In another thread it was stated that there are no facing rules to define observation. This may be the case, said poster should perhaps take some time to IMAGINE the game. It may be the case that some guardian is observing all things in all directions in full darkness AND through walls! Without directly stipulating through the game setting, obviously observation is in the LINE OF SIGHT, a topic which has been written about. Dear poster of this other thread, please expand your mind and your library. On the topic, STEALTH is very powerfull and to any being stealthy it is your perogative to wait until your moment of choice to advance under cover with the maximun difficulty possible PRESENTED TO any who would detect you. The issue here is FIRST STRIKE and RECONISANCE, two masterful elements in RPG'ing.
In another thread it was stated that there are no facing rules to define observation. This may be the case, said poster should perhaps take some time to IMAGINE the game. It may be the case that some guardian is observing all things in all directions in full darkness AND through walls! Without directly stipulating through the game setting, obviously observation is in the LINE OF SIGHT, a topic which has been written about. Dear poster of this other thread, please expand your mind and your library. On the topic, STEALTH is very powerfull and to any being stealthy it is your perogative to wait until your moment of choice to advance under cover with the maximun difficulty possible PRESENTED TO any who would detect you. The issue here is FIRST STRIKE and RECONISANCE, two masterful elements in RPG'ing.
Dear Bright of this thread, no need to shout. Also no need to be condescending and rude.
Furthermore, the poster to whom you refer (whoever they may be) is correct, assuming you have stated their full position here. There are no facing rules in the game. It is assumed that a character is aware of their surroundings in all directions. If someone is observing you, you cannot use Stealth. If you meet certain conditions, you can make a Stealth check, vs the Perception check of anyone who might become aware of you, to remain hidden.
There have been numerous discussions on this in various threads. Shadowlord is generally the most knowledgable about how Stealth works in the game, and the various rules that effect it. I'd give his posts a thorough readthrough.
I understand STEALTH and OBSERVATION and I'm not going to ascribe some cockamamie theory because Paizo hasn't said it's not so in print! Actually open the book and read the race DWARF you will see Observation in use. The real point is you don't know if you are being observed and you don't know if someone is being stealthy. Here is an answer the interaction of dim light/no light/stealth/observation: take 20.
In another thread it was stated that there are no facing rules to define observation. This may be the case, said poster should perhaps take some time to IMAGINE the game. It may be the case that some guardian is observing all things in all directions in full darkness AND through walls! Without directly stipulating through the game setting, obviously observation is in the LINE OF SIGHT, a topic which has been written about. Dear poster of this other thread, please expand your mind and your library. On the topic, STEALTH is very powerfull and to any being stealthy it is your perogative to wait until your moment of choice to advance under cover with the maximun difficulty possible PRESENTED TO any who would detect you. The issue here is FIRST STRIKE and RECONISANCE, two masterful elements in RPG'ing.
If I understand you, what you are saying is that without facing, you can't sneak-up on somebody.
Personally, I don't have a problem with this given that the sneak does not benefit from concealment OR if the sentry isn't considered 'distracted'.
In all of that, the gray zone remains the definition of 'being distracted'. For 'splinter cell' type of games, I'd say that a sentry guarding the courtyard is considered 'distracted' by guarding the courtyard.
Nobody could attempt to sneak pass the guard in the courtyard without concealment (or HiPS), but any attempt to sneak on the guard from anywhere else BUT the courtyard would be legit.
Note that this still wouldn't involve facing per say. The guard's miniature could be facing anywhere for all we know, but the guard would still be 'guarding the courtyard'. Perhaps his physical body may not be facing the courtyard all together; only this is where is attention is set. As a DM, you could turn the miniature toward the courtyard to indicate to the player where the attention of the guard seems to be, but this wouldn't change anything about the fact that facing isn't part of the rules.
'findel
Doesn't work like that.
faced with no threats or distractions, and the skill being
attempted carries no penalties for failure, you can take 20.
In other words, if you a d20 roll enough times, eventually
you will get a 20. Instead of rolling 1d20 for the skill check,
just calculate your result as if you had rolled a 20.
Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right,
and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding.
Taking 20 takes 20 times as long as making a single check
would take (usually 2 minutes for a skill that takes 1 round
or less to perform).
and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding.
