Yes the accuracy is there, but the target has to be within range and on the ground, or at least on the same surface as you.
Tremorsense. A creature with tremorsense can detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the creature and the source of the vibrations are in contact with the same ground or substance. Tremorsense can’t be used to detect flying or incorporeal creatures. Many burrowing creatures, such as ankhegs, have this special sense.
Alternate senses cover the "that you can see" aspect, but it is worth noting that, unless the effect specifies otherwise, you cannot project a spell through total cover, such as using tremorsense to "see" someone on the other side of a wall and then using Fireball on them.
Alternate senses cover the "that you can see" aspect, but it is worth noting that, unless the effect specifies otherwise, you cannot project a spell through total cover, such as using tremorsense to "see" someone on the other side of a wall and then using Fireball on them.
I agree with what I think you're saying. To be more precise, you can't target through total cover even though tremorsense provides "line of sight" to the target. You also need a clear path. Fireball is kind of a bad example, since it doesn't need to target the creature and can often be used to hit someone hiding behind a wall. Misty step should also work fine to reach any square visible to tremorsense - whether it's behind cover or no. You couldn't magic missile or charm a target behind total cover, though, even though they're visible to you with tremorsense.
Tremorsense is tricky because it doesn't actually say that you can see or perceive creatures through the ground, only that you "detect the origin" of the tremors. So in an area of total darkness I'd say that while you know where a creature is, you still can't see it (so would have disadvantage on attacks etc.); the benefit of the sense is knowing the location, so you can ensure you are in range (won't fail automatically).
I believe this is why creatures like the purple worm have both blindsight and tremsorsense; it can use tremorsense to find your location, then blindsight to actually "see" you to attack.
The problem is that vision in general is not something handled terribly well in the 5e rules, and lacks good examples of how to run a game with limited or zero visibility for some characters.
You could for example run the zero visibility area using only markers for a creature's last known location, but when some creatures can "see" the location it gets more complicated. My preference for these cases is to mark the actual location of the creature, and have the limited players declare their action(s) in advance, then use Perception checks (with disadvantage) to see if they guess the correct location, otherwise they go to a location of my choosing and their action(s) may fail (out of range). Usually the location of my choosing is based on the roll; the closer they were to succeeding, the fewer squares away from the target they end up.
Is that the correct way to run it? I have no idea; it seems reasonable to me as checks are there for anything that can fail, and finding a target you can't see absolutely qualifies but pre-declaring actions and having them fail (and move) on a failed check is pretty much homebrew because we're never really told what to do.
Anyway, bit of a tangent there, but my point is that the "can't see, can't reach" case is where tremorsense shows its benefit because even though you still can't see, you can guarantee the target is within your reach so you at least have a chance at hitting when you roll the attacks.
The case of spells is a bit trickier; personally I prefer to allow characters to try to do things when they can't see, but I'd do it in a similar way, i.e- if you don't guess right the spell can go either fail or go awry, so there's still a chance but not a good one. However that's definitely not RAW; RAW if a spell says you must see (or uses the default targeting rules) then you must see, and tremorsense doesn't let you see, but blindsight would.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
As others have stated, with the line of effect caveats, tremorsense should a targeting sense. However, as this thread has been necroed I’d like to as a further question. Tremorsense detects the vibration in a surface caused by motion on that surface. This fine in our typical essentially 2D surface world but what about in the 3D world of the water (or possibly air)? Fish use their later line sense organ(s) to detect tremors in the water giving them a fairly 3D view of the area around them so they can detect prey/predators even in murky/pitch black waters. Flys detect the pressure waves of your hand/shatter before they hit allowing them to escape the swat. Why does tremorsense cover these sorts of uses as well as the 2D “feel it thru your feet”?
As others have stated, with the line of effect caveats, tremorsense should a targeting sense.
I don't believe that's the case though; darkvision and truesight specifically mention seeing within their radius, while blindsight mentions perceiving (a bit of an unhelpful word to use, but in the context of not "relying on sight" it seems clear the intent is that it can simply "see" within the radius). Features that grant blindsight, such as the Blind Fighting fighting style are fortunately a lot more explicit.
Tremorsense doesn't use these terms though, it just mentions detecting "the origin" of vibrations, which makes no indication that it can "see" a creature, only know that it knows that something is (or was) at a location. We're given no reason to assume that it enables a creature to be "seen" beyond knowing its location (or previous location, if it moved beyond the radius, left contact with the surface/substance etc.).
