I think I remember reading something in a previous edition of AD&D that said a Deafened creature would deal with some difficulty casting spells correctly. I don't think that rule has carried over to 5E in any way. I assume this is one of the many methods of making life easier on spellcasters in 5E, but shouldn't there be at least some mechanical penalty to losing your hearing other than failing ability checks re: hearing? RAW, there isn't even any mandatory penalty to Perception checks.
Have you seen any homebrew rules regarding the Silence spell, or Deafness spell that have more profound or serious affects to the target?
If it is a good ham sandwich, the silence of thunder, so I guess nothing. If it was a bad ham sandwich, probably makes the thunder louder, followed by sporadic sounds of waterfall.
No, deafened just makes you auto fail perception checks that requires hearing.
I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with boosting casters and mostly to do with streamlining the game. I'm not sure if it really makes I difference - I don't think I've been deafened at all so far in any of my games.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Are there any creatures where Deafened (and Silence) also creates Blindness against Blindsight?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Are there any creatures where Deafened (and Silence) also creates Blindness against Blindsight?
As far as I'm aware, Swarms of Bats, Grimlocks, Hook Horrors, and Dolphins all use Echolocation, thus cannot utilize blindsight when they are deafened.
No, deafened just makes you auto fail perception checks that requires hearing.
I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with boosting casters and mostly to do with streamlining the game. I'm not sure if it really makes I difference - I don't think I've been deafened at all so far in any of my games.
The implication of my post is that Deafness should make more of a difference. I have never heard of anyone using the Blindness/Deafness spell for anything other than Blindness, which feels sort of odd, as though of two individuals who happen to be fraternal twins, only one of them is ever spoken of, if you know what I mean.
I suppose part of the problem is that most tables do not use any facing rules, so it's assumed that most creatures have 360 degree visual Perception most of the time, which sort of decreases the value of hearing.
Under 3rd Edition rules, a Deafened character had an (IIRC) 20% chance of spell failure while trying to cast spells with verbal components. They also had a -4 penalty on initiative rolls. Fifth Edition's version of Deafened barely does anything by comparison.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I think I remember reading something in a previous edition of AD&D that said a Deafened creature would deal with some difficulty casting spells correctly. I don't think that rule has carried over to 5E in any way. I assume this is one of the many methods of making life easier on spellcasters in 5E, but shouldn't there be at least some mechanical penalty to losing your hearing other than failing ability checks re: hearing? RAW, there isn't even any mandatory penalty to Perception checks.
Have you seen any homebrew rules regarding the Silence spell, or Deafness spell that have more profound or serious affects to the target?
2e had a -1 to hearing checks, surprise, maybe initiative?, and 20% mishap on casting spells.
Okay, so how is Blindsight (the Fighting Style) supposed to work if someone is in a Silence spell field or is made Deaf?
Also, shouldn't invisible creatures be virtually undetectable to a person who can neither see or hear them (barring snowy terrain or flour shenanigans, ofc)?
It seem to me that the lack of rules to cover being Deafened in 5E (other than a very short paragraph in the PHB) feels like a rules omission with consequences that the devs didn't bother to think about.
Okay, so how is Blindsight (the Fighting Style) supposed to work if someone is in a Silence spell field or is made Deaf?
It might not be a satisfactory answer, but blindsight just works. The blindsighter can perceive anything that is not behind total cover. How anyone choose to explain that perception is up to them. If you want to explain it as feeling vibrations through the air, that is okay. If you want to explain it as Spider-Man's precognition Spidey-senses, that is okay too.
Also, shouldn't invisible creatures be virtually undetectable to a person who can neither see or hear them (barring snowy terrain or flour shenanigans, ofc)?
I do not think most creatures can be completely silent. Breathing and walking make noise if you are close enough to the nose and floor. There is also disturbance in the air and vibrations through the floor. Maybe a normal human might not perceive them cause our senses suck, but an elf might be able to, and a small spider on the floor certainly can feel the vibration through the floor as we giant humans walk around.
It seem to me that the lack of rules to cover being Deafened in 5E (other than a very short paragraph in the PHB) feels like a rules omission with consequences that the devs didn't bother to think about.
I do not think the devs intend to go into that much detail. The GM is there for adjudication and filling in the blank as necessary with something that is appropriate.
Okay, so how is Blindsight (the Fighting Style) supposed to work if someone is in a Silence spell field or is made Deaf?
