Stealth Conundrum


Rules Questions

101 to 150 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

MurphysParadox wrote:

Do you want the RAW or the RAI answer?

As Written, it is a 35 DC. Invisibility gives you a +20 and that's just that.

As Intended, it is a 15 DC. There's no reason invisibility would make you quieter.

But in that case the +20 is pointless because you are never made quieter.


johnlocke90 wrote:
MurphysParadox wrote:

Do you want the RAW or the RAI answer?

As Written, it is a 35 DC. Invisibility gives you a +20 and that's just that.

As Intended, it is a 15 DC. There's no reason invisibility would make you quieter.

But in that case the +20 is pointless because you are never made quieter.

stealthing while invis in a brightly lit but otherwise unoccupied area with watch guards around.

invis is great at getting past people at a distance, but they can still hear someone sneaking up on them, just as easily as before.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.

No, no they don't. Being invisible grants you a blanket +20 to your stealth check.


Perception is generally against sight, but if you make noise that is how you can still be picked up. It is assumed you being quiet while being stealthy, but you can stealth while speaking. It is just not a good idea to do so.

@ chess pwn:
I was on my phone when I replied but the table under invisibility says

Invisible creature is........... Perception
In combat or speaking............... -20

The "....." is to make the space represented on the chart.

If you still don't see it let me know, and I will take a screenshot and post it on a site such as google docs or mediafire. The part I am referencing will be circled.


@wraithstrike you're saying that if the invisible person is speaking that it's easier to notice and pinpoint them by 20. If so yes I agree with you. I thought you were saying that if the person seeing was talking it takes a penalty to it's perception check. I'm sorry about the misunderstanding there. I'm curious what the point your trying to portray is so that I may understand what you're trying to say. I'm beginning to wonder if we're saying the same thing but misunderstood and hence discussing the wrong thing.

@Krith there we go, now I see at least where you are coming from. That the pinpointing +20 is to something other than the notice DC. But I ask you when would it apply then?
Also I want to clarify what I feel you're saying. If someone is speaking and running it's a DC 20 to notice them within 30 feet. But pinpointing them would be a -20 to some other check. Is this correct with what you're saying?

Another thing I thought of is this, What if the difficulty for perception was factoring in sight, so when you take out vision the DC to perceive them increase by 20. Hence the +20 to all stealth checks. Because it's already saying you can't visually see them at all. You can have visual clues that they are there, but you can't see them with normal vision.


I think perception is factoring in sight. It is easier to notice a hidden person by sight. That is they invis grants a +20. I think it is fair to say that if you pinpoint the square that the invisible person kicked up some dust or maybe bumped into another object etc etc..

As for the perception DC to notice vs pinpoint, it is one dice roll. As an example say someone is within 20 feet, but they roll 35 on the stealth check. If they are 10 feet away the perception to notice is a 36, but to notice they are in the are you still only need a 20.

PS: I think we agree on the sound issue Chess Pwn.

Silver Crusade

RAW you get +20 to the check making it 35. Inability to see someone is +20 to your stealth, a better question is why a character that is not invisible but on the other side of a door not or just outside of vision range at +20 to stealth for effectively being invisible.

At one point I was all about what is reasonable but the point of the rules is that they are made to give you an easy framework to do things in games. A LOT of things in any RPG don’t make sense like a giant hitting you with a hammer and the blow not killing you outright or a naked higher level character taking a few sword hits to kill or how can a level 18 monk with a high strength and a few feats with 100lbs of gear can run 106 meters in 6 seconds when the fastest Olympic record is 100 meters in 9.58 seconds carrying nothing, having rested and prepared the whole day and is then very tired as they gave 100% during the run.

You can in the interest of more realistic game change it all around but then you get into the territory of rewriting the whole game and bogging it down in minutia. Stealth is already complex enough and does not need more.


So Wraithstrike, I think we do agree about sound. Now I do have a question about your example of perception to pinpoint and notice. Now I agree that it's all one roll, my question is though about the DC's for the two. So if they rolled a 35 on their stealth, it would be a 55 to pinpoint them. Stealth roll 35 + 20 to pinpoint. Now if they were speaking and running, both -20, would you say it's a DC 20 to notice and a DC 15 to pinpoint? (assuming my 55 for the DC to pinpoint.)

On another note with this. Under the perception table and description it says it's a DC of their stealth to notice a stealthed unit. So now, if their stealth is 35, Why is it easier to notice them invisible then it would be if they weren't invisible? I think the DC 20 to notice is if they are not using stealth, because the normal DC to notice someone is 0, +20 for the stealth and boom, a DC 20 To notice a creature, which would then be modified by appropriate modifiers.

Grand Lodge

N N 959 wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


Would you allow someone to scream and yell while invisible and not be noticed?

At this point you're no longer stealthing so it's a moot point.
No, it's not. You're trying to put forth the idea that trying to be stealthy suddenly makes Invisibility apply to senses it explicitly doesn't cover. As wraith is pointing out, you're reading it out of context.

