Stealth


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 221 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

I have a shadowdancer who thinks he is able because of hide in plain sight that he can stealth after his attack without any penalty. Even though sniping is -20 I can only imagine that being that close would count for more penalties.

So for a few game sessions he hit then stealthed, and unless I readied an action to hit him I never saw him. Advice?


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Hide in plain sight allows you to attempt to hide while being observed.

It does nothing else to change any of the actual mechanics of hiding.

If there is nowhere to hide, then the attempt will fail. It only works in a single terrain type.


What Dragon said. SD needs a shadow within 10 feet to use HiPS, and if the enemy has darkvision he can't stealth at all (as the shadow wouldn't give him concealment.)


... and the -20 would still apply for sniping. Also, sniping only works for ranged attacks, so if he's hitting you with a sword, that's not sniping.


Technically, dim light within 10 feet. If he's got that, then he can do so. There are no penalties for being close. There's a bonus of +1/10' away.

The simplest counter is light. Even a torch sheds normal light for 20' (and increases dim light to normal for another 20'). He can still attack, move out to the edge of the light and hide, but he probably can't do that every turn.


The minus 20 only applies if he's actually sniping. Ranged attacks only.

And I'm not sure it would apply with HiPS. Sniping lets you hide again before being seen. With HiPS, you don't care. You can be seen and then hide anyway. I don't think you'd have to take the -20 if you're using HiPS.


There is nothing in the actual rules that says you would avoid the -20 for sniping.

If we are going to try to extrapolate from the rules I would go totally in the opposite direction and say if you get a -20 for popping up at a distance with a bow, you're dang well going to get a -20 for stabbing me in the face.

Sczarni

Snipe is -20 because: it is not a -20 to re-roll stealth, it is a -20 to your previous stealth roll, you remain in stealth the whole time. This is different than HiPS. Entirely.

He can, if within 10 feet of DIM LIGHT use his stealth whenever he pleases. It requires no action. It can be part of a move action. There is no penalty if you were "just observed" any more than there is a penalty for ducking out of sight and then rolling stealth. So on that part he is correct. (RAW anyway).

You would, indeed, need to ready an action OR attack his square blind (allowing the 50% miss chance for full cover) with a full round attack. Alternately, a Daylight spell, or anything that raised the whole area to Normal Light conditions would cancel his plans (a torch would do, since it sheds light 20 feet, making his melee attack at 15 feet from any DIM LIGHT, and thus rendering HiPS useless).

Adamantine Dragon - Shadowdancer HiPS requires NOTHING to hide behind. You are thinking of the Ranger ability, which is a camo effect, not a Su.

Brotato - it is 10 feet of DIM LIGHT, not shadow any more. Which generally means at least ONE SQUARE of DIM LIGHT conditions. Easily negated, as stated, by a torch.

Adamantine Dragon #2 post: He can sneak attack, be visible (and able to be attacked on a readied action) without SNIPING (he can MELEE attack even). His HiPS can then go off on a move action (or, as stated, with no action)... such as drawing a weapon (no AoO)... or even using a SU (like HiPS).

HiPS is powerful at times, but like I said, easily negated if anyone is carrying a torch. At further distances (like 20+ feet) where you are getting attacked at range, you are going to have to use something like a flask of burning oil. The benefit? You know the square he is in, only need a 15 to hit him, and he will be on fire!


Brotato wrote:
What Dragon said. SD needs a shadow within 10 feet to use HiPS, and if the enemy has darkvision he can't stealth at all (as the shadow wouldn't give him concealment.)

HiPS:

A shadowdancer can use the Stealth skill even while being observed. 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. She cannot, however, hide in her own shadow.

I don't see how having darkvision will affect her SU ability which allows her to hide while being observed.

As far as Sniping goes, that is used to maintain your position while at least 10 feet from a target. It is a move action immediately after an attack while using HiPS stealth follows normal stealth rules thus not needing an action nor getting a penalty.


Eugene Nelson wrote:

I have a shadowdancer who thinks he is able because of hide in plain sight that he can stealth after his attack without any penalty. Even though sniping is -20 I can only imagine that being that close would count for more penalties.

So for a few game sessions he hit then stealthed, and unless I readied an action to hit him I never saw him. Advice?