The OneD&D playtest updates to the rule seem to confirm this as the intention, as the updated rule now states in no uncertain terms that "tremorsense doesn’t count as a form of sight", but I would argue this is only clarifying how it works in 5e, the 5e version of the rule is just unnecessarily vague.
Tremorsense detects the vibration in a surface caused by motion on that surface. This fine in our typical essentially 2D surface world but what about in the 3D world of the water (or possibly air)?
Tremorsense does work in water, because it works so long as a creature is "in contact with the same ground or substance", and liquids are a substance. Ordinarily this might even extend to air except that the rule explicitly states that it "can’t be used to detect flying or incorporeal creatures".
Technically this would mean that if you use the alternative falling rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything you could be detected through air while falling, but the moment you start flying you'd be undetectable again? Probably not an intended interaction though (as the default falling rules don't leave you in the air at the end of a turn).
Again this is something the UA has cleared up considerably, as it specifically refers only to the same surface or liquid; so gasses are fully excluded. If you wanted an air pressure sensing creature it would need an additional rule.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
As others have stated, with the line of effect caveats, tremorsense should a targeting sense. However, as this thread has been necroed I’d like to as a further question. Tremorsense detects the vibration in a surface caused by motion on that surface. This fine in our typical essentially 2D surface world but what about in the 3D world of the water (or possibly air)? Fish use their later line sense organ(s) to detect tremors in the water giving them a fairly 3D view of the area around them so they can detect prey/predators even in murky/pitch black waters. Flys detect the pressure waves of your hand/shatter before they hit allowing them to escape the swat. Why does tremorsense cover these sorts of uses as well as the 2D “feel it thru your feet”?
I wasn't going to jump in on a necro thread but here you go asking a legit question ... :)
So tremorsense should work in water. It says in contact with the same ground or substance. The only exclusion is from air as it can't detect flying creatures. Typically it's monsters that have this ability and it usually fits their enviornment. It gets a bit more tricky when players have it. Normally I wouldn't consider it defeating invisibilty because, while you know where the creature is, you can't see what it's doing. Now in water/liquid, I'd say it would work more like blindsight because every movement is in contact with the same substance (much like echo location). There's no set rule on this though so it's all up to the DM to figure out what works.
Normally I wouldn't consider it defeating invisibilty because, while you know where the creature is, you can't see what it's doing.
It wouldn't defeat being invisible anyway, because the invisible condition itself imposes disadvantage regardless of whether you can see it or not; it's the (IMO) dumbest interaction in the whole mess that is the visibility rules, because it means that RAW even a creature with truesight still has disadvantage to hit a creature that it can fully 100% see in front of it.
They never should have duplicated the disadvantage to hit in the condition when it's already covered by the Unseen Attackers and Targets rules; it arguably doesn't really need to be a condition at all, or at most the condition should be "you cannot be visually seen". This is one they still haven't really fixed in the OneD&D playtest UA; it's still got three bullet points, and while they've clarified it to work as people expect (sort of) it could still be a lot simpler.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Tremorsense. A creature with tremorsense can detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the creature and the source of the vibrations are in contact with the same ground or substance. Tremorsense can’t be used to detect flying or incorporeal creatures. Many burrowing creatures, such as ankhegs, have this special sense.
You could certainly target the soles of their feet.
You could certainly target the soles of their feet.
Sure, with disadvantage because it's still an unseen target; knowing where the soles of its feet are (or were) doesn't mean it's standing perfectly still just waiting for you to hit them, so there's still every risk of misjudging or mistiming the attack as you can't see to react.
It's worth keeping in mind that turns happen simultaneously, and when attacking someone you're rarely aiming for where they are, but rather where they're going to be as they seek to dodge your strikes, strike back etc. Knowing where something was is only of limited usefulness.
But you would know where to plant an area effect if that's what you're casting, though it still depends on whether you can target the point (many spells require you to see the point you target, but you could plant large areas outside of the darkness and let them overlap).
Note: Apologies if anyone sees two deleted posts, for some weird reason the formatting got messed up and I couldn't edit them.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Normally I wouldn't consider it defeating invisibilty because, while you know where the creature is, you can't see what it's doing.
It wouldn't defeat being invisible anyway, because the invisible condition itself imposes disadvantage regardless of whether you can see it or not; it's the (IMO) dumbest interaction in the whole mess that is the visibility rules, because it means that RAW even a creature with truesight still has disadvantage to hit a creature that it can fully 100% see in front of it.