You're kidding, right? We're talking about if you get a stealth bonus while invisible. Yes. But if you're screaming and yelling you're not stealthing. What kind of asinine argument is this? Of course you're going to be easier to discern when you're not stealthing.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Krith wrote:
Creature Z is using stealth to move through trees and undergrowth at night in the area of a dwarf on guard. Once Creature Z is within the dwarf's 60' darkvision, Creature Z rolls stealth. Dwarf rolls perception. If dwarf's perception roll is higher than Creature Z's roll (after distance modifiers per perception rules), he completely ignores any stealth of the creature and is fully aware of Creature Z and can act without penalty.

Why would you only just make the check as he enters the range for darkvision? Surely the dwarf guard could (potentially) have heard him approach well before that.


Here's my take on it-
The whole thing is only an issue when doing opposed stealth checks. In the perception skill listing, there are DCs listed for hearing people walking, turning keys, etc. but those people aren't being stealthy. The flat DC checks are the ones that are tied to a specific sense ("Hear the sound of a key being turned in a lock", "Detect the smell of smoke", etc). On the other hand, the opposed checks are based on all senses. Where am I going with this? The stealthy guy behind the door gets the +20 bonus even without the spell cast. He is in fact "invisible" with that door closed one way or the other to that guard.


Iron Giant I agree that those listed DC's are only for if the opposed creature isn't using stealth. That if he uses stealth all or most of those DC's would be replaced by the stealth check. And the +20 for invisible makes sense, it's like saying a -20 to perception because you can't see them and sight is the primary tool of perception. But it wouldn't read well to say apply a penalty to them, but instead they worded it as boosting the stealth. It nets the same result.


The Sleeper wrote:

RAW you get +20 to the check making it 35. Inability to see someone is +20 to your stealth, a better question is why a character that is not invisible but on the other side of a door not or just outside of vision range at +20 to stealth for effectively being invisible.

Because hide and move silently were combined into stealth. In my games if you are on the other side of a door, and you can't be seen I am not giving you the +20 for invis. You can't really be more unseen than if you are on the other side of a wall, which already makes perception more difficult by the rules.


wraithstrike wrote:
Quote:

The Sleeper wrote:

RAW you get +20 to the check making it 35. Inability to see someone is +20 to your stealth, a better question is why a character that is not invisible but on the other side of a door not or just outside of vision range at +20 to stealth for effectively being invisible.
Because hide and move silently were combined into stealth. In my games if you are on the other side of a door, and you can't be seen I am not giving you the +20 for invis. You can't really be more unseen than if you are on the other side of a wall, which already makes perception more difficult by the rules.

Right, but since there's no spot or listen the +20 is to compensate for the lack of vision being possible on the perception check. If they are on the other side of a door and can't be seen then you're saying they are invisible to the person, and as such they'd get the bonus following the perception rules.


So Wraithstrike, I think we do agree about sound. Now I do have a question about your example of perception to pinpoint and notice. Now I agree that it's all one roll, my question is though about the DC's for the two. So if they rolled a 35 on their stealth, it would be a 55 to pinpoint them. Stealth roll 35 + 20 to pinpoint. Now if they were speaking and running, both -20, would you say it's a DC 20 to notice and a DC 15 to pinpoint? (assuming my 55 for the DC to pinpoint.)

On another note with this. Under the perception table and description it says it's a DC of their stealth to notice a stealthed unit. So now, if their stealth is 35, Why is it easier to notice them invisible then it would be if they weren't invisible? I think the DC 20 to notice is if they are not using stealth, because the normal DC to notice someone is 0, +20 for the stealth and boom, a DC 20 To notice a creature, which would then be modified by appropriate modifiers.


Chess Pwn wrote:

So Wraithstrike, I think we do agree about sound. Now I do have a question about your example of perception to pinpoint and notice. Now I agree that it's all one roll, my question is though about the DC's for the two. So if they rolled a 35 on their stealth, it would be a 55 to pinpoint them. Stealth roll 35 + 20 to pinpoint. Now if they were speaking and running, both -20, would you say it's a DC 20 to notice and a DC 15 to pinpoint? (assuming my 55 for the DC to pinpoint.)

On another note with this. Under the perception table and description it says it's a DC of their stealth to notice a stealthed unit. So now, if their stealth is 35, Why is it easier to notice them invisible then it would be if they weren't invisible? I think the DC 20 to notice is if they are not using stealth, because the normal DC to notice someone is 0, +20 for the stealth and boom, a DC 20 To notice a creature, which would then be modified by appropriate modifiers.

The 35 was including the +20 for being invisible.

That DC 20 "to notice" is a flat check within 30 feet. So even if someone is 30 feet away or 10 feet away it is still a flat 20.

Otherwise they could have simply said the notice DC is 20 less than the pinpoint DC within 30 feet. Those modifiers in the chart are for pinpointing not noticing. From the way I read it the notice DC's are flat. The pin point DC's are using all of the modifiers

They really need to do a blog on invis similar to the one for 3.5, which broke this down. Other than replacing hide and move silent with stealth the rules are pretty much the same for this. The 3.5 blog also said it was a 40 DC to "notice" an invisible creature that was not moving. That was not in the rules, but only in the blog clarifying intent.

Of course just like 3.5 this is not exactly stated in the rules, so a GM will have to decide if that is Paizo's intent or not.

edit: Just to be clear that 35 was not assuming the +20 and the die roll were both added in together already.


claudekennilol wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:


Would you allow someone to scream and yell while invisible and not be noticed?

