A rogue in our group recently gained a magic robe that covers her in constantly shifting shadows. As a result she has constant 'concealment' and 20% chance of being missed in combat.
Does this mean that since she has concealment all the time she may attempt a stealth check anywhere, even if people are directly looking at her?
Thanks in advance for your help. If you can site book on this I would be appreciative.
|
From the Pathfinder SRD
Concealment and Stealth Checks: You can use concealment to make a Stealth check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Stealth check.
That being said, wording on the robe would need to be very specific. Does it grant a 20% miss chance, or does it grant concealment (with concealment granting the miss chance)?
What spell was used to craft the item? I would assume Blur. Blur grants concealment, the 20% miss chance is just a bonus of having the concealment effect. So someone with Blur cast on them (or a permanent Blur effect from an item) would be able to effectively stealth at will, per the RAW.
That being said, wording on the robe would need to be very specific. Does it grant a 20% miss chance, or does it grant concealment (with concealment granting the miss chance)?
The wording I used is identical to what the GM told her when she gave it to her off a dead gnome assassin.
To be clear, it grants concealment with concealment granting the miss chance.
What spell was used to craft the item?
No idea, though my character has Craft Magic Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item so I should be able to find out but we don't play again for several weeks so I won't have an answer before then.
Though from your link it would seem that Concealment would allow her to stealth virtually at will, even directly in front of someone. Glad I have constant True Sight (there is something to be said for disposable income and Craft Wondrous!)
This is just as silly as rogues trying to hide in their own shadows.
I copy blur here for easy reference :
Blur
School illusion (glamer); Level bard 2, sorcerer/wizard 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V
Range touch
Target creature touched
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)
The subject’s outline appears blurred, shifting, and wavering. This
distortion grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).
A see invisibility spell does not counteract the blur effect, but a
true seeing spell does.
Opponents that cannot see the subject ignore the spell’s effect
(though fighting an unseen opponent carries penalties of its own).
"Opponents that cannot see the subject ignore the spell's effect"
Ok, so that means if the rogue hides in the blur effect the concealment is effectively negated, then.. where is the rogue hiding.. obviously he is no longer under concealment. kinda self defeating I would say.
I know this is not blur, but for all intends and purposes it might as well be, the effect is identical. I'd draw the following conclusion :
concealment that affects only your person rather than an area can not be used to hide.
This is just as silly as rogues trying to hide in their own shadows.
I copy blur here for easy reference
While that is accurate for Blur, nowhere did I say it was a cloak of Blur. Someone else suggested that Blur might have been used to MAKE the cloak.
The cloak is a 'Cloak of Great Shadow' which covers the wearer in deep, constantly shifing shadows. The cloak gives concealment so that is what I am basing the question on.
Ok.. so you have a homemade item without a how to use manual, I just hit you with the manual. sure the manual is written for blur but it works fine for this one.. trust me.
Ok.. so you have a homemade item without a how to use manual, I just hit you with the manual. sure the manual is written for blur but it works fine for this one.. trust me.
I'll go with Goblins answer thanks. While you may be right if it was a Cloak of Blur, it quite specifically is not. Since one effect is known for sure (Concealment) I'll go by Concealments rules. And the rules cover concealment on an individual as opposed to concealment in the whole square the individual is in.
|
|
I see nothing in the RAW that mention the need for total cover or full concealment to "enter" stealth.
I also think that the "Opponents that cannot see the subject ignore the spell’s effect" is likely just referring to the fact that Blur is a visual effect, an illusion in fact. So, if you are blind, the target is invisible, or are perceiving the target in some way other then sight (blindsight, tremorsense, etc.), then the Blur effect is negated. Either way, I would be hesitant to make a ruling on how all of concealment works based on the wording of one individual spell.
How I would arbitrate the concealed character stealthing while someone is watching is through modifications to the perception check. The fact that the character is concealed allows them to make a stealth check, but if they are in the center of a bright room with indirect lighting, and thus are the only shadow effect visible, I might give someone some kind of massive bonus to perception. If they are in a torchlit cave, and sticking close to the walls, I'd either give them a bonus to their stealth check, or their opponent a negative to their perception check.
Stealth requires "Total Concealment", or "Full Cover to enter stealth. After that it only requires cover or cocealment to maintain it.
This is not correct.
Per RAW, you only need ordinary Cover or Concealment:
Cover and Stealth Checks: You can use cover to make a Stealth check. Without cover, you usually need concealment (see below) to make a Stealth check.
Concealment and Stealth Checks: You can use concealment to make a Stealth check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Stealth check.
|
|
Stealth requires "Total Concealment", or "Full Cover to enter stealth. After that it only requires cover or cocealment to maintain it.This is not correct.
Per RAW, you only need ordinary Cover or Concealment:
Cover and Stealth Checks: You can use cover to make a Stealth check. Without cover, you usually need concealment (see below) to make a Stealth check.
I love it when I ninja a Terrasque by half a dozen posts. :-P
I love it when I ninja a Terrasque by half a dozen posts. :-P
Well, to be fair to the Tarrasque, after you said it, someone else corrected you (incorrectly, on his part). So I am correcting a later post than the one to which you refer.
You also rebutted, but without cites. So I provided them, thusly justifying my post as a valid contribution to the thread.
Don't make me chomp...
Ok.. so you have a homemade item without a how to use manual, I just hit you with the manual. sure the manual is written for blur but it works fine for this one.. trust me.I'll go with Goblins answer thanks. While you may be right if it was a Cloak of Blur, it quite specifically is not. Since one effect is known for sure (Concealment) I'll go by Concealments rules. And the rules cover concealment on an individual as opposed to concealment in the whole square the individual is in.
Imagine a flat plainscape on a sunny day and there is this shadowy shape right in the center, suddenly it is gone *poof*..
If he is hiding then there should be something to hide in if you cant see the shadows because the rogue is hiding this negates the effect, if the shadowy stuff is still there you actually know where he is.. so what was the point ?
On the other side if it actually can do such a thing it effectively gives the Hide in Plain sight ability which is quite powerful and I dont think it is meant to.. common sense and house ruling is needed in this game. It is what DMs are for.
|
Well, the other side there is that you cannot stealth in bright light unless you have cover.
pg 172 Core rulebook:
"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. A creature within an area of dim light can make a Stealth check to conceal itself."
So it seems to me from this that you can only stealth in dim light or darkness during normal circumstances *excluding invisibility*. And, since dim light provides concealment, the robe is kind of useless. Now, what the rogue really needs is a way to reduce the light level around him/herself or to get invisibility up all the time.
So on your sunny day, the character can attempt a stealth check from his concealment, but still fails because the bright light negates it.
If it were normal light, the same problem occurs.
If it were dim light, then stealth would function.
If it were darkness, then stealth would function.
|
|
Interestingly, does a blink spell allow a thief to hide? I would argue that it does...
The way I read Blink, it would not. Blink provides a miss chance, it does not provide Concealment. Blur provides Concealment, and Concealment does grant a miss chance. But having a miss chance does not mean you have concealment.
It's a subtle difference, and even a common logical fallacy.
All tires are black =/= all black things are tires.
I believe MagicDealer settled the issue just now.