How do they work together?
Sure you get +2 to attack sighted opponent or +20 to Stealth. But what about Sleight of Hand? Is there a bonus to pick someones pocket while Invisible?
I am thinking about granting reducing the Sleight-of-hand check to a DC 10 when picking a pocket while invisible. Is this reasonable? How are others handling this?
The sleight of hand DC should remain the same, invisibilty does not make it ANY easier to pull an object of someones person.
What it would do is greatly reduce the chance for the target to notice the attempt, the attempt however could sill fail. So I would say the DCs would remain the same, after all the DC fo 20 for a person holding an object has more to it than site, the person could move right as the attempt is made, or it could be tied tighter than it looks, attached to an alarm device, or lots of other situations were being invisible does not at all help.
LOL, that Bob, he is such a funny guy.
Of course folding it into your invisible cloak will make it disappear.
Yea, Warklaw's got a point, Violation. I mean, anyone who can use SoH has a rank in it and is therefore trained in it; any trained pick pocket knows to pick something and hide it before anyone notices.
I'd give it a +2 circumstance bonus, nothing more. After all, it might just get notice that the flap of a person's bag is raising without wind.
|
Yea, Warklaw's got a point, Violation. I mean, anyone who can use SoH has a rank in it and is therefore trained in it; any trained pick pocket knows to pick something and hide it before anyone notices.
I'd give it a +2 circumstance bonus, nothing more. After all, it might just get notice that the flap of a person's bag is raising without wind.
i didnt realize invisibility had the hide things clause. learn somethin new everyday.
Yea, Warklaw's got a point, Violation. I mean, anyone who can use SoH has a rank in it and is therefore trained in it; any trained pick pocket knows to pick something and hide it before anyone notices.
I'd give it a +2 circumstance bonus, nothing more. After all, it might just get notice that the flap of a person's bag is raising without wind.
Good, logical points. So thank you for that.
But what if Mr. Invisible were trying to steal something larger, say Bob's spare weapon (stowed and non-wielded)? Right before turning around and using said weapon on poor ol' Bob.
I am thinking the same idea applies but would like some other viewpoints.
As I understand it, picking someones pocket tends to rely on a distraction. Bumping or jostling the target, the target distracted by someone else, that's why it's best done in crowds. So it could be argued that invisibility would make an attempt more likely to be noticed because the bump or distraction would be coming from empty air.
I would still say no relative change to the mechanics or the roll. If anything I might add a negative to the roll for trying to steal something so large, especially if the weapon is peace tied, or in a scabbard (generaly a tight fit) etc... But its a situational thing.
Okay this exact situation happened to me. Vendor in an underdarl market (shady type market that sells slaves and poisons) has a medium-sized lock box underneath a table. PC casts invisibility, and stands in front of the vendor (there's no room to get behind her since the stalls are up against a wall and each vendor is tightly packed in).
PC then summons a dolphin in the middle of the market to cause a distraction (points for originality here). The guards surround the dolphin confused, but figure out a caster's in the area. All the vendors instinctively put their hands over their merchandise and lockboxes.
The PC invisible has a +20 to the sleight of hand roll -- his total is 39.
There's no rules for a medium sized object (not to mention he's leaning over the stall to reach under it and pull the lockbox from underneath the vendor's hand).
Vendor's perception roll was 18. I figured even with a -20 that meant he got it out from underneath her hand. But then he has to bring a medium-sized lockbox floating mid air past the nose of a vendor -- aware that something suspicious is going on -- before he can tuck it in the folds of his cloak? Yeah, she noticed that.
PC got a bit upset - cos how could she notice on such a great roll. Given the circumstances, I think it was the right call. Opinions?
Better question is: Does it end invisibility?
It's not an attack nor would it be any more "violent" than opening a door. The latter of which you can now do and not break invisibility.
If used in combat, would that not be a Steal combat maneuver?
That may be a good way to adjucate it within the rules, however the steal maneuver appears to be written for two people who are fighting each other. If fighter A is in combat with Fighter B and rogue A is invisibly stealing from fighter A i don't think it breaks combat. Now if Rogue A botches his roll then fighter A should get an AOO which could break invisility if it hits.
If used in combat, would that not be a Steal combat maneuver?
Not at all. Sleight of Hand uses your skill ranks and Steal your CMB. That's enough for me, anyway.
You can't use Slight of Hand in combat if your opponent is aware of you, but with invisibility, that isn't an issue.
If used in combat, would that not be a Steal combat maneuver?Not at all. Sleight of Hand uses your skill ranks and Steal your CMB. That's enough for me, anyway.
You can't use Slight of Hand in combat if your opponent is aware of you, but with invisibility, that isn't an issue.
That works too.