They never should have duplicated the disadvantage to hit in the condition when it's already covered by the Unseen Attackers and Targets rules; it arguably doesn't really need to be a condition at all, or at most the condition should be "you cannot be visually seen". This is one they still haven't really fixed in the OneD&D playtest UA; it's still got three bullet points, and while they've clarified it to work as people expect (sort of) it could still be a lot simpler.
Thank you Haravikk and others, for some reaso I always seemed to skip right over the “substance” and just read it as a surface. I’m fine with it not working in air, just wanted the option for in water use. I agree the invisibility rules are messed up and Crawford et Al really need to come clean on a straight, simple answer to what abilities eliminate the disadvantage because they allow you to fully detect and follow the otherwise invisible being.
This thread is over 2 years old. It's best (instructed, in fact) not to thread necro.
FYI: There is no longer any prohibition against thread necromancy.
While not specifically against the rules, we have plenty of old bumped threads with new forum members pointing out information that has come out in books in the time since the old thread was last updated, so it's not ideal.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Not all those who wander are lost"
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Can you use tremorsense as a targeting sense? Meaning if you are in darkness can you fight a target that is touching the ground without penalty?
If that is the case, can you use tremorsense to qualify for "target you can see".
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I believe the answer is yes. Blindsight definitely qualifies for spell targeting.
I have a weird sense of humor.
I also make maps.(That's a link)
I just go with "yes." I'm not diving deeper into the poorly written vision and sense rules again...
Yes the accuracy is there, but the target has to be within range and on the ground, or at least on the same surface as you.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
In my opinion, the correct response is "yes." There is no question that blindsight meets the requirements for spell targeting. basket random
Two things:
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
Alternate senses cover the "that you can see" aspect, but it is worth noting that, unless the effect specifies otherwise, you cannot project a spell through total cover, such as using tremorsense to "see" someone on the other side of a wall and then using Fireball on them.
I agree with what I think you're saying. To be more precise, you can't target through total cover even though tremorsense provides "line of sight" to the target. You also need a clear path. Fireball is kind of a bad example, since it doesn't need to target the creature and can often be used to hit someone hiding behind a wall. Misty step should also work fine to reach any square visible to tremorsense - whether it's behind cover or no. You couldn't magic missile or charm a target behind total cover, though, even though they're visible to you with tremorsense.
Tremorsense is tricky because it doesn't actually say that you can see or perceive creatures through the ground, only that you "detect the origin" of the tremors. So in an area of total darkness I'd say that while you know where a creature is, you still can't see it (so would have disadvantage on attacks etc.); the benefit of the sense is knowing the location, so you can ensure you are in range (won't fail automatically).
I believe this is why creatures like the purple worm have both blindsight and tremsorsense; it can use tremorsense to find your location, then blindsight to actually "see" you to attack.
The problem is that vision in general is not something handled terribly well in the 5e rules, and lacks good examples of how to run a game with limited or zero visibility for some characters.
You could for example run the zero visibility area using only markers for a creature's last known location, but when some creatures can "see" the location it gets more complicated. My preference for these cases is to mark the actual location of the creature, and have the limited players declare their action(s) in advance, then use Perception checks (with disadvantage) to see if they guess the correct location, otherwise they go to a location of my choosing and their action(s) may fail (out of range). Usually the location of my choosing is based on the roll; the closer they were to succeeding, the fewer squares away from the target they end up.
Is that the correct way to run it? I have no idea; it seems reasonable to me as checks are there for anything that can fail, and finding a target you can't see absolutely qualifies but pre-declaring actions and having them fail (and move) on a failed check is pretty much homebrew because we're never really told what to do.
Anyway, bit of a tangent there, but my point is that the "can't see, can't reach" case is where tremorsense shows its benefit because even though you still can't see, you can guarantee the target is within your reach so you at least have a chance at hitting when you roll the attacks.
The case of spells is a bit trickier; personally I prefer to allow characters to try to do things when they can't see, but I'd do it in a similar way, i.e- if you don't guess right the spell can go either fail or go awry, so there's still a chance but not a good one. However that's definitely not RAW; RAW if a spell says you must see (or uses the default targeting rules) then you must see, and tremorsense doesn't let you see, but blindsight would.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
As others have stated, with the line of effect caveats, tremorsense should a targeting sense.
However, as this thread has been necroed I’d like to as a further question. Tremorsense detects the vibration in a surface caused by motion on that surface. This fine in our typical essentially 2D surface world but what about in the 3D world of the water (or possibly air)? Fish use their later line sense organ(s) to detect tremors in the water giving them a fairly 3D view of the area around them so they can detect prey/predators even in murky/pitch black waters. Flys detect the pressure waves of your hand/shatter before they hit allowing them to escape the swat. Why does tremorsense cover these sorts of uses as well as the 2D “feel it thru your feet”?