First, he is correct in that Hide in Plain sight allows him to use the stealth skill when he is within 10 feet of dim light. The ability removes the need to be unobserved and also removes the need for cover/concealment. He would not have any penalty (beyond possibly the penalty for moving at full speed) simply for having attacked in that round.

Now the shadowdancer will be visible after he makes the attack and before he moves. This is different from sniping in that he is seen. Likewise as he leaves the square he will be visible, so that will provoke AOOs from those that threaten.

As far as advice goes, I would not contort based on the PC as this engenders adversarial feelings and does not make for a good dynamic.

My suggestion: when he is attacking and then moving, he's only making one attack.. let him have it.. simply focus fire on softer targets. His lack of serious damage contribution will hurt the party more than his stealth is helping him. But rather than give tit for tat, let him 'enjoy' his 'victory'.. simply roleplay the enemies as they would act.

If its an enemy party, you can ready a glitterdust which even if he makes the will save to avoid the blindness will still saddle him with a -40 stealth check.

-James


OK, then, so if HIPS works that way, if the shadowdancer moves up, then attacks, he won't have a movement left to attempt to stealth. So to use stealth after attacking he would have to start his move adjacent to the target, correct?

Sczarni

Yes, Alwaysafk is correct, Darkvision (an EX) does not cancel Shadowdancer HiPS (Su). That would be like if magic didn't trump natural laws. You can still use HiPS in a BRIGHTLY LIT square, with no cover at all, as long as a DIM LIGHT square is within 10 feet. It is Su that way!


The rules state stealth is part of a movement (not a move action), so he could 5 foot step and get stealthed again. My preferred method is to use spring attack.

Sczarni

Adamantine Dragon post #3 - again HiPS / Stealth states under action: USUALLY NONE. But it is typically part of a move action. A move action is not required to activate this Su (I point that out again so you understand that this is a SUPERNATURAL EFFECT = defies the typical rules of nature = does something that isn't supposed to happen).

(That is directed towards Alwaysafk also, Stealth action is USUALLY NONE... not a move action/movement)


Hmm... OK, I can see that. So in that case the OP may be dealing with a correctly played shadowdancer.

If so, I apologize for sticking my foot in my mouth. And it looks like I failed my stealth check in doing so.


maouse wrote:

Adamantine Dragon post #3 - again HiPS / Stealth states under action: USUALLY NONE. But it is typically part of a move action. A move action is not required to activate this Su (I point that out again so you understand that this is a SUPERNATURAL EFFECT = defies the typical rules of nature = does something that isn't supposed to happen).

(That is directed towards Alwaysafk also, Stealth action is USUALLY NONE... not a move action/movement)

Aff, you are correct I left that out. My DM homeruled the movement requirement when my Fighter/Shadowdancer Combat Maneuver junkie could stealth, run up and attack/trip/whatever then just stand in the same spot and likely get the benefits of greater invisibility. No dex to their CMD and a shadow for flanking with Greater Trip made him kinda OP till lvl 12.


maouse wrote:
Yes, Alwaysafk is correct, Darkvision (an EX) does not cancel Shadowdancer HiPS (Su). That would be like if magic didn't trump natural laws. You can still use HiPS in a BRIGHTLY LIT square, with no cover at all, as long as a DIM LIGHT square is within 10 feet. It is Su that way!

I don't think so, though there's much vagueness in the stealth rules. I guess it's a question of whether it requires actual dim light or effective dim light.

To someone with Darkvision, there is no such thing as dim light, at least within their range. Low light vision extends the range of bright/normal light.

It seems strange to think of someone using shadows to hide from someone who can see through shadows.

Sczarni

Alwaysafk wrote:


Aff, you are correct I left that out. My DM homeruled the movement requirement when my Fighter/Shadowdancer Combat Maneuver junkie could stealth, run up and attack/trip/whatever then just stand in the same spot and likely get the benefits of greater invisibility. No dex to their CMD and a shadow for flanking with Greater Trip made him kinda OP till lvl 12.