At this point you're no longer stealthing so it's a moot point.
No, it's not. You're trying to put forth the idea that trying to be stealthy suddenly makes Invisibility apply to senses it explicitly doesn't cover. As wraith is pointing out, you're reading it out of context.
You're kidding, right? We're talking about if you get a stealth bonus while invisible. Yes. But if you're screaming and yelling you're not stealthing. What kind of asinine argument is this? Of course you're going to be easier to discern when you're not stealthing.

There is no rule against intentionally making noise and using the stealth skill, so you could do both by the rules. That is why I brought it up.


So if I'm right you're agreeing that the pinpoint DC for a running talking invisible person with a stealth 35 would be a DC -5, but to only notice them would still be a DC 20. Is this what you're saying?

Also if someone used normal stealth to get a 30 on their check, you're saying they'd be harder to notice, DC 30, then to notice an invisible person with the same check of 30 for stealth before invis bonus, DC 20 according to you? Am I understanding you right?

Silver Crusade

FAQ thread from a year ago, with many good links.


Chess Pwn wrote:

So if I'm right you're agreeing that the pinpoint DC for a running talking invisible person with a stealth 35 would be a DC -5, but to only notice them would still be a DC 20. Is this what you're saying?

Also if someone used normal stealth to get a 30 on their check, you're saying they'd be harder to notice, DC 30, then to notice an invisible person with the same check of 30 for stealth before invis bonus, DC 20 according to you? Am I understanding you right?

Yes for the 1st paragraph, but I also think that since talking gives a -20 that the DC should be 0, but the 3.5 blog I read before did not cover that. In an actual game I will use 0. I want to say it is RAI, but the rules don't always make sense.

For the second paragraph yes, and that is another thing I don't like, but it is the rule. I think the rule is there to keep invis in check, and not many people even know about it so during the playtesting it was never fixed. This topic has come up before and someone found another example of how someone with invis would be easier to notice IIRC.

If the rule could be rewritten I would just say the notice DC is 10 lower than the pinpoint DC, assuming we wanted noticing to even be possible.

Now I want to rewrite the stealth rules.


Ravingdork wrote:
Krith wrote:
Creature Z is using stealth to move through trees and undergrowth at night in the area of a dwarf on guard. Once Creature Z is within the dwarf's 60' darkvision, Creature Z rolls stealth. Dwarf rolls perception. If dwarf's perception roll is higher than Creature Z's roll (after distance modifiers per perception rules), he completely ignores any stealth of the creature and is fully aware of Creature Z and can act without penalty.
Why would you only just make the check as he enters the range for darkvision? Surely the dwarf guard could (potentially) have heard him approach well before that.

Well hypothetically, if more than 60ft away, the DC would be 1 higher for every 10ft, thus +6 or more to the DC.

I figured it was just a safety net to represent the sheer unlikelihood that the Dwarf succeeds at that point.


No it's not all for pinpointing, the perception rules say to notice a person using steal is their stealth check. Perception rules say that if the target is invisible add 20 to the DC. So to notice an invisible stealthed person is stealth +20. Which, hey, is the same as the table in the invisibility table for invisible special ability. And that's just to notice. The reason they put a line saying that you can get a DC 20 to notice an invisible creature is if they weren't using stealth, hence the modifiers for running and in combat would apply to this, while those action exclude stealth, but to notice a creature using stealth is tied to stealth. Now to pinpoint, it's another +20 to the check.

Quote:
What you seem to be suggesting is that the rules are imposing a penalty/bonus on all the other senses if the viewer can't see the target. And this bonus is kicked in when using Stealth. There's nothing in the rules regarding Stealth that suggests it is some magical state of existence that suddenly boosts Inviso. On the contrary, the rules suggests that you use Stealth when Inviso because you can be heard.

I agree that you can be heard, smelled, and touched. What I'm saying is that if perception is using "spot and listen" and stealth is "hide and move silently" that this boost of +20 is what happens when you take out one of those. Now this is just to explain a reason for why the rules are how they are. Which is a +20 to all stealth checks AND immunity to being seen directly.

Quote:
Invisibility states it applies to vision only. Wraithstrike and I have belabored this point. The inability to see something doesn't make it harder to hear.

I agree with this but to clarify your stance. The DC to notice a visible person using their stealth is lets say DC 25. Now that includes sight, sound, touch, and smell. So now if I'm understanding you right, the DC if that same person suddenly became invisible is DC 25, using only sound, touch, and smell, because invisibility doesn't make it harder to do those. Because all those senses are just perception. SO both cases are a DC 25 to notice the stealthed person. Am I right that this is what you're proposing?

I feel that the DC for the invisible person is 45, the +20 coming from all the sources say I get a bonus for being invisible. Which could be explained because of the loss of one of the usable senses involved.


wraithstrike wrote:

Yes for the 1st paragraph, but I also think that since talking gives a -20 that the DC should be 0, but the 3.5 blog I read before did not cover that. In an actual game I will use 0. I want to say it is RAI, but the rules don't always make sense.

For the second paragraph yes, and that is another thing I don't like, but it is the rule. I think the rule is there to keep invis in check, and not many people even know about it so during the playtesting it was never fixed. This topic has come up before and someone found another example of how someone with invis would be easier to notice IIRC.

