GM Kiora's Wrath of the Righteous

Game Master Kiora Atua

Aren't aoo from disarm only allowed from the one being disarmed?

You're right! I didn't know that. No damage for you ;o

Also apparently getting AoOd while performing a combat maneuver penalizes the roll.

Yeah. I couldn't beat part one, as I refused to kill a non-optional boss. :|

Never played 2.

Don't want to kill Demon King again on 3. That fight was just... sad.

Let me guess. Sif?

I've played Bloodborne and 3. I'm still working my way through the mid-game of Blood and I keep getting stomped by stuff in 3 and giving up.

I just super out leveled everything like a true JRPGer.

And yup, Sif. The knowledge that I can't complete the game without killing it just made me give up.

Hopefully part 2 doesn't have one of those, now that I've bought it.

I don't think 2 does. You have to fight god d*mn Ornstein again, but I don't think there's anything as heart wrenching as Sif.

Owwwwww.

Cultists are mean and this fight has a lot of really annoying enemies in it.

Isilme asked me a question regarding grease and oozes, I'm gonna go with the 3.5 FAQ:

Given that being prone means you are lying on the ground (Player’s Handbook, page 311), who can be prone? Can oozes be prone? What about creatures with no limbs like snakes? What about incorporeal creatures?

Anybody can be “prone.” Creatures that use limbs for locomotion can use a free action to drop prone and must use a move action to stand up again. Something with no motive limbs, such as a snake, can go prone or “stand up” as a free action. Such creatures might want to become prone to gain an Armor Class bonus against ranged attacks. (Although giving something like a gelatinous cube that option defies common sense and should not be allowed.) Officially, there’s an attack of opportunity any time a creature stands up. The Sage, however, heartily recommends no attack of opportunity when a snake or similar creature “stands up.”

I will go with the thought of no AoOs for a standing creature such as a snake or an ooze. But grease would likely be effective at locking the ooze into one spot, I suppose due to the fact that it cannot gain traction to crawl away.

Totes forgot the ooze, so, I edited it in.

Annnnnnnnnnnnnd forgot poison also.

Gotta say I'm a bit worried about y'all. But I think you can pull it through. :)

But these next few turns will be pretty crucial to that. No more risks!

Shit, dude.

Whoops, Xanderghul actually isnt dying cause ooze has 5' reach :O Yay!

But I mean, I'm still worried cause, there's a lot of nasty out there coming for everyone, and you guys aren't the greatest at mid-battle healing atm.

My internet is being bad and should feel bad. I'll try to get something up at work around lunch (5.5 hours from now), but feel free to bot Anevia. Priority is killing the Oooze #now, then Unicorn. I don't suspect both will go down. She'll favor sneak attack damage where she can get it in, though. She'll deflecting shot anything the ooze does next round.

-gigantic relieved sigh-

Yeah, I put myself behind Hinagiku for a very specific reason!

Do you guys think I should target the ooze or the Commander with my last offensive spells?

Naturally, Ehren already blew his only cold spell. :P

Can't really use cold spells, they cause it to split. Create water is very effective against the creature, and aqueous orb is essentially a one-hit kill.

I forgot we had a shadow aqueous orb. That thing will freeze the ooze solid if we can get it over to the ooze :p

It would take like four rounds to get over to the ooze unfortunately. It's faster to just beat it to death honestly. Which I'll help with once I withdraw from the commander and the mooks.

Yeah, I'd be hurtling it towards us if I could move it twice per turn. Unfortunately, I can only move it 30' per round, and I'm hoping to really seal the caskets on those three faceless witches with it.

On the other hand, I can cast shadow conjuration again with my arcane bond, which I still haven't used.

Re-casting it might be worthwhile, although we will see how the wall changes things. In theory it should lock everyone else down, and the three witches who haven't made it out of the entangle are pretty close to dead at this point.

That's actually a good idea. This is the last army and the most dangerous. Five witches, the unicorn, the ooze, and the commander along with their troops. There's really not much point in trying to overly conserve our resources right now, since we're likely not going to have another encounter before we can rest. And shutting that ooze down takes a major threat off the field.

