The fact that they are invisible gives them +20 to the DC.
I can't tell if that's a yes or a no, or which question it's in response to. I'll try to rephrase my question:
Using the rules as your table understands them, the target creature makes a stealth check to set the base DC.
When the target creature makes this stealth check, do they include the +20 (or +40) bonus on the stealth checks?
The movement modifier is right out of CRB on page 563
For those of us without a book handy, what section is that?
and are applied independently of invisibility. I was not clear on that.
It's still not clear. Do they take the -5 penalty on their stealth check that the stealth skill says you take if you move at greater than half but less than normal speed, or is that penalty not applied to the stealth check but instead incorporated into the DC modifier you listed?
|
The fact that they are invisible gives them +20 to the DC.I can't tell if that's a yes or a no, or which question it's in response to. I'll try to rephrase my question:
Using the rules as your table understands them, the target creature makes a stealth check to set the base DC.
When the target creature makes this stealth check, do they include the +20 (or +40) bonus on the stealth checks?
The movement modifier is right out of CRB on page 563For those of us without a book handy, what section is that?
and are applied independently of invisibility. I was not clear on that.It's still not clear. Do they take the -5 penalty on their stealth check that the stealth skill says you take if you move at greater than half but less than normal speed, or is that penalty not applied to the stealth check but instead incorporated into the DC modifier you listed?
The page refers to the Invisibility description in the appendix of the CRB.
Your question assumes I make a stealth check. A stealth check is pointless if there isn't someone or something there to perceive it. Similarly, whether a tree makes a sound when it falls is pointless unless someone is there to hear it. Most skills have a check to do something. The stealth description in the CRB, states that stealth is only used as a foil to perception.
So, if A is trying to get past B using stealth, A rolls a d20 and adds their stealth modifier (the "Stealth Check"). Then B, rolls a perception check to beat the "Stealth Check". This is the same thing as saying that A sets B's DC for his perception check.
Now, if an invisible person is moving more than half his movement rate, we don't modify his stealth check under the stealth rule and modify the observers DC under the invisibility rule. That is double dipping. The same applies for the +20 on being invisible. We don't make the DC 20, then give them a stealth check plus 20. That again is double dipping. Granted, the chart under Invisibility indicates that you do get stealth +20. But we do not believe that is what they intended. As Ninja pointed out, to do so makes Invisibility virtually undetectable. They might as well just said that if your invisible you cannot be detected.
The options in your your last question result in the same thing. The stealth check is just setting the DC for the perception check. Ninja said the same thing a few posts back. I agree with that interpretation.
I'll give you an example to show how we do it.
Adam, who is invisible, attempts to get past Bill using stealth. Adam's base movement is 30' and has a Stealth skill of +8. In round 1, Adam moves 20' passing within 10' of Bill. Bill's perception skill is +9.
Adam rolls a 13 for a stealth check of 21. Billy's DC is 21 (Adam's stealth check) +20 (invisibility) -5 (moving more than half movement rate) +1 (10' feet away) for a total of 37. Bill rolls a 19 for a total perception check of 28. Bill does not perceive that Adam is there.
Let's say that Adam had rolled a 10... Just below the average roll. Lets give him a +4 in stealth, an easily attainable skill for a first level character with either a good dex or having stealth as a class skill. The DC would still be 30. Meaning Bill must have at least 10 in perception to even have a chance to know Adam was there... And then only a 5% chance to perceive him. This seems to make invisibility a very nice trick.
If you were to give that additional +20, Bill would have needed a 30 perception to have that 5% chance to notice Adam. That seems to make invisibility an unworldly trick. I cannot believe that is what the designers intended.
The method I described was how the tables I have sat at during GenCon ran invis. Maybe this isn't RAW, but it is certainly the reasonable way to play it.
Basically my opinion is that there is no intended "extra" +40/20 for using stealth while invisible as I believe these are already represented in the DC 20 (0+20) (+20 if not moving) listed under Perception/Invisibility.
