Stop trying to rewrite the rules.-James
Urmmm..
Ignoring Concealment: Concealment isn't always effective. An area of dim lighting or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision. Characters with low-light vision can see clearly for a greater distance than other characters with the same light source...
.
*Edit*
To be totally fair, it doesn't say he doesn't see the shadows, just that he isn't affected by the concealment of the shadows.
I like to play darkvision as wholly a bonus, and not a detriment (such as a shadowdancer turning 2nd level and suddenly becoming unable to see when he's 10' close to shadows *roll eyes*).
So yeah.. he knows where the shadows are. He just sees through them.
Either the shadowdancer is cloaking himself in shadows (and the dwarf can see through it), or he's changing his appearance to that of shadow to "blend in", in which case the dwarf just sees more shadow (and needs to roll a perception check as if against a ranger in a ghillie suit is hiding in his favored terrain).
As an aside: I'm thinking the Dwarf can see shadows, he is just not affected by the concealment of them.
Good thing you don't need the concealment of dim light to hide if you are a Shadowdancer or Assassin.
Either the shadowdancer is cloaking himself in shadows (and the dwarf can see through it),
Even if that was the fluff - fluff is IRRELEVANT to mechanics - then your conclusion is still erroneous and not backed up by anything at all.
in which case the dwarf just sees more shadow (and needs to roll a perception check as if against a ranger in a ghillie suit is hiding in his favored terrain).
Which the dwarf ALWAYS has to do because Darkvision does NOT convey any sort of special perception ability like tremorsense, blindsense, or blindsight.
Even if that was the fluff - fluff is IRRELEVANT to mechanics - then your conclusion is still erroneous and not backed up by anything at all.
Were we not asked to reconcile the fluff with the mechanics so the two make sense regardless of a person's interpretation of the rules on Hide in Plain Sight and Darkvision?
I feel I've done just that.
Even if that was the fluff - fluff is IRRELEVANT to mechanics - then your conclusion is still erroneous and not backed up by anything at all.Were we not asked to reconcile the fluff with the mechanics so the two make sense regardless of a person's interpretation of the rules on Hide in Plain Sight and Darkvision?
I feel I've done just that.
He most certainly is. He is using fluff to shoot holes in mechanics. Never mind fluff to overrule the literal rules of the game.
Stop trying to rewrite the rules.-James
Urmmm..
Ignoring Concealment: Concealment isn't always effective. An area of dim lighting or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision. Characters with low-light vision can see clearly for a greater distance than other characters with the same light source...
So let me understand what you're claiming here...
A party of humans carrying a torch is 100' away from a goblin with darkvision of 60'. Some of the humans are out side of the normal light radius of the torch, sneaking in the dim light.
Does the goblin see them? Automatically or with a perception check beating their stealth rolls? If the goblin sees them, do they still have concealment?
People are making assumptions and reading things into the rules that are not there nor were intended to be taken in that manor.
-James
I just quoted a line from the rules. I didn't say anything one way or another in my post about it.
What do you think that line means? "An area of dim light or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision".
1) It can't if within the range of Darkvision
2) That is irrelevant to Shadowdancer because Darkvision doesn't grant any extraordinary ability to automatically perceive something - which is in fact another discussion related to HiPS in general. Dim light as a global constant exists and does not need to provide concealment for HiPS to work; it only needs to exist.
What do you think that line means? "An area of dim light or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision".
If a person is in dim light, they have concealment. Period.
A person with darkvision can ignore the concealment, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
Just wanted to clarify. :)
Obviously. Soon as you hide, you are no longer not hiding and therefore your ability to hide while being observed becomes null and you automatically unhide!stuff about 3.5 FAQSo you are saying it allows you to hide in the open, but you can't stay in the open?
I know it took me a while to get back, but that makes sense. I will keep that in mind.
I know it took me a while to get back, but that makes sense. I will keep that in mind.Obviously. Soon as you hide, you are no longer not hiding and therefore your ability to hide while being observed becomes null and you automatically unhide!stuff about 3.5 FAQSo you are saying it allows you to hide in the open, but you can't stay in the open?
Your sarcasm detector is broken.
Your sarcasm detector is broken.I know it took me a while to get back, but that makes sense. I will keep that in mind.Obviously. Soon as you hide, you are no longer not hiding and therefore your ability to hide while being observed becomes null and you automatically unhide!stuff about 3.5 FAQSo you are saying it allows you to hide in the open, but you can't stay in the open?
