefit from a flank.

[DeriusA]

Quote:

With "Greater Darkness" do you mean Deeper Darkness?

Yes.

Thank you all for your answers!

[Taja the Barbarian]

DeriusA wrote:

Quote:

With "Greater Darkness" do you mean Deeper Darkness?

Yes.

Thank you all for your answers!

As noted in a previous response:

Deeper Darkness wrote:

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 265

School evocation [darkness]; Level adept 3, antipaladin 3, cleric 3, inquisitor 3, occultist 3, oracle 3, shaman 3, warpriest 3
Casting
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, M/DF (bat fur and a piece of coal)
Effect
Range touch
Target object touched
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw none; Spell Resistance no
Description
This spell functions as darkness, except that objects radiate darkness in a 60-foot radius and the light level is lowered by two steps. Bright light becomes dim light and normal light becomes darkness. Areas of dim light and darkness become supernaturally dark. This functions like darkness, but even creatures with darkvision cannot see within the spell's confines.

This spell does not stack with itself. Deeper darkness can be used to counter or dispel any light spell of equal or lower spell level.

If the original lighting was 'dim light' or 'darkness', your PCs would be just as blind as their foes: The original lighting level needs to be 'normal light' for this tactic to work (which, to be fair, is 'normal')...

[DeriusA]

The original light was indeed normal light. But thank you for your advice anyway. :)

[Wonderstell]

AwesomenessDog wrote:

Further clarification, you don't "threaten" if you can't make an AoO from cover or concealment, so you can't flank someone who you can't see. You can still attack into a square you normally threaten but currently don't for the above reasons, but if say someone can see in the dark and thus see the enemy, but you can't, just because you set up a flanking position, doesn't mean your ally can use you to benefit from a flank.

I don't think that's supported by the rules. Neither the rules for Threatening, Total Concealment, nor Cover makes such as exception.

The ability to make AoOs have no bearing on if you threaten or not. An ally using Total Defense (yes that was clarified) or who is grappling can still flank with you. And an enemy behind soft cover can be flanked by someone with a reach weapon.

It's not an unreasonable houserule but you should clarify that this isn't strictly RAW if you're answering a question in the rules forum.

[Diego Rossi]

Wonderstell wrote:

An ally using Total Defense (yes that was clarified) or who is grappling can still flank with you. And an enemy behind soft cover can be flanked by someone with a reach weapon.

Do you have a link to that clarification? I don't recall ever seeing it.

Wonderstell wrote:

AwesomenessDog wrote:

Further clarification, you don't "threaten" if you can't make an AoO from cover or concealment, so you can't flank someone who you can't see. You can still attack into a square you normally threaten but currently don't for the above reasons, but if say someone can see in the dark and thus see the enemy, but you can't, just because you set up a flanking position, doesn't mean your ally can use you to benefit from a flank.

I don't think that's supported by the rules. Neither the rules for Threatening, Total Concealment, nor Cover makes such as exception.

The ability to make AoOs have no bearing on if you threaten or not. An ally using Total Defense (yes that was clarified) or who is grappling can still flank with you. And an enemy behind soft cover can be flanked by someone with a reach weapon.

It's not an unreasonable houserule but you should clarify that this isn't strictly RAW if you're answering a question in the rules forum.

AoN wrote:

Flanking

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 197
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.

When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers’ centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.

Exception: If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking.

Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.

Creatures with a reach of 0 feet can’t flank an opponent.

Those are the rules on flanking in the CRB, and they say explicitly that you need to threaten to give a flanking bonus.

[willuwontu]

Diego Rossi wrote:

Those are the rules on flanking in the CRB, and they say explicitly that you need to threaten to give a flanking bonus.

Combat Rules wrote:

You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

Correct, and you threaten squares you can melee attack into. The ability to make AoOs is separate from whether or not you're able to flank. Similarly, using up all your AoOs does not prevent you from flanking.

[Diego Rossi]

willuwontu wrote:

Diego Rossi wrote:

Those are the rules on flanking in the CRB, and they say explicitly that you need to threaten to give a flanking bonus.

Combat Rules wrote:

You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

Correct, and you threaten squares you can melee attack into. The ability to make AoOs is separate from whether or not you're able to flank. Similarly, using up all your AoOs does not prevent you from flanking.

I am not sure if we are speaking of the same thing, as I replying to Wonderstell's post:

Wonderstell wrote:

An ally using Total Defense (yes that was clarified) or who is grappling can still flank with you. And an enemy behind soft cover can be flanked by someone with a reach weapon.

CRB wrote:

Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.

AoN wrote:

Total Defense

Source PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 185
You can defend yourself as a standard action. You get a +4 dodge bonus to your AC for 1 round. Your AC improves at the start of this action. You can’t combine total defense with fighting defensively or with the benefit of the Combat Expertise feat. You can’t make attacks of opportunity while using total defense.

If you can't make AoO, how can you threaten a square when it isn't your turn, as the requirement is to be able to make a melee attack in that square? (Barring some special ability that allows you to make melee attacks off turn.)

CRB wrote:

If you’re unarmed, you don’t normally threaten any squares and thus can’t make attacks of opportunity.

If you are unarmed you can make melee attacks, but you provoke, so it isn't simply a matter of having the potential to do an attack if you decide to do so, the requirement is a bit more complex.

As it is one of those things that requires checking a lot of rules and special abilities I am not sure at all that I am right but would like to see this clarification Wonderstell cited.

[willuwontu]

Melee Tactics Toolbox p. 8 wrote:

Using the total defense action prevents you from attacking— including making attacks of opportunity—but you still threaten foes for the purposes of flanking.

[Diego Rossi]

willuwontu wrote:

Melee Tactics Toolbox p. 8 wrote:

Using the total defense action prevents you from attacking— including making attacks of opportunity—but you still threaten foes for the purposes of flanking.

Thanks.

Something that should have been in the CRB. Pathfinder would have greatly benefitted from a 1.5 version.

[Wonderstell]

Diego Rossi wrote:

willuwontu wrote:

Melee Tactics Toolbox p. 8 wrote:

Using the total defense action prevents you from attacking— including making attacks of opportunity—but you still threaten foes for the purposes of flanking.

Thanks.

Something that should have been in the CRB. Pathfinder would have greatly benefitted from a 1.5 version.

It really should have. But I'll bet they just hadn't considered the issue, or if they had, didn't agree on a solution at the time.

===

RAW, you do threaten and can flank an invisible opponent that you're not even aware of. That seems a bit excessive though so I'd limit flanking to foes that you've pinpointed the location of.