If the rule could be rewritten I would just say the notice DC is 10 lower than the pinpoint DC, assuming we wanted noticing to even be possible.

Now I want to rewrite the stealth rules.

Now, take a moment. If you read the rules as I do when it talks about noticing invisible, pinpointing and modifiers, that the modifiers would also be applied to BOTH. Then it works just like you say you'd run it, how one would expect it to run. So even though they said modifiers can apply to the DC, after talking about pinpointing, it's not only talking about modifying pinpointing, because that is a modifier in addition to the check to notice someone. I know you gave an example of how you would have worded it to make it clearer to you saying that the notice DC is 10 less than the pinpoint DC. But the way they worded says basically the same thing. There is nothing in the rules as written to say the modifiers don't apply to the DC 20 to notice. Why would noticing an invisible person be the only skill check in the game that modifiers wouldn't be applied to? (It might not be the only, but I don't know any so I'm saying only.)


Chess Pwn wrote:
No it's not all for pinpointing, the perception rules say to [bold]notice[/bold] a person using steal is their stealth check.

That is another problem. In that stance they were using the everyday form of notice, but the invis has its own form of "notice", and neither "notice" or "pinpoint" or defined game terms despite not using the dictionary version.

PS: Bolding code is {b} {/b}. However replace the {} with [].


To further clarify my last point if your perception DC matches the stealth DC then you actually pinpoint the person, not just notice them. Noticing just means you know they are around per the invis section. That is why the "notice" in the stealth section is not the same as "notice" in the invis section.


Chess Pwn wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

Yes for the 1st paragraph, but I also think that since talking gives a -20 that the DC should be 0, but the 3.5 blog I read before did not cover that. In an actual game I will use 0. I want to say it is RAI, but the rules don't always make sense.

For the second paragraph yes, and that is another thing I don't like, but it is the rule. I think the rule is there to keep invis in check, and not many people even know about it so during the playtesting it was never fixed. This topic has come up before and someone found another example of how someone with invis would be easier to notice IIRC.

If the rule could be rewritten I would just say the notice DC is 10 lower than the pinpoint DC, assuming we wanted noticing to even be possible.

Now I want to rewrite the stealth rules.

Now, take a moment. If you read the rules as I do when it talks about noticing invisible, pinpointing and modifiers, that the modifiers would also be applied to BOTH. Then it works just like you say you'd run it, how one would expect it to run. So even though they said modifiers can apply to the DC, after talking about pinpointing, it's not only talking about modifying pinpointing, because that is a modifier in addition to the check to notice someone. I know you gave an example of how you would have worded it to make it clearer to you saying that the notice DC is 10 less than the pinpoint DC. But the way they worded says basically the same thing. There is nothing in the rules as written to say the modifiers don't apply to the DC 20 to notice. Why would noticing an invisible person be the only skill check in the game that modifiers wouldn't be applied to? (It might not be the only, but I don't know any so I'm saying only.)

The -10 is something I made up and is nowhere in the rules. I just chose -10 because I felt like -20 was too big of a penalty.

The rules also say the DC to notice is 20. The chart is below where it talks about pinpointing, and it matches the 3.5 blog, which did not match RAW. The perception skill allows you to pinpoint. The only mention about noticing is one sentence. There is no reason to assume that once they mention pinpointing they are still also referencing a corner case rule.


Chess Pwn wrote:
I feel that the DC for the invisible person is 45, the +20 coming from all the sources say I get a bonus for being invisible. Which could be explained because of the loss of one of the usable senses involved.

Let's look at the Perception chart in the PRD:

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/perception.html#_perception

So here's what I see:

The baseline DC to "notice" a visible creature = 0

Hear the sound of a creature walking = 10

So right there, I read this as one Perception check, using different senses. It's really easy for me to see you, but I may not hear you, if I'm distracted or in combat, or have a penalty to my hearing.

Why would my ability to hear you be affected by my ability to see you when Inviso explicitly states it only applies to vision? It wouldn't. Let's look down the chart. Near the bottom for Modifiers I see this:

Creature or object is invisible +20

So logic dictates that this +20 only applies to my "noticing" you, not pinpointing you. Do you think the DC for me to hear you walking is now 30 or still 10?


wraithstrike wrote:

The -10 is something I made up and is nowhere in the rules. I just chose -10 because I felt like -20 was too big of a penalty.

The rules also say the DC to notice is 20. The chart is below where it talks about pinpointing, and it matches the 3.5 blog, which did not match RAW. The perception skill allows you to pinpoint. The only mention about noticing is one sentence. There is no reason to assume that once they mention pinpointing they are still also referencing a corner case rule.

Perception skill is used for noticing and pinpointing. Pinpointing is only mentioned once, in invisibility. Notice is in the perception skill table. Notice a visible creature DC 0, Notice a creature using Stealth DC their stealth. MODIFIERS: Creature or object is invisible +20. Hence the DC 20 to notice an invisible creature. Its using the DC 0 from the perception table and adding 20, as the perception table says to do. I suppose that normally if they are visible the DC to notice and pinpoint are the same because there's no talk of pinpointing, but it says in invisibility that pinpointing is an additional +20, which makes sense because this would be an exception to the normal +0 to pinpoint. The paragraph then it goes on to say there are additional modifiers for being invisible which would apply to all the DC bases that are involved.