Take20 will not work on stealth checks. Sorry.
I understand STEALTH and OBSERVATION and I'm not going to ascribe some cockamamie theory because Paizo hasn't said it's not so in print! Actually open the book and read the race DWARF you will see Observation in use. The real point is you don't know if you are being observed and you don't know if someone is being stealthy. Here is an answer the interaction of dim light/no light/stealth/observation: take 20.
it is a game with rules. Every piece on the board is observing every square that is within their line of sight. Therefore you cannot use stealth unless you have cover (blocking line of sight) or concealment, giving you a chance to avoid detection.
You also show a clear ignorance regarding the rules relating to take twenty.
I did say:What about if you are trying to hide yourself to set up for an ambush?In most stealth situations you do NOT have the luxury of time. Also, Taking 20 is not an instantaneous action; Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right,
and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding.Take20 will not work on stealth checks. Sorry.
In most stealth situations you do NOT have the luxury of time.
Didn't I? Obviously DMs discretion applies. But, c'mon. Being nit-picky about the rare exception is just silly.
I did say:What about if you are trying to hide yourself to set up for an ambush?In most stealth situations you do NOT have the luxury of time. Also, Taking 20 is not an instantaneous action; Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right,
and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding.Take20 will not work on stealth checks. Sorry.
In most stealth situations you do NOT have the luxury of time.Didn't I? Obviously DMs discretion applies. But, c'mon. Being nit-picky about the rare exception is just silly.Whoa! Chill out buddy, no need to be so defensive! It was an honest question.
And it is definitely not a rare exception, I set up ambushes all the time as both a player and a DM. I have ruled it just about every way possible (Take 10, Take 20, roll normally since it is an opposed roll). There are good arguments for doing it any of those ways, just wondering if there is something official I'm missing.
I'm plenty chill. Was just pointing out that I was not stating absolutes as you implied.
Discussions of the Perception skill should keep in mind that sight is only one of 5 senses covered by that skill.
Good point. Though you pointing that out makes me wonder why you went ahead and combined Spot/Listen and Hide/Move Silent.
Doesn't work like that.** spoiler omitted **In most stealth situations you do NOT have the luxury of time. Also, Taking 20 is not an instantaneous action; Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding. Take20 will not work on stealth checks. Sorry.
So you would set up a mini pointing face first at a wall and say he is gaurding something? I would not let that pass in one of my games. The mini is the representation of your character. It is that simple! And not take 20 on stealth, use stealth to gain advantage and then Take 20 on observation. It will be easy for someone to say that doesn't answer the question--just your careless miniature--the "question" isn't written in the form of a question.
Facing isn't part of the Pathfinder rules therefore it doesn't matter which way your figure is "looking". If you are including facing that is a houserule, it doesn't feature in the core rules.
As Jason said stealth/perception takes into account sight, sound and (in the case of the barbarian who hasn't had a bath since 1st level) smell.
So your mini facing the wall might not use perception to see the stealthy character but use it to hear him. Or smell the barbarian.
Discussions of the Perception skill should keep in mind that sight is only one of 5 senses covered by that skill.
If my GM ever says "You taste the halfling rogue sneaking up on you" I shall scream.
So you would set up a mini pointing face first at a wall and say he is gaurding something? I would not let that pass in one of my games. The mini is the representation of your character. It is that simple!
That may be so in your game, but acknowledge that this is a houserule, it's not part of the rules as presented in the game.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE houserules. I actually like facing for other games, but I decided not to import that to my Pathfinder games because it implies things that, IMO, don't worth the trouble. For example, I don't want players to spend 5 min. making sure that his facing is perfect so the 90 degree arc covers the most effective angle as possible. I want my NPC to be able to take that attack of opportunity even if the target is 'behind' the figurine. I don't what to enforce the "sorry, you change the facing of your figurine so that counts as your move action" etc.
In more tactical games, such as Necromunda or Warhammer 40K, facing is fully integrated in the rule set and constitutes a fundamental part of the game. These games are also meant to be played WYSIWYG. When I play Pathfinder, I don't always have the proper figurine and improvise with whatever, which sometimes doesn't even have a distinguishable 'face'.
'findel
Discussions of the Perception skill should keep in mind that sight is only one of 5 senses covered by that skill.If my GM ever says "You taste the halfling rogue sneaking up on you" I shall scream.