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
I don't believe that's the case though; darkvision and truesight specifically mention seeing within their radius, while blindsight mentions perceiving (a bit of an unhelpful word to use, but in the context of not "relying on sight" it seems clear the intent is that it can simply "see" within the radius). Features that grant blindsight, such as the Blind Fighting fighting style are fortunately a lot more explicit.
Tremorsense doesn't use these terms though, it just mentions detecting "the origin" of vibrations, which makes no indication that it can "see" a creature, only know that it knows that something is (or was) at a location. We're given no reason to assume that it enables a creature to be "seen" beyond knowing its location (or previous location, if it moved beyond the radius, left contact with the surface/substance etc.).
The OneD&D playtest updates to the rule seem to confirm this as the intention, as the updated rule now states in no uncertain terms that "tremorsense doesn’t count as a form of sight", but I would argue this is only clarifying how it works in 5e, the 5e version of the rule is just unnecessarily vague.
Tremorsense does work in water, because it works so long as a creature is "in contact with the same ground or substance", and liquids are a substance. Ordinarily this might even extend to air except that the rule explicitly states that it "can’t be used to detect flying or incorporeal creatures".
Technically this would mean that if you use the alternative falling rules in Xanathar's Guide to Everything you could be detected through air while falling, but the moment you start flying you'd be undetectable again? Probably not an intended interaction though (as the default falling rules don't leave you in the air at the end of a turn).
Again this is something the UA has cleared up considerably, as it specifically refers only to the same surface or liquid; so gasses are fully excluded. If you wanted an air pressure sensing creature it would need an additional rule.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I wasn't going to jump in on a necro thread but here you go asking a legit question ... :)
So tremorsense should work in water. It says in contact with the same ground or substance. The only exclusion is from air as it can't detect flying creatures. Typically it's monsters that have this ability and it usually fits their enviornment. It gets a bit more tricky when players have it. Normally I wouldn't consider it defeating invisibilty because, while you know where the creature is, you can't see what it's doing. Now in water/liquid, I'd say it would work more like blindsight because every movement is in contact with the same substance (much like echo location). There's no set rule on this though so it's all up to the DM to figure out what works.
It wouldn't defeat being invisible anyway, because the invisible condition itself imposes disadvantage regardless of whether you can see it or not; it's the (IMO) dumbest interaction in the whole mess that is the visibility rules, because it means that RAW even a creature with truesight still has disadvantage to hit a creature that it can fully 100% see in front of it.
They never should have duplicated the disadvantage to hit in the condition when it's already covered by the Unseen Attackers and Targets rules; it arguably doesn't really need to be a condition at all, or at most the condition should be "you cannot be visually seen". This is one they still haven't really fixed in the OneD&D playtest UA; it's still got three bullet points, and while they've clarified it to work as people expect (sort of) it could still be a lot simpler.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
.
Sure, with disadvantage because it's still an unseen target; knowing where the soles of its feet are (or were) doesn't mean it's standing perfectly still just waiting for you to hit them, so there's still every risk of misjudging or mistiming the attack as you can't see to react.
It's worth keeping in mind that turns happen simultaneously, and when attacking someone you're rarely aiming for where they are, but rather where they're going to be as they seek to dodge your strikes, strike back etc. Knowing where something was is only of limited usefulness.
But you would know where to plant an area effect if that's what you're casting, though it still depends on whether you can target the point (many spells require you to see the point you target, but you could plant large areas outside of the darkness and let them overlap).
Note: Apologies if anyone sees two deleted posts, for some weird reason the formatting got messed up and I couldn't edit them.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
100% agree that RAW it's a mess.
FYI: There is no longer any prohibition against thread necromancy.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Oh. Huh. Good to know.
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
Thank you Haravikk and others, for some reaso I always seemed to skip right over the “substance” and just read it as a surface. I’m fine with it not working in air, just wanted the option for in water use. I agree the invisibility rules are messed up and Crawford et Al really need to come clean on a straight, simple answer to what abilities eliminate the disadvantage because they allow you to fully detect and follow the otherwise invisible being.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
While not specifically against the rules, we have plenty of old bumped threads with new forum members pointing out information that has come out in books in the time since the old thread was last updated, so it's not ideal.
"Not all those who wander are lost"