| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So I need a couple of rule clarifications.
My current group has been allowing people (pcs and npcs alike) to stealth in the daylight and I always did find that weird, but recently I had looked up the rules on stealth (because one of the players made a new character and it happens to be an assassin that ooc threatens my paladin) and it says that one needs cover or concealment to stealth.
So from what I gather:
> You can't hide from anyone in light or above while in the open.
> You can't hide from creatures with low light vision while in the open.
> You can't hide in the dark from creatures with darkvision.
Also, from what I gathered noone can see (but can still use blindsense or tremorsense or other non visual senses) in magical darkness. Am I correct?
Also death attack can only be used with melee weapons, so does a thrown dagger still count as a 'melee' weapon or is it considered a ranged weapon?
Sure I have a selfish reason to ask these questions, but I really don't want my Aasimar Paladin/Dragon Disciple which I've had from day 1 to be slain by a Drow Noble recently created by a rules lawyer through rule evasion.
Sorry quick question. How do you get an Aasimar Paladin/Dragon Disciple?
>In normal light one needs cover to stealth
>You can hide in the open against creatures with low-light vision, but you must be outside their sight range.
>Same as above for darkvision unless there is cover.
The dagger becomes a ranged weapon once it is thrown I believe.
Some official ruling is probably what you're seeking though, this is just m2c.
This looks like a player vs player situation, no amount of rules clarification is going to solve your problem.
Talk ooc with that player and your DM and find out if they are ok with blowing up the game, because this is what is going to happen if none of you stop this escalation.
That assassin just needs a potion of invisibility to death attack your character in any lighting condition.
You just need to detect evil on him and you'll have an excuse to smite him on sight.
And for the record; no, no character can use stealth while observed unless he has cover or concealment. Or in you case, reaches 8th level asassin and gains hips.
For further information check this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The stealth rules have been called "intentionally" vague by James, I believe, so that GMs can deal with it as they choose. However, for players and gamers who want concrete rules determining especially what cases sneak attack can be used, it leaves things too fluid.
Putting on a GM hat I've read various parts of the stealth/invisibility/perception rules and go by these general guidelines. Some of which are house rules that bridge between RAW rules.
1. You need either cover/concealment or a distracted observer to use stealth in the traditional sense. Line of sight generally confounds the use of stealth without these factors.
2. guards use a move action to be 360º aware of their environment. If they do not use a move action to guard, a character can use stealth within their line of sight by picking the right time. It is resisted by a perception check.
3. distracted individuals are at penalty to their perception checks, compared to those "not guarding". This would be someone who is studying a spellbook, whittling a stick, or in general focusing their attention on a task.
4. people change their perception status on their action. Someone who is whittling may just put it down for minute and go back to guarding on their action. If someone is stealthed near them without cover/conceal they are immediately revealed.
5. A stealthed individual needs to make a sense motive check to determine the perception status of a person guarding.
The stealth rules have been called "intentionally" vague by James, I believe, so that GMs can deal with it as they choose. However, for players and gamers who want concrete rules determining especially what cases sneak attack can be used, it leaves things too fluid.
Putting on a GM hat I've read various parts of the stealth/invisibility/perception rules and go by these general guidelines. Some of which are house rules that bridge between RAW rules.
1. You need either cover/concealment or a distracted observer to use stealth in the traditional sense. Line of sight generally confounds the use of stealth without these factors.
2. guards use a move action to be 360º aware of their environment. If they do not use a move action to guard, a character can use stealth within their line of sight by picking the right time. It is resisted by a perception check.
3. distracted individuals are at penalty to their perception checks, compared to those "not guarding". This would be someone who is studying a spellbook, whittling a stick, or in general focusing their attention on a task.
4. people change their perception status on their action. Someone who is whittling may just put it down for minute and go back to guarding on their action. If someone is stealthed near them without cover/conceal they are immediately revealed.
5. A stealthed individual needs to make a sense motive check to determine the perception status of a person guarding.
Very nice, I think I may snag that if you don't mind.
1. You need either cover/concealment or a distracted observer to use stealth in the traditional sense. Line of sight generally confounds the use of stealth without these factors.
Make that distracted/non-guarding observer. Basically if you are not watching for enemies, an enemy may attempt to sneak up on you, which you resist with your perception.
-You need cover or concealment to hide. Period. (Unless you have an ability such as a Ranger's Camouflage)
-You can't hide while being observed. Period. (Unless you have an ability such as a Ranger's Hide In Plain Sight)
If you have total cover or total concealment, you can't be seen and therefore are not being observed.
If you are already hidden, you can't be seen (and observed) unless the observer makes an opposed perception check.
To clear up two confusing examples:
If you are in a dimly lit room, behind undergrowth, while the observer is aware of you and "observing" you, you cannot hide. You can try to create a distraction and then hide.
If you are in an empty field in broad daylight while the observer is aware of you and "observing" you, you cannot create a distraction to hide. Well, you could, but you couldn't hide because you don't have cover or concealment even though the observer is distracted.
I really like Anburaid's house rules on Stealth. They add more dimension and realism. Even though there's extra complexity and it almost seems like it's own game, that 'game' is something I'd love to add to my table given how much I love sneaky 1st-person video games.
I remember facing being complicated in 3.0, but the 'always alert in all directions' thing has never sat well with me.
Anburaid, would you consider granting 360-degree awareness as a standard action when a character is already moving?
Darkvision is such a fantastic advantage, regardless if you're using the official rules or not. I hate imagining running a stealth-based character without it.
Here's a question. How much vision-mode overlap is there with a creature with darkvision in a partially lit space. Can someone with darkvision see into shadows, or otherwise see the shadow itself? I'm imagining a situation where a derro is being stalked by a human in a torch-lit room with lots of shadows. Does the light screw up the darkvision entirely or can the derro plainly see the human in the shadow behind the pillar? I can imagine the human not being clear on that either, and the derro bluffing his un-awareness for an advantage if he can see into the shadow.
My current group has been allowing people (pcs and npcs alike) to stealth in the daylight and I always did find that weird, but recently I had looked up the rules on stealth (because one of the players made a new character and it happens to be an assassin that ooc threatens my paladin) and it says that one needs cover or concealment to stealth.