So is yours.
If ONLY you had Darkvision then you'd AUTOMATICALLY know when someone was being sarcastic. Only within 60' though.
Your sarcasm detector is broken.I know it took me a while to get back, but that makes sense. I will keep that in mind.Obviously. Soon as you hide, you are no longer not hiding and therefore your ability to hide while being observed becomes null and you automatically unhide!stuff about 3.5 FAQSo you are saying it allows you to hide in the open, but you can't stay in the open?So is yours.
If ONLY you had Darkvision then you'd AUTOMATICALLY know when someone was being sarcastic. Only within 60' though.
+1 xaxaxaaxxaxaax
But for the HIPS : the fact tha someone has darkvision negates the concealment that a shadowdancer might had inside the shadows or dim light (no difference in pathfinder terminology) but does NOT negates shadowdancer's ability to make a stealth check. The "darkvisioner" still has to make the perception check to see the shadowdancer.
A further example is shadowdancer's 10th level ability Shadow Master
Shadow Master (Su)
At 10th level, whenever a shadowdancer is in an area of dim light, she gains DR 10/— and a +2 luck bonus on all saving throws. In addition, whenever she successfully scores a critical hit against a foe who is in an area of dim light, that foe is blinded for 1d6 rounds.
If a "darkvisioner" is there does this means that the shadowdancer does not gain these bonuses? No i dont think so, he just doesnt have the concealment from the shadows.
I know there are many varying opinions on this subject; personally I disagree with the opinion that Darkvision overcomes HiPS. I know and understand that Darkvision allows you to see in dim light and darkness with the same accuracy as normal vision in normal or bright light, minus the color detail (IE: Darkvision eliminates concealment via light condition within its range). This would unquestioningly disallow normal Stealth attempts (unless you have cover or invisibility) within the range of his/her Darkvision. However, I do not agree that Darkvision has any bearing at all on the use of HiPS.
I’m not sure if this has been discussed yet but there is absolutely no reason why Darkvision should arguably interfere with a Ranger’s HiPS/Camouflage in any way. A Ranger’s HiPS/Camouflage ability is entirely based on terrain, not the concealment of shadow, so Darkvision shouldn’t detect that at all.
I also don’t believe the Shadowdancer or Assassin HiPS would be defeated by Darkvision. Let me explain. First I will post the sections in the PRD that detail Darkvision, with bolded and italicized sections that I will be referencing:
Quote 1.
Darkvision is the extraordinary ability to see with no light source at all, out to a range specified for the creature. Darkvision is black-and-white only (colors cannot be discerned). It does not allow characters to see anything that they could not see otherwise—invisible objects are still invisible, and illusions are still visible as what they seem to be. Likewise, darkvision subjects a creature to gaze attacks normally. The presence of light does not spoil darkvision.Quote 2.
Characters with darkvision (dwarves and half-orcs) can see lit areas normally as well as dark areas within 60 feet. A creature can't hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover.
It seems that most people focus (when discussing HiPS) on the limited description in the PRD/Additional Rules/Vision and Light section of the rules. Quote 2 is very straight forward and easy to understand but it is just one part of the description/rules associated with Darkvsion and it is strictly dealing with accuracy of vision within different lighting conditions.
Keep in mind the quote 2 also says Darkvision allows you to “see normally” in dark areas as well as lit areas. Couple that with the portion in quote 1 that says “It does not allow characters to see anything that they could not see otherwise—invisible objects are still invisible, and illusions are still visible as what they seem to be.” Now look at the actual mechanical effect of Darkvision: You can’t hide from something with Darkvision, within the range of their Darkvision, unless you are invisible or have cover; which are the exact same conditions given for using Stealth while in “Normal Light” conditions. Also remember that Darkvision is an (EX) ability not a (SU) ability.
All of that leads me to view Darkvision like this: It Is not a magical ability in any way. It is a natural, environmental adaptation developed by several nocturnal or subterranean species. Darkvision allows an individual/creature to see normally out to a set range in dark areas granting the same accuracy and detail (minus color) that normal vision provides in areas of normal or bright light. IMO the only difference between a Human looking around a room in the daylight and a Dwarf looking around the same room in pitch-black darkness would be that the Dwarf would see everything in black and white or grayscale. Other than that their accuracy and detail would be exactly the same.