When you make a stealth check the result replaces the normal Perception DC. So, under the Invisibility section, when it says Stealth Check +20 it is attempting to say that you replace the "base" DC 20 with Stealth Check +20 rather than adding it on top of the DC 20.
|
|
Basically my opinion is that there is no intended "extra" +40/20 for using stealth while invisible as I believe these are already represented in the DC 20 (0+20) (+20 if not moving) listed under Perception/Invisibility.
When you make a stealth check the result replaces the normal Perception DC. So, under the Invisibility section, when it says Stealth Check +20 it is attempting to say that you replace the "base" DC 20 with Stealth Check +20 rather than adding it on top of the DC 20.
That's basically what we understand as well, Ninja.
|
The standard bonus being rising the DC 0 to notice to DC 20 to notice, along with all the other modifiers for invisibility that you get without stealth being taken into account.That's not a bonus. It doesn't even exist, since you already have a DC 20 check to notice an invisible creature. And, as I've said over and over now, even if you did apply a +20 modifier to the DC 0 to notice a visible creature, that's not a bonus, and it has nothing to do with stealth.
** spoiler omitted **
Semantics. Whether it is a bonus to a DC 0 or a change to a DC 20, my argument about the text in the stealth and invisibility description stays the same.
The 20 difference in perception DCs for finding someone unseen vs seen is to simulate the finder's inability to use his eyes to find the hider. Being invisible does not help the hider hide except for his inability to be seen.
Truthfully, if the numbers in the stealth and invisibility description were anything but 20 while the DC to notice stayed at 20, I would probably agree with your interpretation, although I would still be very confused as to how being invisible helps you stealth better aside from denying your opponents from seeing you.
Bottom line: "Mechanically speaking, invisibility is just a stealth bonus. +20 if you're moving, +40 if you're not. Capiche?"
This is incorrect. While invisibility does grant a bonus to stealth checks, it also has effects that apply even when you are not using stealth. Such as being visually undetectable.
Using stealth is only one of the potential DC modifiers listed. This means the other modifiers can apply even if the invisible creature is not using stealth.
We have two Player Characters. John Doe is standing still, invisible, but doesn't care about being sneaky, so he's not actively stealthing. Jane Doe gets a perception roll to "detect" him. Let's say she has +2 to perception.
John's *stealth roll: 0+40
Jane's perception roll: 1d20+2*the reason John has a "0" and not "1d20" is because he's choosing to not actively stealth.
John is not making a stealth roll, so any bonuses he has on stealth rolls are irrelevant.
Since John is not moving or engaged in a noisy activity, there are no modifiers to the DC 20 perception check to notice his presence. If Jane rolls an 18 or higher, she will gain a hunch that something is there.
it's very obvious that it's an opposed check to "detect" an invis person and NOT a hardcoded DC.
Incorrect, it's a DC 20 perception check to notice the creature.
This is listed in the invisbility section of the glossary.
This time John Doe is moving about, invisible, and doesn't care about being sneaky, so he's not actively stealthing. Jane Doe gets a perception roll to "detect" him. Let's say she has +2 to perception.
John's *stealth roll: 0+20
Jane's perception roll: 1d20+2*the reason John has a "0" and not "1d20" is because he's choosing to not actively stealth.
Once again, John does not make a stealth check, so any bonuses to his stealth check are irrelevant.
However, since John is moving, this means you modify the DC. If John is moving at full speed, the DC 20 perception check is modified by -10. This means Jane only needs to roll an 8 or higher to succeed at the DC 10 perception check to notice his presence.
This link continues with a table of modifiers that affect perception, including one that describes a +20 to perception DC if the invis person is standing still.
Those modifiers apply if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.
If, for example, John was not moving, but he was speaking, the DC to notice him would be 40. (DC 20, -20 speaking, +20 not moving)
Basically my opinion is that there is no intended "extra" +40/20 for using stealth while invisible
Extra to what?
Either there's a bonus to stealth checks or there's not.
It sounds like you're trying to argue that the bonus exists, but it's just never applied, because the DC is inexplicably lowered by whatever the bonus would be, which results in the same situation as if the bonus simply did not exist.
Whether it is a bonus to a DC 0 or a change to a DC 20, my argument about the text in the stealth and invisibility description stays the same.
