My gaming group has come up with an idea about the shadowdancer prestige class. If anyone has dealt with this class the darn guys can pretty much disappear into any shadow and be hidden. When the character rolls in the 40's for their hide and creatures spots average +3 it can be pretty annoying.
THe question is this, when hidden in a shadow can the shadowdancer's magical items be detected by detect magic spell?
there it is let me know what y'all think?
Glitterdust would pretty much light him up like a christmas tree for the duration (-40 to hide). Detect thoughts should probably work, Detect magic... errm maybe. Dust of appearance would also work.
To be honest Shadow Dancer isn't that powerful, they are sort of a 1 trick pony. Nerfing that one ability is pretty rough.
[moved to compendium forum]
Are you thinking of Battledancer Vic? Shadowdancer is in DMG.
Agreed by the way - if they can't hide *behind something*, detect magic should work - but that isn't an easy thing to do - takes 3 rounds to pinpoint things.
[moved to compendium forum]Are you thinking of Battledancer Vic? Shadowdancer is in DMG.
Agreed by the way - if they can't hide *behind something*, detect magic should work - but that isn't an easy thing to do - takes 3 rounds to pinpoint things.
Yeppers - and a Shadowdancer can do quite a bit in 3 rounds. Ah the memories... ;)
If the Shadowdancer is solo, you have to be just as careful as any rogue-type. If you get caught out in the open, you're done. Which is why a wise Shadowdancer always tries to have backup nearby, to provide a more immediate threat (and distraction) to said spellcasters. Then they can more easily do their job of:
[Shadow Jump behind spellcaster from hiding position]
[STICK STICK STICK]
[Shadow Jump away and let the bodies hit the floor] :)
I'm lucky that my Shadowdancer PC had a party that understood his abilities, and made sure to provide the support he needed to fulfill his role. No man is an island, and all that...
Your Friendly Neighborhood Dalesman
"Bringing Big D**n Justice to the Bad Guys Since 1369 DR"
|
Alignment detecting spells should also work. Same with blindsight, blindsense, tremorsense, etc. Warriors of Darkness (BoVD PrC) and Thoon Thunderclouds (CR 3 MMV monster) get tremorsense, if you're looking for an easy way to get that into your villains' hands. Most of the time, however, you probably should let the PC get away with his sneaky ways. After all, he's invested pretty heavily to get them. A couple of ways you can justify the bad guys being prepped with extra sensory toys without seeming unfair are:
Really, really professional security forces. Play up how on-the-ball these mercenaries that the villain has hired are. If the players know they're going in against foes that have extensive training and experience in counter-infiltration, they will feel less "picked on" if the bad guys see through some tricks.
Survivors. If the PCs are working their way up a nasty organization of some kind, surviving lower-rank personnel from earlier raids may tip off the brass of said organization about the tactics they can expect to face from the PCs.
Are you sure the Shadowdancer has to be hiding behind something? If the shadowdancer has "Hide in Plain Sight" (which she gets at first level of SD) she shouldn't have to hide behind anything. There only has to be a shadow within 10 feet of her. Thoughts, please? It's important becuase it may make the difference on whether or not my shadowdancer has to murder someone.
Are you sure the Shadowdancer has to be hiding behind something?
I don't think you understood what Majuba was saying.
The shadowdancer doesn't have to hide behind something to hide, but unless there's something between him and the caster to block the spell's line of effect, detect magic will work as normal on him.
Even that is not entirely accurate, however, because detect magic doesn't require line of effect to the auras it detects. It specifically penetrates barriers (though 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it).
In short, the shadowdancer has no special immunity to detection by virtue of his Hide in Plain Sight ability. All that ability does is let him make Hide checks while being observed, and without actual cover or concealment. If whatever method of detection is being used would reveal an ordinary hidden person, it will reveal a shadowdancer, too.