If your DM is allowing Stealth in situations where it doesn't belong by RAW then you need to discuss this with the DM. It is possible that the DM simply doesn't know the rules, or that house-rules are being used, in which case you should know how they work.
What OOC threat was made? Does your DM run a PVP table?
So from what I gather:
> You can't hide from anyone in light or above while in the open.
> You can't hide from creatures with low light vision while in the open.
> You can't hide in the dark from creatures with darkvision.
1) In bright or normal light you must have cover or invisibility to use Stealth. The only exception to this is a Ranger in his Favored Terrain who has Camouflage and HiPS. It is also possible for a Shadowdancer or Assassin to use Stealth in bright or normal light without having cover or invisibility, but only as long as they are within 10' of an area of Dim Light. Discuss with your DM what constitutes an "area of Dim Light" because he could take this to mean, in normal light conditions a creature's shadow could be considered dim light. If so the Assassin with HiPS becomes an extremely powerful foe, but can still be defeated.
2) It is not clearly spelled out in RAW if you can hide within the range of low-light vision or not. There are several entries in the Vision and Light section of Additional Rules as well as the Low-light Vision section of the Glossary in PRD that mechanically say they simply see twice as far in any given lighting condition except darkness. However one entry in the Glossary section of the PRD under Low-light Vision does lead me to believe your assumption is correct: "Characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day." If they can see in moonlight (dim light) as well as they can see in the day (normal or bright light) it would stand to reason that when they are in the dim light of a moon lit night they see as if in normal light, which means no Stealth within their range of vision unless you have cover or invisibility. Now the rules to SPECIFICALLY state the condition MOON LIT NIGHT, so it is possible that in some other condition of dim light, say a cave with a torch as a light or a Darkness spell, they would not see as if in the day, but rather would simply see twice as far and as well as a Human with basic vision.
3) You are correct here for sure. You cannot hide in the concealment of darkness from a creature with Darkvision. You can still hide from them if you have cover or invisibility. Creatures with darkvision see just as well in darkness as they do in light, so to them you treat your Stealth as if you were attempting it in normal light conditions, meaning you need cover or invisibility to hide from them.
The exceptions to 2 and 3 are HiPS. Both the (EX) form of HiPS that Rangers gain and the (SU) form of HiPS that Shadowdancers and Assassins gain trumps both low-light vision and darkvision. At least that is my stance on it and I can explain in detail why if anyone has questions about that.
Also, from what I gathered noone can see (but can still use blindsense or tremorsense or other non visual senses) in magical darkness. Am I correct?
That depends on which spell is being used and what level of lighting it brings the conditions down to. There is Bright Light, Normal Light, Dim Light, and Darkness. The Darkness spell brings the level of light down one degree. In dim light you can still see but not very well (everything has concealment, 20% miss chance). It is important to remember that if you have any level of cover/concealment Sneak Attack/Death Attack don't work. So unless your Assassin has Darkvision he will not actually be able to use those abilities against you in dim light or darkness. In darkness everyone is effectively blind and has total concealment (50% miss chance). If you have Darkvision you can see through the Darkness spell. The Deeper Darkness spell drops the light condition 2 degrees and you cannot see through it even with Darkvision.
Also death attack can only be used with melee weapons, so does a thrown dagger still count as a 'melee' weapon or is it considered a ranged weapon?
Throwing a weapon is a Ranged Attack. It should not count for using Death Attack.
Sure I have a selfish reason to ask these questions, but I really don't want my Aasimar Paladin/Dragon Disciple which I've had from day 1 to be slain by a Drow Noble recently created by a rules lawyer through rule evasion.
I would reiterate:
1) What threat did he make, and why is it strictly OOC?
2) Why is your DM tolerating this, does he run a PVP game?
3) If it is a PVP table, why are you tolerating this, you are a Paladin and he is an Evil Assassin? Detect Evil and proceed to Smite it.
Everyone is vulnerable at some point. You just have to study the classes to find out what those are. Everyone will fall to the Rogue/Assassin if they wait for him to CDG them while they sleep. But if the Paladin goes on a full offensive in broad daylight it will be ugly for the Assassin. If you do end up in a fight with the Assassin after 8th level when he gets HiPS, a high Perception, the Daylight spell, and Readied Actions are your best friend.
The high Perception has a chance of negating his Stealth as a factor in the fight.
Daylight will eliminate most shadows in the area (this is particularly important if your DM rules that shadows constitute an area of dim light) If you target yourself with the spell you will radiate light, eliminating your shadow; light bulbs don't cast shadows.
If you don't have a high enough Perception and Daylight isn't an option for whatever reason, ready your attack actions for when he pops out of Stealth to attack you. When that happens you will attack, your attack will come as an interrupt before his attack lands, then he will finish his attack/turn. At that point your initiative count will change to be just before his, so you will then get a full attack on him before he gets his next turn. That and Smite Evil should take care of the problem.
Also remember, his HiPS is a Supernatural Ability, so it doesn't work in an Antimagic or Dead magic area. If you can cast Wiz/Sorc spells you can get a Scroll of Antimagic and that will prevent him from using that ability as well as a few others.
...
I am also interested in how you have a Paladin/Dragon Disciple. Are you using an arcane varient of the Paladin? I believe there was an arcane varient in 3.5 for a Paladin of Mystra in Forgotten Realms.
I am also interested in how you have a Paladin/Dragon Disciple.
I took a level in Sorcerer (Draconic Silver), Draconic language, and 5 ranks in arcana. I was originally going to have a Paladin/Sorcerer (high Cha, low Con made) but then I discovered this prestige class.
1) What threat did he make, and why is it strictly OOC?
It's basically that his character is a bit insane, (He actually turned into a drow noble elf for being so evil from what I heard) so the player sometimes rolls on what he should do. Basically he's sticking to his oath to kill drow but he's just goes about it evilly and stealthily
2) Why is your DM tolerating this, does he run a PVP game?
Here's where it get's complicated, basically at one point we had so many players that it was split into two groups, who played on different days, with different DMs. However that has now dwindled enough to where were submerged back into one group. The assassin was made in the other group after the player's other character was splattered.
3) If it is a PVP table, why are you tolerating this, you are a Paladin and he is an Evil Assassin? Detect Evil and proceed to Smite it.
I'm not actually sure if PVP is even allowed, but it has been implied that it is if there are RP purposes for it.