So you think the intent is for there not to be a bonus to stealth checks. Or, like Ninja, there is a bonus but it is only applied when the DC it affects is lowered by the same amount as the bonus.
Your question assumes I make a stealth check.
You said "the target sets the base DC with stealth."
How does the target set the base DC with stealth if they don't make a stealth check?
Do they take the -5 penalty on their stealth check that the stealth skill says you take if you move at greater than half but less than normal speed, or is that penalty not applied to the stealth check but instead incorporated into the DC modifier you listed?The options in your your last question result in the same thing.
Not at all.
If it's a penalty to stealth checks, then it only applies to stealth checks, and doesn't apply if the creature isn't making a stealth check.
If it's not a penalty to stealth checks, but is instead a modifier of the perception DC, then it applies any time the invisible creature is moving.
Either the DC modifier always applies, and does not remove the penalty to stealth checks, or it is the penalty to stealth checks, and doesn't apply if the creature isn't using stealth.
detecting an invis person is perception against stealth.
"A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check."
Point 1:
This is not a modifier (nor a bonus, nor a penalty). It's a DC. The only DC mentioned in the invisibility section.
Point 2:
The modifiers are applied to the DC 20 Perception check to notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet. This is because that is the only DC mentioned in the invisibility section.
Point 3: One of the modifiers that can be applied to the DC is when the .
If you move at half speed, that applies a modifier to the DC. That doesn't mean the modifier IS the DC, it means you modify the DC with that value. That's what a modifier is.
Point 4: The modifier that is applied to the DC when the is.
So, since the modifier for Moving at half speed is -5, that results in a DC 15 Perception check to notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet that is moving at half speed.
As you can see, nothing is being doubled up. You have a DC and a modifier. The modifier is not the same as the DC.
Point 5: One of the modifiers that can be applied to the DC is when the .
If you are Using Stealth, that applies a modifier to the DC. That doesn't mean the modifier IS the DC, it means you modify the DC with that value.
Point 6: The modifier that is applied to the DC when the is .
So, since the modifier for Using Stealth is Stealth check +20, you modify that DC by adding (or subtracting, if negative) the Stealth check +20.
As you can see, nothing is being doubled up. You have a DC and a modifier. The modifier is not the same as the DC.
This is all what the rules actually say. The blue text IS rule text. Perhaps this isn't the most balanced. Perhaps this isn't what the writers intended. Perhaps the rules need to be changed. If so, that's a discussion for the suggestions forum.
But this is what the rules currently say.
I think people's pride is getting in the way here. GRICK has been right all along from the get go.
The dc to notice a creature doing nothing is 0.
0 is your base.
invisible creatures have a +20 dc to be noticed. This comes from the PRD. then it talks about modifiers that can be applied to THIS dc.
so now we are at 20 dc to notice an invisible creature.
lets look at the chart for the list of modifiers to apply.
the chart is for invisible creatures which already have a dc of 20.
so the first examples are for movement. lets say the invisible creature is not moving. hmm it says if a creature is not moving add +20 to the dc.
we are now at dc of 40 to notice the creature.
Lets say the creature is not speaking or not in combat. so that dc modifier does not apply.
we are now at dc of 40 to notice the creature.
Hmm that creature is using stealth, let us add the dc modifier that it lists to the total we have so far. it says stealth + 20. the stealth roll is 1 and the character has 0 dexterity and 0 ranks in stealth. so we add a total of 21 to the already determined score of 40 for a total of 61.
We are now at a DC of 61
Is the creature far away? yes he is 20 feet away, lets see that adds +2 to the dc.
We are now at a DC of 63
Hmm the creature is also hiding behind a 4 foot tall stone wall. that adds an additional 15 to the dc.
We are now at a DC of 78
That my friends is how you figure out the invisibility modifier.
I don't get where people are getting a 20 DC.
From the invisibility section in the glossary.
Invisibility: "A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check."
This Page: http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/invisibility.html#_invisibility
indicates that they get a +20 to stealth while moving, and a +40 while still.
Yes, that's a bonus to stealth checks. You apply that bonus to any stealth checks you make while invisible.