Well, if there is another army, we will have to run... even if we conserve a slight amount of resources, there is no way we can beat them... although, we do still have two commanders who want to murder us...

Yeah, we'll see how things go. The ooze loses its next turn, its down 8 Constitution and the Kellids get to hit it with another volley before it does anything.

We also officially have more Kellids than there are cultists, which is a really nice spot to be in. Being outnumbered four-to-one isn't really that fun.

I'm conserving absolutely no resources. I have three spells left, plus my arcane bond and all of my binding darkness. It will be very soon before I can't really contribute anymore.

I am pretty sure that Valaria could take her turn... its not like Hinagikku's actions will influence anyone, no?

Looks like things are winding down!

On one hand, the tieflings pretty much have to surrender unless they want to die horrible deaths. On the other hand, that's an awful lot of prisoners we'd have to take. What do? :O

Death by thorn bush does sound like a terrible way to go. ;o

Sorry for holding us up! I've been working a lot lately, saw it was my turn, realizes there wasn't much I could do and forgot it was my turn. Whoops!

I'd kinda like to nail down the particulars of stealthing during combat. I've had people state it was impossible, due to the heightened awareness. I've had people say all you needed was cover/concealment to do so. I've had people say you require a distraction. I've had people say combat itself is a distraction...

So far, I've simply gone with 'if Anevia can get to a place of concealment, she can stealth'. How accurate is that? If stealth is possible, as she swoops out, she will! :)

The way I understand is that you need cover or concealment to make a stealth check in combat. If you are being observed (and not under cover or concealment), you can make a bluff check to create a diversion to hide, and then make a stealth check. If you do not end your turn in cover or concealment, however, you lose your stealth at that point.

Xanderghul - No big deal, next time if you don't have anything to do you can always pass turn!

Anevia - Isilme has the right of it.

->You must have either cover or concealment to stealth in combat, unless you have an ability that explicitly lets you get around that (like the "hide in plain sight" assassin class feature)

-> Once you attack or perform some other sort of "hey look I'm here" action in combat, you are "being observed". In order to re-stealth you must use a bluff check to create a diversion then hide behind something or some other method (go invisible, use the "sniping" option with stealth, etc).

So far, I've simply gone with 'if Anevia can get to a place of concealment, she can stealth'.

Technically, by RAW, you can't re-stealth in combat without A. a bluff check or B. a class feature that says you can. But I'm a bit more laid back than that. As long as the cover she's hiding behind is sufficient to really believe that an enemy wouldn't be able to pinpoint her location, I'm cool. I care less about RAW and more about whether it makes sense.

So like if Anevia runs in and stabs a guy, and then ducks behind an upturned table, that isn't sufficient to be considered "stealthed". The guy totally watched you duck behind that table, duh. The table still gives you cover! But not stealth.

Buuuuuuuuutttt she COULD use bluff to make a distraction, then duck behind the table (cause the guy isn't even looking), and regain stealth, if she succeeded at both checks. I'd be fine with refluffing the bluff as something like "wait until he's distracted by Hinagiku face-punching him, THEN duck behind the table" rather than having to go all Three Stooges and be like "Hay! What's that on the ceiling?! *hides*". But you still need to succeed at the opposed check.

Now if Anevia is spotted on the road, and then runs into a forest, it's conceivable that even if the bad guy followed her into the forest he wouldn't know exactly where she was. She probably ducked behind a tree or something. I'd be fine with re-stealthing in this situation, even though that kinda goes against RAW.

Orrrr for example using a smokestick to create a bunch of fog, obscuring the vision or LoS of the bad guy, then skulking off somewhere. That's a pretty iconic rogue-ly thing to do, yeah? So I'd allow a re-stealth there, too.

I'm a lot more laid back about the use of her "stealth gambit", though, since it seems the intent of that ability is obviously to give you a way to gain invisibility in combat. I mean, you can't even use gambits out of combat, haha. So, I'd be totally okay with Anevia ducking behind the table in the prior example, using her stealth gambit as a swift, and if successful, going invisible.