Well, in the case of a snake its ambiguous... Are snakes "smelling" with their tongue or "tasting" the aromas in the air?
Doesn't work like that.** spoiler omitted **In most stealth situations you do NOT have the luxury of time. Also, Taking 20 is not an instantaneous action; Taking 20 means you are trying until you get it right, and it assumes that you fail many times before succeeding. Take20 will not work on stealth checks. Sorry.So you would set up a mini pointing face first at a wall and say he is gaurding something? I would not let that pass in one of my games. The mini is the representation of your character. It is that simple! And not take 20 on stealth, use stealth to gain advantage and then Take 20 on observation. It will be easy for someone to say that doesn't answer the question--just your careless miniature--the "question" isn't written in the form of a question.
No, if the NPC or whatever were hiding, I wouldn't place him on the map at all. Take 20 on Perception tests, sure. You'll need to take into account that it takes time to search the room so carefully and when the hidden creature noticed this action they would probably not just stay there and wait to be found. (Assuming it is an intelligent creature.)
Facing isn't part of the Pathfinder rules therefore it doesn't matter which way your figure is "looking". If you are including facing that is a houserule, it doesn't feature in the core rules.
As Jason said stealth/perception takes into account sight, sound and (in the case of the barbarian who hasn't had a bath since 1st level) smell.
So your mini facing the wall might not use perception to see the stealthy character but use it to hear him. Or smell the barbarian.
Yes. But with the combined skill rolls, it's really just a matter of 'flavor text' as to whether you saw, heard or smelled the one who is hiding.
What about if you are trying to hide yourself to set up for an ambush?
I wouldn't allow it. Taking 20 assumes failure along the way to maximizing your attempt and, with an opposed check, there's no way to actually determine that.
What I would do is offer a circumstance bonus based on the way the ambush is hidden.
What about if you are trying to hide yourself to set up for an ambush?I wouldn't allow it. Taking 20 assumes failure along the way to maximizing your attempt and, with an opposed check, there's no way to actually determine that.
What I would do is offer a circumstance bonus based on the way the ambush is hidden.
Thanks Bill for the reply! Now, another question, what if you had an ally who was helping you try and hide better, so you knew if you had failed? Would you allow take 20 then, or simply add an additional circumstance bonus for the additional aid?
PS: See Wolfthulhu, this is how mature adults have a conversation!
I'm not Bill but I would say no.
You can take 10 and if someone was helping you by pointing out the fact your arm is showing, etc. I would say that falls into the "aid other" bracket an give a +2 bonus to the stealth check.
What about if you are trying to hide yourself to set up for an ambush?I wouldn't allow it. Taking 20 assumes failure along the way to maximizing your attempt and, with an opposed check, there's no way to actually determine that.
What I would do is offer a circumstance bonus based on the way the ambush is hidden.
Thanks Bill for the reply! Now, another question, what if you had an ally who was helping you try and hide better, so you knew if you had failed? Would you allow take 20 then, or simply add an additional circumstance bonus for the additional aid?
I still wouldn't allow you to take 20, although I would potentialy allow the other persons help to give you a +2 on your stealth check, similar to using the aid another action.
Thanks cwslyclgh and Spacelard! That's how I usually rule it, although players can be very convincing at times, especially when it is in their favor ;)
Are there any situations where you would allow Take 20 for stealth?
Nope.
As said before taking 20 means you fail again and again until you get it right. The best they can get is +2 from aid another.My personal justification for this...
1. Thems the rules!
2. How does player 2 know he succeeded in his perception check to help player 1 stealth? He may have failed his perception roll and given the thumbs up in error. Metagaming. I think this is the intent of not being able to take 20.
3. As a GM my critters will take 20. This will hurt the players more than it does me.
I removed some posts. Flamewars are bad, mm'kay?
|
Hide (Iron Heroes) - Take 10/20: In nonstressful situations, you can take 10 or 20 on a Hide check. For example, if you have sufficient time to gather camouflage and pick a good spot for an ambush, you could take 20 on a Hide check. You cannot take 10 or 20 if you move while hiding.
Move Silently (Iron Heroes) - Take 10/20: You cannot normally take 10 or 20 on a Move Silently check. Using this skill is always a stressful situation.