So how does that interact with HiPS? I don’t believe that Darkvision would defeat HiPS for a couple of reasons:
1) Darkvision doesn’t allow you to see anything you wouldn’t otherwise see; illusions and invisible stuff still appear as they should with normal vision. That said HiPS is not a spell, but it is a (SU) ability which is defined as “magical in nature” and the effect is akin to many illusionary type effects. A natural ability that doesn’t allow you to see through magical effects should not allow you to see through a (SU) effect either, because the (SU) effect is “magical in nature.”
2) Darkvision is a natural ability to see in the dark eliminating the benefit of concealment; HiPS is a supernatural tie to shadows which allows the use of Stealth any time you are within 10’ of dim light (regardless of concealment or the lack of it – no mention of concealment is ever made in the HiPS description). So if you don’t need the concealment of shadow to hide using HiPS then negating that concealment shouldn’t matter in the least.
3) Darkvision allows you to see normally even without light. So it gives you night sight but, again, it doesn’t allow you to see anything you wouldn’t otherwise be able to see. Meaning, you can’t see anything in darkness that a guy with normal vision couldn’t see in normal light. So the question here is, can a guy with HiPS use Stealth while in normal or bright light against a guy with normal vision and without using cover or concealment? The answer, he most certainly can. The guy with HiPS could be standing right in the middle of a sun beam and disappear from view, as long as he is within 10’ of an area of dim light. If that is the case, then I see no reason why Darkvision, which is still normal sight, should be able to trump HiPS.
I’m not sure if this has been discussed yetIt all has been honestly.
It boils down to some deciding to read into, or in some cases rewrite the rules to suit their needs.
They have claimed that areas of dim light are dependent upon the viewer, rather than an environmental terrain feature that may or may not impose penalties on viewers.
Then they run with that claiming concealment that a shadowdancer never had is negated and thus they can't hide despite never needing the concealment in the first place.
Then they run to fluff issues, but don't address the same problems the fluff issues would have with the ranger abilities, etc.
Bottom line, they want the rules to be different plain and simple. I'm not quite sure if they know as to what, but I don't really care. The rules are fairly simple here, baring actively seeking a different outcome.
-James
I will say again keep applying the rules of our universe to the pathfinder universe. in our universe lighting conditions are objective. our in the pathfinder they are subjective because in pathfinder darkvision exists which is a feat that cannot be replicated in our known universe.
Again ranger hips is not at issue because it does not depend on lighting condition.
what you call fluff is material to whether or not hips works against darkvision. if all hips does is grant normal darkness as concealment or cover to make a stealth check while be observed then yes that bit of fluff is material to how it functions against darkvision. as stealth using dim light/darkness, which all hips does is allow a stealth check does not function within 60' of a darkvision person.
if however hips creates a supernatural dim lighting then that might over write darkvision. So in this case the what you call fluff, and i call the key mechanism of its operation is central to the determination of its function. As the rules are woefully inadaquate, it is impossible to give a clear answer until the rules are written.
I will say again keep applying the rules of our universe to the pathfinder universe. in our universe lighting conditions are objective. our in the pathfinder they are subjective
No. They aren't. You are wrong. Period.
|
No, hips allows a stealth check without concealment or cover, while being observed, as long as they are within range of an objective area of dim lighting.
Also, night vision goggles =/= darkvision.
Fluff not necessarily important to the mechanics. Fluff describes mechanics, but does not change how the mechanics work. The ability doesn't provide concealment, so it's not pulling darkness over to itself. If anything, I think the shadowdancer is more likely to look like darkness, like a shadow of the type they can later summon, than to be wrapping up in darkness like a blanket.
But, again, irrelevant since flavor text describes how mechanics look, and not how they work.
Also, night vision goggles =/= darkvision.
I kind of think they are. Have you ever looked through NVG? You can still see shadows. They still exist for people with NVG on, they're just lighter shaded as the goggles intelligently amplify and attenuate standing lighting conditions. You can still more or less see where shadows are, you can just see into them better.
Also, night vision goggles =/= darkvision.I kind of think they are. Have you ever looked through NVG? You can still see shadows. They still exist for people with NVG on, they're just lighter shaded as the goggles intelligently amplify and attenuate standing lighting conditions. You can still more or less see where shadows are, you can just see into them better.