I woulda done the same routine and then just drew a dagger (move action that doesn't provoke AoO) and dropped it(free action that doesn't provoke AoO). But then my GM would have been all snarly at me for having Greater Invisibility/ 50% cover/ mirror image spell continually on. I mean, honestly, if the GM is getting upset about that he can always have folks start lobbing oil at the square I was in... 15 to hit. Light for 20-30 feet... no HiPS for you! (or have the monster carry a torch, 20' NORMAL LIGHT = if SD is in melee he can't HiPS). It is pretty easy to counter, but trip combo folks are pretty nasty... especially with a Flying Talon (reach weapon) thrown in. Yeh... my party has one of those (we are playing three rogue/shadowdancers - one STR/CHR (trip/intimidate?), one DEX/INT (precise shot?), one INT/CHR (skill monkey)). Can you say "trip to prone" and then "intimidate" to cowering status because they can't run away? She can. :) Add a coup de gras and you are all set...

Sczarni

thejeff wrote:
maouse wrote:
Yes, Alwaysafk is correct, Darkvision (an EX) does not cancel Shadowdancer HiPS (Su). That would be like if magic didn't trump natural laws. You can still use HiPS in a BRIGHTLY LIT square, with no cover at all, as long as a DIM LIGHT square is within 10 feet. It is Su that way!

I don't think so, though there's much vagueness in the stealth rules. I guess it's a question of whether it requires actual dim light or effective dim light.

To someone with Darkvision, there is no such thing as dim light, at least within their range. Low light vision extends the range of bright/normal light.

It seems strange to think of someone using shadows to hide from someone who can see through shadows.

Go back and read a few dozen threads... the general concensus is that a Ex (normal physics) does not trump a Su (magic). A detailed reason is there, but basically the DIM LIGHT is not what the SD hides "in." It is a qualifier to USE the Su HiPS. He only needs to be 10 feet from it, not IN DIM LIGHT. He can be in BRIGHT LIGHT, but a DIM LIGHT square 10 feet away will allow him to use HiPS even against people with only NORMAL VISION. That is despite being completely visible to them in BRIGHT LIGHT, with absolutely NO COVER. So the same applies to Darkvision which grants NORMAL VISION in Low light areas. NORMAL VISION is beaten BOTH TIMES when the Su (magic) kicks off. Remember, at no time does the SD (under current RAW) actually use shadows. They use a Supernatural Ability which makes them magically unseen IN PLAIN SIGHT. Your arguement is kind of like saying it is silly to say they can't hide in plain sight under normal light conditions... which they totally can (so long as they are withing 10 feet of dim light). And remember the trigger is to trigger THEIR Su, not based on someone else's observation of the world.


thejeff wrote:
maouse wrote:
Yes, Alwaysafk is correct, Darkvision (an EX) does not cancel Shadowdancer HiPS (Su). That would be like if magic didn't trump natural laws. You can still use HiPS in a BRIGHTLY LIT square, with no cover at all, as long as a DIM LIGHT square is within 10 feet. It is Su that way!

I don't think so, though there's much vagueness in the stealth rules. I guess it's a question of whether it requires actual dim light or effective dim light.

To someone with Darkvision, there is no such thing as dim light, at least within their range. Low light vision extends the range of bright/normal light.

It seems strange to think of someone using shadows to hide from someone who can see through shadows.

It's strange to think of magic doing things that are magical?


HiPS (Su) trumps Darkvision (Ex).


Alwaysafk wrote:
The rules state stealth is part of a movement (not a move action), so he could 5 foot step and get stealthed again. My preferred method is to use spring attack.

This is not allowed. spring attack counts as a full round attack with no movement component. so its not move-attack-move is just a special full round attack. so annoying, pretty much ruined my shadowdancer character.


thejeff wrote:


To someone with Darkvision, there is no such thing as dim light, at least within their range. Low light vision extends the range of bright/normal light.

Incorrect.

A character's vision does not project light! Instead, THEY can treat the lighting conditions differently for purposes of THEIR vision.

A shadowdancer does NOT require CONCEALMENT from dim light, rather they require its PRESENCE within 10 feet of them.

Consider a shadowdancer in BRIGHT LIGHT, but within 10 feet of dim light. If a character with no special vision succeeded in their perception check they would attack the shadowdancer without any concealment miss chance, right?

