Can of Worms: Does Uncanny Dodge stop DEX denial from stealth?


Rules Questions

51 to 60 of 60 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive

wraithstrike wrote:

You said the dex check dropped because uncanny dodge ignore invisiblity, but he gets to keep his check minus invis. That amounts to him ignoring the +20 from invis.

PS:I thought we were discussing how it does work. If we are discussing how it should work then I think if it can detect creatures hiding by magic, then it can definitely avoid mundane hiding. Invis is an automatic +20 without any effort, it is so good.

PS2: I also don't think uncanny dodge stops sneak attack. It only stops people from getting jumped, so it will only stop one attack if someone is hiding. It(uncanny dodge) also means that even if win initiative then you have to wait for the flank, but as a class ability which are stronger than feats normally, it is basically a better blind fight.

Quote:

Blind-Fight (Combat)

You are skilled at attacking opponents that you cannot clearly perceive.
Benefit: In melee, every time you miss because of concealment (see Combat), you can reroll your miss chance percentile roll one time to see if you actually hit.
An invisible attacker gets no advantages related to hitting you in melee. That is, you don't lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class, and the attacker doesn't get the usual +2 bonus for being invisible. The invisible attacker's bonuses do still apply for ranged attacks, however.
You do not need to make Acrobatics skill checks to move at full speed while blinded.
Normal: Regular attack roll modifiers for invisible attackers trying to hit you apply, and you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC. The speed reduction for darkness and poor visibility also applies.
Special: The Blind-Fight feat is of no use against a character who is the subject of a blink spell.

Both of these need to reference opponents they are unaware of instead of calling out invisible opponents, but I can understand the assumption that if someone can dodge an invisible attack the reader would understand that someone who is not invisible can also be dodged.

Nope, I said the dex check dropped because he moved (remember the perception check is compared to the stealth check at the best opportunity for the defender per Buhlman).

And this is how I think it does and should work per the latest update to stealth.

Invisibility is a automatic +20 to stealth versus vision not versus any other sense. If you can't see then invisibility does nothing to help your stealth.

Finally the big deal is Invisibility is it's own defined condition and Unaware is now it's own defined condition, they are 2 completely separate things now and something that calls for for one does not explicitly call for the other.
Uncanny Dodge explicitly protects you from someone under the invisibility condition, it does not mention the unaware condition and until it is modified to protect you from that condition I believe you can SA someone from stealth.

With the new errata on Stealth we no longer are sure what the RAI is for either of these two effects so we ask, but until then I do believe stealth will let you SA that Rogue/Barbarian now.


Threeshades wrote:
I can't seem to find the passage right now where it states what happens to a target's AC that doesn't notice you. I've been looking at Stealth, Perception and Combat rules. I would like to read the exact wording, can anyone help?

Anyone?


Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
Invisibility is a automatic +20 to stealth versus vision not versus any other sense. If you can't see then invisibility does nothing to help your stealth.

Unless it is changed from the printing I have or been erratas that is not true. As silly as it sounds invisbility lets you walk much more quietly across dried leaves. Invis gives a +20 stealth while you move, not a -20 penalty on the observer tryign to see you.

Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


With the new errata on Stealth we no longer are sure what the RAI is for either of these two effects so we ask, but until then I do believe stealth will let you SA that Rogue/Barbarian now.

The new errata on stealth does not let you SA a rogue/Barbarian.

The GENRAL rule is that stealth denise dex.

The SPECIFIC rule is that Uncnanny dodge lets you keep dex.

Specific overrides general.

There is no need to try to make it more complex, it really is that simple.


Threeshades wrote:
Threeshades wrote:
I can't seem to find the passage right now where it states what happens to a target's AC that doesn't notice you. I've been looking at Stealth, Perception and Combat rules. I would like to read the exact wording, can anyone help?
Anyone?

It is in the book twice.

Quote:


You apply your character's Dexterity modifier to:

Ranged attack rolls, including those for attacks made with bows, crossbows, throwing axes, and many ranged spell attacks like scorching ray or searing light.

Armor Class (AC), provided that the character can react to the attack.

Reflex saving throws, for avoiding fireballs and other attacks that you can escape by moving quickly.

Acrobatics, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Fly, Ride, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth check

You can't react if you are not aware.

Here is the combat chapter.

Quote:
Sometimes you can't use your Dexterity bonus (if you have one). If you can't react to a blow, you can't use your Dexterity bonus to AC. If you don't have a Dexterity bonus, your AC does not change.


Thanks. That seems kind of loosely defined anyway. At least if i were a rule designer i wouldn't have let it stand that way, it should have stated somewhere explicitly when you can't react in my opinion.

Anyway now i see the problem with the whole issue. But I will say that at least invisible creatures of who'm the target is not aware will also deny the uncanny dodger's DEX, if visible ones do.

The Exchange

So what's the concensus here? By RAW a stealthed character can SA someone w/ uncanny dodge?

I'm not sure if I buy it and if I DM PFS I don't think that's how I would run it. The first sentences of UD tell me, by my reading, "Before her senses would normally allow her to do so." It uses Invis as one example and it seems as if people are stating it's the only case.

I'm fairly certain this isn't the RAI either. It just doesn't seem very uncanny to be good at protecting yourself from invisible enemies but stealthed ones beware.

Either way, what is the concensus to this question?


Well there does not appear to be consensus.

Some people view it my way and other people are wrong :)


I don't know that there is one.

IMO, the validity of allowing Uncanny Dodge to affect invisibility but not stealth (based on the given evidence) is pretty weak. But again, that's just my opinion.

Again, just my opinion, but the first sentence of the ability (regarding reacting to an attack) seems to lend greater weight to Uncanny Dodge guarding against stealthed attackers, if for no other reason than it's the same word\similar language to how stealth was originally written, and what it was intended to do (but not how it really worked until the errata).

Thus why I FAQ'ed it.

If we get any designer response, I wouldn't expect it until next week, since their offices are closed right now in holiday observance.


The Todd wrote:

So what's the concensus here? By RAW a stealthed character can SA someone w/ uncanny dodge?

I'm not sure if I buy it and if I DM PFS I don't think that's how I would run it. The first sentences of UD tell me, by my reading, "Before her senses would normally allow her to do so." It uses Invis as one example and it seems as if people are stating it's the only case.

I'm fairly certain this isn't the RAI either. It just doesn't seem very uncanny to be good at protecting yourself from invisible enemies but stealthed ones beware.

Either way, what is the concensus to this question?

The consensus is that Uncanny Dodge does stop DEX denial from Stealth. Everyone knows it does. Some folks are arguing that the current rules have not been updated, and that they need to be (and I am sure in the next Ed they will be) . No sane person plays it that it doesn’t. It doesn’t need a FAQ. FAQing this will just annoy the Devs.


Lord Inquisitor Shrimp Slaad wrote:

Thanks. That seems kind of loosely defined anyway. At least if i were a rule designer i wouldn't have let it stand that way, it should have stated somewhere explicitly when you can't react in my opinion.

Anyway now i see the problem with the whole issue. But I will say that at least invisible creatures of who'm the target is not aware will also deny the uncanny dodger's DEX, if visible ones do.

edit:I misread your question. Most of us apply uncanny dodge to hidden characters, even if they are not using invis. Otherwise invis makes you worse at your job. I don't know anyone that does not, other than the few in this thread.

51 to 60 of 60 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can of Worms: Does Uncanny Dodge stop DEX denial from stealth? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.