In the campaign, almost every elf we ran into (NPC or PC) has been a dick. So sometimes I'll say something about it. When he goes, "Oh really?" I have to clarify that this is me speaking OOC not my Paladin. This is reason enough to suspect that he's looking for a party conflict, which I have been trying to avoid (even before I knew his character was a drow noble, which has been disguised and hidden). Now that I know this, I'm a little bit paranoid. He also has plethora of items that add bonuses to his stealth (which stack according to him) including a ring of chameleon he also has a wand of invisibility and boots of levitation. (This guy has some ridiculous luck as treasure is rolled for)
I fear that there's nothing to stop the assassin from killing my character on a whim if he so chooses. Though it would turn the rest of the party against him, he might be able to set it up so noone would know it was him.
One last thing, how long does stealth last? I believe it only lasts 1 round, but I don't know if it actually says it anywhere in the book.
I want to know as much about it as I can to prepare for the worst case scenario.
One last thing, how long does stealth last? I believe it only lasts 1 round, but I don't know if it actually says it anywhere in the book.
A Stealth check is made as a part of movement, opposed by Perception checks by anyone who might be able to notice. As long as conditions don't change (hidden character doesn't move, no one moves to a different viewing angle) a single Stealth check could last indefinitely. Note however that it's impossible to remain hidden while attacking (unless sniping, and that'd be at a -20).
|
Check out the Chronicles Pathfinder Podcast #009 for a good baseline explanation of Vision & Light.
--Vrocktoberfest
I really like Anburaid's house rules on Stealth. They add more dimension and realism. Even though there's extra complexity and it almost seems like it's own game, that 'game' is something I'd love to add to my table given how much I love sneaky 1st-person video games.
I remember facing being complicated in 3.0, but the 'always alert in all directions' thing has never sat well with me.
Anburaid, would you consider granting 360-degree awareness as a standard action when a character is already moving?
Darkvision is such a fantastic advantage, regardless if you're using the official rules or not. I hate imagining running a stealth-based character without it.
Here's a question. How much vision-mode overlap is there with a creature with darkvision in a partially lit space. Can someone with darkvision see into shadows, or otherwise see the shadow itself? I'm imagining a situation where a derro is being stalked by a human in a torch-lit room with lots of shadows. Does the light screw up the darkvision entirely or can the derro plainly see the human in the shadow behind the pillar? I can imagine the human not being clear on that either, and the derro bluffing his un-awareness for an advantage if he can see into the shadow.
Actually spending a move action to guard is in the RAW, in the perception skill description. So someone who is on patrol spends 1 move action to be aware, and one move action to do the actual moving.
As for when stealth ends... this is always a sticking point with a lot of people. I do it as:
1. an observer beats a stealth roll on his action.
2. the person using stealth does something that breaks stealth (running, charging, attacking) on their action.
3. for attacking, the stealth breaks when the attack roll is made, but since the attack was made on a flat footed opponent, sneak attack applies. This counts as the surprise round, so only 1 attack is done on the surprise round, then initiative is rolled.
The exceptions to 2 and 3 are HiPS. Both the (EX) form of HiPS that Rangers gain and the (SU) form of HiPS that Shadowdancers and Assassins gain trumps both low-light vision and darkvision. At least that is my stance on it and I can explain in detail why if anyone has questions about that.
I would actually be curious to hear your stance on the matter. As RAW, just because HiPS is a (SU)/(EX) ability does not mean it automatically disregards vision.
All HiPS allows you to do is hide while being observed, you still need cover.
Ok, I see what your point is, with the Shadowdancer and Assassin, it does indicate they can hide without actually having to hide behind anything. I will admit, the one I had looked at was the Ranger. So yes, they are different in that regards.
However, both the Shadow Dancer and Assassin still need dim light (or a shadow) to hide in, which I consider as cover. Just because the Assassin and Shadow Dancer are using a (SU) ability, doesn’t mean it negates any ability of someone with Darkvision able to see in dim light (shadow).
Now if the dim light is being caused by a Darkness spell, or another other magical darkness, I would agree, the person with darkvision could not see through it normally. But natural shadows/dim light, yes, they can see in it normally and therefore negate the cover of the dim light/shadow the Shadow Dancer and Assassin could normally use.
At least that’s how I understand it per RAW and how I would also play it.
You know, I almost started typing up a retort. :) However, I read over you response again, read over Assassin and Shadow Dancer again, and then read your response once again. And I agree with you. As per RAW, the Assassin and Shadowdancer only have to be within 10’ of dim light, they aren’t using the dim light as cover/concealment to hide.
Although I do have some confusion in regards to what is a shadow with someone who has darkvision. The way we have always treated it to the person who has darkvision, there is effectively no shadow, just as there is no darkness in pitch black for them (at least within their darkvision range).
I do see your point in that the shadow is still there, whether someone had darkvision or not, but my mind has issues agreeing with that.
For example, let’s not even talk about HiPS here, but a Rogue uses Stealth (hides) in a pitch black dungeon. They are just standing in an open hallway, behind nothing physical for cover. However, since it is pitch black, they are able to hide.
Now, let’s bring in someone with darkvision, they are walking down this hallway with the ‘hiding’ Rogue. They look in the location of the Rogue is hiding. Do they see them? Or is the pitch black is allowing the Rogue to hide? Or, since this person has darkvision, does the pitch black mean nothing to them and they are seeing the Rogue plain as day?
These are the questions going on in my mind.
Well, I would like to think it like this:
Darkvision is like a night-vision: Everything is black and white, but you can see in darkness
Normal player & rogue = 1) Stealth won´t protect you against darkvision
Ranger = HIPS 2) You are able to hide even while being observed (improved HIPS)
Assassin & SD = Stealth (SU) 3) You are able to hide even while being observed.
3 = Since darkvision is like nightvision = white & black. You are in shadows, but kind of, well, wrapping yourself to the blackness, making yourself stealthy against people with darkvision.
My way of thinking, but... let´s see how many will argue :P
Yes, it makes sense from how you explain it. And I see it is truly RAW. However, it isn’t all that realistic. Basically with HiPS, you can hide right out in the open (no cover) just as long as you are within 10’ of dim light. I understand that’s what the ability name says, but we have always understood that as being able to hide without having to create a distraction.