....but Dispel Magic does require a "line of sight". Wouldn't that mean that if the spellcaster doesn't have a line of sight (can't see her) to the hidden Shadowdancer, the spell wouldn't work? Maybe? Don't shadowdancers borrow from the shadow plane for their "hidey" ability? Wouldn't the shadow be what the shadow dancer is "hiding" behind? Detect magic doesn't mention it working through shadow.
I mean, I could have my character kill our sorceress just to add some spice to our campaign but I want to make sure that my shadowdancer turns murderess for "valid" reasons. ;)
....but Dispel Magic does require a "line of sight".
Only if you want to make a Spellcraft check to determine an aura's school of magic. You need line of sight to do that, but otherwise dispel magic works just fine without line of sight.
Except that I meant Detect Magic, not Dispel. My bad. Sorry. I still think that my hidden shadowdancer is hidden because of her Hide in Plain Sight.
I suggest that Detect Magic - by the 3rd round of use - would at the very most pinpoint the square in which the Shadowdancer is hiding, but that the Shadowdancer would still have total concealment (50% miss chance).
By comparison, See Invisibility (a L 2 spell, one level higher than Detect Magic) will not even reveal the presence of creatures who are simply hiding. It doesn't seem logical that a spell one level lower (Detect Magic) will actually pierce the Shadowdancer's Hide in Plain Sight ability/skill.
On the other hand, if Detect Magic was used to pinpoint the square, then the spellcaster could use the afore-mentioned Glitterdust to reveal precisely where the Shadowdancer is (assuming that the Shadowdancer fails a Hide check with a -40 penalty). Optionally, Faerie Fire could be used in place of Glitterdust. And someone also mentioned Dust of Appearance previously.
And if a Shadowdancer can make a Hide check even with a -40 penalty while Glitterdusted, then I think that she deserves to remain unseen!
Except that I meant Detect Magic, not Dispel. My bad. Sorry.
I'm kinda surprised I didn't catch that, either. Oh, well. It doesn't matter, anyway. We both knew what we meant.
I still think that my hidden shadowdancer is hidden because of her Hide in Plain Sight.
She is hidden. It's just that hiding doesn't interfere with detect magic. :)
I suggest that Detect Magic - by the 3rd round of use - would at the very most pinpoint the square in which the Shadowdancer is hiding, but that the Shadowdancer would still have total concealment (50% miss chance).
I agree.
By comparison, See Invisibility (a L 2 spell, one level higher than Detect Magic) will not even reveal the presence of creatures who are simply hiding. It doesn't seem logical that a spell one level lower (Detect Magic) will actually pierce the Shadowdancer's Hide in Plain Sight ability/skill.
Of course it does. The two spells do entirely different things, and therefore are more (or less) effective in different situations.
Or does it not "seem logical" that fireball works better against frost giants than cone of cold does? Fireball is two levels lower than cone of cold! How could it be more effective!? ;)
I suggest that Detect Magic - by the 3rd round of use - would at the very most pinpoint the square in which the Shadowdancer is hiding, but that the Shadowdancer would still have total concealment (50% miss chance).
I agree.
Thank you.
By comparison, See Invisibility (a L 2 spell, one level higher than Detect Magic) will not even reveal the presence of creatures who are simply hiding. It doesn't seem logical that a spell one level lower (Detect Magic) will actually pierce the Shadowdancer's Hide in Plain Sight ability/skill.
Of course it does. The two spells do entirely different things, and therefore are more (or less) effective in different situations.
Or does it not "seem logical" that fireball works better against frost giants than cone of cold does? Fireball is two levels lower than cone of cold! How could it be more effective!? ;)
You're correct there - it wasn't a good argument for me to use! :)
I appreciate everyone's comments! They have been very helpful. We kind of played around the situation last Saturday so it didn't come up but, at the very least, if it's ruled by my DM that detect magic can be used to spot the square my shadowdancer occupies in three rounds then that will be okay because my shadowdancer doesn't stay in the same square for three rounds ever. Liandrin won't have to kill the sorceress......................yet. ;)