just curious....any other benefits besides the obvious one associated with the two weapon fighting feat?
Two IDENTICAL Light weapons, or two light weapons?
Identical means weapon focus/spec/etc see double usage.
Multiple attacks at low level mean Pounce potentially useful before level 6.
Depending on the weapon, light weapons can often be thrown.
Usable with weapon finesse.
can't remember if Power attack works with light weapons in Paizo. It doesn't in 3.5. Save you a feat.
You can use Improved Buckler Defense easily on the offhand.
==Aelryinth
just curious....any other benefits besides the obvious one associated with the two weapon fighting feat?
If you're going 2 weapon fighting, one usually assumes a decent DEX, so you can use weapon finesse with both attacks.
Personally, I like to dual wield the same type of weapons to minimize the number of related feats needed (wep focus, wep spec, imp crit, etc.). In PFRPG you can even power attack with light weapons, so there's no real disadvantage other than they usually have slightly lower base damage (max out at d6 instead of d10 for 1 handed weapons).
Just my personal take.
Power Attack (Combat)
You can make exceptionally deadly melee attacks by sacrificing accuracy for strength.Prerequisites: Str 13, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2. You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll, and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
As far as I can tell... there is nothing saying you cannot power attack with a light weapon. You just cannot get the "double" because you cannot two-hand a light weapon.
I myself kinda like the Oversized Two-weapon feat, Double Slash for the full strength bonus on off hand, combined with Power Attack.
Two-weapon fighting with two Bastard Swords with only the normal -2 on the attacks is pretty nice. Take the additional penalty for Power Attack against lightly armored foes to really blow them away.
I myself kinda like the Oversized Two-weapon feat, Double Slash for the full strength bonus on off hand, combined with Power Attack.
Two-weapon fighting with two Bastard Swords with only the normal -2 on the attacks is pretty nice. Take the additional penalty for Power Attack against lightly armored foes to really blow them away.
I can just see it now.. the dwarven TWF ranger with dual dwarven waraxes... the elven mage with.. expeditious retreat? where's he going.
You can hide both light weapons with Slight of Hand. With Quickdraw you go from nothing to two weapons as a move action. But then there isn't anything that allows you to do two attacks as a single standards action, is there? Bummer.
Vital strike was made for surprise rounds :)
You can hide both light weapons with Slight of Hand. With Quickdraw you go from nothing to two weapons as a move action. But then there isn't anything that allows you to do two attacks as a single standards action, is there? Bummer.
There is a feat in PHB2 that allows 2 attacks as a standard.
There is also the two-weapon defense feat. But I don't think that it is affected by what the two weapons are.
Many light weapons can be thrown, which I think works well with TWF and many of the other things mentioned.
You could potentially get more crits a round using 2 kukris or 2 scimitars... 2 sawtooth sabers ftw? Though none of those are thrown weapons.
Vital strike is not just for surprise rounds. It's for whenever you need to move and attack.
How the blazes are you surprising someone from melee range?
One moment, you're just standing there and talking (maybe arguing, discussing heatedly, or maybe sitting there and telling someone that her food smells like crotch), and all of a sudden, someone has a weapon in hand and attacks before you know what happens ("you look good in red").
And that's just one option.
Another is sneaking up to someone. I see that in flicks and spy games all the time.
just curious....any other benefits besides the obvious one associated with the two weapon fighting feat?
Feat consolidation.
I can just see it now.. the dwarven TWF ranger with dual dwarven waraxes... the elven mage with.. expeditious retreat? where's he going.I myself kinda like the Oversized Two-weapon feat, Double Slash for the full strength bonus on off hand, combined with Power Attack.
Two-weapon fighting with two Bastard Swords with only the normal -2 on the attacks is pretty nice. Take the additional penalty for Power Attack against lightly armored foes to really blow them away.
I have played a Dwarven Fighter using Dewarven Waraxes with TWF chain for several years. He just made 21st level.
He's the Grond that is my avitar's namesake. Even with the -4 to hit he's as devastating as HIS namesake.
Unfortunately, D&D3e's stealth rules are incredibly punishing in this sort of situation. Unless someone is actually standing in (or immediately adjacent to) an area of concealment, as soon as you leave concealment you're no longer hidden. (And, thus, combat generally begins, assuming you have a weapon out and are pointing it at them.) It's something that's totally awesome in both real life and fiction that 3e just doesn't simulate.
