Ravingdork - It all depends. You don't give enough info to decide.
What gives the dim illumination? If it is daylight out (you can't double the range of the sun) and a spell gives the dim illumination, (which would block the sun anyway) then they both can stealth from the elf and checks are needed to perceive.
The elf cannot see through DIM LIGHT. He only gets extra range from light. So if the light is a cone set to the correct angle, it may help him, for example if it was facing towards the shadowdancer. If it is headed away, and just the edge lights the Shadowdancer, it won't help the elf because the range is moving AWAY from the Shadowdancer.
See, I do put a lot of thought into all this. To give you an answer I would have to know the starting, no item/spells, lighting level. I would then need to know all light sources and distances. I would need to know all darkness sources and distances. Directions of each might matter (bullseye lantern and the opposite for darkness if something like it exists).
Now to darkvision. I am going to have to give on that one. I still feel adamant about the elf WITH A LIGHT SOURCE. Darkvision says: "see lit areas normally as well as dark areas" which is not the same as doubling the light.
Working on this tonight honed in on the idea that LLV doesn't see through DIM LIGHT. It is the LIGHT that is widened. So I am able to narrow my claim to only include LLV with a light source headed in the correct direction (bullseye lantern).
Darkvision actually sees through DIM LIGHT. That would mean it is still there, as perceived by the dwarf, but he just doesn't suffer any penalties because he sees "as well as".
I no longer claim there is any special benefit from darkvision in relation to HiPS.
So if there is no other light source to change the LLV perception:
Elf can't see anyone without checks (in this case too high).
Dwarf can't see Shadowdancer without checks (in this case too high), but can see rogue automatically within 60' of dwarf.
Assume that the light is from a stationary external source, such as a nearby hearth. The lighting conditions given are what a human would see. The elf and dwarf both can see all areas of the room due to their vision abilities.
Here's a visual aid that I hastily put together.
Does that help?
In that case, assuming camp fire = torch rules for lighting, the edge of the light would be base of 20' doubled to 40' then the elf would be able to see both the Shadowdancer and the rogue automatically because the fire would put out 40' of Normal Light for him negating any DIM LIGHT areas for the Shadowdancer or the rouge to use against the elf.
The Dwarf would be dead as he still can't see the Shadowdancer.
the fire would put out 40' of Normal Light for him negating any DIM LIGHT areas
But there's nothing anywhere that says this.
Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
The elf can see farther because the effective radius of bright light is doubled to 40' for the purposes of his vision, but the actual radius is unaffected.
In that case, assuming camp fire = torch rules for lighting, the edge of the light would be base of 20' doubled to 40' then the elf would be able to see both the Shadowdancer and the rogue automatically because the fire would put out 40' of Normal Light for him negating any DIM LIGHT areas for the Shadowdancer or the rouge to use against the elf.
The Dwarf would be dead as he still can't see the Shadowdancer.
How can you say that and still rule the way you do for the Shadowdancer's other abilities then?
You're basing how one ability works for the user off how the observer sees the area, but not the other ones, which use the SAME THING, strictly because there is an opposed check. Either that area of dim light IS THERE or it isn't.
"The elf can see farther because the effective radius of bright light is doubled to 40' for the purposes of his vision, but the actual radius is unaffected."
That is not what it says. The effective radius of a torch is 20' That is the radius that it's effects work. To an elf, the effective radius is 40'.
It does not say that his range is effectively doubled. These are different things.
From Webster's: Effective
a : producing a decided, decisive, or desired effect <an effective policy>
b : impressive, striking <a gold lamé fabric studded with effective…precious stones — Stanley Marcus>
2 : ready for service or action <effective manpower>
3 : actual <the need to increase effective demand for goods>
You cannot use any of those definitions to say that it doesn't ACTUALY work for the elf. If the fire is lit, there is not a day that the elf will ever perceive those squares as DIM LIGHT. As such, I feel, the Shadowdancer cannot hide from him in it. (as there is not one within 10' either.)
From Webster's: Effectively
in effect : virtually <by withholding further funds they effectively killed the project>
Now that would make it mean what you think. Notice how Effective = Actual and Effectively = Virtually. These are completely different.
I've added a visual diagram to my previous post. Komada, please note that the shadowdancer is standing in the light, not in the shadows like the rogue.
The fact that the elf can see into the shadowy areas NEXT to the shadowdancer has no effect on his ability to hide, since he is not even using them like the rogue is.
Like many others, I believe that the rogue is visible to both the rogue and the elf, while the shadowdancer is visable to neither.
Crystal Spell Blade - Walk out side in the dark and see if you don't run into something.
Now if a cat does it, they are not going to run into anything.
Same source of light. It is there for one of you, not for the other.
The opposed checks show that what the elf sees matters. The fact that TO THE ELF, there is plenty of light (as per light rules in the CRB) to see the HiPS, (up to 30' from torch) just like there is plenty of light to see the Normal Stealth person, even though there is not enough light for the human to see him.
I would rule that to teleport it doesn't matter what the elf sees.
To gain DR, it doesn't matter what the elf sees.
To use shadow power, it doesn't matter what the elf sees.
But to hide from the elf, it matters what the elf sees.
Based on the diagram:
Dwarf sees R as he is in DIM LIGHT within 60' of dwarf.
Dwarf can't see S as he is 10' from DIM LIGHT using HiPS with high roll.
Elf sees S as he is in BRIGHT LIGHT and not within 10' of DIM LIGHT as the elf sees it.
Elf sees R as he is in NORMAL LIGHT as the elf sees it.
In your example, which is more drastic than any I imagined, the elf sees the Shadowdancer in BRIGHT LIGHT, yet you feel he can still HiPS. That is where you really lose me.
In relation to HiPS, you strip the elf of any vision bonus and make it just as easy to hide from him as from a human. I don't think that is within the rules.
-------
See, I don't understand the reverse. If you agree that one can not stealth because there is no DIM LIGHT as the elf sees it, I find it strange that you feel one can HiPS from the elf as there still is no DIM LIGHT as the elf sees it. And we all seem to agree that there is no DIM LIGHT, as the elf sees it. Is not the DIM LIGHT still there for the NORMAL STEALTH guy? The rules never say the elf sees through DIM LIGHT. They say the light radius doubles, making it NORMAL LIGHT to the elf.
Even if you don't agree, I can get that, but I find it strange that you think I am absolutely crazy for using the exact opposite logic on you.
If A + B = C does not C - B = A?
"The elf can see farther because the effective radius of bright light is doubled to 40' for the purposes of his vision, but the actual radius is unaffected."
That is not what it says. The effective radius of a torch is 20' That is the radius that it's effects work. To an elf, the effective radius is 40'.
It does not say that his range is effectively doubled. These are different things.
I did not say that his range is effectively doubled. You quoted what I said.
I said: "the effective radius of bright light is doubled to 40' for the purposes of his vision"
In the rules it says: "Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters."
Which is why I said what I said, because I was reading straight from the rules.
From Webster's: Effective
a : producing a decided, decisive, or desired effect <an effective policy>
b : impressive, striking <a gold lamé fabric studded with effective…precious stones — Stanley Marcus>
2 : ready for service or action <effective manpower>
3 : actual <the need to increase effective demand for goods>You cannot use any of those definitions to say that it doesn't ACTUALY work for the elf. If the fire is lit, there is not a day that the elf will ever perceive those squares as DIM LIGHT. As such, I feel, the Shadowdancer cannot hide from him in it. (as there is not one within 10' either.)
Now that would make it mean what you think. Notice how Effective = Actual and Effectively = Virtually. These are completely different.From Webster's: Effectively
in effect : virtually <by withholding further funds they effectively killed the project>
You're mixing the argument about low-light vision working for the elf with the the argument about the low-light vision modifying the objectively existing physical light level of the area.
These are different issues.
And bringing in the dictionary trying to say that the effective light radius doubling for that character means the light radius has actually doubled is missing how the word is used in the system.
Examples:
Wild Shape (Su): A plains druid gains this ability at 6th level, except that her effective druid level for the ability is equal to her druid level - 2.
