So, I have a player who has a very unique concept in mind. We are playing in the campaign setting in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount, and she is playing a homebrew sorcerer that we've tested and found to be balanced. One of the first level abilities is about a gravity anchor that she can make stronger or weaker on herself. In her backstory, she used to scam people in the Empire out in the streets when she would blindfold herself, and activate the gravity anchor, making it stronger. When she makes it stronger, she gains tremorsense out to 30 feet, along with a couple of other cool things. She has asked me since she is technically blinded, but has tremorsense, which allows the character/monster to sense vibrations in the ground, pinpointing the origin, could she cast a spell with the phrase "that you can see within range", without disadvantage on the attack roll, like Fire Bolt. I know by RAW, the answer is no, but I wanted to see what fellow DM's felt about this before I gave her a firm answer.
I'd say she should still have disadvantage. Think of it like the episode where Aang and the gang first meet Toph at the fight arena. She can pinpoint exactly where he is and throw a rock at him. But he just jumps into the air, and she suddenly has no idea where he is, or if she even hit him.
If she had Blindsight, on the other hand, that would absolutely negate the disadvantage, but it's a totally different form of sight.
I would rule that anything your player can detect via tremorsense, they effectively 'see,' just as if they had detected it using normal sight, darkvision, truesight, or blindsight. Tremorsense is as much a legitimate sense as those ones, albeit just not frequently used. I wouldn't say that the character can attack without disadvantage 'even though they're blinded,' but because they aren't blinded. Not even a little bit. At least, not within range.
However. This character cannot detect things that are not touching the ground (e.g. flying or incorporeal creatures). Those would effectively gain the benefits of being invisible against your player, regardless of whether they officially have the Invisible condition.
I think they should NOT have disadvantage. The basic question is how good is tremorsense.
There is plant creature that has tremorsense and no eyes: mantrap
This creature has an attack and no where does it mention that it has disadvantage. If one creature that uses tremorsense to aim attacks does not get disadvantage, then I would rule no one does.
I think they should NOT have disadvantage. The basic question is how good is tremorsense.
There is plant creature that has tremorsense and no eyes: mantrap
This creature has an attack and no where does it mention that it has disadvantage. If one creature that uses tremorsense to aim attacks does not get disadvantage, then I would rule no one does.
Nowhere in the mantrap's stat block does it say that it can't see normally. So since it can see normally AND has tremorsense, of course its attacks don't have disadvantage.
I also want tremorsense to count as seeing/sight, but could find a rule that says it does (unlike all other senses). If I missed something please point it out, otherwise it is still susceptible to unseen target/attacker rules.
DxJxC has a point. WotC is very good about putting "blind beyond this radius" in with creatures with blindsight, so I imagine they'd do the same if a creature can't see beyond its tremorsense radius.
I think they should NOT have disadvantage. The basic question is how good is tremorsense.
There is plant creature that has tremorsense and no eyes: mantrap
This creature has an attack and no where does it mention that it has disadvantage. If one creature that uses tremorsense to aim attacks does not get disadvantage, then I would rule no one does.
Nowhere in the mantrap's stat block does it say that it can't see normally. So since it can see normally AND has tremorsense, of course its attacks don't have disadvantage.
I also want tremorsense to count as seeing/sight, but could find a rule that says it does (unlike all other senses). If I missed something please point it out, otherwise it is still susceptible to unseen target/attacker rules.
Where did you see a rule that says that blindsight counts as seeing/sight? I mean darkvision and truesight don't need rules to explain those cause they're just enhancements of normal sight. But what about blindsight?
I also want tremorsense to count as seeing/sight, but could find a rule that says it does (unlike all other senses). If I missed something please point it out, otherwise it is still susceptible to unseen target/attacker rules.
Where did you see a rule that says that blindsight counts as seeing/sight? I mean darkvision and truesight don't need rules to explain those cause they're just enhancements of normal sight. But what about blindsight?
About that. Blindsight says "without relying on sight," so that makes it specifically a replacement to normal sight and blindness rules.
This is the only response about tremorsense I can see. Seems to agree with me (if you can “see” with tremorsense then no disadvantage).