Why do you insist that the table is only for pinpointing? Why would the modifiers only be about pinpointing? pinpointing isn't a DC. What would you add the pinpointing DC to for an invisible person who was not using stealth? Since pinpointing isn't a DC but a modifier the modifying table isn't just referring to it.

Edit, it's also mention in the Darkness section of Environment. Where it also says that it's a +20 to pinpoint over the normal DC to notice a stealthed creature. Again, agreeing with my interpretation on this.


Ravingdork said wrote:
Why would you only just make the check as he enters the range for darkvision? Surely the dwarf guard could (potentially) have heard him approach well before that.

Ravingdork, scroll to the end of the post of mine you quoted here. The very end of it says:

"I apologize for ignoring hearing in this (you can hear further than 60') but wanted to keep it simple to emphasis the DC 20 hunch roll."


N N 959 wrote:

Let's look at the Perception chart in the PRD:

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/perception.html#_perception

So here's what I see:

The baseline DC to "notice" a visible creature = 0

Hear the sound of a creature walking = 10

So right there, I read this as one Perception check, using different senses. It's really easy for me to see you, but I may not hear you, if I'm distracted or in combat, or have a penalty to my hearing.

Why would my ability to hear you be affected by my ability to see you when Inviso explicitly states it only applies to vision? It wouldn't. Let's look down the chart. Near the bottom for Modifiers I see this:

Creature or object is invisible +20

So logic dictates that this +20 only applies to my "noticing" you, not pinpointing you. Do you think the DC for me to hear you walking is now 30 or still 10?

DC for hearing walking is 30. Because rules say. I agree that this doesn't make sense and would probably use the 10 myself. BUT this isn't the point I'm trying to make, because it's not involving stealth skill. stealth is moving and hiding. So talking isn't covered by stealth and would be separate. But walking is moving so my point is below.

SO just to clarify this is what I'm understand you to say, the DC to notice a stealthed creature is their stealth check. Lets use a check of 30, this is a very stealthy person. So to notice stealthed is DC 30. But to hear the footsteps of them walking, aka notice, is still ONLY DC 10?
Is this what you're saying?

My point is once they use stealth all other base DC's get overwritten by their stealth score, because that's what the table shows. So it would be DC 30 to hear their footsteps because that's their stealth. And Invisibility says you get a +20 to that.


Wraithstrike said wrote:
There is no rule against intentionally making noise and using the stealth skill, so you could do both by the rules. That is why I brought it up.

Wraithstrike, per RAW, this is an incorrect statement. If you're intentionally making noise, whether it's talking, screaming/shouting, snapping your fingers, etc, and the other person can hear you, you cannot stealth.

Per the Stealth rule:

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth."

If someone can hear you, they are observing you with one of their senses and therefore you can't use Stealth.


Chess Pwn wrote:
DC for hearing walking is 30. Because rules say.

No, that's not what the rules say. The rules explicitly state that Invisibility ONLY applies to vision. You've already agreed with that. Why are you ignoring that now? Wraith addressed this issue awhile back. You don't get to ignore the limitation on Invisibility because the chart doesn't repeat the limitations.

Quote:
SO just to clarify this is what I'm understand you to say, the DC to notice a stealthed creature is their stealth check.

Minus any penalties to specific aspects of stealth. If you're wearing a clapping mechanical monkey that slaps with you a -20 on Stealth, that's not going to apply to visually noticing you, only in hearing you walk down the hall.

Quote:

So to notice stealthed is DC 30. But to hear the footsteps of them walking, aka notice, is still ONLY DC 10?

Is this what you're saying?

No. Look at the Stealth skill defined:

PRD on Stealth wrote:
This skill covers hiding and moving silently.

When you use the Stealth skill, that affects your visibility and sound.. When you use Invisibility, it only affects your visibility.

Quote:
My point is once they use stealth all other base DC's get overwritten by their stealth score

Technically only sound and visibility. Your odor, tangibility, and taste are not covered by Stealth, but that's not at issue.

Quote:
So it would be DC 30 to hear their footsteps because that's their stealth. And Invisibility says you get a +20 to that.

Only if you insist on ignoring the explicit limitation that RAW puts on Invisibility.


Krith wrote:
Wraithstrike said wrote:
There is no rule against intentionally making noise and using the stealth skill, so you could do both by the rules. That is why I brought it up.

Wraithstrike, per RAW, this is an incorrect statement. If you're intentionally making noise, whether it's talking, screaming/shouting, snapping your fingers, etc, and the other person can hear you, you cannot stealth.

Per the Stealth rule:

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth."

If someone can hear you, they are observing you with one of their senses and therefore you can't use Stealth.

If the person who is making the noise starts out of audible range of another creature, then they can certainly use Stealth at the beginning of their turn. When someone else comes within audible range, the opposing rolls are made.


N N 959, I agree that some of it doesn't make sense. I agree that Invisible creatures are visually undetectable. That While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt. And that Of course, the subject is not magically silenced, and certain other conditions can render the recipient detectable (such as swimming in water or stepping in a puddle). All quotes from sources of invisibility. I also see Creature or object is invisible +20 in perception. Invisible creature is... Using Stealth DC Stealth check +20. And that a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving. SO none of this to me reads that I don't get a bonus to my stealth. If I'm missing something that you feel would explain why this bonus is ignored I'd like you to share. Now I understand that if you go back and try to separate perception to spot and listen and stealth to hide and move silently then Yes, you wouldn't get the bonus. Now with my understand of what I've read there is nothing in the rules saying that the bonues only apply sometimes.
SO again, where does it say the +20 bonus only applies to "sight" instead of all checks?