Familiar (Ex) Familiar (Ex): The magus gains a familiar, using his magus level as his effective wizard level.
Solid Note: The note has an effective Strength equal to 10 + your caster level.
Use Magic Device - Emulate an Ability Score: Your effective ability score (appropriate to the class you're emulating when you try to cast the spell from the scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15.
The druid cannot have a druid level equal to her druid level and to her druid level-2 at the same time. That's a contradiction. Obviously her effective druid level is not her actual druid level.
A non-multiclassed magus has no levels in wizard. Obviously having an effective wizard level for a familiar is not actually having a wizard level.
Casting Solid Note does not create a character. It's strength score is only used as a gague for a handful of effects. A real strength score would allow it to do many things. Obviously the effective strength score is just to calculate the effects of the spell, not an actual strength score.
The skill Use Magic Device doesn't actually change your ability score. It lets you pretend you have a higher score for the purposes of using the device. The higher effective score is obviously difference from your Actual score.
And finally, an effective increase in the light radius of an object for the purpose of a special ability is different from an actual increase in the light radius.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is Dim Light, and the Elf sees it. He is just not hindered by.
It still exists. No matter how awesome, or terrible anyone's vision is.
It exists.
It exists in a boat.
It exists in a moat.
It exists for the Elf.
It exists for yourself.
It exists for the Dwarf.
It exists on the wharf.
It exists whether you like it, or not.
It exists, no matter what.
The elf is always hindered by DIM LIGHT. To think otherwise is to err.
It is his perception of the light source that changes the area affected, not his affect on DIM LIGHT.
It also exists for the rogue and shadowdancer. Can't leave them out.
I don't agree with your interpretation, Komoda, but at least we understand each other better now.
The elf is always hindered by DIM LIGHT. To think otherwise is to err.
Except when the elf is taking advantage of low-light vision and staying within the area of dim light that she gets to treat as lighter thanks to effectively doubling the radius of a light source for her character.
It is his perception of the light source that changes the area affected, not his affect on DIM LIGHT.
Her eyeballs are not headlights. The elf's special vision does not produce any affects on the area, the elf's special vision allows him to treat light sources as if they her different effects (double radius). They actually do not, but the elf gets to treat them as if they do.
You're mixing the argument about low-light vision working for the elf with the the argument about the low-light vision modifying the objectively existing physical light level of the area.
I disagree. The DIM LIGHT still exists so far as anything not pertaining to the elf's vision. I do not claim that the matter that is DIM LIGHT to cease to exist. I claim that it has no affect on the elf's vision in that area due to the benefit the elf gains from LOW LIGHT VISION. I claim that this continues on to make it impossible to use that DIM LIGHT that the elf cannot see, DIM LIGHT that cannot impair the elf's vision, to use that DIM LIGHT to make an opposed roll against that elf.
The Shadowdancer is still in the square. He didn't move to the plane of shadow. He didn't go invisible. If there is nothing at all for him to blend into, or for him to bring to shroud him, where did he go? If those things are now showing in the square, shouldn't the elf clearly see them as he is in the middle of BRIGHT LIGHT as the elf sees it?
If I ask you what stops R from hiding from E your answer should be, E sees the square R is in as NORMAL LIGHT which offers no way to hide.
It is not because he doesn't have concealment. The only reason he doesn't have concealment is because E perceives the square as NORMAL LIGHT.
If it doesn't matter how E perceives the square, DIM LIGHT is still in square R, and as such, DIM LIGHT gives R concealment, because DIM LIGHT is still there no matter how E perceives it. Since concealment is still there, R can hide from E.
A + B = C and B + A = C
Crystal Spell Blade - Walk out side in the dark and see if you don't run into something.
Now if a cat does it, they are not going to run into anything.
Same source of light. It is there for one of you, not for the other.
The opposed checks show that what the elf sees matters. The fact that TO THE ELF, there is plenty of light (as per light rules in the CRB) to see the HiPS, (up to 30' from torch) just like there is plenty of light to see the Normal Stealth person, even though there is not enough light for the human to see him.
I would rule that to teleport it doesn't matter what the elf sees.
To gain DR, it doesn't matter what the elf sees.
To use shadow power, it doesn't matter what the elf sees.But to hide from the elf, it matters what the elf sees.
If it doesn't matter what the elf sees when I use teleport, or to gain my DR or any of my other abilities that rely on dim light, why does HiPS? Because there's an opposed check? That doesn't make much sense and it seems silly to me that because the elf doesn't perceive this area to be dim light that I can't use one ability but I can make use of all my others when NOTHING in the ability itself makes a point of it being relative to the observer.
Would an elf shadowdancer have to be 30 feet away from torch to use HiPS?
You're mixing the argument about low-light vision working for the elf with the the argument about the low-light vision modifying the objectively existing physical light level of the area.I disagree. The DIM LIGHT still exists so far as anything not pertaining to the elf's vision. I do not claim that the matter that is DIM LIGHT to cease to exist. I claim that it has no affect on the elf's vision in that area due to the benefit the elf gains from LOW LIGHT VISION. I claim that this continues on to make it impossible to use that DIM LIGHT that the elf cannot see, DIM LIGHT that cannot impair the elf's vision, to use that DIM LIGHT to make an opposed roll against that elf.
The Shadowdancer is still in the square. He didn't move to the plane of shadow. He didn't go invisible. If there is nothing at all for him to blend into, or for him to bring to shroud him, where did he go? If those things are now showing in the square, shouldn't the elf clearly see them as he is in the middle of BRIGHT LIGHT as the elf sees it?
If I ask you what stops R from hiding from E your answer should be, E sees the square R is in as NORMAL LIGHT which offers no way to hide.
It is not because he doesn't have concealment. The only reason he doesn't have concealment is because E perceives the square as NORMAL LIGHT.
If it doesn't matter how E perceives the square, DIM LIGHT is still in square R, and as such, DIM LIGHT gives R concealment, because DIM LIGHT is still there no matter how E perceives it. Since concealment is still there, R can hide from E.
A + B = C and B + A = C
There is still Dim Light in that square. R still has concealment, just not from E. If R had HiPS he could continue to use it as HiPS doesn't require the area of dim light to be from the observer, just for it to exist and be within 10 feet of him. If that square was no longer dim light, then R would also have concealment from D and thus be seen by him as well. E's LLV doesn't change the light levels, just how much he can see.
You're mixing the argument about low-light vision working for the elf with the the argument about the low-light vision modifying the objectively existing physical light level of the area.I disagree. The DIM LIGHT still exists so far as anything not pertaining to the elf's vision. I do not claim that the matter that is DIM LIGHT to cease to exist.
Ok, we're on the same page here. The dim light exists whether or not the elf is penalized by it.
I claim that it has no affect on the elf's vision in that area due to the benefit the elf gains from LOW LIGHT VISION. I claim that this continues on to make it impossible to use that DIM LIGHT that the elf cannot see, DIM LIGHT that cannot impair the elf's vision, to use that DIM LIGHT to make an opposed roll against that elf.The Shadowdancer is still in the square. He didn't move to the plane of shadow. He didn't go invisible. If there is nothing at all for him to blend into, or for him to bring to shroud him, where did he go?
And we're off the page again. The dim light was there in the above quote, but now it's gone. <sigh>
If those things are now showing in the square, shouldn't the elf clearly see them as he is in the middle of BRIGHT LIGHT as the elf sees it?If I ask you what stops R from hiding from E your answer should be, E sees the square R is in as NORMAL LIGHT which offers no way to hide.
It is not because he doesn't have concealment. The only reason he doesn't have concealment is because E perceives the square as NORMAL LIGHT.
If it doesn't matter how E perceives the square, DIM LIGHT is still in square R, and as such, DIM LIGHT gives R concealment, because DIM LIGHT is still there no matter how E perceives it. Since concealment is still there, R can hide from E.
A + B = C and B + A = C
The elf can certainly observe the shadow dancer (non-HiPS) if that what the elf wishes to do. Whether of not anyone would get concealment normally is not the issue.
The issue is that the shadowdance has a supernatural ability that allows her to use stealth, even while being observed, as long as there is dim light within 10 feet.
