Shadowlord you are 100% Wrong
You are trying to argue I take 1 Feat and a Presiege Class and I walk around with Invisibility...
Really? 1 Feat and 1 PrC huh? I think you are the one who needs to study some rules. HCS has 1 prerequisite feat so that's 2 feats and that one level in Shadowdancer requires 3 different feats and 2 skill points that are otherwise useless. I think you are understating this builds investment quite a bit here.
Wrong You need to pull the Stealth Skill and the Errata again...
They Reworded it to a Condition and you can not.
Stealth
You are skilled at avoiding detection, allowing you to slip past foes or strike from an unseen position. This skill covers hiding and moving silently.
CheckYour Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Creatures that fail to beat your Stealth check are not aware of you and treat you as if you had concealment. You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty. It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.
Creatures gain a bonus or penalty on Stealth checks based on their size: Fine +16, Diminutive +12, Tiny +8, Small +4, Large –4, Huge –8, Gargantuan –12, Colossal -16.
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
I extended your emphasis to include the next sentence. As stated above, all of that describes the use of unaltered Stealth. The skill and rules that govern it are modified with HCS and HiPS.
But hey, don't just take my word for it, here's what the Pathfinder Rules guy who actually wrote some of the rules we are talking about had to say about it:
|
What you are suggesting, is that this can stealth, while observed, without cover or concealment, but need to be unobserved, and have cover/concealment, at the end of his turn?
That means both abilities do nothing, as per your interpretation.
What is written does not support it either.
In fact, stating how Stealth normally works is all you have put up as evidence.
|
|
As a side topic and a possible counter to this character I would say that you are not simultaneously using all the abilities and that you cannot switch instantly.
If you're using Hellcat Stealth and someone with Darkvision drops a Darkness spell in the area, he sees you even though you might be within 10' of dim light. You weren't using HiPS.
If you're using HiPS and someone drops a light spell in the area so there is no dim light within 10', you can be seen. You weren't using Hellcat Stealth.
Similarly if you're just hiding in normal darkness, not only can you be seen with Darkvision, but sudden light will reveal you.You can always use Stealth again on your next turn if the new conditions permit one of your abilities to work.
There is nothing to support this stance.
LOL how is it so hard to accept that the rules are not giving you Invisibility...
No one is saying it gives you invisibility.
You are standing in front of me in a light area and you use Stealth and Say in that lit area... You are no longer stealth at the end of your turn...
Correct, unless you are using HCS or HiPS.
These 2 abilities are not granting you Invisibility. It is granting you a Condition, and Overrides the requirement of being able to do it while being watched. That is all it does....
Really? So, you are denying that the ability also trumps your need for Cover/Concealment?
Hide in Plain Sight (Su): 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.
In the open without anything to hide behind sounds pretty clear to me. No need for cover. Within 10' of dim light sounds pretty clear too. No need to be IN concealment.
HS trumps the need for cover/concealment, but you have a penalty on the check. HIPS trumps the need for cover/concealment, but it requires a nearby shadow, and has no penalty.
I feel like he should know the rules and intent of them a bit better than you.
Bottom Line
It lets you roll when you could not roll.If you do not meet the Requirements for Stealth at the end of your turn you lose the condition.
Correct, except that with HCS and HiPS if you meet the lighting requirement your Stealth requirements don't include cover/concealment.
Breaking Stealth
When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).
Yes, I read it. It's still only talking about basic Stealth without HCS or HiPS.
There is nothing to support this stance.
As a side topic and a possible counter to this character I would say that you are not simultaneously using all the abilities and that you cannot switch instantly.
If you're using Hellcat Stealth and someone with Darkvision drops a Darkness spell in the area, he sees you even though you might be within 10' of dim light. You weren't using HiPS.
If you're using HiPS and someone drops a light spell in the area so there is no dim light within 10', you can be seen. You weren't using Hellcat Stealth.
Similarly if you're just hiding in normal darkness, not only can you be seen with Darkvision, but sudden light will reveal you.You can always use Stealth again on your next turn if the new conditions permit one of your abilities to work.