This is a common misunderstanding. There have been a number of threads on this kind of thing if you want to search for more back and forth on it.

-James


ikarinokami wrote:
Alwaysafk wrote:
My preferred method is to use spring attack.

This is not allowed. spring attack counts as a full round attack with no movement component. so its not move-attack-move is just a special full round attack. so annoying, pretty much ruined my shadowdancer character.

Umm.. No, this is also incorrect.

Spring attack is a full round action (not full attack action), movement is certainly part of spring attack! If one were immobilized then there would be no springing being done!

It is not a MOVE ACTION that is required, but rather actual movement. Spring attack has one move, and that will suffice.

So the good news is that you can resurrect your old shadowdancer character!

-James


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shadowlord wrote:
HiPS (Su) trumps Darkvision (Ex).

HiPS (Su or Ex) has NOTHING to do with Darkvision. It has to do with the actual presence of dim light within range. Nothing on the part of a potential observer.

-James


I have a related question I was going to post, but thought I'd try to piggy back on here in the interest of space.

Under the rules there are 5 situations where you can get a sneak attack:
When you attack before the opponent has acted in combat that encounter
When you feint an opponent
When you're invisible
When you're flanking
When the target would otherwise be denied his Dex bonus for some reason.

My question is this: when you are successfully stealthing and unobserved by any enemies, are you considered invisible?

I ask because taking Shadowdancer levels after being a Rogue means this is about to come up frequently for me. Yet it appears that nowhere in the rules do you actually get a sneak attack from sneaking up on someone already engaged in some form of combat. I understand why you can't be considered sneaking while attacking, but I don't get how being undetectable up until the second I stab with my rapier gives the guy enough time to react, while running up 30 feet in front of the guy and swinging does not give him enough time if its the start of combat.

I can't figure this one out, so some clarification would be much appreciated.

Sczarni

Brutedude, no you are not considered invisible. You are considered unseen/unobserved.

You get a sneak attack because you are attacking from an unseen location.

The RAW on sneak attack is actually: "Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage." If you cannot observe someone, you cannot defend effectively from her attack.

Additionally, it doesn't matter if they are flat footed (get their dex) or not. Helpless = no dex, blind (to the SD) = no dex, You can infer backwards or just go find all the other threads about the topic.


I don't have the relevant link (cheapy probably does though lol), but they had a play test where they were going to create "hidden" as a condition so that people arguing over stealth not getting sneak attack would be ended...it was basically LIKE being invisible but a different condition itself...don't remember everything said...will attempt to find the link (on phone...may be awhile)


Quote:
HiPS (Su or Ex) has NOTHING to do with Darkvision. It has to do with the actual presence of dim light within range. Nothing on the part of a potential observer.

I disagree with the above as much as possible.

Dim Light only exists where the observer observes it. For instance. 25' away from a torch is Dim Light to a human. But to an elf, it is still normal light.

There are no shadows (dim light) within an observer's darkvision.

CRB wrote:

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.

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.

If you don't apply it based on the observer, how could you run your game? You take away a huge tactical advantage of the elf and half-orc. If the encounter is elves vs. elves and the shadowdancer is an elf, do you still say he can hide at 25' from a torch?

The only logical way to adjudicate it is to base it on the observer. Type of vision matters just as much as other senses, such as tremorsense, that can be used to thwart the ability.

And to go one further, there is nothing in HiPS that states it negates Darkvision. If it were to overpower darkvision, it would have to state as such.


I'm now imagining a Drow Shadowdancer living in the Darklands who's learned to hide in this thing called dim light, that no one including him can perceive. He can never tell when it'll work or not. Everyone else thinks he's mad, but still it sometimes works.

I guess it all depends on how HiPS works, which isn't really specified. Are you using that dim light to hide even though you're not really in it. Or is just that you can fade out or something when you're near a certain level of light. One would rely on the observers vision. The other wouldn't.
Also, if it really is independent of vision, does HiPS work against other senses: tremorsense and the like? It doesn't seem like it should, but I'm not sure if the rules support that.