It might not be a satisfactory answer, but blindsight just works. The blindsighter can perceive anything that is not behind total cover. How anyone choose to explain that perception is up to them. If you want to explain it as feeling vibrations through the air, that is okay. If you want to explain it as Spider-Man's precognition Spidey-senses, that is okay too.
Since it's only a 10 foot range, it could be explained as sensitivity to changes in air currents. Or it could be magical, since there are other fighting styles that give you explicitly magical abilities (Divine Warrior and Nature Warrior).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Okay, so how is Blindsight (the Fighting Style) supposed to work if someone is in a Silence spell field or is made Deaf?
It might not be a satisfactory answer, but blindsight just works. The blindsighter can perceive anything that is not behind total cover. How anyone choose to explain that perception is up to them. If you want to explain it as feeling vibrations through the air, that is okay. If you want to explain it as Spider-Man's precognition Spidey-senses, that is okay too.
Also, shouldn't invisible creatures be virtually undetectable to a person who can neither see or hear them (barring snowy terrain or flour shenanigans, ofc)?
I do not think most creatures can be completely silent. Breathing and walking make noise if you are close enough to the nose and floor. There is also disturbance in the air and vibrations through the floor. Maybe a normal human might not perceive them cause our senses suck, but an elf might be able to, and a small spider on the floor certainly can feel the vibration through the floor as we giant humans walk around.
[SNIPPED]
Re: Invisible creatures. Breathing and walking make noise, but a person who is completely deaf or in a zone of the Silence spell would not be able to hear anything whatsoever, which is the topic of this thread.
Mechanics and Lore are inter-related. If lore has no attachment to mechanics, you get a game where players don't know how to solve problems on their own or you get a game that is effectively a chess game with dice, like Warhammer. That is not an RPG. "Spideysense" a) does not exist in D&D, and b) doesn't actually help Spider-Man see opponents. It's a way for to help him dodge out of the way of imminent danger, not what he uses to swing from building to building or to decide where to aim his punches and kicks.
Daredevil has something like super Blindsight, but he uses a hearing A LOT. Yes, he feels some vibrations as well, but a lot of his movement and attack precision is also related to his hearing. As such Blindfight should not fully function if a creature has been Deafened.
Also, shouldn't invisible creatures be virtually undetectable to a person who can neither see or hear them (barring snowy terrain or flour shenanigans, ofc)?
I do not think most creatures can be completely silent. Breathing and walking make noise if you are close enough to the nose and floor. There is also disturbance in the air and vibrations through the floor. Maybe a normal human might not perceive them cause our senses suck, but an elf might be able to, and a small spider on the floor certainly can feel the vibration through the floor as we giant humans walk around.
[SNIPPED]
Re: Invisible creatures. Breathing and walking make noise, but a person who is completely deaf or in a zone of the Silence spell would not be able to hear anything whatsoever, which is the topic of this thread.
Mechanics and Lore are inter-related. If lore has no attachment to mechanics, you get a game where players don't know how to solve problems on their own or you get a game that is effectively a chess game with dice, like Warhammer. That is not an RPG. "Spideysense" a) does not exist in D&D, and b) doesn't actually help Spider-Man see opponents. It's a way for to help him dodge out of the way of imminent danger, not what he uses to swing from building to building or to decide where to aim his punches and kicks.
Actually, it is. Spider-Man has long been noted as having had no formal martial arts training, instead relying on his spider-sense to tell him where and how to hit enemies (explaining how he could use super strength against normal human foes without breaking bones or punch a fist-shaped hole in someone's torso) and aim his webs while swinging so he doesn't attach them to something that wouldn't be able to support his weight. When he lost his spider-sense but not his other powers in one story arc, he was so off his game that he could barely land a punch successfully until Iron Fist taught him martial art techniques that were specially designed for someone with Spider-Man's powers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Re: Invisible creatures. Breathing and walking make noise, but a person who is completely deaf or in a zone of the Silence spell would not be able to hear anything whatsoever, which is the topic of this thread.
The invisible creature in a zone of silence is imperceptable via regular sight and sound in that case. And a normal person cannot hear anything in the silence zone. I do not think the deafness as a condition need anything more than failing hearing checks. If you want sound to be more important, you can make it affect perception checks more specifically, but I think the rules as-is is fine.