In order to Vital Strike someone in the surprise round, you need to start the surprise round in melee reach of them with your weapon in hand. (Alternately, you could have some sort of swift-action movement, like a quickened movement spell or a handful of non-core abilities.) Barring tower shield cheese, this means that they're in melee reach of concealment, they are blind, you have Hide in Plain Sight, or you are invisible.
Vital Strike is a Standard Action. You can move or use a Move Action before the attack. With Quick Draw, "You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action."
So there you are, standing 10' away totally unarmed talking to someone. Suddenly, surprise, you have a weapon in your hand. They are surprised, and flat-footed. You make a 5' step and attack them once using Vital Strike. Since they are denied their Dex bonus due to being flat-footed you get Sneak Attack damage.
The next round you tumble to the other side of them and ready an action to attack as soon as you have flank. Your Barbarian cousin charges in from what seemed to be a safe 80' away. As soon as she is in position you attack with Vital Strike and Sneak Attack a second time and your cousin takes him down before he can even react.
Unfortunately, D&D3e's stealth rules are incredibly punishing in this sort of situation. Unless someone is actually standing in (or immediately adjacent to) an area of concealment, as soon as you leave concealment you're no longer hidden. (And, thus, combat generally begins, assuming you have a weapon out and are pointing it at them.) It's something that's totally awesome in both real life and fiction that 3e just doesn't simulate.
That's . . . incredibly unlike the way I've always understood the relevant rules for such things, all the way back to 2000, under a half-dozen GMs, GMing myself, and at least a dozen campaigns. It's always been ran for me that if a person isn't looking the right way, Stealth lets someone else walk right up to them. I can't find the rules bits that directly support what you say; can you spell it out for me?
Vital Strike is a Standard Action. You can move or use a Move Action before the attack. With Quick Draw, "You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action."
So there you are, standing 10' away totally unarmed talking to someone. Suddenly, surprise, you have a weapon in your hand. They are surprised, and flat-footed. You make a 5' step and attack them once using Vital Strike. Since they are denied their Dex bonus due to being flat-footed you get Sneak Attack damage.
I think you're trying to say that the move action of drawing the concealed weapon happens before the surprise round, so that way the surprise round itself can be a Vital Strike, right? Characters can't take both a standard and a move action in a surprise round.
There's another problem too. Surprise rounds are for when some combatants aren't aware of eachother; persons speaking to eachother are aware of eachother, so there needs to be some deception about the intent to kill. If I were GMing I'd call for Bluff vs Sense Motive to be able to pull that off, then Sleight of Hand vs. Perception to get the dagger out without being noticed. Failure at either of these could very well be Initiative and then off to the races.
It seems logical that if you receive a break on the penalties to hit with using a light weapon in your off hand, that you might get an additional break using a light weapon in your primary hand as well.
A bit off topic... I have a fellow player who's doing a pair of bastard swords (twin katanas). It's working very well even with the additional -2 to hit. Fighters are gross.
Unfortunately, D&D3e's stealth rules are incredibly punishing in this sort of situation. Unless someone is actually standing in (or immediately adjacent to) an area of concealment, as soon as you leave concealment you're no longer hidden. (And, thus, combat generally begins, assuming you have a weapon out and are pointing it at them.) It's something that's totally awesome in both real life and fiction that 3e just doesn't simulate.That's . . . incredibly unlike the way I've always understood the relevant rules for such things, all the way back to 2000, under a half-dozen GMs, GMing myself, and at least a dozen campaigns. It's always been ran for me that if a person isn't looking the right way, Stealth lets someone else walk right up to them. I can't find the rules bits that directly support what you say; can you spell it out for me?
Vital Strike is a Standard Action. You can move or use a Move Action before the attack. With Quick Draw, "You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action."
So there you are, standing 10' away totally unarmed talking to someone. Suddenly, surprise, you have a weapon in your hand. They are surprised, and flat-footed. You make a 5' step and attack them once using Vital Strike. Since they are denied their Dex bonus due to being flat-footed you get Sneak Attack damage.