It doesn't matter if other characters treat that dim light as normal light. It doesn't matter if other characters treat that dim light as bright light.
As long at that dim light is there, it satisfies the requirement for using stealth to hide herself from view. You can flavor that however you want, but that's the mechanical bottom line.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if the devs get a kick out of watching us struggle to explain things like this? I know I would lol
My point is that "As long at that dim light is there, it satisfies the requirement for using stealth to hide herself from view."
Also applies to NORMAL STEALTH, so if you are saying it is there no matter how the ELF perceives it, No matter if the elf sees through it or not, it would apply to both.
The difference is HiPS doesn't require concealment or cover only dim light. Actual stealth requires one of those things. The elf eliminates the concealment but not the dim light.
Nothing about the elf says he sees through the CONCEALMENT. It says that he sees through the DIM LIGHT.
As far as I can tell, the claim is that the dim light the SD has to be within 10' of is what is actually providing the concealment he needs. Even though he's not in it. Thus it has to be a light level that would provide concealment from that particular observer.
I don't actually agree with his argument, but most of the responses aren't actually addressing the issue at all. Saying the elf's eyes aren't emitting light beams or questioning the use of other SD abilities misses the point entirely.
If that's the claim being made, I'll cop to not addressing it.
I didn't see it made that explicitly, and I wouldn't have inferred it since nothing in the ability suggests it's borrowing concealment conditions from another square.
The shadowdancer isn't getting concealment from lighting condition.
She's getting to use stealth because of a supernatural ability with a requirement to be near at least low-light conditions.
Lets do it another way then...no elf this time...to explain the difference of HiPS and someone else using concealment
HiPS does not grant concealment, dim light does, nowhere in HiPS does it say it grants you conealment...now to explain that out
1)Human "A" in dim light, rolls stealth since he has concealment, gets a +24 total and is trying to stealth from Human "B" at 10ft away from him, by which "B" is right at the edge of the 20ft lighting of a torch. Human "B" rolls perception and get +25, he sees human "A" yes? Ok but does human "A" still have concealment? YES HE DOES because he is in dim light still, so even if he is spotted by human "B", he still has to roll a 20% miss chance against human "A" if he chose to attack
2)Now if Human "A" was trying to hide from Elf "A" then he would be out of luck if the elf were in the same spot as human "B" was because his LLV would allow him to see another 20ft out, so Human "A" no longer has concealment from him so cannot attempt stealth and elf "A" has no miss chance if he tries to attack him
3)Same situation as 1) but human "A" happens to be a shadowdancer and now is within the first 20ft of the torchlight, does he have concealment? NO...but he can still "attempt" stealth, so lets say he rolls and gets the same +24. Human "B" rolls perception and gets +25, human "A" is now spotted, and HAS NO CONCEALMENT since nothing about HiPS grants it or needs it
Now lets bring in an elf...
4)Same situation as 2), but like 3) human "A" is a SD and is within the first 20 ft of torch light, does he have concealment? NO...but he doesn't need concealment to "attempt" stealth so he does...gets a +24 again, Elf "A" rolls perception and get a +22, is the human spotted? NO...elf "A" failed his perception against stealth of SD so he does not see him, the lighting as the elf sees it is irrelevant at that point because he failed his perception to even spot the SD
5) same as 4) but SD is out of "normal" torchlight, 30ft out so that he has concealment except from elf "A", now he is still meeting the requirements of HiPS so "attempts" stealth, if elf "A" fails, then SD is not within sight so LLV doesn't come into play, if elf "A" succeeds on perception, THEN the light level is relevant because SD is spotted and has no concealment from the elf
LLV is irrelevant until the SD is actually spotted, only to determine whether the SD has concealment still or not...HiPS is allowing the SD to stealth regardless of him being looked at or having concealment, you can "fluff" it anyway you want but thats the RAW, LLV does not negate HiPS anymore than it negates invisibility
Absolutely right, Drakkiel.
Now this is someone that understands my point but doesn't agree. I can completely appreciate that.
I don't actually agree with his argument, but most of the responses aren't actually addressing the issue at all. Saying the elf's eyes aren't emitting light beams or questioning the use of other SD abilities misses the point entirely.
I just disagree as to when to apply the elf's vision. I say it matters before the SD rolls stealth, many feel it only matters afterwards.
I know it is not about concealment, never thought it was. Never used that term.
But to the elf, 25' from the torch, there is no DIM LIGHT. The DIM LIGHT is what is missing, not the concealment from it, as far as the elf sees things.
But it is clear we disagree. I am ok with that.
Except to Komoda there is no dim light because there's an elf nearby.My point is that "As long at that dim light is there, it satisfies the requirement for using stealth to hide herself from view."
Also applies to NORMAL STEALTH, so if you are saying it is there no matter how the ELF perceives it, No matter if the elf sees through it or not, it would apply to both.
Yes, but normal stealth requires concealment, which the dim light normally gives you. The elf sees through the dim light, therefore no concealment and no stealth.
HiPS does not require concealment. So with HiPS, even though the elf can see through the dim light (that is STILL THERE), you can still stealth.
If HiPS worked the same as stealth why would they even need to have the HiPS ability?
Because A) it lets you do it while already observed.
B) You don't have to be in the dim light, just near it.Both of those remain true, even if you interpret it as Komoda does.
Well, at least not as far as the elf is concerned.
@ Komoda
I wrote a huge counter argument to your reply to me. I wrote it offline over the course of these last two nights only to find today when I popped onto the thread that some of it no longer matters due to points in your argument that you have given up. It is a wall of text and I didn't want to blast the thread with it so I am hiding it behind a spoiler tag. I don't know if you will take the time to read the full post, I hope so as I have taken the majority of two sleep cycles to write it, but in case you don't I will post some of the stronger and more relevant points outside the spoiler.
Shadowlord - I hear you. But you haven't proven anything. Your assessment is that the elf's perception of DIM LIGHT doesn't matter. You haven't proven it. You have supported it, very well.
Unfortunately we may never be able to 100% prove our case. Why? Because there are items in the rules that can be taken more than one way, or that REQUIRE a certain amount of analysis, but people analyze differently. Additionally the designers have been silent on the majority of issues dealing with this topic. At the end of the day the only level of PROVING we will achieve is to the degree that an argument makes more sense than the way we currently understand the rules and seems to take into account all relevant data.
On the other hand, I haven't proven that it does matter. I have supported my position with the general rules of light and vision and stealth and I have applied them to HiPS by stating it does matter how the elf sees it. I accept that is not proof or enough support for you and have given credence to your argument as such. That is a healthy debate.
All true. However, you are forming your opinion (and I am basing this on your words) using only THREE things: 1) Vision and Light description, 2) Stealth description, and 3) HiPS description. Those three things are the main things people tend to focus on, but they are NOT the only relevant data to consider. A solid stance on this subject needs to take into consideration, and be able to make sense of, as much data as can be found on the subject. Unfortunately there is not a one stop shop for this, the rules are scattered throughout the CRB.
Your claim, which obviously is more popular, is that the state exists no matter what. My claim is that it is based on the viewer.
In an area of bright light, all characters can see clearly. Some creatures, such as those with light sensitivity and light blindness, take penalties while in areas of bright light. A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover. Areas of bright light include outside in direct sunshine and inside the area of a daylight spell.
Remember this bolded section it will come up again.
Normal light functions just like bright light, but characters with light sensitivity and light blindness do not take penalties.] Areas of normal light include underneath a forest canopy during the day, within 20 feet of a torch, and inside the area of a light spell.
This bolded section refers to the bolded section above.
In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision or the ability to see in darkness. A creature within an area of dim light can make a Stealth check to conceal itself. Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
Notice the difference in Stealth qualifiers. In bright or normal it says you MUST have cover or invisibility. Now in dim light it says you can make stealth chechs without the need for cover or invisibility. Why? Because you have concealment.
In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded. In addition to the obvious effects, a blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat (all opponents have total concealment), loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and takes a –4 penalty on Perception checks that rely on sight and most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks. Areas of darkness include an unlit dungeon chamber, most caverns, and outside on a cloudy, moonless night.