Chess Pwn wrote:
SO again, where does it say the +20 bonus only applies to "sight" instead of all checks?

It's implicit in the rules. When the section under Invisibility starts out like this:

PRD wrote:

Invisibility

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

Invisibility makes a creature undetectable by vision, including darkvision.

And then you add in the fact that the Perception skill explicitly discusses skill checks based solely on hearing. So.

1. I'm allowed to make Perception checks purely on sound;

2. Invisibility does nothing to attenuate sound;

1+1=2. Again, you, as the GM, need to connect the dots.

The way I read the rules, Stealth skill doesn't change how any of this works. Stealth is just an additional modifier on top. When the NPC uses Stealth, he's actively trying to reduce the sound he's making. So the DC to hear the NPC would be the the opposed skill check and nothing else. The PC still hasn't pinpointed the NPC, but he knows someone is in the hall.


N N 959
Take a look at this, it's in the blinded rules. The creature takes a –4 penalty... on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail.
Here is an example, they are blind, auto-fail vision checks. But they take a -4 penalty to opposed perception skill checks. One of those opposed perception skill checks is stealth, another is pickpocket. Now if you were correct that vision difficulties, blindness being the same as everyone being invisible, only applies to vision checks, then he wouldn't have a penalty to his opposed skill checks. But here is an example of the rules giving a penalty for not being able to see a creature. Now the wording here is a penalty because it's on the finding creature, while invisibility is a bonus on the hiding side. but the effects are the same. It's harder.

So I feel this further supports my stance that it doesn't matter why it gives you a bonus, or how in the game world it's working. The fact is that it is a bonus that says it should be applied, at least to stealth checks because if you're invisible by the spell Invisibility, it specifically says you get that bonus to your stealth check. Also for normal stealth because it too says the DC is their stealth +20.

also the rules don't handle finding someone without vision other then relating to invisibility and blindness, and in both of those it's harder to do then with vision. So even though it doesn't make them quieter it makes them harder to perceive, hence the bonus.

N N 959 wrote:
Again, you, as the GM, need to connect the dots.

I agree with you on this N N 959, but which dots and how you're doing it I do not. I have connected the perception table, the invisibility table, the spell invisibility, the blindness rules, the stealth rules, to easily agree on the same thing. That it's harder to perceive an invisible creature using stealth then it is to perceive a visible creature using stealth. This also lets the spell do what I feel it should, and I bet others would agree at feeling this way, make you overall better at using stealth.

You have only that invisibility doesn't make you quieter so your perception shouldn't be harder. That is your stance, is it not?

Now if perception were spit into spot and listen checks I would agree that invisibility wouldn't change the listen DC. Nor would it provide a bonus to the move silently check. But since the skills have been combined if you remove part of what goes into it, it's harder to do. So removing sight from a perception check makes it harder to perceive.


Chess Pwn wrote:

N N 959

Take a look at this, it's in the blinded rules. The creature takes a –4 penalty... on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail.

Being blind and trying to find someone who is invisible are not comparable. The rules you quoted make that explicitly clear. I can locate you if you are invisible and talking. In fact, it's trivial. I cannot locate you visually if I am blind, no matter what you're doing because I "automatically fail." Being blind is disorienting to creatures who normally rely on sight. Your being invisible is not.

Quote:
Now if you were correct that vision difficulties, blindness being the same as everyone being invisible

No, it's absolutely not. Being blind is not at all the same as being in a room of invisible people nor do the rules treat it the same.

Quote:
also the rules don't handle finding someone without vision other then relating to invisibility and blindness

I don't know what you mean by "finding" someone. But Perception table makes it explicitly clear that I can make a Perception check based ONLY on sound.

Quote:
You have only that invisibility doesn't make you quieter so your perception shouldn't be harder. That is your stance, is it not?

I'm not sure what you mean by "perception". By definition, Invisibility does not affect my ability to hear you. Not. One. Point. If you move through the hallway, there's a chance I may hear you. The DC is 10 if you're walking. Invisibility does NOTHING to that number. If you're trying to sneak across the room, then the DC is an opposed check minus modifiers for how fast you're trying to move. Invisibility does not affect the DC for me to hear you. There's no exception to that unless you try and take the chart out of context, which it seems you are intent on doing. What is true is that even if I hear you, I don't see you unless I beat the Inviso effect.

Quote:
Now if perception were spit into spot and listen checks I would agree that invisibility wouldn't change the listen DC. Nor would it provide a bonus to the move silently check. But since the skills have been combined if you remove part of what goes into it, it's harder to do. So removing sight from a perception check makes it harder to perceive.

I don't see a single thing in any of the rules that says hearing sound is affected by your ability to see the source of it. Nothing. You've invented that rule because without it, you'd have to concede the debate.

Chess, it comes down to one unavoidable issue. My reading comprehension tells me that Invisibility ONLY applies to Perception checks which rely on sight. The chart is bound by that restriction. Nothing you've posted suggests otherwise.