This Page:http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/perception.html#_perception
states that the base dc to notice a creature using stealth is set using an opposed stealth check, and separately in the modifiers table, a modifier to the dc for an invisible creature is +20.
Those are two different things.
Normally, noticing a creature using stealth is just an opposed stealth check. You then apply whatever modifiers are relevant to that DC.
One of those modifiers is "Creature or object is invisible" which is +20. That's not a bonus to stealth checks, it's a DC modifier.
Using an opposed stealth check as a DC which is then modified by +20 is numerically identical to just using a DC 20 modified by a stealth check. In both cases, that stealth check will have any relevant bonuses or penalties applied.
However, since there are modifiers listed under invisibility that aren't listed under Perception, that means you're better off using the invisibility section when dealing with an invisible creature.
As far as the argument of someone not using a stealth check...I don't get it.
It's possible to be invisible but not be using stealth. You're still invisible, you're still visually undetectable, so it's still a DC 20 perception check to notice your presence.
If you do try to be stealthy, then you modify that DC.
If the person does do something that would cause the other person to notice them and makes no attempt to hide, no check is required by either of them. The detecting party knows that they're there, and what square they're in.
The rules contradict this.
Even if the invisible creature is speaking and moving at full speed, you still need to make a DC 10 Perception check to know what square they're in. (DC 20, +20 pinpoint, -20 speaking, -10 moving full speed)
The dc to notice a creature doing nothing is 0.
0 is your base.
invisible creatures have a +20 dc to be noticed. This comes from the PRD. then it talks about modifiers that can be applied to THIS dc.so now we are at 20 dc to notice an invisible creature.
lets look at the chart for the list of modifiers to apply.
Those modifiers are only applied if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.
I think this has turned into a terminology convo.
While it certainly doesn't help when people use the wrong words to express their ideas, the main problem is still people removing a bonus or changing a DC resulting in an incorrect number.
Most of us all have matching numbers.
Not really. Of the 3 or so variant invisibility rules proposed, most of them will end up different depending on circumstances.
Someone who just removes the stealth bonus from invisibility will have different DCs than someone who changes the base DC, which will be different from someone who replaces the DC with a stealth check.
The only common idea seems to be most of the people doing it wrong want the DC to be lower.
It's really just what those "numbers" are called that we're talking about now.
Fortunately, the terms being used are defined in the rules.
Bonus
Difficulty Class (DC)
Check
Some call it a "perception DC" (as per the verbiage in one rules section) and some call it a "stealth bonus" (as per verbiage in another rules section)
A perception DC and a stealth bonus are different things.
One is a numerical value that is added to a skill check.
The other is a level of difficulty a check must meet in order for the action to be successful.
The perception DC exists regardless of whether the creature is using stealth.
A stealth bonus only applies when a creature is using stealth.
but the numbers still all match up. There is congruence and all is well.
/end thread
No, some people are still claiming their house rules are RAW, and posting incorrect DCs. For example, all four examples you posted here are incorrect. You're one of the few who is posting example DCs that are actually higher than RAW.
Basically my opinion is that there is no intended "extra" +40/20 for using stealth while invisibleExtra to what?
Either there's a bonus to stealth checks or there's not.
It sounds like you're trying to argue that the bonus exists, but it's just never applied, because the DC is inexplicably lowered by whatever the bonus would be, which results in the same situation as if the bonus simply did not exist.
No, once again, I'm arguing that the +20 from being invisible is already (effectively) "figured in" to the DC 20 listed under Invisibility.
Normal Perception, noticing a creature is DC 0. If the creature rolls a stealth check you replace the DC 0 with the result of your stealth check.
If Invisible you add a +20 modifier to the base 0, this is IMO what is listed as a "DC 20" to notice under the invisibility section.
If that invisible character rolls a stealth check they then should replace the 0+20 perception DC with Stealth Check +20 and not add the result of their stealth check +20 to it as this is how Stealth Vs Perception works.
Yes, it is technically listed as a modifier (and again I'll point out the lack of a + sign in front of the word Stealth), but I do not believe it is intended to add on to it rather than replace it as this is not how Stealth Vs Perception normally works.