This is actually how I picture Darkvision looking as well, except in gray scale.
No, hips allows a stealth check without concealment or cover, while being observed, as long as they are within range of an objective area of dim lighting.
Also, night vision goggles =/= darkvision.
Fluff not necessarily important to the mechanics. Fluff describes mechanics, but does not change how the mechanics work. The ability doesn't provide concealment, so it's not pulling darkness over to itself. If anything, I think the shadowdancer is more likely to look like darkness, like a shadow of the type they can later summon, than to be wrapping up in darkness like a blanket.
But, again, irrelevant since flavor text describes how mechanics look, and not how they work.
Again you are applying the wrong rules and ignoring the fact that those rules do not apply to darkvision, thus those rules are subjective..
those lighting conditions are only going to apply to people with "normal vision".
Darkvision is essientally magic. there is no known analogue in over world nor is it possible by our laws. Darkvision overrules all those lighting rules because such persons can see in total darkness. such a person makes lighting conditions SUBJECTIVE as it relates to vision because they ingore them. you keep conflating absolute number of Photons (light levels ) with the state of being dark. They are not the same in pathfinder because darkvision exists.
yes in our world it would work the way you say it does, because we only have the ability to use normal vision, low light vision. Vision in our world always rquires that some part of the light spectrum be present, Darkvision does not. Darkvision eliminates shadows, sees without any visible spectrum of light aviable, thus the condition of being dark is neccassarily Subjective, because wether or not a room is "dark" will depend upon the viewer and not the state of the room, which is not true in our world, whether or not there is a shadow is dependant upon the view, because poeple with darkvision don't see shadows, by logical neccassity, the state of being a shadow cannot be objective if shadows do not exists for darkvision. it would be one thing if the shadows were "invisible" but thats not the case, the case if that darkvision simple eliminates the effect shadows, nullifing their existance.
what you call fluff is material to whether or not hips works against darkvision.
No it isn't because "fluff" never affects mechanics. Never!
if all hips does is grant normal darkness as concealment or cover to make a stealth check while be observed then yes that bit of fluff is material to how it functions against darkvision. as stealth using dim light/darkness, which all hips does is allow a stealth check does not function within 60' of a darkvision person.
Does the HiPS ability state that it grants normal darkness as concealment to make a stealth check while being observed? No, it states that when within 10' of an area of dim light you can use Stealth even with nothing to hide in and even while observed.
And you are combining two things (shadows and concealment) into one and the same thing in your argument. You are saying that because HiPS uses Stealth and Stealth uses concealment = HiPS must somehow wrap you in darkness so you can Stealth, but since Darkvision allows you to see through darkness you can't hide. However, shadows (IE: dim light and darkness) and concealment are two completely separate things. Shadow is a natural lighting condition nothing more. Concealment is a separate condition that you just so happen to receive while in areas of shadow. Normally you are correct, Stealth must have concealment to work, and if Darkvision eliminates the concealment then Stealth would not work against the creature with Darkvision while in his visual range. This is not a normal ability though, and it says nothing about needing concealment to use Stealth, it says you need to be within 10' of dim light. Dim light is a completely different thing than concealment and while Darkvision does eliminate concealment it certainly does not eliminate the environmental presence of dim light in an area it is not a torch or a light spell.
if however hips creates a supernatural dim lighting then that might over write darkvision.
Does the HiPS ability say it creates any darkness, supernatural or otherwise? No, it functions in the presence of existing dim light. Which, as I said above is not the same as saying it functions in the presence of the concealment granted by the existing dim light.
So in this case the what you call fluff, and i call the key mechanism of its operation is central to the determination of its function.
The key mechanics of the abilities in RAW and how they interact are:
1) Darkvision doesn’t allow you to see anything you wouldn’t otherwise see; illusions and invisible stuff still appear as they should with normal vision. That said HiPS is not a spell, but it is a (SU) ability which is defined as “magical in nature” and the effect is akin to many illusionary type effects. A natural ability that doesn’t allow you to see through magical effects should not allow you to see through a (SU) effect either, because the (SU) effect is “magical in nature.”