Creative Director
|
Good point. Though you pointing that out makes me wonder why you went ahead and combined Spot/Listen and Hide/Move Silent.
Because the "notice" skills are perhaps the most used skills in the game, combining Search, Spot, and Listen into one skill helps to make skill points go farther... it's more efficient and is a pretty subtle way of giving classes more skill points as opposed to 3.5 without actually changing the amount of skill points each class gets. Furthermore, by combining these all into Perception, we don't have to worry about what happens when a creature like a wolf smells out its prey, or a creature like a snake tastes its prey, or a creature like a spider feels prey approach. Humans are mostly sight and then hearing, but the game covers EVERYTHING. Not just humans. Creating a single "Sense" skill works a lot better than creating a skill for EVERY sense, and THAT works better than having skills for only 2/5 of the senses.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Good point. Though you pointing that out makes me wonder why you went ahead and combined Spot/Listen and Hide/Move Silent.Because the "notice" skills are perhaps the most used skills in the game, combining Search, Spot, and Listen into one skill helps to make skill points go farther... it's more efficient and is a pretty subtle way of giving classes more skill points as opposed to 3.5 without actually changing the amount of skill points each class gets. Furthermore, by combining these all into Perception, we don't have to worry about what happens when a creature like a wolf smells out its prey, or a creature like a snake tastes its prey, or a creature like a spider feels prey approach. Humans are mostly sight and then hearing, but the game covers EVERYTHING. Not just humans. Creating a single "Sense" skill works a lot better than creating a skill for EVERY sense, and THAT works better than having skills for only 2/5 of the senses.
Heh. I used to always use Listen whenever the players could smell something. I figured if it was good enough for the Ghostbusters, it was good enough for my PCs.
My DM brought up this:
If you cast invisibility on a fighter in full plate, and then he walks right past a guard, the invisibility gives him +20 on stealth checks, despite the fact that he'd probably be making a hell of a lot of noise.
A consequence of combining the skills.
Thoughts?
My DM brought up this:
If you cast invisibility on a fighter in full plate, and then he walks right past a guard, the invisibility gives him +20 on stealth checks, despite the fact that he'd probably be making a hell of a lot of noise.
A consequence of combining the skills.
Thoughts?
LOL, good one.
hide in plain sight is another weird example. it obviously started as a visual thing, but it allows stealth checks (type unspecified). is it still exclusively visual, or does it apply to move silently, or other senses for that matter?
My DM brought up this:
If you cast invisibility on a fighter in full plate, and then he walks right past a guard, the invisibility gives him +20 on stealth checks, despite the fact that he'd probably be making a hell of a lot of noise.
A consequence of combining the skills.
Thoughts?
That's one of the reasons invisibility gives you a large bonus, instead of merely saying 'Spot doesn't affect you'. The armor check penalty on the armor accounts for the noise, making it only +14 over a similar, unencumbered character.
Consider that the chance that the guards hear something, but decide nothing's actually there since they can't see anything.
|
|
My DM brought up this:
If you cast invisibility on a fighter in full plate, and then he walks right past a guard, the invisibility gives him +20 on stealth checks, despite the fact that he'd probably be making a hell of a lot of noise.
A consequence of combining the skills.
Thoughts?
LOL, good one.
hide in plain sight is another weird example. it obviously started as a visual thing, but it allows stealth checks (type unspecified). is it still exclusively visual, or does it apply to move silently, or other senses for that matter?
It isn't really an issue in either circumstance: bonuses are granted to perception rather than a penalty to stealth.
Charlie the fighter is invisible but in plate. He has a +20 to Stealth. Then he has whatever his armor check penalty to Stealth is. He kust walks around, in no way attempting to Stealth so his basic check is 20 - ACP.
Guy is standing in the hallway. It is quiet. Well it was until a creaking Charlie in plate started walking around...so this guy hears this sounds, sees nothing, etc. He knows something is happening and begins to investigate...at that point depending on what our guy does he will be able to hone in on Charlie, the walking invisible metal pile, and essentially the guard will know where he is enough to target the square (Assuming this entire time Charlie never stands still or attempts to Stealth) and then the whole miss chance and what not comes into play.
the only thing that combining the skills does is make it that you have to think more comprehensively about what bonuses or penalties would be in play and who would get them. In this example clearly a bonus is given to the listener (for all the noise that Charlie makes).