You also quoted my favorite broken line from the stealth rules. "A creature can’t hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover." Obviously the intent is "can't use dim light or darkness to hide", but as stated also rules out all other forms of concealment. Nor does it have to the person you're hiding from. Technically, if you have darkvision, you can't hide within 60' of yourself without invisibility or cover!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Komoda wrote:


Dim Light only exists where the observer observes it. For instance. away from a torch is Dim Light to a human. But to an elf, it is still normal light.

And to go one further, there is nothing in HiPS that states it negates Darkvision. If it were to overpower darkvision, it would have to state as such.

Two separate issues there.

1. Elves absolutely still observe dim light. The difference is that they can still see and do things like read scrolls by moonlight. Why would you say that creatures with dim light vision loose the ability to perceive light? You can still tell the difference between a room lit with different types of florescent lighting even though you can still see perfectly fine. No where does it say that Elves and such can't tell the difference between dim and regular light so I find it hard to see how to make the argument that they literally can't perceive its existence.
This is even more true for Darkvision since Darkvision doesn't give you improved sight, it just allows you to see in darkness you normally couldn't, but only in black and white (ala fantasy night vision googles almost) so you're always aware of its existence even if you can overcome it.

2. Hide in Plain Sight has nothing to do with Darkvision. Its a Supernatural Ability so it should by default trump the Extraordinary Darkvision ability anyway. But you've actually got your burden of rule proof mixed up here. Here's the rule:
"A shadowdancer can use the Stealth skill even while being observed. 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."

Can hide herself in the open even while being observed, period. No ifs, ands, or buts. To be clear, you are not hiding in dim light, that's what normal people do to stealth, its presence is what allows you to activate your magic and disappear. For darkvision to trump it there would need to be a rule saying so, not the other way around since the ability says you can be currently observed and with nowhere to hide. There's nothing that says that isn't true for everybody regardless of the vision they have, and there's no reason to assume that's not the case.


maouse wrote:

Brutedude, no you are not considered invisible. You are considered unseen/unobserved.

You get a sneak attack because you are attacking from an unseen location.

The RAW on sneak attack is actually: "Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage." If you cannot observe someone, you cannot defend effectively from her attack.

Additionally, it doesn't matter if they are flat footed (get their dex) or not. Helpless = no dex, blind (to the SD) = no dex, You can infer backwards or just go find all the other threads about the topic.

Drakkiel wrote:
I don't have the relevant link (cheapy probably does though lol), but they had a play test where they were going to create "hidden" as a condition so that people arguing over stealth not getting sneak attack would be ended...it was basically LIKE being invisible but a different condition itself...don't remember everything said...will attempt to find the link (on phone...may be awhile)

Thanks for the help. I went back and found the playtest here which looks very promising. http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5lcml&page=9?Stealth-Playtest-Round -TwoStealth#407

And James Jacobs response:

James Jacobs wrote:

This is the extent of it for now. We have no plans at this point to put it into the PRD or do much else with it at this point—feel free to use the variant rules of this playtest in your games as you wish... but it's not going to be something we officially adopt into the game, since that type of change goes from errata to re-design.

And the time for re-design is not now.

So to sum this up as best as I can understand it, logically you can infer from different conditions that being unobserved would deny an opponent their dexterity. Unfortunately nowhere in the rules does it come out and say that, so I strict reading of just playing by the rules would mean you can't get a sneak attack off by sneaking up to someone in combat, and other corner cases where a person would not be considered flatfooted by other conditions (such as being out of combat). To try and fix this discrepancy and general rules oversight, Paizo came up and playtested a new clarification that described exactly when you can use the stealth skill, and implemented the hidden condition to describe someone currently stealthing. Unfortunately by filling in these holes they crossed the line from being errata to re-design, and its currently against Paizo's policy to make an update that amounts to more than errata. In the meantime though there's still ultimate discretion in one's own game, and you can always choose to implement the new stealth rules on your own.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

The rules for Stealth, Perception, and HiPS are all vague and lack clarity on this matter - especially the rules for Stealth. Technically Stealth doesn't even cause unaware foes to be denied their DEX. Go ahead, look it up.

Another thing the rules fail to mention is that dim light and darkness do not grant concealment / total concealment against those with Darkvision. This is how it's supposed to work, but it's not actually there RAW.