N N 959
What is the DC to hear a stealthing person? What is the DC to smell a stealthing person? to Touch a stealthing person? to see stealthing person?

Answer? As far as I know there isn't any. You have a DC to notice a stealthing person combining all your senses into "Perception."

Now where does it say that being invisible doesn't change your stealth check? Where does it say that perception DC doesn't change if they are invisible or not? I can't see any. But I can see where it says I get bonus to my stealth, or that the DC to perceive an invisible stealthed creature is harder.

Now in your own game you're free to run anything as you like. But saying what the rules say, you can't just ignore that the rules say you get a bonus to stealth or that the perception DC is higher. There isn't a narrowing of perception to use only one sense. Or of stealth for different senses.

Example, armor gives a penalty to stealth. Why? It doesn't matter why it does, it just does. Now we might be able to come up with reasons as to why it does. but the rules don't cover that. The rules only say a penalty to all dex and str based skill checks. What If I really oiled my armor so it doesn't make sounds? What if I'm invisible so they can't see the shiny? Neither of those makes any difference to the penalty applied.

Same with stealth, doesn't matter why it says you get the bonus, just that you do. You don't have a check to see a steathed person, nor a check to hear a stealthed person. Just a perception check against a stealthed person.


Chess Pwn wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

The -10 is something I made up and is nowhere in the rules. I just chose -10 because I felt like -20 was too big of a penalty.

The rules also say the DC to notice is 20. The chart is below where it talks about pinpointing, and it matches the 3.5 blog, which did not match RAW. The perception skill allows you to pinpoint. The only mention about noticing is one sentence. There is no reason to assume that once they mention pinpointing they are still also referencing a corner case rule.

Perception skill is used for noticing and pinpointing. Pinpointing is only mentioned once, in invisibility. Notice is in the perception skill table. Notice a visible creature DC 0, Notice a creature using Stealth DC their stealth. MODIFIERS: Creature or object is invisible +20. Hence the DC 20 to notice an invisible creature. Its using the DC 0 from the perception table and adding 20, as the perception table says to do. I suppose that normally if they are visible the DC to notice and pinpoint are the same because there's no talk of pinpointing, but it says in invisibility that pinpointing is an additional +20, which makes sense because this would be an exception to the normal +0 to pinpoint. The paragraph then it goes on to say there are additional modifiers for being invisible which would apply to all the DC bases that are involved.

Why do you insist that the table is only for pinpointing? Why would the modifiers only be about pinpointing? pinpointing isn't a DC. What would you add the pinpointing DC to for an invisible person who was not using stealth? Since pinpointing isn't a DC but a modifier the modifying table isn't just referring to it.

Edit, it's also mention in the Darkness section of Environment. Where it also says that it's a +20 to pinpoint over the normal DC to notice a stealthed creature. Again, agreeing with my interpretation on this.

Because if the table was not for pinpointing you would only know someone that was stealthing was in the area if you beat the DC. Pinpointing says you are in "that" square. Do you not allow for players to know where someone is if they beat the stealth DC?


Krith wrote:
Wraithstrike said wrote:
There is no rule against intentionally making noise and using the stealth skill, so you could do both by the rules. That is why I brought it up.

Wraithstrike, per RAW, this is an incorrect statement. If you're intentionally making noise, whether it's talking, screaming/shouting, snapping your fingers, etc, and the other person can hear you, you cannot stealth.

Per the Stealth rule:

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth."

If someone can hear you, they are observing you with one of their senses and therefore you can't use Stealth.

So if an animal has scent then you can't use stealth against it?


N N 959 wrote:

I'm not sure what you mean by "perception". By definition, Invisibility does not affect my ability to hear you. Not. One. Point. If you move through the hallway, there's a chance I may hear you. The DC is 10 if you're walking. Invisibility does NOTHING to that number. If you're trying to sneak across the room, then the DC is an opposed check minus modifiers for how fast you're trying to move. Invisibility does not affect the DC for me to hear you. There's no exception to that unless you try and take the chart out of context, which it seems you are intent on doing. What is true is that even if I hear you, I don't see you unless I beat the Inviso effect.

I don't see a single thing in any of the rules that says hearing sound is affected by your ability to see the source of it. Nothing. You've invented that rule because without it, you'd have to concede the debate.

Chess, it comes down to one unavoidable issue. My reading comprehension tells me that Invisibility ONLY applies to Perception checks which rely on sight. The chart is bound by that restriction. Nothing you've posted suggests otherwise.

N N 959, perception is a skill in pathfinder. yes invisibility doesn't affect your ability to hear me. But it does boost stealth, also a skill in pathfinder. There is no DC to hear a stealthed person. There's a DC for perception to notice a stealthed and potentially invisible character.

I don't see a single source saying that you can use hearing to notice a stealthed character. Only rules saying perception skill. Which I find rules that modify the DC of the check for perception.

So it comes down to one unavoidable issue. noticing a stealthed creature isn't one sense based. it's perception based. And being invisible increases the DC for perception.
But not only do we have the perception table we have the invisible table which says that if the Invisible creature is... Using Stealth then the Perception DC Modifier get replaced by Stealth check +20. That is to notice them, +20 to that to pinpoint them. This table, coming from a source that says invisibility doesn't do anything for smell, touch, or sound, says the DC needed to succeed on a perception check to notice a character is their stealth +20.