Going to have to talk to my DM about this, will be a hard sell.
Its funny what misreadings become 'accepted' in given circles. From reading a decent amount online and previously traveling a lot playing an organized campaign I got to witness this and I always find it interesting.
I spoke with my DM and there were really no issues with it. He just went along with what I explained to him.
The thing is, what he ruled originally was not that unrealistic. The rules aren't that clear. We basically are now going on the assumption that darkvision does not negate shadows or darkness (for the person who has darkvision) just for the fact RAW doesn't say it illuminates the shadows. Who's to say that isn't the effect for a creature with darkvision?
That was his question, do characters/monsters that have darkvisions 'see' shadows or dim light? As I said above, the RAW doesn't clarify either way. Since you can see in absolute darkness do you actually see that it is dark or that there is a shadow?
He ruled that you couldn't (you as in having darkvision). Therefore, since you do not see a shadow (dim light), the creature with HiPS does not have dim light within 10' for you and therefore cannot hide from you. It made sense to us, so we did not question it. And really, it isn't that unreasonable of a ruling.
As to realism, fire-breathing dragons, 360 degree vision and turn based combat isn't realistic. Let alone swinging say a polearm in a 5' corridor so as to threaten both 'infront' and 'behind' at the same time...
-James
Not to sound snippity, but please do not pull that. You understood what I meant. There are some things you can look at and bypass, especially the firebreathing dragon (that IS realistic in fantasy). But you also like the rules to be grounded in some reality to some extent so they make sense. I know people make arguments and homebrew their campaigns all the time because there is something they don't agree with. But, that is a discussion for another time.
One last thing, how long does stealth last? I believe it only lasts 1 round, but I don't know if it actually says it anywhere in the book.A Stealth check is made as a part of movement, opposed by Perception checks by anyone who might be able to notice. As long as conditions don't change (hidden character doesn't move, no one moves to a different viewing angle) a single Stealth check could last indefinitely. Note however that it's impossible to remain hidden while attacking (unless sniping, and that'd be at a -20).
These guys are doing a great job of clarifying all this stuff but I just can't resist putting my 2cp in when it comes to Stealth.
They are right, a single Stealth check could potentially last indefinitely. However, it more than likely won't. There are a couple things of note here in the Stealth and Perception descriptions: Stealth says it is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Perception says that most checks are made in reaction to some stimulus, but deliberate Stealth checks are a Move Action.
So let's say the Assassin rolled Stealth before combat. You roll Perception but do not detect him. He now is unseen/unnoticed by you. So you have the option of using a Move Action to deliberately try to spot him if you know he is near, in which case you will sacrifice your Movement to roll a new Perception check against his previous Stealth roll. If you still fail he now has some options on his turn. He can stay perfectly still and bide his time, if he does he needs not roll a new Stealth check and the only time you will get to roll Perception is on your turn in place of a Move Action. That being said, he could very well decide to move closer to you or do something else that could get him spotted. So in the even he does that, he would have to roll a new Stealth check to ensure he is able to move quietly and stay out of sight durring those actions that could get him noticed. You then get a free Perception check against his new Stealth check, because Perception is primarily reactionary. If you still don't see him he may be able to come right up to you without being noticed. If he attacks he will automatically become visible to you, because you cannot use Stealth while Charging, Running, or Attacking.
So his Stealth roll stands until he does something that could potentially get him noticed. Generally that includes any Movements and possibly some other move actions or standard actions. But you will get a free Perception check each time he has to roll Stealth and beyond that you can deliberately try to spot him by sacrificing your Move Action on your turn. Also if he loses the cover/concealment that is allowing him to use Stealth he will be noticed. So, if he is hiding around a corner and has cover then you walk around the corner, well his cover is blown and Stealth drops off.
Check out the Chronicles Pathfinder Podcast #009 for a good baseline explanation of Vision & Light.
--Vrocktoberfest
Awesome link, thanks for sharing that. Wow, I am a little impressed that I came to the same conclusion with low-light vision that they are talking about in here, as far as Moonlight vs. Torch light. Especially considering that is the first time I have given it much attention.
Has anyone tried on Night vision goggles? My brother got a pair for his kids to play with. I tried them out in pitch black room with no windows. After that experience that what I think Dark vision is. The goggle produce light. The light if you look at the goggles looks like a green light, just dot of it on the goggles. So on these goggle there were two light. Looked like 2 green dots. When you look through the goggles you see a the room illuminated in a green light with shadows and every thing.
So I look at a person with dark vision producing a non visible light out the range that they see. Their visual senses can pick up the reflections of that light just like a normal person picks up normal light to see when using a lantern out to specific range.
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would actually be curious to hear your stance on the matter. As RAW, just because HiPS is a (SU)/(EX) ability does not mean it automatically disregards vision.
All HiPS allows you to do is hide while being observed, you still need cover.
That is Ranger HiPS, as pointed out, but you are also forgetting that Ragers get Camouflage (which is the part that allows them to hide without cover/concealment) at an earlier level and those two abilities combined to act the same way that Shadowdancer HiPS works with a few key differences.
Firstly is why Ranger HiPS would be utterly unaffected by Darkvision. Well, because Ranger HiPS has exactly ZERO to do with shadows and concealment. It has 100% to do with the Ranger's intimate knowledge of his Favored Terrains. When in his Favored Terrain he can use Camouflage and HiPS whether it is in bright light, normal light, dim light, or darkness and no amount of seeing through shadows is going to affect that in any way.
....
Now there are several completely separate reasons why I think that Shadowdancer and Assassin HiPS would trump Darkvison.
1) Let's examine the actual text defining Darkvision. A lot of people get hung up on that one sentence in the Vision and Light section of the rules; the part I have in bold:
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.
But this isn't what Darkvision is, it is just a simple explanation of how Darkvision interacts with the normal, non-magical, ambient light conditions of the world. It does not take into account in any way, special cases or abilities; it is just how DV interacts with the light conditions. Now what I want to draw your attention to, and what most people tend to avoid or forget, is the text in the Glossary section of rules describing what DV actually is. Pay particular attention to the highlighted sections:
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.