I think you're trying to say that the move action of drawing the concealed weapon happens before the surprise round, so that way the surprise round itself can be a Vital Strike, right? Characters can't take both a standard and a move action in a surprise round.
There's another problem too. Surprise rounds are for when some combatants aren't aware of eachother; persons speaking to eachother are aware of eachother, so there needs to be some deception about the intent to kill. If I were GMing I'd call for Bluff vs Sense Motive to be able to pull that off, then Sleight of Hand vs. Perception to get the...
Come now come now... that is what the Catch-off-guard and Improvised Weapon Mastery feats are for. Combine those with Vital Strike and you can walk right up to someone and cut their heart out with a spoon.
"Why a spoon cousin?"
"Because its dull you twit! It'll hurt more!"
Come now come now... that is what the Catch-off-guard and Improvised Weapon Mastery feats are for. Combine those with Vital Strike and you can walk right up to someone and cut their heart out with a spoon.
"Why a spoon cousin?"
"Because its dull you twit! It'll hurt more!"
That seals it. My next fighter character will use COG, IWM and TWF to dual-wield sporks. Just cause sporks are cooler than spoons.
Still slightly of topic...
I also had the idea of using a rogue with Catch-off-guard, Improvised Weapon Mastery, and the Bleeding Attack rogue talent.
Just to have a rogue dressed a scribe and assassinate people with quills.
"Please sir, may I have your signature?"
"certainly let me just... OMG my eye!"
... but that is just silly and overly graphic.
Back on topic -
Using light weapons is rather nice in that... they are just that... light. Light enough actually that you can usually afford to carry multiple spares. Also... why not make your spares of different materials as well?
That seals it. My next fighter character will use COG, IWM and TWF to dual-wield sporks. Just cause sporks are cooler than spoons.Come now come now... that is what the Catch-off-guard and Improvised Weapon Mastery feats are for. Combine those with Vital Strike and you can walk right up to someone and cut their heart out with a spoon.
"Why a spoon cousin?"
"Because its dull you twit! It'll hurt more!"
The battle cry of "Spoooooork!" just doesn't have the same ring to it as "Spoooooon!"
I agree though... sporks are pretty nifty. I have several that are made of Titanium.
You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check.
I don't want to get in to one of those silly hundred-post rules arguments you're discussing (in part because we're getting offtopic here), but I think you and I are miscommunicating about what was once Move Silently and Hide, versus what is now just Stealth. Plenty of 3.0/3.5 situations don't require Hide checks at all. As with my example from earlier, if the target is facing the wrong way, it's just Move Silently with no Hide check necessary. I'm not sure I can prove that with 3.0/3.5 rulestext because I don't have my core rulebooks in front of me and the SRD is pure crunch. The PRD has The Most Important Rule though, which makes me a happy panda. :'D
Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.
Er, that whole paragraph is about what to do when a character tries to hide from obververs, which means creatures that can already perceive them. I don't think taking that sentence out of context is appropriate:
"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) . . . "
Anyway, I think we agree about what really matters, which is to say, how the game ought to be played. I guess I forgot how dumb armies of D&D forum posters could be, because I stayed away from it for so long. :'P
Vital strike was made for surprise rounds :)How the blazes are you surprising someone from melee range? I don't think Mr. Magoo is very high CR.
really?... Watch from about 2min. 30 seconds til about 3 minutes, or watch the whole thing he's pretty funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQVaTEPOsTA
Just as a note guys, power attack doesn't penalize light weapons, it penalizes off-hand weapons, meaning a light weapon in your main hand gets the normal bonus of 2 for 1.
It does not really "penalize" you. You are still getting a +1 to damage on off-hand attacks at 1st-3rd. At 4th it'd give you +2 damage.
Hmmm... keeping that in mind though, we are using Double Slice which allows for full STR bonus on off-hand attacks.
I might need to house-rule in my games that I'll allow full base power attack for off-hand attacks for those that have Double Slice.
The idea being that you have trained up your arm strength so both are equally powerful and all.
Just as a note guys, power attack doesn't penalize light weapons, it penalizes off-hand weapons, meaning a light weapon in your main hand gets the normal bonus of 2 for 1.It does not really "penalize" you. You are still getting a +1 to damage on off-hand attacks at 1st-3rd. At 4th it'd give you +2 damage.