By saying it is DC 20 + Stealth Check + 20 you are, IMO, effectively applying the +20 bonus to stealth checks twice rather than once.
the rules say to add not replace. to replace is not RAW
Except the rules as written contradict you NitR. Until someone makes an FAQ stating it's supposed to work differently, I'll continue to run it the way Grick has stated since his first post in this thread.
And I have conceded that Grick is most probably correct by RAW, but he was asking me my opinion of RAI, not RAW.
Though, again, I point out that there is no + sign in front of Stealth +20 under the Invisibility modifier section, which I consider significant if we're discussing strict RAW.
RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a blinded creature to locate another one using Stealth would be 20 higher than a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth.
Firstly, you're not reading this part
I've read every part, I've just used the words as defined in the rules instead of changing them to mean other things.
The fact that the +20 and +40 mentioned in the spell description EXACTLY ALIGNS with what is said in the invis description should end any confusion
You would think so, but there's still plenty of people saying the bonus doesn't exist. Or it exists but it's never actually used.
Back in 3.5 (which as we all know PF is built on), skills came in two varieties: passive and active. STEALTH was BOTH passive and active.
Stealth didn't exist in 3.5, it used Hide and Move Silently.
In 3.5, to notice an invisible creature, you either made a spot check vs a set DC, or you used a listen check vs the creatures Move Silently. And invisibility still granted a bonus on Hide checks. This was all covered in spoilers earlier in the thread.
Spot was passive only.
d20 Spot: "Trying to spot something you failed to see previously is a move action. To read lips, you must concentrate for a full minute before making a Spot check, and you can’t perform any other action (other than moving at up to half speed) during this minute."
I think when they wrote PF, in this one instance, they did not clearly articulate that distinction that invis is--mechanically--just a passive stealth bonus.
You're welcome to your opinion, but I personally think it's ridiculous that someone could clearly see an invisible creature if it's not using stealth.
My examples are dead on accurate and align with both 3.5 and PF.
No, your examples are factually incorrect, for either system. I've explained why. I'll do so again.
Your "Example 1: Standing Still" has DC 40 to detect John, even though he's not moving or making noise. This is contradicted by the rules which state it's DC 20. The modifiers only apply if John is moving or making noise, so the extra bonus for standing still doesn't apply.
Your "Example 2: Moving" has DC 20 to detect John, which is incorrect regardless of how fast John is moving. The rules state it's DC 20, modified by either -5 or -10 depending on half or full-speed. This results in either DC 15 or DC 10.
My first post above cannot be much more explicit.
Sure it could. You could explain why John is getting a +20 bonus in the first example even though no modifiers are supposed to be used. You could explain where the other -10 or -15 modifiers are coming from when he's moving.
I'm arguing that the +20 from being invisible is already (effectively) "figured in" to the DC 20 listed under Invisibility.
So the skill check gets a bonus, but that bonus is only ever applied in a situation in which the bonus is already incorporated into the DC, resulting in it being exactly the same as if the bonus didn't exist at all?
I do not believe it is intended to add on to it rather than replace it as this is not how Stealth Vs Perception normally works.
It would be helpful if you were more clear when you're arguing intent, rather than rules, especially when they contradict.
RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a blinded creature to locate another one using Stealth would be 20 higher than a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth.
It's not.
It's not.
RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a blinded creature to locate another one using Stealth would be 20 higher than a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth.
Them I'm missing something. Were do the rules give a creature using stealth against blind (or effectively blind) opponent a +20 to their stealth due to the blindness?
Yes a creature that has been blind a long time adapts. What about a creature that was just made blind by a spell or effect? Or a creature blind due to being in darkness?
And regardless that doesn't answer the rules question.
Them I'm missing something. Were do the rules give a creature using stealth against blind (or effectively blind) opponent a +20 to their stealth due to the blindness?It's not.
RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a blinded creature to locate another one using Stealth would be 20 higher than a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth.
They don't.