2) Darkvision is a natural ability to see in the dark eliminating the benefit of concealment; HiPS is a supernatural tie to shadows which allows the use of Stealth any time you are within 10’ of dim light (regardless of concealment or the lack of it – no mention of concealment is ever made in the HiPS description). So if you don’t need the concealment of shadow to hide using HiPS then negating that concealment shouldn’t matter in the least.
3) Darkvision allows you to see normally even without light. So it gives you night sight but, again, it doesn’t allow you to see anything you wouldn’t otherwise be able to see. Meaning, you can’t see anything in darkness that a guy with normal vision couldn’t see in normal light. So the question here is, can a guy with HiPS use Stealth while in normal or bright light against a guy with normal vision and without using cover or concealment? The answer, he most certainly can. The guy with HiPS could be standing right in the middle of a sun beam and disappear from view, as long as he is within 10’ of an area of dim light. If that is the case, then I see no reason why Darkvision, which is still normal sight, should be able to trump HiPS.
What you call fluff are two completely made up descriptions that cannot be found anywhere in the actual rules of the ability. Nowhere in HiPS does it say that you wrap shadow/concealment around yourself while standing 10' from the source of shadow. It is not in existing "fluff" at all and certainly isn't in any existing RAW mechanics for the ability. The descriptions, both fluff and mechanics, of HiPS have been written in the same way since 3.5 and were carried over into PF with little modification. That tells me that the way they are printed IS in fact the way the designers intended to present them. So instead of making up new rules and descriptions I try to logically piece together how the existing RAW should interact. Which I believe I have done reasonably well in my post above, and I suspect others have done previously in this thread.
As the rules are woefully inadaquate, it is impossible to give a clear answer until the rules are written.
IMO, what is woefully inadequate in many of these forum discussions is peoples comprehension of the rules as written.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
those lighting conditions are only going to apply to people with "normal vision".
Which makes them the objective lighting conditions of the world
Darkvision is essientally magic.
Really? Really? No, it isn't.
there is no known analogue in over world nor is it possible by our laws.
Yet you sit there and say Darkvision is magic. It is only magic in looking at it through the lens of the "real world." In Golarian, it is a mundane ability of certain sets of the natural fauna.
Darkvision overrules all those lighting rules because such persons can see in total darkness.
Overruling != invalidating. Because a Dwarf has darkvision that does not mean torches no longer shed normal light in a 20' radius and dim light in a 40' radius. How the hell do torches work in Dwarven tunnels then? Do they just not by the very fact Dwarves are near them?
This is actually how I picture Darkvision looking as well, except in gray scale.
Salvatore decided Darkvision works like heat-vision now everyone thinks it works like that despite that making even LESS sense *face palm*
Again you are applying the wrong rules and ignoring the fact that those rules do not apply to darkvision, thus those rules are subjective.
Really? Then please point to the section in the rule book where a separate set of rules is laid out for individuals with Darkvision. There is no separate set of rules, the only rule change is that it overrides the benefit of concealment granted by dim light and darkness. NOWHERE in the Darkvision description does it even hint that you "don't see shadows, or that shadows don't exist for you."
It simply says you see normally in darkness as well as you would in daylight. Creatures in the range of your Darkvision don't gain the benefit of concealment from the lighting conditions.
Darkvision is essientally magic.
No it's not. It is an Extraordinary Ability, hence the (EX). Extraordinary abilities are described in RAW as natural abilities. If it was magical it would be a Supernatural Ability (SU) but it's not. However, HiPS is a (SU).
there is no known analogue in over world nor is it possible by our laws.
This is in no way even a valid argument. There is also no known analogue in our world for someone who can be standing right in plain view and suddenly disappear due to a Supernatural tie to shadow either. But it is a game and the game has rules; those rules support what I and several others have written above, not your idea that Darkvision suddenly turns total darkness into the utter absence of any darkness or shadow.
wether or not a room is "dark" will depend upon the viewer and not the state of the room, which is not true in our world, whether or not there is a shadow is dependant upon the view, because poeple with darkvision don't see shadows, by logical neccassity, the state of being a shadow cannot be objective if shadows do not exists for darkvision. it would be one thing if the shadows were "invisible" but thats not the case, the case if that darkvision simple eliminates the effect shadows, nullifing their existance.
Outstanding, now show me in RAW where that is supported. I have posted quotes of all the Darkvision rules and others have posted rules on lighting. Nowhere in the book is RAW supporting what you just said.