Mechanics and Lore are inter-related. If lore has no attachment to mechanics, you get a game where players don't know how to solve problems on their own or you get a game that is effectively a chess game with dice, like Warhammer. That is not an RPG. "Spideysense" a) does not exist in D&D, and b) doesn't actually help Spider-Man see opponents. It's a way for to help him dodge out of the way of imminent danger, not what he uses to swing from building to building or to decide where to aim his punches and kicks.
Daredevil has something like super Blindsight, but he uses a hearing A LOT. Yes, he feels some vibrations as well, but a lot of his movement and attack precision is also related to his hearing. As such Blindfight should not fully function if a creature has been Deafened.
Mechanics and lore are definitely inter-related, but I do not think the lore part needs to go into that level of detail either. The mechanics should be tight and concise, but I prefer the lore to be a little loose and vague to make it easier for players to roleplay how they want to roleplay. In instances where mechanics and lore clash, that is where the GM comes in to help adjucate.
Plenty of people play Warhammer like an RPG too. A lot of people like to play Warhammer competitively or semi-competitively like chess, but there are also a lot of people who like narrative play. There is no one way to enjoy Warhammer. Hell, some people just paint and kitbash minis, but not play at all.
And back to D&D, some people play D&D more like chess and that is okay. My group plays D&D more like chess/board game. There is roleplay too, but to me, it feels like I enjoy the roleplay more, while the rest of the group seems to like the battles more, and that is okay. I still get my roleplay fix making funny noises and acting out all the different NPCs, and my group get that teamwork and beating up bad guy fix.
RE: Blindsight - a creature's statblock tells you if its blindsight is based on a particular sense, e.g. the Bat Echolocation ability. If such a line isn't present, the blindsight can't be turned off by turning off a particular sense.
No, deafened just makes you auto fail perception checks that requires hearing.
I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with boosting casters and mostly to do with streamlining the game. I'm not sure if it really makes I difference - I don't think I've been deafened at all so far in any of my games.
It's also arguably ableist; the assumption behind the spell failure in prior editions seems to have been a belief that non-hearing people aren't capable of speaking clearly or articulately.
RE: Blindsight - a creature's statblock tells you if its blindsight is based on a particular sense, e.g. the Bat Echolocation ability. If such a line isn't present, the blindsight can't be turned off by turning off a particular sense.
No, deafened just makes you auto fail perception checks that requires hearing.
I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with boosting casters and mostly to do with streamlining the game. I'm not sure if it really makes I difference - I don't think I've been deafened at all so far in any of my games.
It's also arguably ableist; the assumption behind the spell failure in prior editions seems to have been a belief that non-hearing people aren't capable of speaking clearly or articulately.
TBF, if someone has suddenly been rendered deaf- which would be the usual circumstance where this rule would come into play, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that they wouldn't have perfect control of their pitch and tone immediately afterwards, and in at least some of the material that kind of precision is part of what makes a V component work. In general I don't think D&D has supported taking mechanical flaws at character creation in exchange for boosts elsewhere, so in terms of the assumptions they're making for the game you're not going to have characters with deafness as a pre-existing condition. Now I've never really enjoyed the idea of spell failure in this sense, so I'm not saying this was a good rule for gameplay overall, but I feel like calling it ableist in the context of how one would expect it to come into play is a bit slanted.
I agree that the suddenness of onset for the condition could reasonably play a role, but I can also understand if WotC would rather just not bother trying to justify that in the fiction and devote text to distinguishing between people who've been deaf all their lives vs deaf for a shorter time vs deaf suddenly as the result of a debuff. Just seems like a path that it's easier not to embark on in the first place by attaching loss of spellcasting capability to that condition.
I agree that the suddenness of onset for the condition could reasonably play a role, but I can also understand if WotC would rather just not bother trying to justify that in the fiction and devote text to distinguishing between people who've been deaf all their lives vs deaf for a shorter time vs deaf suddenly as the result of a debuff. Just seems like a path that it's easier not to embark on in the first place by attaching loss of spellcasting capability to that condition.
I don't recall any NPCs who were listed as naturally deaf in 3.0 or 3.5 Editions, but there were some monsters that were and they were noted in their statblocks as not suffering from the spell failure chance or initiative penalties for the condition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I agree that the suddenness of onset for the condition could reasonably play a role, but I can also understand if WotC would rather just not bother trying to justify that in the fiction and devote text to distinguishing between people who've been deaf all their lives vs deaf for a shorter time vs deaf suddenly as the result of a debuff. Just seems like a path that it's easier not to embark on in the first place by attaching loss of spellcasting capability to that condition.