A blind creature has a -4 penalty on opposed perception checks. A blind creature also has a -4 penalty on dexterity checks, which include stealth. So a blind creature trying to sneak past another blind creature just uses an opposed perception vs stealth check. (More accurately, an opposed perception vs stealth check with both checks suffering a -4 penalty)
So a blind creature trying to locate another blind creature will have a much lower DC than an otherwise identical sighted creature trying to find an otherwise identical sighted invisible creature.
It would be helpful if you were more clear when you're arguing intent, rather than rules, especially when they contradict.
I used the word "intended" like, 3 times in that post.
No Grick you misunderstood him. He's saying that it should be just as hard for a blind person to spot a sighted, stealthed, visible person as it is for a sighted person to spot an sighted, stealthed, invisible person.
If that's what he intended to say, then he's saying invisibility should not grant a bonus to stealth checks. If this is the case, it would be helpful if he would post that opinion here: Is invisibility supposed to grant a bonus to stealth checks?
-edit-
Except, I guess, that would also mean that you're either removing the -4 perception penalty from being blind, or applying that penalty to someone who can see. In addition to removing the bonus to stealth.
Made edit to a # below. Changed 16 to 36.
Yes, my sentence was messed up.
For one thing I had my sentence backwards, and I should have worded it different to be clear it wasn't a blind creature trying to locate another blind creature.
I meant to say "RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth would be 20 higher than a blinded creature to locate another creature (not blind).
But looking the rule again that's still wrong. DC against the invisible creature would technically be 40 higher, but effectively 36 higher since the blind creature will take a -4 on it's check. Right?
And Grick I already did post about this very thing in that thread. Although my # is wrong.
RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth would be 20 higher than a blinded creature to locate another creature (not blind).
But looking the rule again that's still wrong. DC against the invisible creature would technically be 40 higher, but effectively 36 higher since the blind creature will take a -4 on it's check. Right?
To avoid the penalties of the blind condition, how about this:
It's harder to notice an invisible creature in complete darkness than it is to notice an otherwise visible creature in complete darkness, despite not being able to see anything at all in either case.
This makes it clear what many consider the problem to be: The invisibility bonus to stealth applying to stealth checks even when they're not sight-based checks.
Even house ruling the bonus to only apply to sight-based checks has problems, because it would still be harder for a creature that can see invisible things to find an invisible creature that's using stealth than it is if that creature wasn't invisible, despite you being able to see invisibility.
Which leads to it being useless to have a bonus to sight-based checks when you're visually undetectable, which leads to the bonus never actually being used. So as long as you're changing the rules, why keep the bonus when the only time you can use the bonus is when the relevant DC is modified by the inverse of that bonus, resulting in absolutely no change at all?
Neither of the other two threads seemed right to post this in based on the original question asked. So I'll put this here.
This is my not-so-brief attempt to come up with a rules question to ask, that gets closer to what some of us are really trying to get at. Hack away. Use as a springboard. Whatever. I have to go for awhile.
The table under Perception skill lists "Opposed by Stealth" as the Perception DC. So effectively the the Perception DC and the Stealth check are effectively the same thing.
Given that, are the following bonuses to Stealth checks....(continue below)
Under Stealth skill
+40 bonus on Stealth checks "If you are invisible" & "if you are immobile".
+20 bonus on Stealth checks "If you are invisible" & "if you're moving".
Under Invisibility Spell
+40 bonus on Stealth checks for "a stationary invisible creature"
+20 bonus on Stealth checks for "if the creature is moving"
...and the following modifiers to Perception DC's...(continue below)
Under Perception skill
+20 to the Perception DC for "Creature or object is invisible" under
Under Invisibility Condition
+20 under "Perception DC Modifier Column" if "Invisible Creature is..Not moving
"Stealth check + 20" under "Perception DC Modifier Column" if "Using Stealth"
...supposed to be the same thing or are these modifiers/bonuses to BOTH the Stealth Check and Perception DC, resulting in an effective end result +40 for using stealth while invisible and moving or +80 for using stealth while invisible and immobile?
are the following bonuses to Stealth checks....
Under Perception skill
+20 to the Perception DC for "Creature or object is invisible"
That is not a bonus to stealth checks.