Here Stealth isn't even mentioned, because creatures without DV are blind and you have 50% concealment against them.
Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
The italics highlight the portion of the statement that refers to a CONSTANT. The given radius.
The bold highlights the portion of the statement that refers to PERCEPTION. The effective radius.These are two different things, in this case effective radius refers to "virtual" radius not "actual" radius.
You quote the dictionary saying effective = actual and effectively = virtual. But in this case it boils down to common sense. Would you write "Double the effectively radius?" I hope not, it's terrible grammar. What is the form of "effectively" that fits in that sentence? "Effective." Thus the statement is "Double the effective radius." Do you honestly think the writters consulted the dictionary to decide the difference between effective and effectively, they are different forms of the same word? If I were writting it I would not have consulted a dictionary, and I had no idea that the two words could mean different things. I would have used that word to equate "virtually" and never thought twice. You could even say, "well they could have used the word effectively if they changed the sentence." That's true lets play with that idea and see if we come up with any verbage that flows as well as the current version while using the word effectively.
1. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius.They mayeffectively double the radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
This works, but without looking up definitions and anticipating this very argument why would you write it that way? It sounds better and flows better the way it's written now.
2. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the radius effectively of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
This may be correct grammar and utilize the right dictionary definitions but it sounds terrible and would probably cause confusion in anyone trying to read it without consulting a dictionary and and English teacher.
3. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius.Effectively double the radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
This would work but it too could cause confusion as the word "effectively" in that sentence could be taken to mean a couple things. It could be taken to mean effectively vs. ineffectively rather than effectively = virtually/actual.
The way the writers phrased that text is the way it sounds best. It flows and is easy to follow.
With all that in mind: The statement very explicity refers to two different kinds of radius. One is given = actual / baseline. The other is effective = percieved, having no effect on the actual / baseline. The definition of LLV in the glossary lends further support to my interpretation.
Characters with low-light vision have eyes that are so sensitive to light that they can see twice as far as normal in dim light. Low-light vision is color vision. A spellcaster with low-light vision can read a scroll as long as even the tiniest candle flame is next to him as a source of light.
Characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day.
The bolded sections support my interpretation. You aren't changing the "actual" level of light. In the LLV description the word "effective" doesn't mean "actual." You just have increadibly sensitive eyes so while dim light exists, you can see further into it than a human can using the same light source. I am sure you can't believe that the last sentence in that quote means he turns moonlit nights into "actual" daylight. The dim light still exists all around him, he is just able to see clearly through it as if it were daylight because his eyes are so sensitive to moonlight. There is no change to the "actual" light level in the area. Not for the elf, and not for anyone else. The elf simply sees further with the same light.
The shadowdancer's power comes from proximity to "actual" dim light. Your perception of the dim light doesn't move the "actual" dim light and IF IT IS THERE, I CAN USE IT. That is not my opinion that is what's actually printed in the rules... point blank:
As long as she is within 10 feet of an area of dim light, a shadowdancer can hide herself from view in the open without anything to actually hide behind.
I don't see any if's and's or but's in there, do you? It is a constant statement refering to a constant light level, that of dim light. The way YOUR special eyes interact with the CONSTANT light level does not make the "actual" light level any less CONSTANT.
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.
The italics statement is interchangable with the word "and" in this sentence. Most creatures are effectively blinded but the creature with DV can see "lit areas" and "dark areas within 60 feet."
The bold statement is a reference back to the bolded statement in the description of bright light. Bright light says I can see clearly and therefore you must have cover or invisibility to hide. Dark vision say I can see lit and dark, so even in the dark you must still have cover or invisibility. Why? Because I can see, you get no concealment from me and thus cannot hide in it.
I may be wrong. I also admitted that. I didn't just keep posting it. I only tried to explain it more when I felt my claim was misrepresented.
Fair enough. I've had to admit I was wrong more than once on the boards, most times due to FAQ I wasn't aware of, or a designer statement I wasn't aware of. But I only admit it when I have been PROVEN wrong. By that I mean: Explicit rules I can't refute, Designer statements I can't refute, or someone convinces me that their interpretation makes more sense, and handles all available data better than mine. In this case, I have ZERO doubt of my argument. I have had this debate MANY times and have read through the relevant rules many times. I absolutely believe that the way I am interpreting those rules is the best way to handle all relevant rules, and is correct; otherwise why argue so hard? If a designer popped in here and said, "Shadowlord, you are WRONG, this is how it works..." I would admit defeat and immediately recant my arguments, then I would argue just as hard for that point of view; the differance would be, then I would actually have a designer backing my argument. But I don't think that will happen.
We may differ in that attitude, and I can't be sure, but in my mind if you are admitting that you may be, "100% incorrect," it means you don't have full confidence in your argument. If that is the case, even just a little, then IMO it warrants re-reading ALL relevant data and re-thinking your stance. You still may find you don't agree with me, but if nothing else it will make you better able to explaining what it is you believe and why.
In the case above, if one applied my claim, the human could use HiPS against an elf anywhere from 30' to 90' away from the torch. This is a lot more area than the 10' to 50' away from a torch that he could use it against a human. The part that I said was NOT my claim is that it could never be used against an elf.
To be clear, I was exaggerating. I am, and was, aware that you weren't saying it couldn't be used normally OUTSIDE the range of their vision or other humans inside the range. However, the rule is still quite explicitly stated that an Elf, outside in moonlit night, can see as clearly as in the day. It makes no mention of range here. This is a seperate statement than the rules about them being able to see twice as far as humans in torchlight. They see as clearly as in the day. And if we are talking about scenarios that are flat ground that means a VERY large radius. And what if we say that Elf is standing on a lone hill in the vast plains? The rules say he can see as well as if it were day. He may well be able to see for MILES. Do you really believe that in that situation my 10 Rogue / 10 Shadowdancer should not be able to use HiPS within MILES of even the lowliest level 1 NPC Elf? If this is really what your interpretation allows you have game breaking problems. Elf is now the single most powerful race in your game, and not by a little, they are most powerful by a landslide. How can you justify that? I will quote the whole section so you can read for yourself.
Characters with low-light vision have eyes that are so sensitive to light that they can see twice as far as normal in dim light. Low-light vision is color vision. A spellcaster with low-light vision can read a scroll as long as even the tiniest candle flame is next to him as a source of light.
Characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day.
Additionally, how would you EVER justify any Elf, in elven society, ever becoming a Shadowdancer or Assassin. Not only would the class be near useless in their society, if you are saying they TRUELY don't percieve any evidence of shadows through their low-light vision then they UTTERLY wouldn't understand shadow. They wouldn't comprehend shadows and dim light the way a human would and therefore wouldn't understand the potential power that could be gained from embracing it... as a Shadowdancer. Yet elven shadowdancers and assassins exist both as NPCs in game and as characters in the lore and novels written for/about the game. The same could be said for Dwarves, Drow, Tieflings, Orcs and more.
And how about the new Fetchling race in the Advanced Race Guide. They are creatures of shadow... yet have Darkvision and Low-light vision. Additionally they have the ability to attain the "see in darkness" ability which allows them to see in dim light or darkness as clearly as if it were daylight. Now what about them, if they are in fact utterly unable to distinguish whether they are in dim light or not becuase they TRUELY can't see any sign of it, how would they even begin to understand the abilities of a Shadowdancer. How would they be able to understand when they could blend into shadows and when the could not if they are never able to tell the difference between night and day? Additionally they have light blindness. So what happens when a Fetchling and and Elf are in the same area under a starlit night? Does the pressence of the elf (creating precieved normal light) actually BLIND the Fetchling? If not, why not? Better question, does the Fetchling who has the see in darkness ability (creating percieved normal light even in pitch blackness) actually blind himself? If not, why not?
You see there are FAR more problems with how you are running light and vision in your game than just the application of HiPS and other shadowdancer abilities. You run into situations where in a starlit NIGHT the mere pressence of an elf might cuase light blindness to a Drow, Fetchling, or any number of other light blind races.