I haven't thought it through clearly, since I just came up with it, but it seems reasonable to me.
If you're hiding in the Darkness, you're not using Hellcat Stealth. You don't meet the conditions, you're not taking the penalty.
IF these were ACTIVE abilities I would possibly agree. But they are PASSIVE abilities that modify your Stealth Skill. The active skill is Stealth and any time you employ the Stealth Skill these abilities PASSIVLY adjust the skill if you meet the requirements for them to work.
That is how I understand the interactions and would rule in your scenario.
Also, you don't have to move at all to use Stealth. I debated that back and forth quite a bit over this thread, THIS is my final post.
You could run some searches and see if any official posts have been made on the subject. But just in case a DM doesn't rule your way, I wanted to show you that even the 5' step isn't needed.
Two other things regarding posts in this thread:
1. Your DM might allow use of Shadowdancer HiPS in Darkness, mine usually do at home games. But even if the DM doesn't there are plenty of items, spells, or custom magic trinkets you could use to create dim light.
2. If your DM allows any 3.5 material there is a super cheap magic ring, "ring of darkhidden" that makes you invisible to darkvision. PF is bringing in items and spells that make you invisible to blindsight, scent, and all those goodies, so I see no huge reason for a DM not to allow this ring, or a custom built magic item that does the same thing. Unless this is for PFS.
I feel like this needs to be brought up for an official FAQ. This can't be the intention for it to work this way.
Even if it is I simply wont ever play a game this way. Unlimited invisibilty that can't be dispelled or otherwise defeated shouldn't exist. With the combination of items and feats you have listed BBT, unless someone has an higher perception than you have stealth you will never be found. That just shouldn't be possible. You shouldn't be perpetually invisible.
If you tried this at my table my response would be "F**k you, you're dead."
I agree that it can be difficult, but not unbeatable.
As for, your last sentence, well you wouldnt have to worry cause would get up and leave any GM's table that was so rude.
Allow me to recant my statement to an extent and provide some explaination and context.
At my tables, my players no my feelings about style of play and they have a sense of what I consider acceptable. They would know that such a buld would be unacecptable, and they would know that I would find it insulting that they would try to pass it off as acceptable (you just shouldn't bring cheese to the table). If one of my players really thought it was acceptable I would tell them their character is dead and to make a new one. If it was someone new (doesn't happen often) I would probably be a little nicer and explain that I don't find such combinations to be acceptable and you must redesign your character.
For a character who is obviously going to put as much as he can into stealth it will be impssible for someone who doesn't super focus into perception to ever find their opponent. This character is immune to scent, blindsight, blindsense, termorsense, etc. The character is essentially never vunerable because all he has to do is walk up to an emeny undetected and wait. Then on their next turn they full attack and then take a 5ft move and use stealth.
To me the best way to fix this is to simply say you can't use stealth to hide after attacking in a round. That way you're always exposed for at least one round after attacking. I don't mind someone being an undetectable infiltrator, but the fact that in a 1v1 melee contest the opponent has no chance because he'll never be able to detect them bothers me too much. And to be honest it's not even rogues or ninjas with sneak attack I'm worried about. In general two-handed fighters do more damage unless they can get a full round of sneak attack which this still wont let them do. It will however let the two-handed fighter hide and move up next to you, and then next round he can full attack you and take a 5ft step and hide again. You can't detect him, and at best you could ready an action to make one attack against him after he breaks stealth. Yeah...thats a great plan. Lets trade a single attack against a full attack every round.
Fair enough, I'm not strongly attached to it.
One last line of argument: They are passive abilities that let you make a Stealth check, which takes an action. If you didn't use them when you first made the Stealth check (because you couldn't), they don't apply when the conditions change.
If you are using Stealth but your party member can still see you and casts invisibility on you, do you need to make a new check to recieve the bonus to Stealth from invisibility?
There are no rules that specifically say one way or the other. My own interpretation is that they automatically/PASSIVLY apply when the conditions are met, just like my above example. There is no RAW that I can think of to support that. And if I can't draw on RAW I think, what would the designers do... and I am left with, make it simple and easy to rule on in the heat of the game with as few die rolls as possible slowing things down. That's just my opinion and how I would rule in my own games.