It's a modifier to the DC of one of the details listed in that table.
That modifier applies to the DC even if the invisible creature or object is not using stealth.
|
|
Them I'm missing something. Were do the rules give a creature using stealth against blind (or effectively blind) opponent a +20 to their stealth due to the blindness?It's not.
RAI I find it hard to believe that the DC for a blinded creature to locate another one using Stealth would be 20 higher than a creature with normal vision to locate an invisible creature using stealth.They don't.
A blind creature has a -4 penalty on opposed perception checks. A blind creature also has a -4 penalty on dexterity checks, which include stealth. So a blind creature trying to sneak past another blind creature just uses an opposed perception vs stealth check. (More accurately, an opposed perception vs stealth check with both checks suffering a -4 penalty)
So a blind creature trying to locate another blind creature will have a much lower DC than an otherwise identical sighted creature trying to find an otherwise identical sighted invisible creature.
Except, according to your way, the blinded invisible person still gets a +20 bonus to his stealth check to remain undetected from the blind person who's trying to find him, since he's invisible and stealthing, because magic. This ends up in an opposed check of Perception-4 vs. Stealth+20-4.
Except, according to your way, the blinded invisible person still gets a +20 bonus to his stealth check, because he's invisible, and stealthing
In none of those examples was someone both blind and invisible.
|
|
More invisibility fun!
So, how does talking while invisible work? Example:
An invisible creature is standing still adjacent to a listener. He speaks clearly saying, "Hi!". What's the mechanical difference between failing the DC 20 (20 (to notice) + 20 (standing still) - 20 (talking)) check to notice him, and succeeding at noticing him, but can't pinpoint him?
Can the listener not hear the speaker if he fails the DC 20 check to notice?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Notice Person: DC 0
Invisible: +20Ok, that's how we get our DC 20 to notice a "presence"
If you prefer to think of it that way, sure. Just keep in mind that +20 you applied is not a bonus.
listed...
Sigh... Did you even look at the SRD? http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/perception.html#_perception
The +20 I applied for Invisibility IS a bonus. It's in the second half of the table, bottom line, in the table marked modifiers and it has a + in front of it, can't see how that's NOT a bonus.
At look at the top, do you see anywhere a DC to notice an Invisible person? No. It's because it's DC 0 to notice a person, +20 for being Invisible. Same for stealth.
If you follow this premise, you get all the same numbers under the Invisibility section where they state it's DC 20 to notice a presence and Stealth +20.
Not sure why you insist on double adding the +20 to come up with insanse 56 & 76 DC numbers.
Notice Person: DC 0
Invisible: +20Ok, that's how we get our DC 20 to notice a "presence"
If you prefer to think of it that way, sure. Just keep in mind that +20 you applied is not a bonus.
listed...Sigh... Did you even look at the SRD? http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/perception.html#_perception
The +20 I applied for Invisibility IS a bonus. It's in the second half of the table, bottom line, in the table marked modifiers and it has a + in front of it, can't see how that's NOT a bonus.
At look at the top, do you see anywhere a DC to notice an Invisible person? No. It's because it's DC 0 to notice a person, +20 for being Invisible. Same for stealth.
If you follow this premise, you get all the same numbers under the Invisibility section where they state it's DC 20 to notice a presence and Stealth +20.
Not sure why you insist on double adding the +20 to come up with insanse 56 & 76 DC numbers.
The question is, "Did you? "
Before you get to the table, it sets a base modifier for being invisible. Its a 20 DC
Can you agree to this?
Also just before the table, it says that on the following table there are additional modifiers that are added to the first.
Can you agree to this?
On the table there is a modifier that adds a +20 for not moving.
Can you agree to this?
Lower on the table there is a modifier for using stealth. It says to add your stealth +20.
Can you agree to this?
So if you can agree to all the above you should then agree that a character meeting all three requirements will then have the following DC of 20+20+stealth roll+20 = 60+stealth roll.
Either way it may be futile.
Now it may seem unbalanced to you but it really isn't.
See invisibility isn't a hard spell to cast. Flour isn't expensive