Yes, definitely something that can just as easily be skipped over to avoid it all.
I agree that the suddenness of onset for the condition could reasonably play a role, but I can also understand if WotC would rather just not bother trying to justify that in the fiction and devote text to distinguishing between people who've been deaf all their lives vs deaf for a shorter time vs deaf suddenly as the result of a debuff. Just seems like a path that it's easier not to embark on in the first place by attaching loss of spellcasting capability to that condition.
Okay, but WotC does actually have "Blinded" as a condition, which inflicts very significant debuffs as a result. So why is it that "Deafened" has next to no impact on combat whatsoever? Also note that "blinded" and "deafened" are adjectives that imply a change of condition. This is not a character or creature that was born blind or deaf. I get that modern society tends to rely ever so much on sight, but the idea that suddenly not hearing anything does not impose any problems while trying to respond to a literal life-and-death situation baffles me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think I remember reading something in a previous edition of AD&D that said a Deafened creature would deal with some difficulty casting spells correctly. I don't think that rule has carried over to 5E in any way. I assume this is one of the many methods of making life easier on spellcasters in 5E, but shouldn't there be at least some mechanical penalty to losing your hearing other than failing ability checks re: hearing? RAW, there isn't even any mandatory penalty to Perception checks.
Have you seen any homebrew rules regarding the Silence spell, or Deafness spell that have more profound or serious affects to the target?
If it is a good ham sandwich, the silence of thunder, so I guess nothing. If it was a bad ham sandwich, probably makes the thunder louder, followed by sporadic sounds of waterfall.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
No, deafened just makes you auto fail perception checks that requires hearing.
I'm pretty sure that it has nothing to do with boosting casters and mostly to do with streamlining the game. I'm not sure if it really makes I difference - I don't think I've been deafened at all so far in any of my games.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Are there any creatures where Deafened (and Silence) also creates Blindness against Blindsight?
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
As far as I'm aware, Swarms of Bats, Grimlocks, Hook Horrors, and Dolphins all use Echolocation, thus cannot utilize blindsight when they are deafened.
The implication of my post is that Deafness should make more of a difference. I have never heard of anyone using the Blindness/Deafness spell for anything other than Blindness, which feels sort of odd, as though of two individuals who happen to be fraternal twins, only one of them is ever spoken of, if you know what I mean.
I suppose part of the problem is that most tables do not use any facing rules, so it's assumed that most creatures have 360 degree visual Perception most of the time, which sort of decreases the value of hearing.
Under 3rd Edition rules, a Deafened character had an (IIRC) 20% chance of spell failure while trying to cast spells with verbal components. They also had a -4 penalty on initiative rolls. Fifth Edition's version of Deafened barely does anything by comparison.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
2e had a -1 to hearing checks, surprise, maybe initiative?, and 20% mishap on casting spells.
Okay, so how is Blindsight (the Fighting Style) supposed to work if someone is in a Silence spell field or is made Deaf?
Also, shouldn't invisible creatures be virtually undetectable to a person who can neither see or hear them (barring snowy terrain or flour shenanigans, ofc)?
It seem to me that the lack of rules to cover being Deafened in 5E (other than a very short paragraph in the PHB) feels like a rules omission with consequences that the devs didn't bother to think about.
It might not be a satisfactory answer, but blindsight just works. The blindsighter can perceive anything that is not behind total cover. How anyone choose to explain that perception is up to them. If you want to explain it as feeling vibrations through the air, that is okay. If you want to explain it as Spider-Man's precognition Spidey-senses, that is okay too.
I do not think most creatures can be completely silent. Breathing and walking make noise if you are close enough to the nose and floor. There is also disturbance in the air and vibrations through the floor. Maybe a normal human might not perceive them cause our senses suck, but an elf might be able to, and a small spider on the floor certainly can feel the vibration through the floor as we giant humans walk around.
I do not think the devs intend to go into that much detail. The GM is there for adjudication and filling in the blank as necessary with something that is appropriate.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Since it's only a 10 foot range, it could be explained as sensitivity to changes in air currents. Or it could be magical, since there are other fighting styles that give you explicitly magical abilities (Divine Warrior and Nature Warrior).