1. You need a source of concealment or cover to hide using Stealth. This also applies to Shadow Dancers, except they can ALSO hide if they have a shadow / dim light within 10 feet of them (yet another vague rule).

2. The ability Hide In Plain is Supernatural itself, but THE SOURCE of your hiding spot (shadow, dim light, darkness) is NOT supernatural. Therefore, those with Darkvision see through it just fine, therefore it's not a legitimate hiding source against someone with Darkvision.

Sure, this is just an opinion, and I have no documentation to back it up. But my point is since the rules are vague in these areas, you're essentially arguing over opinions anyway. Blame the lack of clarity in the rules, not each other for different interpretations.


Just a couple of other thoughts:

How about blindsight, tremorsense or similar abilities? Can HiPS be used to hide from those abilities? Why or why not? AFAIK, there is no specific rule saying either way.

More generally, what's your idea of the effect of using HiPS?
What does it look like to the person observing the Shadowdancer? Do they just fade away? Gone after you blink? Something more dramatic - Shadows from nowhere cover them for an instant then shadows and dancer are gone? Or do they somehow use the nearby darkness to actually hide in?

For that matter, does darkness work? Assuming they're being watched by someone with darkvision, if there are no light sources and thus no dim light only darkness, they shouldn't be able to use HiPS, right?


Sinatar wrote:
Another thing the rules fail to mention is that dim light and darkness do not grant concealment / total concealment against those with Darkvision. This is how it's supposed to work, but it's not actually there RAW.
Actually, that is RAW. In Vision and Light
Quote:
A creature can't hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover.

Though I suppose you could argue that it grants concealment (and thus miss chance) even though you can't use stealth. Is that what you meant?

Of course, it's worse than that, since the text also prevents you from using any other form of concealment. And, literally read, keeps you from hiding from everyone, not just the character with darkvision.


thejeff wrote:

How about blindsight, tremorsense or similar abilities? Can HiPS be used to hide from those abilities? Why or why not? AFAIK, there is no specific rule saying either way.

More generally, what's your idea of the effect of using HiPS?
What does it look like to the person observing the Shadowdancer? Do they just fade away? Gone after you blink? Something more dramatic - Shadows from nowhere cover them for an instant then shadows and dancer are gone? Or do they somehow use the nearby darkness to actually hide in?

For that matter, does darkness work? Assuming they're being watched by someone with darkvision, if there are no light sources and thus no dim light only darkness, they shouldn't be able to use HiPS, right?

You were probably asking someone else, but we all have opinions, right? I will briefly share mine.

Look at the spells Darkness and Deeper Darkness. There's even a quote there from James Jacobs with Deeper Darkness. You have bright light, normal light, dim light, and darkness. These are all the normal levels of light there are. In Pathfinder, the Darkness spell simply drops the current "light level" by 1 step. However, Deeper Darkness introduces a new kind of darkness that is 1 step darker than normal darkness... supernatural darkness. Darkvision can see through all 4 normal lighting conditions just fine. It takes this special supernatural darkness from the Deeper Darkness spell to overcome Darkvision in Pathfinder. In my opinion, this is a good mechanic, and how it SHOULD work. The only problem here is that the rules don't clarify that you CAN'T use dim light or darkness to hide from someone with Darkvision. To me (and others) this is fairly obvious, but apparently to many folks out there, it isn't. Using the mechanic this way, you can't use dim light or darkness to hide from someone with Darkvision, but you CAN use the supernatural darkness from Deeper Darkness to hide from someone with Darkvision.

Again, HiPS is vague. If a Deeper Darkness effect was 10 feet away from a Shadow Dancer, could she use that as her shadow to hide from someone with Darkvision? Now THIS is a good question that doesn't have a clear answer from the rules, but I would say YES. If the effect was normal darkness, no. But Deeper Darkness, yes.\

HiPS is essentially a supernatural ability that amplifies your ability to hide. It doesn't make it EASIER for you to hide, but it DOES present you with more opportunities to hide. It doesn't even have to be a shadow; normally a person standing behind a statue can't hide from an enemy who's staring him down, but a Shadow Dancer can. So to me this would look like to the naked eye the shadow dancer suddenly vanishing. The character is using the HiPS supernatural ability to sort of meld with her hiding source, and this appears as an instant vanish to observers. *shrugs* This is mostly flavor though... it's the actual mechanic that matters.