And now I want you to look back up to the first quote and pay particular attention to the first sentence: "Characters with darkvision can see lit areas normally as well as dark areas..." When we combine those parts we have some fluff, and we have some mechanics. The mechanics are what is important here, and they are:
1) DV allows you to see in dark areas (dim light, darkness) as well as you would normally see in lit areas (bright light, normal light). Which means that while shadows still exist in the radius of their vision, they see everything within that radius AS IF it were in fact normal light. And that is all it means. They don't have beams of light coming from their eyes melting away the shadows. The shadows are still there, they just don't affect the accuracy of Darkvision sight the way they affect basic and low-light vision sight. (This by the way is 100% the reason why you can't use Stealth within the radius of DV unless you have cover or invisibility. It has nothing to do with dissolving the shadows in that radius. It has to do with you being able to see as if you were in the normal lighting condition. Read the normal lighting condition, it says you may not use Stealth without cover or invisibility.)
2) Darkvision allows you to see with no light source at all. So there is no light and you can still see. You are not producing flames from your eyes that burn away shadows. If you wanted to explain it the way Night Vision Goggles work, that is fine, but it still has no actual affect on the mechanics. You are not producing any kind of visible light that would change the lighting conditions in the radius of your vision. The shadows are still there, it is still dim light or darkness, you are simply able to see regardless of that fact.
3) Lastly, darkvision does not allow you to see anything you could not otherwise see of which, magical effects would be the most common things in that category, but it's not exclusive. This is just saying you aren't gaining any type of magical vision; you are simply able to see in darkness as if you were in normal light.
....
Now after breaking Darkvision down in that manner, why do I feel Shadowdancer and Assassin HiPS are both able to trump Darkvision? I would think it is fairly obvious where I am going with this but I will break that down as well:
1) Darkvision is (EX) and Shadowdancer/Assassin HiPS is (SU). I generally don't allow natural (EX) abilities that a number of PCs, NPCs, and Monsters are born with to outclass a hard earned (SU) ability that my players have spent a great deal of time and character resources achieving (unless it is specifically stated, and in the case of DV vs HiPS it is not). That would be a fairly dickish and anti-PC thing to do IMO.
2) The description of Darkvision actually comes out and explicitly states that it is not magical and does not allow you to see through magical effects. HiPS (SU) is a magical effect, all Supernatural Abilities are:
Supernatural Abilities (Su): Supernatural abilities are magical but not spell-like. Supernatural abilities are not subject to spell resistance and do not function in areas where magic is suppressed or negated (such as an antimagic field). A supernatural ability's effect cannot be dispelled and is not subject to counterspells.
4) Darkvision eliminates a creature's ability to hide based on the concealment granted by the lighting conditions. However, Shadowdancer and Assassin HiPS allows them to use Stealth based on a whole different set of parameters. They are not using the concealment granted by the shadows. They are using the empowerment of a magical ability granted to them by mere proximity to shadows. As explicitly stated above, Darkvision does not eliminate the shadows in the area, it simply allows the creature to see as if in normal lighting conditions, which eliminates the effect of concealment only. Again, the Shadowdancer/Assassin is not using concealment to hide, he is using the presence of the shadows, which are still very much there.
5) Lastly, Darkvision only allows you to see normally in dark areas as if it were a lit area, but does not allow you to see anything you could not otherwise see, magical or not. So I pose this example: A creature with normal vision is looking at a Shadowdancer who is standing in normal light but is also within 10' of dim light. The Shadowdancer attempts Stealth and is successful, he disappears. No one argues that this isn't an acceptable use of the HiPS ability. It is exactly what the ability states the Shadowdancer may do. He can be standing in normal light (where generally he would need cover or invisibility to hide) and use Stealth as long as he is within 10' of dim light. So I ask you this, why do you say that the Shadowdancer can hide in broad daylight from the creature with normal or low-light vision, but can't hide in shadows from the creature with darkvision? Before you answer, think carefully about what I said about DV. It doesn't allow you to see anything you couldn’t normally see, and it only allows you to see as if you there were normal light conditions. (IE: If the guy with NORMAL vision can't see you in NORMAL LIGHT, then the guy with DARKVISION can't see you in DIM LIGHT/DARKNESS.)
....
You can go to THIS THREAD and check out some of the threads that have been linked there for further information or study. This thread is just a big list of all the Stealth threads we could find and link together. I will be adding this thread to that list momentarily.
Ok, I see what your point is, with the Shadowdancer and Assassin, it does indicate they can hide without actually having to hide behind anything. I will admit, the one I had looked at was the Ranger. So yes, they are different in that regards.
In the open (no concealment) without anything to hide behind (no cover).
However, both the Shadow Dancer and Assassin still need dim light (or a shadow) to hide in, which I consider as cover. Just because the Assassin and Shadow Dancer are using a (SU) ability, doesn’t mean it negates any ability of someone with Darkvision able to see in dim light (shadow).
No! They do not hide IN the shadows with HiPS, they can hide even outside the shadows, they only need to be close to them to draw on their magical ability.
Now if the dim light is being caused by a Darkness spell, or another other magical darkness, I would agree, the person with darkvision could not see through it normally. But natural shadows/dim light, yes, they can see in it normally and therefore negate the cover of the dim light/shadow the Shadow Dancer and Assassin could normally use.
Darkvision works inside the Darkness spell, it just doesn't work in the Deeper Darkness spell. Dim light and darkness don't provide cover, they provide concealment. Those are two separate things, and the Shadowdancer/Assassin doesn't need either as long as he is within 10' of shadows.
Shadowlord, I first want to say what an EXCELLENT write up on your argument. If I hadn't been corrected already, I would be now.
However, if you had looked at the posts prior (and maybe you did, but wanted to answer anyways), you would notice James Maissen had corrected me on my incorrect assumption.
And if that wasn't clear, I was assuming that creature activating HiPS was using the shadows/dim light 10' away as it's cover/concealment to hide (Stealth), which of course it is not.
But I did want to talk a bit on what my recent posts had touched on. And that is, what does the creature using darkvision see when looking at shadows/natural darkness?
If you see my recent posts, I indicated our DM had originally ruled on that those who have HiPS was not able to use it against a creature with darkvision. For the reason of, and as you even said, Darkvision only allows you to see normally in dark areas as if it were a lit area.