Hmmm... keeping that in mind though, we are using Double Slice which allows for full STR bonus on off-hand attacks.
I might need to house-rule in my games that I'll allow full base power attack for off-hand attacks for those that have Double Slice.
The idea being that you have trained up your arm strength so both are equally powerful and all.
I think a lot of people are doing that. I don't think I will. TWF puts out HUGE damage now for fighters with weapon training and specialization. I'm hesitant to give them more damage on their offhand :) Double slice on it's own is huge.. imagine a divine power righteous might half-orc cleric with double slice using an orc double-axe with maxed out STR, natural, inherant bonuses,enhancement bonuses, size bonuses, and now luck bonuses with the changes to some spells.
You could be looking at a large creature with 46 STR at level 20 and doubleslice will be crazy, full damage for offhand power attack will be even more crazy.Also if you give power attack full for offhand it will actually add MORE damage than using it with a two-handed weapon.
Also if you give power attack full for offhand it will actually add MORE damage than using it with a two-handed weapon.
...which is exactly what Double Slice does for Strength. IMO it's appropriate. Stupidly powerful, but appropriate.
I agree though... sporks are pretty nifty. I have several that are made of Titanium.
Quote from link---> "Your food consumption can become the stuff of legends. Even just holding the Titanium Spork in your hand, you can feel its power. It is perhaps the greatest gastronomic invention since lickable wallpaper. Hunger, beware - your end is near!"
That sir, is absolutely awesome!! :D
You can't be facing the wrong way because 3e has no rules for facing.
I think we both know that the DM is especially empowered to interpret game situations, especially when there are no rules on a subject. Facing must therefore be one of these. Whether or not a check is even allowed in a given situation is absolutely up to the DM. Let's take another example -- what if the target of the sneaky person is blindfolded? There are no blindfold rules, yet we both know that no Spot check should be allowed. One can claim that wearing a blindfold causes the Blinded condition, but that claim isn't backed by rules anywhere, regardless of how obvious it is.
Anyway, in the interest of staying on-topic I think this is the last I'm going to say on this subject on this thread; if you'd like to start a discussion on another one I'm happy to continue.
Also if you give power attack full for offhand it will actually add MORE damage than using it with a two-handed weapon....which is exactly what Double Slice does for Strength. IMO it's appropriate. Stupidly powerful, but appropriate.
Which do you think should hurt more. Same opponent, same strength, getting hit by a short sword or getting hit by a claymore?
I like double slice..I actually like it more than power attack for TWF as you get extra damage with no penalty to attack. adding it to power attack I think is too much. I could see it on 2 large weapons like longswordss where the person is taking an additional -2 to hit, but even then I think it's too much.
I agree though... sporks are pretty nifty. I have several that are made of Titanium.Quote from link---> "Your food consumption can become the stuff of legends. Even just holding the Titanium Spork in your hand, you can feel its power. It is perhaps the greatest gastronomic invention since lickable wallpaper. Hunger, beware - your end is near!"
That sir, is absolutely awesome!! :D
Glad you approve! :)
@ TO & A Man In Black:
These rules are found in the Complete Adventurer and should settle your disagreement.
Move between Cover: If you’re already hiding (thanks
to cover or concealment) and you have at least 5 ranks in
Hide, you can make a Hide check (with a penalty) to try
to move across an area that does not offer cover or concealment
without revealing yourself. For every 5 ranks
in Hide you possess, you can move up to 5 feet between
one hiding place and another. For every 5 feet of open
space you must cross between hiding places, you take a
–5 penalty on your Hide check. If you move at more than
one-half your speed, you also take the normal penalty
on Hide checks when moving quickly (–10 for moving
faster than normal speed, or –5 for moving between half
speed and normal speed).You can also use this option to sneak up on someone
from a hiding place. For every 5 feet of open space
between you and the target, you take a –5 penalty on
your Hide check. If your Hide check succeeds, your
target doesn’t notice you until you attack or make some
other attention-grabbing action. Such a target is treated
as being flat-footed with respect to you.
Sure you can say, "Well that's not Pathfinder." Remember, Pathfinder was designed as a compatible upgrade to 3.5 and most things in 3.5 still apply. In fact on several occasions debates about Pathfinder rules have been settled by the PF team jumping in and pointing people back to the 3.5 Rules, Eratta, or FAQ. Also keep in mind the first line of the Stealth skill plainly states it now covers both hiding and moving silently and as these rules are a skill use of Hide I would say they still apply in the Pathfinder Stealth skill.