It isn't really an issue in either circumstance: bonuses are granted to perception rather than a penalty to stealth.
OK, slightly different scenario, where perception bonuses aren't applicable (maybe). McStabby the assassin is trying to sneak up on Red the dragon disciple who has blindsense. McStabby is within 10' of shadow and uses his hide in plain sight. Normally no perception check would be required for Red as her blindsense relies on non visual cues and so the subject is observed even if invisible or otherwise concealed from vision. But, the hide in plain sight allows stealth checks in the absence of concealment or cover. So, does the blindsense negate hide in plain sight, or vice versa?
Good point. Though you pointing that out makes me wonder why you went ahead and combined Spot/Listen and Hide/Move Silent.Because the "notice" skills are perhaps the most used skills in the game, combining Search, Spot, and Listen into one skill helps to make skill points go farther... it's more efficient and is a pretty subtle way of giving classes more skill points as opposed to 3.5 without actually changing the amount of skill points each class gets. Furthermore, by combining these all into Perception, we don't have to worry about what happens when a creature like a wolf smells out its prey, or a creature like a snake tastes its prey, or a creature like a spider feels prey approach. Humans are mostly sight and then hearing, but the game covers EVERYTHING. Not just humans. Creating a single "Sense" skill works a lot better than creating a skill for EVERY sense, and THAT works better than having skills for only 2/5 of the senses.
More good points. Though I don't think Search should have bee rolled into that group. That's really another issue though.
Wulfulthu (minor browser malfunction) Yes, exactly, suspend all non-obvious unhidden information from the players at all times. To telll the absolute truth I ussually bring a bag of glass aquarium decorations (they look like buttons) and we use them. What I am really trying to address is insincerity in both questions and in play. The fact is the "question" still hasn't been asked. It is a series of topics divided by "/"s and ending with a question mark. Scanning through I noticed something I have wondered about; and invisible noisy character would become unheard (move silently) if he/she used stealth??? No MOVE SILENTLY is a gap in this and other versions...what about PICK POCKETS (the doom of many great campaigns)
(...) I noticed something I have wondered about; and invisible noisy character would become unheard (move silently) if he/she used stealth???
I'd say that a noisy character would become harder to notice when invisible (as opposed to become harder to be heard).
Perception isn't necessary about seeing or hearing (although those senses are used to perceive things), its about noticing and pinpointing.
So the guard hears the noisy (yet invisible) character in full plate. He turns around, except that there is nothing to be seen. Depending on how good the character was at being stealthy, the guard will have more or less suspicion that "something's going on".
Now, the invisible fighter (lets say its a fighter) probably doesn't have the best DEX, the most ranks in Stealth and suffer from a substantial armour check penalty. To that he can add +20 to his check from being invisible, which everything calculated will likely be somewhere between +15 and +20 to his roll. While the guard isn't likely to have that much in perception, its probably not a guarantied success either.
If the roll is successful, the guard will go "hum, that was weird" but will not have enough evidence to say "hey, there's an invisible fighter in full plate in square E5!". Suspicious guard will get extra attentive now, probably getting a +2 circumstance bonus to their next roll.
|
|
It isn't really an issue in either circumstance: bonuses are granted to perception rather than a penalty to stealth.OK, slightly different scenario, where perception bonuses aren't applicable (maybe). McStabby the assassin is trying to sneak up on Red the dragon disciple who has blindsense. McStabby is within 10' of shadow and uses his hide in plain sight. Normally no perception check would be required for Red as her blindsense relies on non visual cues and so the subject is observed even if invisible or otherwise concealed from vision. But, the hide in plain sight allows stealth checks in the absence of concealment or cover. So, does the blindsense negate hide in plain sight, or vice versa?
Neither.
HiPs allows McStabby to make a check in extenuating circumstances.
Blindsense allows our DD to know something is there even if he can't see it.
Now here is the key per the Dragon Disciple's ability description:
Any opponent the dragon disciple cannot see still has total concealment against him , and the dragon disciple still has the normal miss chance when attacking foes that have concealment. Visibility still affects the movement of a creature with blindsense. A creature with blindsense is still denied its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class against attacks from creatures it cannot see. At 10th level, the range of this ability increases to 60 feet.