Allow me to recant my statement to an extent and provide some explaination and context.
At my tables, my players no my feelings about style of play and they have a sense of what I consider acceptable. They would know that such a buld would be unacecptable, and they would know that I would find it insulting that they would try to pass it off as acceptable (you just shouldn't bring cheese to the table). If one of my players really thought it was acceptable I would tell them their character is dead and to make a new one. If it was someone new (doesn't happen often) I would probably be a little nicer and explain that I don't find such combinations to be acceptable and you must redesign your character.
For a character who is obviously going to put as much as he can into stealth it will be impssible for someone who doesn't super focus into perception to ever find their opponent. This character is immune to scent, blindsight, blindsense, termorsense, etc. The character is essentially never vunerable because all he has to do is walk up to an emeny undetected and wait. Then on their next turn they full attack and then take a 5ft move and use stealth.
To me the best way to fix this is to simply say you can't use stealth to hide after attacking in a round. That way you're always exposed for at least one round after attacking. I don't mind someone being an undetectable infiltrator, but the fact that in a 1v1 melee contest the opponent has no chance because he'll never be able to detect them bothers me too much. And to be honest it's not even rogues or ninjas with sneak attack I'm worried about. In general two-handed fighters do more damage unless they can get a full round of sneak attack which this still wont let them do. It will however let the two-handed fighter hide and move up next to you, and then next round he can full attack you and take a 5ft step and hide again. You can't detect him, and at best you could ready an action to make one attack against him after he breaks stealth. Yeah...thats a great plan. Lets trade a single attack against a full attack every round.
So you would allow one or the other but not both on the same character?
Do you disallow Ninjas, because they can do better with fewer resources?
Do you disallow Wizards to cast Greater Invisibility on the Fighter? Because unless all your NPCs roll around with a counter to invisibility that's essentially the same thing.
Do you disallow Rangers, because a smart player can build his Favored Terrains to cover 80% - 90% of most adventures and Rangers have the best version of HiPS that exists in PF.
...
There are just as many ways to boost Perception as there are to boost Stealth.
...
If the only way you can think of to deal with this tactic is readying a single attack you are limiting yourself.
Wow this thread blew up fast
BBT I believe your understanding of stealth for this PC is sound
I also believe he could match my assassin in stealth (we should test that)
At this point do you have anymore questions since the thread has devolved into another thread like the one where me and shadowlord had to beat Komoda into submission over HiPS lol
So you would allow one or the other but not both on the same character?
Do you disallow Ninjas, because they can do better with fewer resources?
Do you disallow Wizards to cast Greater Invisibility on the Fighter? Because unless all your NPCs roll around with a counter to invisibility that's essentially the same thing.
Do you disallow Rangers, because a smart player can build his Favored Terrains to cover 80% - 90% of most adventures and Rangers have the best version of HiPS that exists in PF.
...
There are just as many ways to boost Perception as there are to boost Stealth.
...
If the only way you can think of to deal with this tactic is readying a single attack you are limiting yourself.
[
No, I would allow all these abilities to be placed on a character with the caveat of you can't stealth in the same turn after an attack. If that were the case then I would think that it is relatively balanced.
As far as all the other cases they take up limited daily resources and cannot be used all day, the Ninja's Invisible Blade has a limited number of uses per day, spells are limited per day. Once you have the feats there is no limit to how often you can do this. With both HiPS and Hellcat Stealth you actually have a better version of invisibility that can be used all day long without any resources being spent. I don't care that it used two feats to do it, anyone without tremorsense, scent, blindsense, or blindsight will never find you. Yes your opponents can focus on perception to counter your stealth, but most characters do not pump perception because this ulimited duration invisibility didn't exist before. Also, if the GM suddenly pumps every monsters perception just to be able to counter you thats pretty s!#!ty.