Komoda wrote:
Quote:
HiPS (Su or Ex) has NOTHING to do with Darkvision. It has to do with the actual presence of dim light within range. Nothing on the part of a potential observer.

I disagree with the above as much as possible.

Dim Light only exists where the observer observes it. For instance. 25' away from a torch is Dim Light to a human. But to an elf, it is still normal light.

There are no shadows (dim light) within an observer's darkvision.

No, shadows are still there, that darkvision can see what is in those shadows doesn't change that.

The shadow dancer class even gets Darkvision at level 2, obviously this doesn't prevent them from using their own HiPS ability.

Keep in mind, there's an entire plane of shadow, the shadow dancer gains the ability to manipulate and utilize this plane and bring bits of it into the material world.


thejeff wrote:


Actually, that is RAW. In Vision and Light

Though I suppose you could argue that it grants concealment (and thus miss chance) even though you can't use stealth. Is that what you meant?

Of course, it's worse than that, since the text also prevents you from using any other form of concealment. And, literally read, keeps you from hiding from everyone, not just the character with darkvision.

Yet another example of vagueness in the rules... is it really so hard to write:

Darkvision (Ex): You can see clearly in dim light and darkness (as if they were normal light) out to the indicated distance and are not hindered by their effects. Other creatures cannot use dim light or darkness to gain concealment or total concealment from you. In areas of darkness, you discern colors as black and white only.

Problem solved. The problem is the way the rules are currently written.

EDIT: Why did they put that in the rules for light and darkness?? Shouldn't it belong in the rules for Darkvision? (like in my suggestion)


Komoda wrote:
Quote:
HiPS (Su or Ex) has NOTHING to do with Darkvision. It has to do with the actual presence of dim light within range. Nothing on the part of a potential observer.

I disagree with the above as much as possible.

Dim Light only exists where the observer observes it.

Even if you 'strenuously object', I'm afraid that you are wrong.

Dim light is independent of the observer. The effects can vary, and different observers can treat it as something else... but it's still dim light.

-James


Brutedude wrote:


My question is this: when you are successfully stealthing and unobserved by any enemies, are you considered invisible?

If you are unseen then your attack will (in general) deny the victim their DEX modifier.

Whether you are invisible, the target is blind, or you are firing through say an illusionary wall so they can't see the attack coming.. it is all treated the same way.. they are denied their DEX (baring uncanny dodge or the like).

-James


Quote:
Elves absolutely still observe dim light.

I agree and did not state otherwise. My point was, and still is, that a single square that counts as dim light to a human may count as normal light to a elf. So unless you count it from the point of the individual you are hiding from, how do you count it?

The link brings up a map I made for a game run with a projector. I could click on Normal Light or Low Light to show the players what their characters could see based on their type of vision.

I have supplied screenshots of Normal Vision and Low Light Vision. I have also marked a black dot to show a square that is in Dim Light for Normal Vision characters, but not for Low Light Vision characters. The light sources DID NOT CHANGE, it is just how two different characters PERCEIVE the light.

I hope this helps clear up my position. You will still have to decide if you agree with me.

Normal Vision vs Low Light Vision.


Quote:
Dim light is independent of the observer. The effects can vary, and different observers can treat it as something else... but it's still dim light.

If the elf treats it as normal light, what makes you think you can hide from him in it?

If the shadowdancer is an elf, can he hide in it? Why, he treats it as if it is normal light?

The fact that it is supernatural only affects how it interacts with magic. For instance, supernatural abilities don't work in anti-magic fields. Saying darkvision can't overcome it because it is supernatural and darkvision is extraordinary has just as much validity as saying a torch can't overcome it because a torch isn't a power at all, it is just natural.

My point way above was that you would still need the dim light area that a character with darkvision would NEVER SEE. There is no such thing as DIM LIGHT to character within it's darkvision range.


How about blindsight, tremorsense or similar abilities? Can HiPS be used to hide from those abilities? Why or why not? AFAIK, there is no specific rule saying either way.