The problem with you hiding behind the bramble though isn't that it isn't sufficient cover, but rather the fact that the back side of the bramble has a bunch of entangle stuff Ehren laid down. Basically the scenario is:

..................................................... [Entangle]
Nobody over here < --- [20'x20' cube o' bramble death] --> Isilme, Hinagiku, & Commander
|
|
|
Barricades

So if she ran around the other side she'd be sneaky but she'd need to run through the entangle to do so. I'd say the Commander is paying too much attention to the direction of the barricades to make sneaking from that side an option.

I'd argue that by RAW you *can* restealth in combat without a distraction if you have concealement or cover. The reason being that while the guy knows you're there, he can't directly verify you're there because you've broken line of sight (or are assumed to be capable of doing so). So if you stealth successfully, it's possible to move from that location and have him still thinking you're there. What you cannot do is maintain stealth in the open without some sort of class ability that allows it. Hide-in-plain-sight abilities remove the necessity for a distraction and the requirement that you end the turn in cover to maintain stealth.

You're correct as long as you start your turn using stealth and are unobserved. So you'd need to move to cover, wait until next turn, and then stealth. You can't, however, stealth during your turn.

Unless you bluff.

When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment.

If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.

But anyway that's all moot because idgaf about what raw thinks, I care about what makes sense :)

If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight)

It is reasonable to assume that this is only senses with which you can actually "see" someone (sight/low-light vision, blindsight, darkvision) such that they have no cover or concealement from you. You cannot "observe" someone with sound or smell, at best you can pinpoint the square they are in, and it's opposed to their stealth check. Once you cease to be able to observe someone, you can attempt a new stealth check. Otherwise I could duck into a building and someone outside with whom I was in combat would magically know where I was within the building for the remainder of the encounter.

Edit: Things like tremorsense and blindsense would also negate this, because while you cannot directly observe someone with them, they auto-succeed on perception checks to pinpoint your square, and hence you always know where the person is.

Edit to the Edit: A good way to put it is that if you can break LoS and move with stealth in such a way that that you could exit the square he last saw you in while not entering his LoS again, you can regain stealth during combat.

That makes sense if you duck into a building, but not all forms of cover/concealment break LoS. For example, can you stealth with blur? In this example, the ogre has cover from the rogue, can it stealth from the rogue?

So you need a way to adjudicate what is acceptable cover/concealment or what isn't. Which is pretty much GM discretion, from what I can tell.

In the ogre case, he *can* actually stealth. Here's why:

If the fighter in question wasn't there, the ogre could press up against the wall, essentially completely breaking LoS with the rogue. Once he's done that he could conceivably move down along the wall towards where the fighter is, thus ending up somewhere the rogue isn't expecting. The fact that is extremely difficult for him is handled by his abysmal stealth and penalties due to size.

Blur is definitely a good point, but my prior rule of thumb actually covers it. Blur doesn't break line-of-sight, so it would not serve to allow you to stealth. Nor would displacement which gives a 50% miss chance. Darkness (not dim-light), however would, as would a fog cloud.

Could she stealth then teleport shot past the entangle? If so, that seems the best choice for now.

Anevia - That sounds fine by me!

Isilme -

That's interesting if RAW actually works like that, I don't know if I'd allow it myself.

Your rule of thumb makes sense to me but isn't explicitly stated by RAW, which was my point. But for the purposes of this game, that doesn't really matter, unless you're trying to build a rogue for PFS or something.

Apparently this was added in the 6th printing of CRB, I checked cause I never noticed it before, haha.

When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment.

I actually really like that, it's really slick, and I think I'll go with that from now on because it's really easy for a PC to predict and use.

SO, Anevia, if you wanna stealth in the middle of your turn use bluff.

Otherwise as long as you begin your turn in cover or concealment and are unobserved you can re-roll stealth and then remain in stealth as long as you end your turn in cover or concealment.

I'm gonna say that once you've broken stealth that particular bit of cover or concealment cannot continue to be used to provide stealth, you have to go find something new, unless you're using sniping or something similar (like false attacker).