Exactly how would you counter this combination that doesn't involve running away? Imagine there is a party of four fighters with the both HellCat Stealth and either one level in shadowdancer or picked up the shadow well ability with eldritch heritage feats. You have a party of four with equal levels. Assuming you don't have any of the enhanced senses (which is a decent assumption) and it also being unlikely all 4 members of your party have pumped perception sky how do you think this will end? The fighters will kill off anyone who looks like a spell caster first and then move onto everyone else.
Once Invisibility is cast you receive total Concealment.
I will admit this wasn't my best example. But my point was the +20/+40 to Stealth part of Invisibility is passive. You don't have to re-roll Stealth to gain it. It just happens when you gain invisibility.
IMO, if you had HCS and were using basic Stealth in a dark area, then someone cast Daylight in your area, you are still under your previous Stealth roll. The only change is that a -10 is applied which will make you easier to spot via Perception.
That was my point, bad example though.
Wow this thread blew up fast
BBT I believe your understanding of stealth for this PC is sound
I also believe he could match my assassin in stealth (we should test that)
At this point do you have anymore questions since the thread has devolved into another thread like the one where me and shadowlord had to beat Komoda into submission over HiPS lol
OMG that was a rough thread.
Shadow to correct you
Rangers and Rogues have the best Hide in Plain Sight...
Rogues don't have the best HiPS, they are able to use precious resources to pay for a taste Ranger HiPS, one Favored Terrain at a time. That is FAR from optimal. I would far rather gain HiPS another way. Rangers have the best version of HiPS by leaps and bounds, way better than the Rogue Advanced Talent.
But the Rules State you cannot use Stealth after an Attack...
As pointed out already, there are no rules that actually say that. Your desire does not make it so.
back to what was Brought up before Full round of Attacks and the a 5 foot Step is not Classified as Movement you can not use Stealth with this... It still requires to be part of a Move action and that has been given up.
Really? Please show me where Stealth is required to be part of a Move Action.
Also I would challenge you to find ANYTHING in the rules that is specifically classified as a Movement.
Now it can be argued Observed... But Observed and Completely aware of you are 2 different things...
I don't know what you're talking about here.
It makes the Target Aware of you...
Even that wording is not used. An attack simply ends your Stealth. That would put you in the plainly observable catagory though. Which is trumped by the fact that with HiPS you can use Stealth while observed.
I think its developing into a different topic all together...
No it's not, you are just misquoting rules.
Aware... Observing... This breaks into a new Realm of conversation.
Observed is when something is actively observing you using one of it's senses, as defined in the Stealth rules, and is a limiting factor for using Stealth unless you have some ability to beat it.
Aware seems to be a generic term the designers have used in the fluff portions of Stealth interchangably with the word Observed. If you think it has a seperate meening please provide RAW examples.
Jeff Shadow was referring the Above posts and Making Full Round Attacks
If you make A FULL round Attack you can not Stealth using the 5 foot Step because it is not a True Movement that is what is stopping you from stealthing again.
True Movement is not a defined term in the rules so I don't know what you are talking about. My best guess is that you mean Move Action. In that case you are wrong. Stealth doesn't require a Move Action. A 5' step is sufficiant "movement" to trigger Stealth if so desired. Standing still in your same square and clicking your heals together or snapping your fingers is sufficiant "movement" to trigger Stealth IMO. But Stealth doesn't actually require any movement at all. If you go back up a few posts I linked an argument detailing why.
Well you still have to remember these are done at -10 and -20
Where is a -20 penalty stated?
No matter what happens those penalties are not said to removed anywhere...
Who is saying they are? I think the people on this thread realize the -10 penalty from HCS can't be removed. I haven't seen anyone say it could be removed. I don't know what -20 penalty you are talking about though. Maybe Sniping, but that has absolutly NO relation to the OPs question.
They just allow you make the checks observed... and According to the 2010 Dev post they do not require them to return to cover as long as they stay in those conditions...
Really, questioning the specific rulings of developers now? It's pretty well known that Specific rules override General rules. The Stealth skill description is a General description. It is overridden by the Specific rules of HCS and HiPS. If the developers wanted to update what they had said in 2010 about using HCS and HiPS it would have been updated. It wasn't.