Yes, the creature with Darkvision is not shooting beams of light to eliminate the shadows for everyone, however, from even how your quote reads, the darkness/shadows are viewed as a lit area for the character with Darkvision. Therefore, our DM had ruled, for them, there was no shadow or darkness for the character with HiPS to be within 10' of. Again, for the creature with Darkvision.
Although I understand what you and James have said, I can certainly see where my DM was coming from. And he was certainly not doing it to be jerk by any means. I can see the misinterpretation.
You are in shadows, but kind of, well, wrapping yourself to the blackness, making yourself stealthy against people with darkvision.
My way of thinking, but... let´s see how many will argue :P
Many people think of it like this, which is fine, as long as you don't let your perception of how it works affect the actual RAW mechanics presented in the rules. If that is the way you justify it within your own mind that is fine. I actually do not think of it that way because to me it would look rather obvious where the Shadowdancer was at if a large area of shadow sprang from the natural dim light to wrap around the Shadowdancer who is 10' away.
Has anyone tried on Night vision goggles? My brother got a pair for his kids to play with. I tried them out in pitch black room with no windows. After that experience that what I think Dark vision is. The goggle produce light. The light if you look at the goggles looks like a green light, just dot of it on the goggles. So on these goggle there were two light. Looked like 2 green dots. When you look through the goggles you see a the room illuminated in a green light with shadows and every thing.
So I look at a person with dark vision producing a non visible light out the range that they see. Their visual senses can pick up the reflections of that light just like a normal person picks up normal light to see when using a lantern out to specific range.
That is actually more or less how I envision sight through Darkvision as well. Again, it is a fine way to justify the ability within your mind as long as you never allow your own perceptions and justifications to manipulate RAW mechanics.
Its funny what misreadings become 'accepted' in given circles.
And frustrating how much remains accepted even when it is proven wrong.
Not to sound snippity, but please do not pull that. You understood what I meant. There are some things you can look at and bypass, especially the firebreathing dragon (that IS realistic in fantasy). But you also like the rules to be grounded in some reality to some extent so they make sense.
I agree there needs to be some realism. But James isn't being difficult. The ability IS Supernatural; by definition a magical effect. So what you are saying isn't realistic, is an effect that isn't supposed to be realistic; it is supposed to be magical.
As for Rangers and their (EX) version. It works in exactly the same way which one could see as a bit farfetched, but not so much if you compare it to several other (EX) abilities in the game. Also, if you have ever seen pictures of a sniper in his ghillie suit, well that is just how I imagine it, and you can see how they could easily disappear into their favored terrain. Now, that is not to say I require them to wear ghillie suits; that is just how I imagine it sometimes.
Once again, well spoken and after seeing your explanation, I agree.
I would be curious what your opinion is on my DM's original ruling (detailed in my above posts).
Shadowlord, I first want to say what an EXCELLENT write up on your argument. If I hadn't been corrected already, I would be now.
Thank you.
However, if you had looked at the posts prior (and maybe you did, but wanted to answer anyways), you would notice James Maissen had corrected me on my incorrect assumption.
I read them and I thought James did an excellent job. Like I said, I just can't resist putting in my own 2cp when it comes to matters of Stealth, especially concerning HiPS. I have spent a great deal of time studying those bits of the rules and getting it straight in my mind.
And if that wasn't clear, I was assuming that creature activating HiPS was using the shadows/dim light 10' away as it's cover/concealment to hide (Stealth), which of course it is not.
But I did want to talk a bit on what my recent posts had touched on. And that is, what does the creature using darkvision see when looking at shadows/natural darkness?
I actually envision it much like looking through Night Vision Goggles (NVGs). And yes, you still do see shadows. It is as if the star and moon light and the lights from the goggles are amplified within the goggles to allow you to see in perfect detail as if you were standing in daylight. I think of it as the same process. Except instead of needing a huge set of goggles, your eyes do it naturally. But you can very much still see shadows. Now, with DV it would be all black and white vision. So I envision it as a NVG type sight but rendered in Grayscale color.
If you see my recent posts, I indicated our DM had originally ruled on that those who have HiPS was not able to use it against a creature with darkvision. For the reason of, and as you even said, Darkvision only allows you to see normally in dark areas as if it were a lit area.
Yes: AS IF in normal light, but that doesn't actually change the lighting condition, nor eliminate the shadows. It allows you to see in the same detail as you would in normal light. Think about walking around every day, you see shadows everywhere; they just aren't dark enough or thick enough for people to hide in them without some form of physical cover. That is exactly the way DV works. The thing is HiPS doesn't actually use the concealment of the shadows to apply Stealth, which is why it defeats DV.
And even if a creature with DV didn't see shadows at all, HiPS would still work. The ability says you need to be within 10' of shadows, it doesn't say your enemy needs to be able to perceive those shadows. The shadows are still there, whether the enemy sees them or not.
Yes, the creature with Darkvision is not shooting beams of light to eliminate the shadows for everyone, however, from even how your quote reads, the darkness/shadows are viewed as a lit area for the character with Darkvision. Therefore, our DM had ruled, for them, there was no shadow or darkness for the character with HiPS to be within 10' of. Again, for the creature with Darkvision.
But even lit areas, bright and normal light, contain shadows. It is just not so dark as to obscure you from sight, via concealment. Just because the shadows aren't thick enough to conceal someone doesn't mean that shadows don't exist in DV or that the creature with DV doesn't see shadows.
Although I understand what you and James have said, I can certainly see where my DM was coming from. And he was certainly not doing it to be jerk by any means. I can see the misinterpretation.
It is a very common mistake. And no, it doesn't sound like your DM was being a jerk, it simply sounds like he didn't know better. I hope that helps.
....
:::EDIT:::
I would be curious what your opinion is on my DM's original ruling (detailed in my above posts).
My opinion is that he made a common mistake, likely based on not knowing, never reading, or possibly simply not understanding when he read the RAW dealing with these subjects. It is only recently, and mostly through debates on these forums, that I have come to a more accurate understanding of it. My own misconceptions were from ignorance, I had never actually read the rules for myself; I simply went with whatever the consensus was and what the DM ruled.
My opinion is that he made a common mistake, likely based on not knowing, never reading, or possibly simply not understanding when he read the RAW dealing with these subjects. It is only recently, and mostly through debates on these forums, that I have come to a more accurate understanding of it. My own misconceptions were from ignorance, I had never actually read the rules for myself; I simply went with whatever the consensus was and what the DM ruled.