Salvatore decided Darkvision works like heat-vision now everyone thinks it works like that despite that making even LESS sense *face palm*
This is actually how I picture Darkvision looking as well, except in gray scale.
It was also decided at some point that wearing a Drow Piwafwi would completely hide you from Darkvision.
Also, has anyone addressed that the way some people are explaining Darkvision would UTTERLY and COMPLETELY nullify one of the biggest reasons to multiclass into the Shadowdancer or Assassin PrCs for several player races not to mention a ton of NPC races. That would just be stupid.
No one living in an orc, dwarven, drow, etc society would ever take either of those PrCs. They wouldn't even understand the benefit of one of the core abilities. So, any DM who thinks Darkvision works that way should say good bye to any idea of an NPC Shadowdancer or Assassin from any of those cultures. Again, that is stupid IMO.
Salvatore decided Darkvision works like heat-vision now everyone thinks it works like that despite that making even LESS sense *face palm*
This is actually how I picture Darkvision looking as well, except in gray scale.
Night Vision Goggles and Infra-Red (heat vision) are quite different. With heat vision you tend to just see red, yellow, and orange blobs with no real detail. Seeing through NVGs is extremely detailed.
I have always pictured DV as a very detailed gray scale vision, much like looking through NVGs but black and white.
Also, has anyone addressed that the way some people are explaining Darkvision would UTTERLY and COMPLETELY nullify one of the biggest reasons to multiclass into the Shadowdancer or Assassin PrCs for several player races not to mention a ton of NPC races. That would just be stupid.
No one living in an orc, dwarven, drow, etc society would ever take either of those PrCs. They wouldn't even understand the benefit of one of the core abilities. So, any DM who thinks Darkvision works that way should say good bye to any idea of an NPC Shadowdancer or Assassin from any of those cultures. Again, that is stupid IMO.
Shadowdancers get darkvision, regardless of race. It would be rather nonsensical to say that those with darkvision can't use their class abilities.
Shadowdancers get darkvision, regardless of race. It would be rather nonsensical to say that those with darkvision can't use their class abilities.Also, has anyone addressed that the way some people are explaining Darkvision would UTTERLY and COMPLETELY nullify one of the biggest reasons to multiclass into the Shadowdancer or Assassin PrCs for several player races not to mention a ton of NPC races. That would just be stupid.
No one living in an orc, dwarven, drow, etc society would ever take either of those PrCs. They wouldn't even understand the benefit of one of the core abilities. So, any DM who thinks Darkvision works that way should say good bye to any idea of an NPC Shadowdancer or Assassin from any of those cultures. Again, that is stupid IMO.
It's nonsensical to say Darkvision negates global light values, but that argument has been made by multiple people.
It's nonsensical to say Darkvision negates global light values, but that argument has been made by multiple people.Shadowdancers get darkvision, regardless of race. It would be rather nonsensical to say that those with darkvision can't use their class abilities.Also, has anyone addressed that the way some people are explaining Darkvision would UTTERLY and COMPLETELY nullify one of the biggest reasons to multiclass into the Shadowdancer or Assassin PrCs for several player races not to mention a ton of NPC races. That would just be stupid.
No one living in an orc, dwarven, drow, etc society would ever take either of those PrCs. They wouldn't even understand the benefit of one of the core abilities. So, any DM who thinks Darkvision works that way should say good bye to any idea of an NPC Shadowdancer or Assassin from any of those cultures. Again, that is stupid IMO.
Saddening isn't it?
Saddening isn't it?It's nonsensical to say Darkvision negates global light values, but that argument has been made by multiple people.Shadowdancers get darkvision, regardless of race. It would be rather nonsensical to say that those with darkvision can't use their class abilities.Also, has anyone addressed that the way some people are explaining Darkvision would UTTERLY and COMPLETELY nullify one of the biggest reasons to multiclass into the Shadowdancer or Assassin PrCs for several player races not to mention a ton of NPC races. That would just be stupid.
No one living in an orc, dwarven, drow, etc society would ever take either of those PrCs. They wouldn't even understand the benefit of one of the core abilities. So, any DM who thinks Darkvision works that way should say good bye to any idea of an NPC Shadowdancer or Assassin from any of those cultures. Again, that is stupid IMO.