And if you woud then say, "No that's not the case," why not? You stated you might allow someone with Hellcat Stealth to hide in the middle of a starlit night against an elf, because the elf's sight is causing there to be normal light for him to vanish into. How then can you say that same phenomenon doesn't cause the Drow or Fetchling to go blind?
The same goes for darkvision. I do believe it would be impossible to use HiPS, in this manner, within the 50' of Darkvision 60'. It could still be used outside of that if the DIM LIGHT condition existed. This IS DIFFERENT than stating HiPS never works against those with darkvision.
My above statements cover darkvision also. But I have a new question now. When two Drow are in pitch black room together, standing only 15' apart, do they blind eachother? If their percieved vision actually changes the light levels in a meaningful way that allows and/or disallows light and shadow based special abilities then those two Drow should be blinding eachother. If not, PLEASE explain in detail WHY NOT?
I say they see "as clearly" in the dark "as if" they were in light. This has no actual effect on the light level, only the way they percieve it. And there is no disruption. If you are saying their vision "actually changes the light level" then Drow society couldn't exist... they would blind eachother. It would mean they had evolved to destroy one another and their race would die out. The same could be said about any race with LLV and/or DV who have light sensitivity or light blindness. IF that is the case, your current interpretation of the rules is not only unlikely the intent of the designers, it is game breaking.
I never encountered Hellcat Stealth before this thread. Unfortunately, for this discussion, I joined the Navy 3 years ago and no longer play in a weekly game with my old crew that loved to debate rules. My only outlet for that is here. As such, I never saw that feat.
I first encountered that feat on the boards too. Luckily it fits just fine into my interpretation of the rules. However, if you encounter new data and it seems to break your interpretation of the rules then it's time to rethink your ideas. Perhaps what you interpreted was not accurate. Do you really want a guy with Hellcat Stealth being able to hide from Elves in bright light, normal light, AND for miles around in a moonlit dim light any time he wants with only a -10 penalty? That is a horrific idea. Every elf assassin would have that feat, it is GAME BREAKING in any elven campaign. IMO this is a far worse option than simply allowing HiPS to work on a baseline lighting level.
As I meant to imply before, which I may not have done well, I do not know how I would apply that feat. To apply the rules consistently, I guess I would allow it to apply to darkvision. I would surely allow it to work against an elf within the 40' range of a torch as without question the elf sees it as normal light. Without that feat, the character would not be able to stealth in this area against an elf as the elf would observe him. (This assumes no HiPS).
And again I bring you to the rule that an elf can see as clearly under a starlit night as he can in the daylight. Which means I don't just use Hellcat Stealth within 40' of a torch against an elf in that scenario. I can use it from miles away. I hope you can see this cannot be what the designers intended. Do you honestly think they intend a feat that requires normal or bright light to be used in the middle of the night if you are using it against an elf? They intend it to be used in the light, ACTUAL LIGHT, not percieved lighting conditions. You keep saying to rule otherwise is to deny the advantage of those special visions, I disagree. I believe to rules as you do is to invite game breaking instances into your campaign.
I really have no idea what I would do with Shadow Walk. I have never used that spell before and I haven't worked through all the options. Applying your claim to it would be the easiest way to adjudicate. Applying my way would make it different for each caster. That would seriously unlikely be the intention of the designers and is a great counter to my claim.
An interpretation of the rules must incorporate ALL available data in a valid and common sense way. The writters don't write the rules in a way that can only be understood by a physics degree. They write the rules to the lowest common denominator. I think most rule books like these are meant to be at about a 3rd or 4th grade reading/comprehention level. Do you honestly think the kid in 3rd or 4th grade is going to be trying to figure out Objective light vs. Subjective light during his/her game? NO. They are going to say, ok dim light is here, cool I can use HiPS. Someone asks, but there is an elf there they see better/further. Shadowdancer, yeah they can SEE better/further, but the dim light still starts here, I hide.
But that counter doesn't prove you are correct even if it does give you support. Support is not equal to proof.
Really? You have admitted that your argument has holes. You see that your interpretation of rules has no valid way of dealing with several large sections of rules. You've admitted that your way is so complicated it's almost certainly not the designers intent. What more is there to prove?
My interpretation is more logical based on relevant RAW and the small ammount of designer input that is available. My interpretation is better able to validly and smoothly handle all portions of the relevant rules. My portion is even more based in reality: [i]IE: Just because my very human eyes can't see UV light doesn't mean that UV light isn't all around me at any given time. If something faded into UV I would be unable to percieve it. If something only existed in UV I would never know it existed. In the same manner the Shadowdancer could be right next to a Dwarf in his pitch black cave and the Dwarf would never know it. WHY? Because the Shadowdancer has faded into a spectrum of light the Dwarf is unable to percieve. In this example "shadow" could be explained as a seperate spectrum of light. People with "normal" vision can't see through it so they would "lose sight of me in the darkness" while people with LLV or DV may not be able to percieve it at all, in which case when I fade into "shadow" I too slip out of their visual spectrum. That may not be a perfectly scientific way of explaining it but I think it's a pretty good example, and conveys my point.
As to your claim that HiPS trumps the need for concealment and cover, I totally agree with that and I always have. I just don't agree that this statement equals "I DON'T NEED YOU TO SEE THE DIM LIGHT. I JUST NEED IT TO EXIST IN THAT LOCATION, AND IT ABSOLUTELY DOES." I think it actually means, you don't need concealment or cover. It makes no mention of the actual state vs the perceived state of the observer.
In a way the rules do address actual state vs precieved state... through omission. The HiPS rule is very simple, perhaps TOO simple because it is SO simple that people a constantly trying to overcomplicate it. The rule says two things that are added to existing Stealth rules:
1. You can use Stealth even while being observed. This is generally disallowed by the Stealth rules. HiPS overrides the Stealth rules in this instance.2. If you are within 10' of an area of dim light you may use Stealth even without cover/concealment. Again, this is generally disallowed by the Stealth rules, but trumped by HiPS.
The dirrectness of the statement indicates it is unchanging, it is based on a constant, that constant is the baseline pressence of dim light. There is no mention of precieved light levels, there is no mention of interacting differently with particular types of vision. It is a point blank statement that indicates a constant. If you are within 10' of dim light you may do this. That dim light referes explicitly to a constant, the dim light described in Vision and Light. But let's also examine that passage. It referes to TWO distinct things, VISION and LIGHT. Firstly it describes the levels of light, which are a constant. It then goes on to describe how particular types of vision interact with different light levels. Your vision is a caveate and if there were some intention of caveating HiPS it would be mentioned in the description.
You are right, it doesn't refer explicitly to ACTUAL dim light vs. PERCIEVED dim light. It just referes to dim light. But that's the thing, dim light is a constant. It is explicitly defined. You may percieve it differently but that doesn't change that dim light itself is a constant. HiPS referes dirrectly and explicitly to that constant, not the perception of it.
In my opinion, I see the Shadowdancer as blending into or dissolving into shadows. If the Shadowdancer did that in an area the elf sees as not having shadow (25' away from a torch as Normal Light) it would be comparable to a sniper. A sniper wearing the proper clothing will be all but invisible standing, in plain sight, with a forest behind him. When he walks into the center of a mall, everyone sees him as the forest is not close enough for him to use his skill. Just as a person that is color blind will pick him out while he is standing in the forest in half a second because he doesn't blend in to the person that is color blind.
But all of that is in-game extrapolation of the mechanic, which has no bearing on the actual mechanic. It is just a way to try to justify it. Any mention of shadows is the same, as there is no mention of shadows, except the obviously left over "cannot... hide in her own shadow", in the skill anymore.
I would refer you above to my "spectrum of light" example. Treat shadows as a seperate spectrum of light. The guy with normal vision can percieve it but can't see through it. So in his vision the Shadowdancer seems to become part of the shadows around him. He can't see through shadow so it blocks his vision. The guy with LLV or DV can't percieve the "shadow" spectrum of light in a certain proximity to a light source. That doesn't mean the shadows arent there. Just like I can't see UV light or IR light but that doesn't mean it isn't there. So when the Shadowdancer blends into the shadow, becoming part of it, all the guy with LLV or DV sees is him disappear into nothing. The Shadowdancer is wrapping himself into a spectrum of light that the Elf and Dwarf simply can't effectiely percieve.