Now this does raise the Question with the Errata in Place does this change that ruling...
Judging from people's responses to you, I think the only place that question was raised was in your head. Everyone else seems to have a pretty clear understanding of how the errata to the Stealth Skill doesn't change anything in the HCS or HiPS descriptions.
For the same reasoning, you cannot stealth without penalty while taking a 5' step. The fact that your movement rate is 30 or 500 doesn't matter.. for the 5' step your full speed movement in that 'step' is 5feet. You are moving at full speed, not reduced.
-James
I understand what you are saying. I just don't think I agree, probably one of the few things you have said about Stealth that I disagree with. But if a DM ruled that way, I would just make sure I had Fast Stealth. Not a game breaker IMO.
Well Shadow Put your foot in your mouth
Challenge Accepted
Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.
And it corrected me there as part of a Movement, Somewhere earlier in this Forever Long thread someone said Move Action... So that can stand corrected.
You did say Anything
OMG, yeah I did say anything. I hope you realize that I MEANT within the confines of your examples and this discussion. Yes, for SNIPING using Stealth takes up your Move Action. But 1. We aren't discussing the Sniping rules in this thread, 2. HiPS and Sniping have nothing to do with eachother, 3. You still don't actually move with the Move Action in Sniping, you stay perfectly still it just happens to take up that resource in your turn.
For the Record... Stealth Breaks After An Attack...
So the Rule Implies You can not Move Attack and then Stealth...
But you can Attack then Stealth and Move...
You can do either, it's just a matter of how you build the character. Also, you don't have to move at all to use Stealth.
You suffer a -10 when you are being in someones face it is in the Skill
Read it again...
f your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
No where does it state this penalty is removed so with HCS its a -20 if your in someones face
and with Hide In Plain Sight it is a -10
You no longer have to distract and are viewed... But you still have the -10 from the Stealth Attempt.
Is English a second or third language for you? I mean that in all seriousness and will be far more understanding in the future if you say yes.
Firstly, this example, like Sniping is discussing a very specific maneuver that doesn't even enter into the equation when you are using HCS or HiPS.
Secondly, that whole section is still talking about using the basic Stealth skill.
Thirdly, let me break down this description for you:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
There is only ONE reason for the -10 penalty, "because you have to move fast." Furthermore, that part of the sentence grammatically refers back to the "if you can get to an unobserved place" in the previous sentence. To build on that, the only reason you need to "move fast" and get to an "unobserved place" is because generally you can't use Stealth while being "observed." So, when HCS and HiPS say you can use Stealth even while being observed, they also trump the need for you to take a -10 penalty on Stealth in order to "move fast" to an "unobserved place."
|
Shadow,
So in this case how would it all work together,
In bright light the character can Stealth, attack, 5 foot steep and stealth again? What needed rolls would I need and at what penalties (if any)?
In dim light the character can Stealth, attack, 5 foot steep and stealth again? What needed rolls would I need and at what penalties (if any)?
In darkness the character can Stealth, attack, 5 foot steep and stealth again? What needed rolls would I need and at what penalties (if any)?
As for HCS and Hide In plain Sight... I never read any Rules that say it Trumps Cover and Concealment...
RAW... Mere States you get to Roll for Stealth even Observed
HiPS states you can hide even while in the open and with nothing to hide behind. Something to hide behind is the definition of Cover, so if you can hide without something to hide behind you can hide without cover. Also, you obviously don't need to be IN concealment if you can use HiPS as long as you are standing 10' from dim light (concealment). I can stand in bright light and as long as there is dim light within 10' I can hide. So, I don't need concealment.
Combine that with the actual rules guy on the designer team stating that HiPS trumps the need for Cover/Concealment and I think it's pretty clear. I am not sure what is vague or confusing about that.
It never removed the Stipulation that you had to get to an Unobserved Location... It never removed the -10 when from when you are Observed...
Yes it does, by saying you can use Stealth even while observed. If I can hide even while being observed, there is no longer a reason to get to an unobserved place.