Actually the way they explain it anyone with darkvision wouldn't even be able to use basic Stealth utilizing shadow.
|
Believe it or not, I'm actually trying to come up with a description that will fit the RAW and not raise questions about darkvision or planar connection. It's proving difficult as the ability is a fairly loose fit into the rules structure as is.
How do you handle the shadow evocation and conjuration spells?
I doubt that darkvision foils them, and I don't believe that they are foiled by dimensional locks or being on outer planes.
Hope this helps you guys,
James
Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration tap the Plane of Shadow. So, depending on what flavour of the Planes you are playing, it's possible to be on a Plane that doesn't have a direct connection with the Plane of Shadow. If you can't reach the Plane of Shadow, you can't cast the spell. I'll note that this also depends on how that particular flavour of the Planes handles magic. Planescape & 3.5 had specific rules about magic on the Planes. Pathfinder hasn't yet delved into it. As far as I can't see, the Plane of Shadow didn't exist in Planescape.
In 3.5 Shadow Conjuration and Evocation are more powerful on the Plane of Shadow. You can't Shadow Walk of course, because you are already there.
Back to Pathfinder, Dimensional Anchor certainly stops Shadow Walk or any other extradimensional travel, but doesn't stop spells or spell like abilities that bring forth power from other planes.
Darkvision doesn't foil the illusion of Shadow Conjuration or Evocation because what is created by these spells or spell like abilities is quasi-real. You do have a will save to negate though.
The Shadow Dancer is a creature of shadows, of darkness, of the night. The very first level of shadow dancer is symbolic, as the shadow dancer learns how to use the darkness within herself to sympathetically resonate near dim light, and thus darkness everywhere. This resonance allows the shadow dancer to hide, though there be no darkness around him. He hides in the darkness that pervades every living creature. People who fail their perception checks fail to see him because they fail to see themselves.
Great job. Flavourful without breaking any rules. Kind of steps outside the other abilities though. You have to rewrite the Shadowdancer to make it fit.
A creature can't hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover.
The Shadowdancer has darkvision, and the Shadowdancer is within 60 feet of himself. By a stubbornly literal reading of that rule he wouldn't be able to hide at all unless he is invisible or has cover. Even if he was in a shadow where any normal PC could hide he wouldn't be able to do it. I think it is pretty obvious that this should only apply when it is somebody else who has the darkvision...
Even then it seems that the presence of a creature with darkvision within 60 feet would prohibit you from hiding. What if the creature is your ally? Even if it is an enemy, what if there are other enemies who don't have darkvision? Can you hide from them? I'd expect that most DMs would answer that of course you could since the darkvision doesn't help those other creatures. There's nothing in the rule quoted above which indicates this though. You're still within 60 feet of a creature with darkvision, so you can't hide. The rule needs interpretation for it to function in a way that will make sense to most players.
I'll grant that a fairly literal reading of the rule also prohibits somebody with HiPS from hiding within 60 feet of somebody with darkvision, but I'm not sure that literal readings of this rule are a great idea. I guess it comes down to whether or not you want the very common darkvision ability to trump the rather hard to come by HiPS. A high level Ranger with Desert terrain could normally use HiPS on a sunny beach. A human could be standing right next to him and not notice, but if some orcs with darkvision came by (perhaps wearing sunglasses) they'd see him once they got within 60 feet. Actually, even if it was some guy with Darkvision 30 he'd still see the Ranger once he got within 60 feet, just like he'd see a shadowdancer hiding in a shadow 50 feet away. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can only conclude that the quoted rule wasn't written taking every possibility into account and was probably just meant to be a general guideline.
Going waaaay back to the first page of this thread, if someone at my table said he was hiding in the shadow of a marble, I'd slap the snot out of him and tell him to come back when he was ready to talk sense.
Just sayin...
A creature can't hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover.The Shadowdancer has darkvision, and the Shadowdancer is within 60 feet of himself. By a stubbornly literal reading of that rule he wouldn't be able to hide at all unless he is invisible or has cover.
And this is why it's a ridiculous interpretation of the ability, so it's tossed out. That is far too strict a reading, and a perfectly valid reading is to mean that you can't hide from the creature with darkvision, not "can't hide at all".
Darkvision doesn't change the fact that shadows are still there, it just changes how the person with Darkvision sees the results of the shadows.