Emphasis Mine
So given the the language above you get a sort of interesting situation. McStabby gets to roll Stealth. The DD still knows where he is, but he can't see him and has to suffer concealment penalties. Simple as that.
The term "negation" (in my mind at least) implies that one ability or the other won't work when that isn't the case. If someone else was in the room it isn't as though McStabby couldn't hide because of the DD and vice versa it isn't as though the DD doesn't get to use it ability because one sense is countered.
Now, I personally would still have the DD roll perception (obviously just because McStabby gets to try to Stealth doesn't mean he will "succeed") and perhaps grant a contextual bonus to his perception check supported by the fact that he has a general bearing of where this "thing" that he cannot see is but that enters rule 0 territory IMHO.
I'd say that a noisy character would become harder to notice when invisible (as opposed to become harder to be heard).
Perception isn't necessary about seeing or hearing (although those senses are used to perceive things), its about noticing and pinpointing.
So the guard hears the noisy (yet invisible) character in full plate. He turns around, except that there is nothing to be seen. Depending on how good the character was at being stealthy, the guard will have more or less suspicion that "something's going on".
Now, the invisible fighter (lets say its a fighter) probably doesn't have the best DEX, the most ranks in Stealth and suffer from a substantial armour check penalty. To that he can add +20 to his check from being invisible, which everything calculated will likely be somewhere between +15 and +20 to his roll. While the guard isn't likely to have that much in perception, its probably not a guarantied success either.
If the roll is successful, the guard will go "hum, that was weird" but will not have enough evidence to say "hey, there's an invisible fighter in full plate in square E5!". Suspicious guard will get extra attentive now, probably getting a +2 circumstance bonus to their next roll.
So what it all boils down to, is how perceptive the guard is. See what I did there?
Someone who is not very perceptive may hear (or even see, smell, feel or taste) something odd, but they don't put it all together to realize exactly what's going on. It's not just a measure of how good your hearing or eyesight is anymore.
So given the the language above you get a sort of interesting situation. McStabby gets to roll Stealth. The DD still knows where he is, but he can't see him and has to suffer concealment penalties. Simple as that.
Thanks for delving into it. I am amazed that you found a way to get them to both work.
Just to turn it up to 11, what about mcstabby facing off against an intellect devourer (or another entity with blindsight)? would HiPS work then?
|
|
So given the the language above you get a sort of interesting situation. McStabby gets to roll Stealth. The DD still knows where he is, but he can't see him and has to suffer concealment penalties. Simple as that.Thanks for delving into it. I am amazed that you found a way to get them to both work.
Just to turn it up to 11, what about mcstabby facing off against an intellect devourer (or another entity with blindsight)? would HiPS work then?
** spoiler omitted **
Okay...I need to make sure I type this very carefully.
Per the ways the rules are written currently I think the following would happen:
McStabby still gets to roll Stealth, because McStabby's ability lets him. Our Intellect Devourer (ID) creature just doesn't care. This matters because if the room has our previous DD and the ID in it McStabby derives benefits for being "engaged" in stealth even though the ID can just point at it (metaphorically).
One ability keys off of the objective universe (there is shadow and I can hide in it) and the other ability is subjective in usefulness (I can "see" anything around me regardless of circumstances). So the Shadowdancer is *hiding*, an objective reality that would need to be addressed by anything else in the room, its just that the ID essentially can't fail to see it within its blindsight radius.
I have a lot of theories on how to streamline these interactions which I may offer up on the boards at some point but as far as RAW this is how I see the interaction playing out.
Edit: As an added point: Were someone to walk in the room and see the ID fighting some unseen foe I would certainly grant a bonus to perception checks against McStabby.
McStabby still gets to roll Stealth, because McStabby's ability lets him. Our Intellect Devourer (ID) creature just doesn't care.
I think that is a logical conclusion, and a very clear explanation.
it agrees pretty well with my own view. The implication is that HiPS provides some kind of visual concealment, even though this isn't specified RAW. This leaves open an alternative interpretation that it isn't limited to visual senses, and could therefore work against blindsight, etc.in any case, I would love to hear more of your ideas on the subject when it all comes together!