And if one were to go just by RAW and not RAI this can totally be broken, especially if we follow your claim and not mine. Cast permanent darkness on an rock. Take an everburning torch. Throw them both in the same backpack. You are always within 10' of a defined, no questions asked, source of DIM LIGHT. Even though no one can perceive it. It could be broad daylight 1000' in the air, no clouds and no shadows of any kind. Yet following RAW and applying your claim, the shadowdancer could hide from anyone.
Firstly, this example does NOT reflect my claim. No where did I say that such a thing is possible nor does my claim support it. Secondly, my argument is dealing with RAW, there is no RAW to address your example, RAW is silent. In areas where RAW is silent or incomplete, RAI and common sense must be applied.
I have been asked a similar question, quite recently in fact. My answer was and is, there is no explicit RAW to deal with that. RAI and common sense must be applied. RAW doesn't quantify how large an "area of dim light" must be, therefore RAI and common sense must be applied. Size is measured in 5' squares so between my thoughts on RAI and my own common sense I answered the area must be at least one 5' square for a small or medium creature. There is no explicit RAW that says you must have Line Of Sight or Line Of Effect to the dim light, so could it be in a sealed container you carry with you at all times? My answer is there is no explicit RAW so RAI and common sense must be applied. Personally I would not say you must have LoS to dim light within 10' because it's impossible for a Shadowdancer, they have Darkvision 60' and don't see dim light the same way. I would, however, expect them to have LoE since they are drawing the ability from that source. In my mind, my common sense, and my interpretation of RAI I would say to use an ability that draws on dim light you must have LoE to that source of dim light.
That example is only to show that RAW isn't what we always go by, as much as people use that as a way to trump everything anyone says. I am sure that there are very few, if any, of us that think that RAW example should be allowed in play. I think it was even this thread where someone points out RAW stealth doesn't allow sneak attack to work even though that is clearly RAI. It might have been another thread in the last few days though.
It was this thread, and I was one of the people pointing out RAI. I believe very heavily in RAI and in some cases, like Stealth providint SA damage, I believe it can be more important than RAW. The fact is RAW cannot always be propperly used without the application of RAI and common sense. I absolutely believe you should follow both RAW and RAI, I also absolutely believe your argument contains neither. You have based it on just a few pasages of RAW, without RAI and without even justifying all relevant data.
.....
In an area of bright light, all characters can see clearly. Some creatures, such as those with light sensitivity and light blindness, take penalties while in areas of bright light. A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover. Areas of bright light include outside in direct sunshine and inside the area of a daylight spell.
Remember this bolded section it will come up again.
Normal light functions just like bright light, but characters with light sensitivity and light blindness do not take penalties.] Areas of normal light include underneath a forest canopy during the day, within 20 feet of a torch, and inside the area of a light spell.
This bolded section here refers to the bolded section above.
In an area of dim light, a character can see somewhat. Creatures within this area have concealment (20% miss chance in combat) from those without darkvision or the ability to see in darkness. A creature within an area of dim light can make a Stealth check to conceal itself. Areas of dim light include outside at night with a moon in the sky, bright starlight, and the area between 20 and 40 feet from a torch.
Notice the difference in Stealth qualifiers. In bright or normal it says you MUST have cover or invisibility. Now in dim light it says you can make stealth chechs without the need for cover or invisibility. Why? Because you have concealment.
In areas of darkness, creatures without darkvision are effectively blinded. In addition to the obvious effects, a blinded creature has a 50% miss chance in combat (all opponents have total concealment), loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and takes a –4 penalty on Perception checks that rely on sight and most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks. Areas of darkness include an unlit dungeon chamber, most caverns, and outside on a cloudy, moonless night.
Here Stealth isn't even mentioned, because creatures without DV are blind and you have 50% concealment against them.
Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
The italics highlight the portion of the statement that refers to a CONSTANT. The given radius.
The bold highlights the portion of the statement that refers to PERCEPTION. The effective radius.These are two different things, in this case effective radius refers to "virtual" radius not "actual" radius.
You quote the dictionary saying effective = actual and effectively = virtual. But in this case it boils down to common sense. Would you write "Double the effectively radius?" I hope not, it's terrible grammar. What is the form of "effectively" that fits in that sentence? "Effective." Thus the statement is "Double the effective radius." Do you honestly think the writters consulted the dictionary to decide the difference between effective and effectively, they are different forms of the same word? If I were writting it I would not have consulted a dictionary, and I had no idea that the two words could mean different things. I would have used that word to equate "virtually" and never thought twice. You could even say, "well they could have used the word effectively if they changed the sentence." That's true lets play with that idea and see if we come up with any verbage that flows as well as the current version while using the word effectively.
1. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius.They mayeffectively double the radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
This works, but without looking up definitions and anticipating this very argument why would you write it that way? It sounds better and flows better the way it's written now.
2. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the radius effectively of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
This may be correct grammar and utilize the right dictionary definitions but it sounds terrible and would probably cause confusion in anyone trying to read it without consulting a dictionary and and English teacher.
3. Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius.Effectively double the radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters.
This would work but it too could cause confusion as the word "effectively" in that sentence could be taken to mean a couple things. It could be taken to mean effectively vs. ineffectively rather than effectively = virtually/actual.
The way the writers phrased that text is the way it sounds best. It flows and is easy to follow.
With all that in mind: The statement very explicity refers to two different kinds of radius. One is given = actual / baseline. The other is effective = percieved, having no effect on the actual / baseline. The definition of LLV in the glossary lends further support to my interpretation.
Characters with low-light vision have eyes that are so sensitive to light that they can see twice as far as normal in dim light. Low-light vision is color vision. A spellcaster with low-light vision can read a scroll as long as even the tiniest candle flame is next to him as a source of light.
Characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day.
The bolded sections support my interpretation. You aren't changing the "actual" level of light. In the LLV description the word "effective" doesn't mean "actual." You just have increadibly sensitive eyes so while dim light exists, you can see further into it than a human can using the same light source. I am sure you can't believe that the last sentence in that quote means he turns moonlit nights into "actual" daylight. The dim light still exists all around him, he is just able to see clearly through it as if it were daylight because his eyes are so sensitive to moonlight. There is no change to the "actual" light level in the area. Not for the elf, and not for anyone else. The elf simply sees further with the same light.
The shadowdancer's power comes from proximity to "actual" dim light. Your perception of the dim light doesn't move the "actual" dim light and IF IT IS THERE, I CAN USE IT. That is not my opinion that is what's actually printed in the rules... point blank:
As long as she is within 10 feet of an area of dim light, a shadowdancer can hide herself from view in the open without anything to actually hide behind.
I don't see any if's and's or but's in there, do you? It is a constant statement refering to a constant light level, that of dim light. The way YOUR special eyes interact with the CONSTANT light level does not make the "actual" light level any less CONSTANT.
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.
The italics statement is interchangable with the word "and" in this sentence. Most creatures are effectively blinded but the creature with DV can see "lit areas" and "dark areas within 60 feet."
The bold statement is a reference back to the bolded statement in the description of bright light. Bright light says I can see clearly and therefore you must have cover or invisibility to hide. Dark vision say I can see lit and dark, so even in the dark you must still have cover or invisibility. Why? Because I can see, you get no concealment from me and thus cannot hide in it.
.....
In the case above, if one applied my claim, the human could use HiPS against an elf anywhere from 30' to 90' away from the torch. This is a lot more area than the 10' to 50' away from a torch that he could use it against a human. The part that I said was NOT my claim is that it could never be used against an elf.