I mean, if I know there their feet are I can probably judge posture. Plus knowing where feet are is surely a much better guide than knowing which 5 ft cube someone might be in.
This is the only response about tremorsense I can see. Seems to agree with me (if you can “see” with tremorsense then no disadvantage).
I mean, if I know there their feet are I can probably judge posture. Plus knowing where feet are is surely a much better guide than knowing which 5 ft cube someone might be in.
That isn't an official ruling. Tweets were declared unofficial at some point (2018 I think) and only compiled answers (SAC) are official.
You are probably right that it is RAI, but it is not RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, I have a player who has a very unique concept in mind. We are playing in the campaign setting in Explorer's Guide to Wildemount, and she is playing a homebrew sorcerer that we've tested and found to be balanced. One of the first level abilities is about a gravity anchor that she can make stronger or weaker on herself. In her backstory, she used to scam people in the Empire out in the streets when she would blindfold herself, and activate the gravity anchor, making it stronger. When she makes it stronger, she gains tremorsense out to 30 feet, along with a couple of other cool things. She has asked me since she is technically blinded, but has tremorsense, which allows the character/monster to sense vibrations in the ground, pinpointing the origin, could she cast a spell with the phrase "that you can see within range", without disadvantage on the attack roll, like Fire Bolt. I know by RAW, the answer is no, but I wanted to see what fellow DM's felt about this before I gave her a firm answer.
I'd say she should still have disadvantage. Think of it like the episode where Aang and the gang first meet Toph at the fight arena. She can pinpoint exactly where he is and throw a rock at him. But he just jumps into the air, and she suddenly has no idea where he is, or if she even hit him.
If she had Blindsight, on the other hand, that would absolutely negate the disadvantage, but it's a totally different form of sight.
You would still have disadvantage, but know where (which space) they are, which is better than being fully blind.
I would rule that anything your player can detect via tremorsense, they effectively 'see,' just as if they had detected it using normal sight, darkvision, truesight, or blindsight. Tremorsense is as much a legitimate sense as those ones, albeit just not frequently used. I wouldn't say that the character can attack without disadvantage 'even though they're blinded,' but because they aren't blinded. Not even a little bit. At least, not within range.
However. This character cannot detect things that are not touching the ground (e.g. flying or incorporeal creatures). Those would effectively gain the benefits of being invisible against your player, regardless of whether they officially have the Invisible condition.
I think they should NOT have disadvantage. The basic question is how good is tremorsense.
There is plant creature that has tremorsense and no eyes: mantrap
This creature has an attack and no where does it mention that it has disadvantage. If one creature that uses tremorsense to aim attacks does not get disadvantage, then I would rule no one does.
Nowhere in the mantrap's stat block does it say that it can't see normally. So since it can see normally AND has tremorsense, of course its attacks don't have disadvantage.
I also want tremorsense to count as seeing/sight, but could find a rule that says it does (unlike all other senses). If I missed something please point it out, otherwise it is still susceptible to unseen target/attacker rules.
No eyes in that picture. Just a man surrounded by a plant.
DxJxC has a point. WotC is very good about putting "blind beyond this radius" in with creatures with blindsight, so I imagine they'd do the same if a creature can't see beyond its tremorsense radius.
Where did you see a rule that says that blindsight counts as seeing/sight? I mean darkvision and truesight don't need rules to explain those cause they're just enhancements of normal sight. But what about blindsight?
About that. Blindsight says "without relying on sight," so that makes it specifically a replacement to normal sight and blindness rules.
It says that tremorsense can “pinpoint” the location. Therefore no disadvantage, as long as the enemy isn’t flying or levitating.
That still only gives location, not position or obstacles. And more importantly, does not omit any of the rules described in unseen attackers.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/03/24/can-i-see-the-target-with-blindsighttremorsense/
This is the only response about tremorsense I can see. Seems to agree with me (if you can “see” with tremorsense then no disadvantage).
I mean, if I know there their feet are I can probably judge posture. Plus knowing where feet are is surely a much better guide than knowing which 5 ft cube someone might be in.
That isn't an official ruling. Tweets were declared unofficial at some point (2018 I think) and only compiled answers (SAC) are official.
You are probably right that it is RAI, but it is not RAW.