Complete Adventurer add some extra rules to cover this essential 3e omission, but they're really punishing. They are better than nothing, though. That in mind, this isn't really a criticism of Pathfinder in particular. It's a 3e problem that PF inherited.
The Complete Adventurer rules make the maneuver difficult for low level Stealthy guys but I wouldn't call it punishing by any means. The run of the mill low level scrub shouldn't really be able to do this because, let's face it, he isn't that good at hiding yet. If you take Stealthy or Skill Focus (Stealth) this maneuver would be much easier.
I think it is on a pretty level scale with the Bluff, move to cover/concealment, and Stealth at -10 maneuver. With these rules you are starting off at a -10 and that doesn't take into consideration that you might have to move more than half your speed and will take an additional -5.
With the CA rules it is just -5 per 5 feet. So it is much less difficult if you only have to move 5 feat. If you are moving up to 10 feet it is at an even difficulty. After 10 feet it starts becoming quite a bit more difficult than the Bluff, move to cover/concealment, and Stealth at -10 maneuver.
All this just boils down to: It isn't easy to avoid detection and if you really want to do it well, you are going to have to invest in the ability.
NOTE: The CA Skill Use rules have not been Pathfinderized. What I mean by that is the skill point system in Pathfinder has changed from 3.5. In the 3.5 system the maneuvers described in CA could be performed by a 2nd lvl character with full ranks in Hide. If you want convert this use you would have to say: This Skill use can be performed by anyone with 2 ranks in Stealth. I would probably leave the -5 per 5 feet though because although the rank system has changed, the total bonus a character, with that class skill, would get is exactly the same.
3.5 SRD, Gaze attacks wrote:
An opponent can shut his eyes, turn his back on the creature, or wear a blindfold. In these cases, the opponent does not need to make a saving throw. The creature with the gaze attack gains total concealment relative to the opponent.3.5 SRD, Spot wrote:
Total cover or total concealment usually (but not always; see Special, below) obviates the need for a Hide check, since nothing can see you anyway.RAW, wearing a blindfold means that you cannot see someone (barring appropriate non-visual senses).
Yes you would be able to hide from someone if they were blindfolded. But not necessarily for the reason you think. In conditions of normal light or bright light you cannot use concealment to use Stealth, you must instead have cover or invisibility. So, the Total Concealment granted by him being blindfolded would be irrelevant in this situation.
I am not arguing that you cannot hide from a blindfolded or blind man in the daylight. You absolutely can, I am just saying that the concealment isn't a factor. If he is blindfolded or blind then you are, for all intents & purposes, invisible and as such may use Stealth.
If he can't see you then it doesn't matter if you have concealment or cover because you aren't using the "hiding" portion of Stealth, you are using the "moving silently" portion of it. So you roll Stealth (Move Silently) and he rolls Perception (Listen). If he doesn't hear you, and can't see you, then you are successfully hidden.
The Complete Adventurer rules make the maneuver difficult for low level Stealthy guys but I wouldn't call it punishing by any means. The run of the mill low level scrub shouldn't really be able to do this because, let's face it, he isn't that good at hiding yet. If you take Stealthy or Skill Focus (Stealth) this maneuver would be much easier.These rules require level 2 and a 5-rank skill investment before you can sneak past an open doorway. Man, I can do that. Not allowing that to someone whose whole character concept is sneaking around and doing sneaky stuff, that's pretty punishing.
Actually in PF it is level 2 and a 2-rank skill investment (the other 3 points come from Stealth being a class skill in PF). Even in 3.5, however, I wouldn't call investing 5 ranks in Hide a big punishment for a Rogue, Ranger, etc who as you say, has a concept built around stealth.
.
So let't take a Rogue at 2nd lvl who wants to do this vs. a Fighter of 2nd lvl.
Rogue's Stealth: 2 Ranks + 3 points class skill + 4 Dex bonus.
Fighter's Perception: 2 Ranks + 0 points Perception isn't a class skill + 0 Wis mod.