Yeah it really is an area of the rules that has been very obtuse. Its got fragments in 3-4 different parts of the book, and has generated lots of heated discussion on the forums, one of in which brought forth my favorite quote by DM_Blake:
"You have opened a can of bees here. Yes, bees, because they're much more painful than worms..."
My opinion is that he made a common mistake, likely based on not knowing, never reading, or possibly simply not understanding when he read the RAW dealing with these subjects. It is only recently, and mostly through debates on these forums, that I have come to a more accurate understanding of it. My own misconceptions were from ignorance, I had never actually read the rules for myself; I simply went with whatever the consensus was and what the DM ruled.
Well, I know it was not due to him not reading the material. He is the only one in our gaming group who reads each book cover to cover. At least speaking for myself, that is something I need to work on doing.
It was probably due to him seeing the reference of seeing dark areas as a lit area, and made the assumption that for those who have darkvision, do not see shadows/darkness.
I really think using that comparison was not a good one to use and I am sure it has been a common mistake because of it.
Thanks for your help.
Well, I know it was not due to him not reading the material. He is the only one in our gaming group who reads each book cover to cover. At least speaking for myself; that is something I need to work on doing.
It was probably due to him seeing the reference of seeing dark areas as a lit area, and made the assumption that for those who have darkvision, do not see shadows/darkness.
I really think using that comparison was not a good one to use and I am sure it has been a common mistake because of it.
Thanks for your help.
Understand I am not trying to be insulting. I am just being blunt, most people don't understand Stealth (as well as many other rules) due to not knowing where the rules are located in the book, never reading the rules about the subject, or reading it and still not understanding it. These all lead to house-rules being accepted as "the actual rules."
For me, I realized a lot of things, after I started reading the rules for myself, about the games I played when I was a kid. Namely I realized that in a lot of instances my buddies who usually DMd the games didn't really know what they were talking about. So it always pays to read it for yourself and probably more than once. Then jump on these or other forums, because the debates will force you to look things up and it will keep you sharp and each time you look it up you might learn something you missed the first time.
I always recommend that my players read the core rules cover to cover. And I can always tell who has and who hasn't. The game goes much smoother and faster if everyone has at least a basic understanding of the whole rules set.
Yes, it is a common mistake, very common. And you are welcome.
I want to clarify, I was not trying to say it being a common mistake was due solely to what I feel was a bad example for when viewing through darkvision. What you say is very true, people make assumptions from not reading the rules, or not reading them at all. “Well, 3.5 did it that way” or skimming the rules and feeling they understand it completely. As I said in my prior post, I am guilty of not reading the book cover to cover, and am making plans to do so. Even with not reading most of the rules, our group is still finding small nuances and changes from 3.5. Will take awhile for us to learn it ‘well’.
But even with my DM, who I know does read cover to cover (he likes to read technical manuals), he still had missed it. You are so right you need to keep on top of it and peruse the forums. Now ‘that’, is something I have done, maybe too much!
You are in shadows, but kind of, well, wrapping yourself to the blackness, making yourself stealthy against people with darkvision.
My way of thinking, but... let´s see how many will argue :P
Many people think of it like this, which is fine, as long as you don't let your perception of how it works affect the actual RAW mechanics presented in the rules. If that is the way you justify it within your own mind that is fine. I actually do not think of it that way because to me it would look rather obvious where the Shadowdancer was at if a large area of shadow sprang from the natural dim light to wrap around the Shadowdancer who is 10' away.
Has anyone tried on Night vision goggles? My brother got a pair for his kids to play with. I tried them out in pitch black room with no windows. After that experience that what I think Dark vision is. The goggle produce light. The light if you look at the goggles looks like a green light, just dot of it on the goggles. So on these goggle there were two light. Looked like 2 green dots. When you look through the goggles you see a the room illuminated in a green light with shadows and every thing.
So I look at a person with dark vision producing a non visible light out the range that they see. Their visual senses can pick up the reflections of that light just like a normal person picks up normal light to see when using a lantern out to specific range.
That is actually more or less how I envision sight through Darkvision as well. Again, it is a fine way to justify the ability within your mind as long as you never allow your own perceptions and justifications to manipulate RAW mechanics.
Yup, just fluff to wrap my head around the concept of how RAW works.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Whew, just read most of that thread dealing with HiPS. Talk about some discussion!
There were a couple of people in the thread that were voicing my original beliefs in how HiPS works with Darkvision. Although I will admit I did see what James was getting at right away, some people are stubborn! :)
There is one thing I am still a bit unclear on, though, which light levels a Shadowdancer and Assassin can activate HiPS.
From the rulebook, it indicates there is bright light, normal light, dim light and darkness.
Bright light and normal light are a pretty obvious no in activating HiPS. In Shadowdancer, he is able to HiPS in the condition of dim light, where with an Assassin, it is a shadow. Now, from what I recall reading in a couple of threads, James Jacobs had made a ruling that dim light=shadows. Which makes sense, since there isn't even a 'shadow' category from what I have seen.
However, my question is, can a Shadowdancer and Assassin activate HiPS being within 10' from dim light only? What about the darkness category?
Whew, just read most of that thread dealing with HiPS. Talk about some discussion!
There were a couple of people in the thread that were voicing my original beliefs in how HiPS works with Darkvision. Although I will admit I did see what James was getting at right away, some people are stubborn! :)
There is one thing I am still a bit unclear on, though, which light levels a Shadowdancer and Assassin can activate HiPS.
From the rulebook, it indicates there is bright light, normal light, dim light and darkness.
Bright light and normal light are a pretty obvious no in activating HiPS. In Shadowdancer, he is able to HiPS in the condition of dim light, where with an Assassin, it is a shadow. Now, from what I recall reading in a couple of threads, James Jacobs had made a ruling that dim light=shadows. Which makes sense, since there isn't even a 'shadow' category from what I have seen.
However, my question is, can a Shadowdancer and Assassin activate HiPS being within 10' from dim light only? What about the darkness category?
James Jacobs has in fact stated that the differences in wording, between Shadowdancer HiPS and Assassin HiPS were a copy/paste error from 3.5 they both act in exactly the same way. Dim light = Shadows. I am not sure if that is in any of the Stealth threads I have linked but you can find the quote in the d20pfsrd.com FAQ.