No, because hide in plain sight only alters the rules for the observation requirements for stealth to work: it doesn't suddenly make stealth work against things stealth doesn't work against.


BigNorseWolf wrote:

How about blindsight, tremorsense or similar abilities? Can HiPS be used to hide from those abilities? Why or why not? AFAIK, there is no specific rule saying either way.

No, because hide in plain sight only alters the rules for the observation requirements for stealth to work: it doesn't suddenly make stealth work against things stealth doesn't work against.

So you can't use HiPS to "hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover"?

Blindsight "makes invisibility and concealment (even magical darkness) irrelevant to the creature."

How is that, other than invisibility, different than the rule for darkvision?


Komoda wrote:
Quote:
Dim light is independent of the observer. The effects can vary, and different observers can treat it as something else... but it's still dim light.

If the elf treats it as normal light, what makes you think you can hide from him in it?

If the shadowdancer is an elf, can he hide in it? Why, he treats it as if it is normal light?

The fact that it is supernatural only affects how it interacts with magic. For instance, supernatural abilities don't work in anti-magic fields. Saying darkvision can't overcome it because it is supernatural and darkvision is extraordinary has just as much validity as saying a torch can't overcome it because a torch isn't a power at all, it is just natural.

My point way above was that you would still need the dim light area that a character with darkvision would NEVER SEE. There is no such thing as DIM LIGHT to character within it's darkvision range.

So does dark vision make you immune to shadow conjuration and evocation then?


Time to reroll my Half-Orc Shadowdancer as apparently I can never be within 10' of dim light as my darkvision extends 60'.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Shinigaze wrote:
Time to reroll my Half-Orc Shadowdancer as apparently I can never be within 10' of dim light as my darkvision extends 60'.

You also can never hide without cover or invisibility, because you're always within 60' of someone with Darkvision: You.


Komoda wrote:
Quote:
Dim light is independent of the observer. The effects can vary, and different observers can treat it as something else... but it's still dim light.

If the elf treats it as normal light, what makes you think you can hide from him in it?

I'm not hiding IN it, but rather all I need is that level of light to be nearby. Not concealment from it, nothing obscuring vision, but it's mere presence.

You're confusing yourself here. A shadowdancer is not hiding from concealment. He is empowered to disappear by drawing on the powers from the plane of shadows. To do this he needs to be within 10' of dim light.

-James


james maissen wrote:
Komoda wrote:
Quote:
Dim light is independent of the observer. The effects can vary, and different observers can treat it as something else... but it's still dim light.

If the elf treats it as normal light, what makes you think you can hide from him in it?

I'm not hiding IN it, but rather all I need is that level of light to be nearby. Not concealment from it, nothing obscuring vision, but it's mere presence.

You're confusing yourself here. A shadowdancer is not hiding from concealment. He is empowered to disappear by drawing on the powers from the plane of shadows. To do this he needs to be within 10' of dim light.

-James

Hide In Plain Sight wrote:
A shadowdancer can use the Stealth skill even while being observed. 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.

Are you saying the shadowdancer actually disappears? Becomes invisible?

There's an awful lot of extrapolation from the text of the rules being done on both sides of this discussion. Mostly because the actual text of the rules is vague and unclear about how it actually works and how all the various parts of Stealth interact.
The Shadowdancer is definitely hiding. A lousy stealth skill or a lousy stealth roll mean you get spotted. If he actually disappears, shouldn't there be a bonus? If not, what actually happens? The rules don't say.


thejeff wrote:

So you can't use HiPS to "hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover"?

How is that, other than invisibility, different than the rule for darkvision?

Here's the difference:

Tremmorsense/blindsense/blindsight/scent all stop stealth skill from working.

Darkvision USUALLY stops stealth from working BY denying the concealment that the stealth skill requires. If* something grants the concealment back then darkvision has no mechanism for stopping stealth from working.

*The question here, and i don't believe that there is a raw answer, is whether something like a shadow/ low light is an objectively existing phenomenon that the shadow dancer is wrapping around themselves like a cloak or a subjective entity that the shadowdancer is just hiding in. If its the former they can hide from a dwarf. If its the latter they cannot. I am inclined towards the former but i can very easily see someone rulling the latter.

1 to 50 of 221 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Stealth All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.