So even at 2nd lvl when a stealthy character first gets this ability he likely has a +2 point advantage to cross that doorway. And that is before he rolls the die. (Of course this is assuming he didn't take Skill Focus (Stealth) or Stealty at lvl 1.)
Let's go up to lvl 10.
Rogue's Stealth: 10 Ranks + 3 Points class skill + 5 Dex bonus.
Fighter's Perception: 10 Ranks + 0.
Goes up to a +3 advantage to cross that first 5 feet. But the thing about this example is, it doesn't account for the fact that a character who has a design all around Stealth has invested in the skill. Whereas the most the average character/NPC will invest in Perception is full ranks. Lets do one more example at lvl 10.
Rogue's Stealth: 10 Ranks + 3 Class skill + 5 Dex bonus + 6 Skill Focus + 10 Shadowed Armor = 34 (Keep in mind this is still a fairly tame example of a Stealth focused Rogue.)
Fighter's Perception: 10 Ranks + 0 + 4 Alertness (we will say he took one feat to boost his Perception) = 14
It is actually impossible for the Fighter to spot the Rogue at this point unless the Rogue has negatives to his Stealth check. The Rogue could actually roll a 1 and the Fighter could roll a 20 and the Rogue would still be undetected.
Now let’s say the Rogue wants to move past that open doorway. His +34 now goes to + 29. Now even if he rolls a 1 the Fighter would still have to roll a 16 to spot him. If the Rogue rolls average (10) the Fighter would have to roll a 25 to see him (oh wait that's impossible)
Let’s say the Rogue wants to move 15 feet unnoticed and attack the Fighter. The +34 is now a +19. If the Rogue rolled average (10) the Fighter would have to roll a 15 to see him before it is too late (odds are on the Rogue's side).
.
So again, no I wouldn't call it punishing. I would call it challenging and not for the run of the mill alley stalker. But for a PC who has invested in Stealth, knowing he wanted to do things like this, I would say it is simply a matter of focusing on Stealth. Sure it will be challenging, but avoiding detection by trained guards should always be a challenge.
.
And besides, challenging is better than impossible by RAW which is what the whole argument was about to begin with.
Wait, I missed this. PF made it even harder to hide? Now you can't even hide in bushes in the daytime. That's...that's...
.
It may be harder but it is believable. By your method, someone who has a Blur spell on them can walk right out in the middle of a busy street in broad daylight and never be seen at all because the technically can use Stealth because Blur gives them concealment and concealment lets them hide regardless of the lighting conditions.
If the bushes don't grant cover then NO you can't.
I just don't have words for that. PF rogues are less capable than my cat.
Your cat probably gains cover from bushes, a full grown man in armor may not.
-EDIT- No, Shadowlord is just wrong.
Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.
Sometimes, when someone posts something you haven't heard of before, it is beneficial to do your homework, or maybe even ask a question or two, before you accuse them of being wrong in such a blunt, and somewhat rude, manor. Otherwise, something like this might happen:
In an area of bright light, all characters can see clearly. Some creatures, such as those with light sensitivity and light blindness, take penalties while in areas of bright light. A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover. Areas of bright light include outside in direct sunshine and inside the area of a daylight spell.
Normal light functions just like bright light, but characters with light sensitivity and light blindness do not take penalties. Areas of normal light include underneath a forest canopy during the day, within 20 feet of a torch, and inside the area of a light spell.
So now, I believe you sir are the one who is, "just wrong," because when I read the above, I tend to believe it means you can't use cover to hide in bright or normal light. In which case, MY EXAMPLE would be absolutely correct. And just so you don't get the idea I am making this up, I will even post a link to the appropriate PAGE IN THE PRD on which if you search for "normal light" you should come right to the quoted text.
.
EDIT: I see you have retracted your earlier statements and replaced them with THIS POST :
I understand how the rules work. It's still pretty silly that you need to be level 2 to sneak past a doorway when my cat can do that.
My answer to this new statement would be: At lvl 1 you represent an average guy who just decided to pick up adventuring. You have little skill and no experience. It makes absolute sense that you would learn new uses of your talents as you progress in levels.
Besides, in the game a cat has racial bonuses to Stealth, a human does not. As for real life, I am sure there are many things your cat can do that you are utterly incapable of and would fail miserably if you tried.