Whether or not the Shadowdancer/Assassin version of HiPS can be used within 10' of darkness or if it is only possible within 10' of dim light is still a point of contention. According to the strictest reading of RAW it can only be used near dim light. However, I feel that is a bit of a word play and that dim light is simply the minimum requirement of presence of shadow. Darkness is still shadow. Personally I would allow it in or near darkness as well, but there are some who disagree with me.
Yes, I would allow it as well, as for the reasons you had stated. Another contention, unless via a spell, I don't even know if you can have absolute darkness next to normal light or especially bright light. Doesn't it incremently get darker towards darkness?
For example, you are standing outside in the middle of the day, looking into a tunnel going underground. Wouldn't the first 'x' feet be dim light, anyways? And then it goes to darkness further in?
So maybe that's why it states dim light for HiPS?
Yes, I would allow it as well, as for the reasons you had stated. Another contention, unless via a spell, I don't even know if you can have absolute darkness next to normal light or especially bright light. Doesn't it incremently get darker towards darkness?
For example, you are standing outside in the middle of the day, looking into a tunnel going underground. Wouldn't the first 'x' feet be dim light, anyways? And then it goes to darkness further in?
So maybe that's why it states dim light for HiPS?
You are absolutely correct as to the "scaling" of the light conditions. The only way you would find darkness, near normal or bright light would be in the presence of a spell effect. As far as I can think of off the top of my head right now, I will admit I am very tired right now though so I could be overlooking something.
Ok, I had thought so.
Now I was talking with my DM last night and he says he completely agrees with what we’ve discussed in regards to HiPS.
But then another question started to nag at me last night. Since someone with Darkvision does not play a factor in ‘eliminating’ the shadows (or dim light) to prevent a character from using HiPS, what about someone with low-light vision in detecting someone normally (not using HiPS) who is in Stealth?
For example, let’s say there is a campfire, that is exhibiting off a 30’ radius of normal light. After that of course, would be another 30’ of dim light. Now, you have a rogue (or stealth type character) hiding 50’ out from the campfire, which of course, would put him in the dim light range for those with normal sight and therefore make a Stealth check possible.
However, what about someone with low-light vision? If an elf was looking in the area of the rogue, would he be exposed, due to the campfire normal light would extend out to a 60’ radius for the elf and negate the rogue’s ability to make a Stealth check?
I only ask because I know in the other Darkvision versus HiPS thread, there was a discussion about subjective vision, which I think this would fall under. And that there was nothing subjective about vision in regards to HiPS, which I do agree with. Now would this be different in someone in just using Stealth on it’s own (i.e., not HiPS)?
Edit: Wish I would have thought it through a little more before making the long post. Lol
The more I think about it, yes, it is different, because the rogue is using the dim light as concealment, where the other example in someone using HiPS, isn’t. So I would definitely think the elf would see the rogue as he would not have concealment against the elf. Just like if a dwarf was looking into the dim light, the rogue could also not hide from him.
But yes, the more I think about it, the big difference is one situation is using concealment (standard Stealth check) and the other is using a supernatural ability and does not require concealment (or cover).
Unless someone wishes to point out anything I am missing. :)
Well, if the rogue is not using HiPS, just normal stealth in dim-light vs "light-vision" owning race is in the range, I would have to say now yes. Elf will be able to see him in this case.
Well, if the rogue is not using HiPS, just normal stealth and dim-light and "light-vision" owning race is in the range, I would have to say now yes. Elf will be able to see him in this case.
And I would add that this is why having low-light vision AND darkvision is not useless... ;)
Ok, I had thought so.
Now I was talking with my DM last night and he says he completely agrees with what we’ve discussed in regards to HiPS.
But then another question started to nag at me last night. Since someone with Darkvision does not play a factor in ‘eliminating’ the shadows (or dim light) to prevent a character from using HiPS, what about someone with low-light vision in detecting someone normally (not using HiPS) who is in Stealth?
For example, let’s say there is a campfire, that is exhibiting off a 30’ radius of normal light. After that of course, would be another 30’ of dim light. Now, you have a rogue (or stealth type character) hiding 50’ out from the campfire, which of course, would put him in the dim light range for those with normal sight and therefore make a Stealth check possible.
However, what about someone with low-light vision? If an elf was looking in the area of the rogue, would he be exposed, due to the campfire normal light would extend out to a 60’ radius for the elf and negate the rogue’s ability to make a Stealth check?
I only ask because I know in the other Darkvision versus HiPS thread, there was a discussion about subjective vision, which I think this would fall under. And that there was nothing subjective about vision in regards to HiPS, which I do agree with. Now would this be different in someone in just using Stealth on it’s own (i.e., not HiPS)?
Edit: Wish I would have thought it through a little more before making the long post. Lol
The more I think about it, yes, it is different, because the rogue is using the dim light as concealment, where the other example in someone using HiPS, isn’t. So I would definitely think the elf would see the rogue as he would not have concealment against the elf. Just like if a dwarf was looking into the dim light, the rogue could also not hide from him.
But yes, the more I think about it, the big difference is one situation is using concealment (standard Stealth check) and the other is using a supernatural ability and does not require concealment (or cover).
Unless someone wishes to point out anything I am missing. :)
You have successfully, and accurately, answered your own question.
The only thing I would add is that there is one line that presents an interesting fact about low-light vision. Outside under the light of the moon and stars a creature with low-light vision sees as if it is normal light, but with no limit on range like DV has. This only applies to the type of dim light that occurs outside under stars and moon on a clear night. Any other circumstance, for instance in a cave with a torch, they get the standard range x2 for each light gradient the torch puts off.
So in effect, you can NEVER hide from a creature with low-light vision unless:
1) There is darkness, not dim light, in which you are hiding.
2) You have cover or invisibility.
3) You have Ranger/Shadowdancer/Assassin HiPS.
That is a very good point in regards to a creature with low-light vision viewing an evening with the moon and stars, how it is all ‘normal’ light. Will have to point that out to my DM (or remind him, he very well may already know).
The question is now, going back to the example with the campfire setting, would the campfire itself be viewed as the ‘bright light’ category for a creature with low-light vision? I can’t think of where bright light would make a difference compared to normal light in this kind of situation, but this is just for the sake of clarification.