A person can still hide in the shadows. The person with darkvision can just see him still as long as they are within 60'. Someone else without darkvision would not see him.
And if Hide in Plain Sight isn't using the concealment of the shadows, then the darkvision ability will not work against them. Simply as that.
.
I think someof the people who are choosing to "argue against me" are either missing the points where I'm agreeing with them, or are just vehemently opposed to any other reading of the rules, to the point of calling me "opposition" in this argument.
Quite frankly, all I'm saying is that the rules could really stand to be rewritten in a more clear form, using game terms that are currently in use.
As it stands, we are trying to interpret rules that were written and virtually unchanged since the beginning of 3.0e, 10 freaking years ago.
I'll agree that some of the relevant the rules are a little unclear or at least result in seemingly silly situations if taken too literally. The same might be true for some of the rules the OP finds problematic though. The marble tactic sounds pretty ridiculous, but honestly most hallways will have plenty of shadows to begin with. Also, the shadowdancer is presumably hiding from some enemy, and most of those enemies would cast shadows which the SD can activate his HiPS with. If not then the SD's allies probably have shadows, and his pet shadow is a shadow.
Any way you look at it this guy is going to be hidden much of the time. It isn't any worse than a Rogue with an 8th level sorcerer buddy or a wand of greater invisibility though, and GI is a tactic you should expect to see in play a lot. Heck, I had a bard in a 15 point buy 3.5 game (that's brutally low power) using GI on the party rogue to pretty good effect and nobody complained. If the SD has a killer app it is the shadow, but even then he could have stuck with Rogue levels and gotten closer to a Str damaging sneak attack of his own.
Now taking bets: Over/Under 500 posts? Anyone? 2:1 odds for over 500 posts.
Also taking bets on cyclical, repeating arguments. 500:1 that the same stuff will be repeated that's been stated for dozens upon dozens of replies. Anyone?
And if Hide in Plain Sight isn't using the concealment of the shadows, then the darkvision ability will not work against them. Simply as that.
Let's give the situation I've given pages earlier in this thread:
A human is trying to see a shadowdancer hiding that is OUTSIDE of dim light, but within 10' of it.
The human WINS the perception/stealth opposed roll, so he does see the shadowdancer.
The human ATTACKS the shadowdancer.. No one so far has claimed that the human would suffer a 20% miss chance due to concealment from dim light that neither he nor the shadowdancer are in. Likewise nothing in the ability mentions that the shadowdancer has this concealment.
-James
Are you trying to argue against me again? I'm agreeing with you in my post... if concealment isn't being used, then Darkvision wouldn't work.
There was no sarcasm or malice in my post.I honestly don't know whether the miss chance should apply if you rule that he's using concealment. It's why I'd prefer better worded rules.
|
How to deal with a Shadowdancer with Hide in Plain Sight? It doesn't seem that this question was answered simply in this post. I appologize if it was.
Hide in Plain Sight is the supernatural ability to cloak oneself in nearby (within 10') dim light while being observed, negating the requirement for cover or concealment.
First, HiPS for the Shadowdancer (and Assassin) is a Supernatural ability. This requires a standard action to use unless the description states otherwise. It doesn't in this case. HiPS is an Extraordinary ability for the Ranger though and is thus a free action. Go Ranger!
Darkvision and low-light vision affect the perception of dim light in different ways than those with normal vision.
Example: A human, an elf and a half-orc are standing in a dark room. The human hold a normal torch that illuminates an area of 20' around him with an additional area of dim light beyond that to diameter of 40'.
A Shadowdancer stands 10 feet from the trio, easily within 10' of that are of dim light outside the area of normal light. Using Hide in Plain Sight as a standard action, the Shadowdancer wraps himself in shadow and makes a Stealth check. The human makes a Perception check against the Stealth check while the check automatically fails against the elf and half-orc.
Why? Because to the elf the torch illuminates an area of 40' which places the Shadowdancer 30' from the area of dim light negating the ability. The half-orc with darkvision sees normally in an area of 60' which places the Shadowdancer 50' from an are of normal darkness (skipping over the 40' of dim light entirely).
A Shadowdancer cannot use Hide in Plain Sight, move and attack unless somehow able to take two standard actions and a move action in a single round.
If there is a flaw in my reasoning or additional information crucial to this topic, please advise.