I think that goes along with what Isilme is saying about not being able to verify exactly where you are being the logic behind what you can do. So with the table example, this is what I'd allow you to do:

Round 1: Anevia stabs mookface a bunch in melee. He slaps her back and she almost dies, so she figures she shouldn't keep meleeing.
Round 2: Anevia runs and hides behind a table, gaining cover. She can't shoot from behind the table to gain sneak attack THIS round cause that's not very surprising, as he OBSERVED her hiding behind the table. [But she could if she bluffed - then mookface never saw her run behind the table in the first place.]
Round 3: Anevia starts turn behind cover of table. Bad guy cannot be 100% sure she is still behind table or not. She can roll stealth. Assuming she is successful, she can shoot from behind the table and gain sneak attack.
Round 4: Anevia starts turn behind cover of table. Bad guy is suspicious of her still being behind the table, he OBSERVED her behind there and is gonna assume she is there. She can't use the table to gain sneak attack again, unless she succeeded at her sniper check last round (which means the bad guy doesn't know she's behind the table). But she can still stealth, creep to behind the counter and, if she succeeds on a stealth check again, sneak attack. If there isn't anything else in the room to hide behind she's SoL. But chances are there is a doorframe or something she can go to, even if the room is totally empty.

As an example of when that rule-of-thumb wouldn't allow stealthing even after breaking line of sight: Imagine you've got a 5x5x5' pit. You jump into it with an enemy watching you. Once you're in the pit you have cover and have broken line of sight, but there is no where you can move to without re-entering line of sight. As such, you cannot stealth. You would need an ability like incorporeal or earth glide to allow you to stealth in that situation.

Edit: Yeah, your interpretation is pretty close to mine at this point. I think it's fair to have to remain in cover until the start of your next turn.

Also I would add that stealthing in a new round and sniping immediately from the spot you were last known to be in probably shouldn't work. You would need to move before you could snipe again. But concievably as long as you have cover, you could keep moving and sniping from new locations (which is exactly what a sniper would do once spotted).

Also I would add that stealthing in a new round and sniping immediately from the spot you were last known to be in probably shouldn't work. You would need to move before you could snipe again. But concievably as long as you have cover, you could keep moving and sniping from new locations (which is exactly what a sniper would do once spotted).

Sniping explicitly allows you to do this.

If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.

Is it alright if Isilme's warning causes Val to stop before she heads too far out on to the battlefield?

Sure, how far do you want to move out?

30 feet should do. A bit away from the wall, but not close enough that the guy could come after me if he gets up.

Anevia will attempt to deflect the first attack from the big bad this turn, if applicable.

Otherwise, sounds good. I'll reread once home and try to figure out things that sound off.

Also, I personally allow stealth with blur, as I treat it as a form of camouflage. If you're constantly blinking, you're gonna blend in with your surroundings. That doesn't do you a bit of good once someone has noticed you, but until then, you're actually pretty well hidden in my mental image.

At least no less hidden than dim light would afford.

Re: Stealth and Displacement/Blur

Yeah, if you're already stealthed I'd be willing to consider it concealment for purposes of ending your turn in concealment/cover to maintain stealth, just like dim light is sufficient as well. But it isn't enough to get back into stealth once you've been noticed.

Isilme wrote:

Also I would add that stealthing in a new round and sniping immediately from the spot you were last known to be in probably shouldn't work. You would need to move before you could snipe again. But concievably as long as you have cover, you could keep moving and sniping from new locations (which is exactly what a sniper would do once spotted).

Sniping explicitly allows you to do this.

Quote:

If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.

Right, you can keep sniping from the same spot as long as you can keep making the stealth checks. I meant that once you are spotted, you can no longer use that spot, even if you re-stealth at that location (unless you went and sniped somewhere else and came back or something like that).

Anevia -

I'm going to say that in order to stealth you must be both in cover or concealment and unobserved. If someone is staring at you with blur, you are still being observed, even if you're flashing in and out of sight.

Isilme -

Yes, I covered that in the above example.

----

And that's 10,000 discussion posts! Did you know we have the FIFTH largest discussion thread of ANY paizo pbp in all of time??? It's true!

It's cause we're awesome.