To be clear, I was exaggerating. I am, and was, aware that you weren't saying it couldn't be used normally OUTSIDE the range of their vision or other humans inside the range. However, the rule is still quite explicitly stated that an Elf, outside in moonlit night, can see as clearly as in the day. It makes no mention of range here. This is a seperate statement than the rules about them being able to see twice as far as humans in torchlight. They see as clearly as in the day. And if we are talking about scenarios that are flat ground that means a VERY large radius. And what if we say that Elf is standing on a lone hill in the vast plains? The rules say he can see as well as if it were day. He may well be able to see for MILES. Do you really believe that in that situation my 10 Rogue / 10 Shadowdancer should not be able to use HiPS within MILES of even the lowliest level 1 NPC Elf? If this is really what your interpretation allows you have game breaking problems. Elf is now the single most powerful race in your game, and not by a little, they are most powerful by a landslide. How can you justify that? I will quote the whole section so you can read for yourself.
Characters with low-light vision have eyes that are so sensitive to light that they can see twice as far as normal in dim light. Low-light vision is color vision. A spellcaster with low-light vision can read a scroll as long as even the tiniest candle flame is next to him as a source of light.
Characters with low-light vision can see outdoors on a moonlit night as well as they can during the day.
Additionally, how would you EVER justify any Elf, in elven society, ever becoming a Shadowdancer or Assassin. Not only would the class be near useless in their society, if you are saying they TRUELY don't percieve any evidence of shadows through their low-light vision then they UTTERLY wouldn't understand shadow. They wouldn't comprehend shadows and dim light the way a human would and therefore wouldn't understand the potential power that could be gained from embracing it... as a Shadowdancer. Yet elven shadowdancers and assassins exist both as NPCs in game and as characters in the lore and novels written for/about the game. The same could be said for Dwarves, Drow, Tieflings, Orcs and more.
.....
I never encountered Hellcat Stealth before this thread. Unfortunately, for this discussion, I joined the Navy 3 years ago and no longer play in a weekly game with my old crew that loved to debate rules. My only outlet for that is here. As such, I never saw that feat.
I first encountered that feat on the boards too. Luckily it fits just fine into my interpretation of the rules. However, if you encounter new data and it seems to break your interpretation of the rules then it's time to rethink your ideas. Perhaps what you interpreted was not accurate. Do you really want a guy with Hellcat Stealth being able to hide from Elves in bright light, normal light, AND also for miles around in a moonlit dim light any time he wants with only a -10 penalty? That is a horrific idea. Every elf assassin would have that feat, it is GAME BREAKING in any elven campaign. IMO this is a far worse option than simply allowing HiPS to work on a baseline lighting level. It cannot possibly be the intent of the designers.
As I meant to imply before, which I may not have done well, I do not know how I would apply that feat. To apply the rules consistently, I guess I would allow it to apply to darkvision. I would surely allow it to work against an elf within the 40' range of a torch as without question the elf sees it as normal light. Without that feat, the character would not be able to stealth in this area against an elf as the elf would observe him. (This assumes no HiPS).
And again I bring you to the rule that an elf can see as clearly under a starlit night as he can in the daylight. Which means I don't just use Hellcat Stealth within 40' of a torch against an elf in that scenario. I can use it from miles away. I hope you can see this cannot be what the designers intended. Do you honestly think they intend a feat that requires normal or bright light to be used in the middle of the night if you are using it against an elf? They intend it to be used in the light, ACTUAL LIGHT, not percieved lighting conditions. You keep saying to rule otherwise is to deny the advantage of those special visions, I disagree. I believe to rules as you do is to invite game breaking instances into your campaign.
.....
But that counter doesn't prove you are correct even if it does give you support. Support is not equal to proof.
Really? You have admitted that your argument has holes. You see that your interpretation of rules has no valid way of dealing with several large sections of rules. You've admitted that your way is so complicated it's almost certainly not the designers intent. What more is there to prove?
My interpretation is more logical based on relevant RAW and the small ammount of designer input that is available. My interpretation is better able to validly and smoothly handle all portions of the relevant rules. My portion is even more based in reality: [i]IE: Just because my very human eyes can't see UV light doesn't mean that UV light isn't all around me at any given time. If something faded into UV I simply see it disappear. If something only existed in UV I would never know it existed. In the same manner the Shadowdancer could be right next to a Dwarf in his pitch black cave and the Dwarf would never know it. WHY? Because the Shadowdancer has faded into a spectrum of light the Dwarf is unable to percieve. In this example "shadow" could be explained as a seperate spectrum of light. People with "normal" vision can't see through it so they would "lose sight of me in the darkness" while people with LLV or DV may not be able to percieve it at all, or at least percieve it differently, in which case when I fade into "shadow" I too slip out of their visual spectrum. That may not be a perfectly scientific way of explaining it but I think it's a pretty good example, and conveys my point.
.....
In my opinion, I see the Shadowdancer as blending into or dissolving into shadows. If the Shadowdancer did that in an area the elf sees as not having shadow (25' away from a torch as Normal Light) it would be comparable to a sniper. A sniper wearing the proper clothing will be all but invisible standing, in plain sight, with a forest behind him. When he walks into the center of a mall, everyone sees him as the forest is not close enough for him to use his skill. Just as a person that is color blind will pick him out while he is standing in the forest in half a second because he doesn't blend in to the person that is color blind.
But all of that is in-game extrapolation of the mechanic, which has no bearing on the actual mechanic. It is just a way to try to justify it. Any mention of shadows is the same, as there is no mention of shadows, except the obviously left over "cannot... hide in her own shadow", in the skill anymore.
I would refer you above to my "spectrum of light" example. Treat shadows as a seperate spectrum of light. The guy with normal vision can percieve it but can't see through it. So in his vision the Shadowdancer seems to become part of the shadows around him. He can't see through shadow so it blocks his vision. The guy with LLV or DV can't percieve the "shadow" spectrum of light within a certain proximity to a light source. That doesn't mean the shadows arent there. Just like I can't see UV light or IR light but that doesn't mean it isn't there. So when the Shadowdancer blends into the shadow, becoming part of it, the guy with LLV or DV see him disappear into nothing. The Shadowdancer is wrapping himself into a spectrum of light that the Elf and Dwarf simply can't effectiely percieve.
.....
As to your claim that HiPS trumps the need for concealment and cover, I totally agree with that and I always have. I just don't agree that this statement equals "I DON'T NEED YOU TO SEE THE DIM LIGHT. I JUST NEED IT TO EXIST IN THAT LOCATION, AND IT ABSOLUTELY DOES." I think it actually means, you don't need concealment or cover. It makes no mention of the actual state vs the perceived state of the observer.
In a way the rules do address actual state vs precieved state... through omission. The HiPS rule is very simple, perhaps TOO simple because it is SO simple that people a constantly trying to overcomplicate it. The rule says two things that are added to existing Stealth rules:
1. You can use Stealth even while being observed. This is generally disallowed by the Stealth rules. HiPS overrides the Stealth rules in this instance.2. If you are within 10' of an area of dim light you may use Stealth even without cover/concealment. Again, this is generally disallowed by the Stealth rules, but trumped by HiPS.
The dirrectness of the statement indicates it is unchanging, it is based on a constant, that constant is the baseline pressence of dim light. There is no mention of precieved light levels, there is no mention of interacting differently with particular types of vision. It is a point blank statement that indicates a constant. If you are within 10' of dim light you may do this. That dim light referes explicitly to a constant, the dim light described in Vision and Light. But let's also examine that passage. It referes to TWO distinct things, VISION and LIGHT. Firstly it describes the levels of light, which are a constant. It then goes on to describe how particular types of vision interact with different light levels. Your vision is a caveate and if there were some intention of caveating HiPS it would be mentioned in the description.
You are right, it doesn't refer explicitly to ACTUAL dim light vs. PERCIEVED dim light. It just referes to dim light. But that's the thing, dim light is a constant. It is explicitly defined. You may percieve it differently but that doesn't change that dim light itself is a constant. HiPS referes dirrectly and explicitly to that constant, not the perception of it.
.....
Additionally, I think it is a falacy to believe that LLV and DV are unable to percieve shadows or darkness. They simple allow a creature to percieve shadows and darkness differently than with normal vision. DV for example still percieves shadow and darkness, they are able to distinguish it from light. This is because in shadow or darkness they can only see 60' and that vision is in black and white. Likewise I feel Elves would be able to distinguish a moonlit night from a sunlit day, even without being able to see the sun or moon. The text says their eyes are so sensitive they can see twice as far as humans... and under moonlit night they see as well as in the day. To me that says they have increadibly sensitive eyes that can pick up far more detail that humans. To me that says they are not as hindered by a lack of light as humans are due to the sensitivity of their eyes. It does not say to me they don't percieve shadow or darkness and that they could not tell the day from a moonlit night.