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Re: Invisible creatures. Breathing and walking make noise, but a person who is completely deaf or in a zone of the Silence spell would not be able to hear anything whatsoever, which is the topic of this thread.
Mechanics and Lore are inter-related. If lore has no attachment to mechanics, you get a game where players don't know how to solve problems on their own or you get a game that is effectively a chess game with dice, like Warhammer. That is not an RPG. "Spideysense" a) does not exist in D&D, and b) doesn't actually help Spider-Man see opponents. It's a way for to help him dodge out of the way of imminent danger, not what he uses to swing from building to building or to decide where to aim his punches and kicks.
Daredevil has something like super Blindsight, but he uses a hearing A LOT. Yes, he feels some vibrations as well, but a lot of his movement and attack precision is also related to his hearing. As such Blindfight should not fully function if a creature has been Deafened.
Actually, it is. Spider-Man has long been noted as having had no formal martial arts training, instead relying on his spider-sense to tell him where and how to hit enemies (explaining how he could use super strength against normal human foes without breaking bones or punch a fist-shaped hole in someone's torso) and aim his webs while swinging so he doesn't attach them to something that wouldn't be able to support his weight. When he lost his spider-sense but not his other powers in one story arc, he was so off his game that he could barely land a punch successfully until Iron Fist taught him martial art techniques that were specially designed for someone with Spider-Man's powers.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The invisible creature in a zone of silence is imperceptable via regular sight and sound in that case. And a normal person cannot hear anything in the silence zone. I do not think the deafness as a condition need anything more than failing hearing checks. If you want sound to be more important, you can make it affect perception checks more specifically, but I think the rules as-is is fine.
Mechanics and lore are definitely inter-related, but I do not think the lore part needs to go into that level of detail either. The mechanics should be tight and concise, but I prefer the lore to be a little loose and vague to make it easier for players to roleplay how they want to roleplay. In instances where mechanics and lore clash, that is where the GM comes in to help adjucate.
Plenty of people play Warhammer like an RPG too. A lot of people like to play Warhammer competitively or semi-competitively like chess, but there are also a lot of people who like narrative play. There is no one way to enjoy Warhammer. Hell, some people just paint and kitbash minis, but not play at all.
And back to D&D, some people play D&D more like chess and that is okay. My group plays D&D more like chess/board game. There is roleplay too, but to me, it feels like I enjoy the roleplay more, while the rest of the group seems to like the battles more, and that is okay. I still get my roleplay fix making funny noises and acting out all the different NPCs, and my group get that teamwork and beating up bad guy fix.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
It's also arguably ableist; the assumption behind the spell failure in prior editions seems to have been a belief that non-hearing people aren't capable of speaking clearly or articulately.
TBF, if someone has suddenly been rendered deaf- which would be the usual circumstance where this rule would come into play, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that they wouldn't have perfect control of their pitch and tone immediately afterwards, and in at least some of the material that kind of precision is part of what makes a V component work. In general I don't think D&D has supported taking mechanical flaws at character creation in exchange for boosts elsewhere, so in terms of the assumptions they're making for the game you're not going to have characters with deafness as a pre-existing condition. Now I've never really enjoyed the idea of spell failure in this sense, so I'm not saying this was a good rule for gameplay overall, but I feel like calling it ableist in the context of how one would expect it to come into play is a bit slanted.
I agree that the suddenness of onset for the condition could reasonably play a role, but I can also understand if WotC would rather just not bother trying to justify that in the fiction and devote text to distinguishing between people who've been deaf all their lives vs deaf for a shorter time vs deaf suddenly as the result of a debuff. Just seems like a path that it's easier not to embark on in the first place by attaching loss of spellcasting capability to that condition.
I don't recall any NPCs who were listed as naturally deaf in 3.0 or 3.5 Editions, but there were some monsters that were and they were noted in their statblocks as not suffering from the spell failure chance or initiative penalties for the condition.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Yes, definitely something that can just as easily be skipped over to avoid it all.
Okay, but WotC does actually have "Blinded" as a condition, which inflicts very significant debuffs as a result. So why is it that "Deafened" has next to no impact on combat whatsoever? Also note that "blinded" and "deafened" are adjectives that imply a change of condition. This is not a character or creature that was born blind or deaf. I get that modern society tends to rely ever so much on sight, but the idea that suddenly not hearing anything does not impose any problems while trying to respond to a literal life-and-death situation baffles me.