You are right, it doesn't refer explicitly to ACTUAL dim light vs. PERCIEVED dim light. It just referes to dim light. But that's the thing, dim light is a constant. It is explicitly defined. You may percieve it differently but that doesn't change that dim light itself is a constant. HiPS referes dirrectly and explicitly to that constant, not the perception of it.
And this is basically the only place we disagree.
Normal Stealth
If the fact that DIM LIGHT is present, and it doesn't matter what the elf perceives, then anyone could hide 25' away from a torch because DIM LIGHT is still present. Nothing anywhere states that the elf sees through concealment. The elf SEES THROUGH the DIM LIGHT that GRANTS CONCEALMENT.
As a computer would see your claim:
A rogue wants to stealth.
What is the status of a square 25' from a torch? DIM LIGHT
What does DIM LIGHT due? Gives Concealment
Can the elf see through Concealment? No
Allow rogue to make stealth check.
As a computer would see my claim:
A rogue wants to stealth.
What is the status of a square 25' from a torch? DIM LIGHT
What does DIM LIGHT due? Gives Concealment
Can the elf see through DIM LIGHT at that square? Yes
Rogue automatically fails stealth check against elf.
I apply the same logic to HiPS.
HiPS Stealth
As a computer would see your claim:
A Shadowdancer wants to HiPS.
What is the status of a square 25' from a torch? DIM LIGHT
What does DIM LIGHT due? Allows stealth (via HiPS)
Can the elf see through DIM LIGHT at that square and all squares with 10' of Shadowdancer? Doesn't matter
Allow Shadowdancer to make stealth check.
As a computer would see my claim:
A Shadowdancer wants to HiPS.
What is the status of a square 25' from a torch? DIM LIGHT
What does DIM LIGHT due? Allows stealth (via HiPS)
Can the elf see through DIM LIGHT at that square and all squares with 10' of Shadowdancer? Yes
Shadowdancer automatically fails stealth check against elf.
As you said in your post, the only thing HiPS does is:
1. You can use Stealth even while being observed...
2. If you are within 10' of an area of dim light you may use Stealth even without cover/concealment...
In my logic above the only thing I changed was asking if DIM LIGHT was within 10' of the square. There would be a lot more questions required in the logic statements above (concealment, cover, observed, feint, etc. but they don't matter for this example because all are assumed favorable for the rogue/Shadowdancer in the examples.
I know it is not popular. I know I may be wrong. The reason I say that I may be wrong is because I know I am not infallible. The reason that became important in this thread is because I was called a troll. IMHO, trolls say everyone else is wrong and they are right. I was pointing out that I know there is a difference of opinion and it all hinges on interpretation of one point.
Why I stick to it
Because I haven't seen anything that, IMHO, counters my point enough to make me change my mind. It was the misrepresentation of my claim that brought me back here, not me trying to force my claim on people.
thejeff- thanks for understanding my claim even if you don't agree with it.
I have spent 2 months contacting 3 different people over 8 emails about the grades for all students in one of my college classes. All of them stated I was wrong and didn't understand how the grading system worked. I was out numbered 3 to 1.
Well, just now, while typing this, I got an email from my college and they apologize for not taking my claim more seriously. They just felt my claim was so outlandish that there was no way I was correct. They were wrong and now they realize it.
By no means does that suggest I am right in this, but it is a clear example that having a majority does not make an idea correct.
Democracy is two wolves and a rabbit deciding what is for lunch. Liberty is giving the rabbit a shotgun to contest the vote.
Closing
I think this has been a great debate. I appreciate the time anyone has spent with actually debating it. But it looks like both sides have come to an understanding of disagreement.
@Komodo: SD's don't get darkvision until lvl 2...but you have said you now believe DV would not affect a SD using his HiPS yes?
SD's get HiPS at lvl 1......so an elf with LLV that takes one level in SD gets HiPS correct?
Using your claim, this elf SD would be unable to use his OWN ability against a human even if he were 25 ft from a human, and would also not have any concealment...if this is not how your claim on the rules would run that then please tell me how this would work
Cody the human is in a 90 ft square room...there is a fire in the middle granting normal light out lets say 25 ft for the purpose of this example...Tiernen the elf is attempting to stealth at 30 ft out from the fire, he is a rogue 5/SD 1
Would Tiernen be able to stealth from Cody? Using your example, LLV of the elf means that he is not in dim light and also that there is not dim light within 10 ft, not only that but since according to the Tiernen he is not within dim light so gains no concealment, if Cody were to spot Tiernen (which he does since Tiernen auto fails stealth in this situation, no dim light on him or within 10 ft for HiPS) then he would also be able to attack him without any miss chance
Basically if we use your interpretation of what LLV does then elves never have concealment in dim light since their own perception works against them, negating the dim light
IF this is not how you see it then please explain how the above situation would differ and why...I would appreciate the clarification of your claim
Shinigaze -
The disconnect that I see in your claim is that at some point the fact that the elf sees through DIM LIGHT matters (Stealth)
And at another point the fact that the elf sees through DIM LIGHT doesn't matter (HiPS)
We all agree that DIM LIGHT is actually in the square no matter what they elf perceives. But I feel it matters what the elf perceives in both cases. The other side feels it only matters in one case.
OR
Steath - 25' from torch, is DIM LIGHT Present, regardless of elf perception? YES. Does it stop elf from seeing? NO
HiPS - 25' from torch, is DIM LIGHT Present, regardless of elf perception? YES. Does it stop elf from seeing? YES
I understand why you feel that way: All that matters is for DIM LIGHT to be present for HiPS, not what the elf perceives.
What I don't agree with is that: It doesn't matter what the elf perceives for HiPS, yet we agree what he perceives matters for stealth.
At some point, somewhere in the argument, you have got to agree to the fact that via stealth, your claim applies what the elf perceives (actual DIM LIGHT state doesn't matter) and at another point in your argument, via HiPS you claim what the elf perceives does not matter, (actual DIM LIGHT state does matter)even though there is no EXPLICT statement stating as such.
I am ok with that claim, and I don't think your side is nuts, but it is the basis of what I don't agree with.
The idea that elves have flashlight eyes and two dark elves would blind anyone is a gross misrepresentation of my claim.
Drakkiel - You don't seem to understand my claim at all if you feel the elf affects what the human sees.
Cody the human is in a 90 ft square room...there is a fire in the middle granting normal light out lets say 25 ft for the purpose of this example...Tiernen the elf is attempting to stealth at 30 ft out from the fire, he is a rogue 5/SD 1
Would Tiernen be able to stealth from Cody? Using your example, LLV of the elf means that he is not in dim light and also that there is not dim light within 10 ft, not only that but since according to the Tiernen he is not within dim light so gains no concealment, if Cody were to spot Tiernen (which he does since Tiernen auto fails stealth in this situation, no dim light on him or within 10 ft for HiPS) then he would also be able to attack him without any miss chance.
Of course the elf can hide from the human. The human does not have LLV. He gains no benefit from the elf's presence.
Go back and look at my map. The yellow tinted squares are DIM LIGHT. The purple squares are darkness.
1)Is the top map the proper representation of how a human would perceive that scene? 2)Can a rogue NORMAL STEALTH from a human in the square with the black dot on this map?
3)Is the bottom map the proper representation of how an elf would perceive that scene? 4)Can a rogue NORMAL STEALTH from an elf in the square with the black dot on this map?
-------
Go back and answer those questions.
If your answers are 1)Yes, 2)Yes, 3)Yes, 4)No; then we agree so far.
If you agree so far, you see the basis for my claim. The lights did not get brighter. There is no beam of light coming from the elf. What the elf sees does not help the human.
At the same point on the map, at the same time, the level of light is different AS PERCEIVED by two different characters.
All I claim is that this perception matters. Others claim it doesn't. I understand that.