I do concede that your hear walking wouldn't be effected by invisibility. Your case works in that instance. Or to hear an invisible battle or smell invisible garbage.


wraithstrike wrote:


Chess Pwn wrote:


wraithstrike wrote:


The -10 is something I made up and is nowhere in the rules. I just chose -10 because I felt like -20 was too big of a penalty.
The rules also say the DC to notice is 20. The chart is below where it talks about pinpointing, and it matches the 3.5 blog, which did not match RAW. The perception skill allows you to pinpoint. The only mention about noticing is one sentence. There is no reason to assume that once they mention pinpointing they are still also referencing a corner case rule.

Perception skill is used for noticing and pinpointing. Pinpointing is only mentioned once, in invisibility. Notice is in the perception skill table. Notice a visible creature DC 0, Notice a creature using Stealth DC their stealth. MODIFIERS: Creature or object is invisible +20. Hence the DC 20 to notice an invisible creature. Its using the DC 0 from the perception table and adding 20, as the perception table says to do. I suppose that normally if they are visible the DC to notice and pinpoint are the same because there's no talk of pinpointing, but it says in invisibility that pinpointing is an additional +20, which makes sense because this would be an exception to the normal +0 to pinpoint. The paragraph then it goes on to say there are additional modifiers for being invisible which would apply to all the DC bases that are involved.

Why do you insist that the table is only for pinpointing? Why would the modifiers only be about pinpointing? pinpointing isn't a DC. What would you add the pinpointing DC to for an invisible person who was not using stealth? Since pinpointing isn't a DC but a modifier the modifying table isn't just referring to it.
Edit, it's also mention in the Darkness section of Environment. Where it also says that it's a +20 to pinpoint over the normal DC to notice a stealthed creature. Again, agreeing with my interpretation on this.
Because if the table was not for pinpointing you would only know someone that was stealthing was in the area if you beat the DC. Pinpointing says you are in "that" square. Do you not allow for players to know where someone is if they beat the stealth DC?

I do, and reason is, when you're not invisible the difference between noticing and pinpointing is 0. AND true that "if the table was not for pinpointing you would only know someone that was stealthing was in the area if you beat the DC." This is what I mean, that if they are using stealth, you only know they are in the area by beating the Stealth+20 DC and pinpoint is an additional +20. This way it's even easier to notice a non stealthed invisible person because they'd likely have a penalty to that base 20. But if they are using stealth, it's against their modified stealth check. This way stealth while invisible is overall better than stealth. which is what you'd expect. It should in no way be easier to notice you stealthing if you can't be seen.


Wraithstrike said wrote:
So if an animal has scent then you can't use stealth against it?

Not if they have scent, only if they are able to smell you, according to RAW. Obviously the would be stealther would need to have a scent and be within range. But yes, if those two factors were present, you couldn't stealth according to RAW.

Per the Stealth rule:

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth.""

From Perception:

"Perception covers all five senses, including sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell."

Seems pretty clear you can't stealth if you're being perceived by smell, hearing, touch, sight, or taste.


Krith wrote:

Not if they have scent, only if they are able to smell you, according to RAW. Obviously the would be stealther would need to have a scent and be within range. But yes, if those two factors were present, you couldn't stealth according to RAW.

Per the Stealth rule:

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth.""

From Perception:

"Perception covers all five senses, including sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell."

Seems pretty clear you can't stealth if you're being perceived by smell, hearing, touch, sight, or taste.

I agree, because if their scent ability has noticed you, you're notice. Not pinpointed unless within 5ft, But noticed. So they auto succeed at noticing something. Which means you can't successfully stealth against it. Now if you're outside the range of scent then you could stealth against it still.


N N 959
To illustrate my point that there is no sense for perception. And to clarify what I feel your point is. Here is an example

Bob has a stealth of 15 and he is 30 feet out and we have base human senses.
so if I understand what you're saying is that the base DC to See bob is 15
so it's DC 18.
The DC to hear Bob is base 15 so DC 18.
The DC to smell Bob is base 15 so DC 18.
The DC to taste the air and notice he's there is base 15 so DC 18 (this one is a bit extreme but as far as I'm understanding you it could be allowed?)

Is this correct to what you're saying.
so now if Bob is invisible its
See DC 38, (But it's actually impossible since we can't see him?)
Hear DC 18
Smell DC 18
Taste DC 18

Dang, it this is how it works enough ranks into perception and you have a nose basically with Scent powers.

Now, The way I read it is, there is no one perception tied to notice a stealthed creature but all the senses. So you can't split it saying you're using different senses to get the same result as all of them combined. There isn't a listen DC and a Spot DC that are the same. And it's not having an identical hide and move silently. It's an all encompassing perception against an all encompassing stealth.


Chess Pwn wrote:

N N 959

To illustrate my point that there is no sense for perception. And to clarify what I feel your point is. Here is an example

Bob has a stealth of 15 and he is 30 feet out and we have base human senses.
so if I understand what you're saying is that the base DC to See bob is 15
so it's DC 18.
The DC to hear Bob is base 15 so DC 18.
The DC to smell Bob is base 15 so DC 18.
The DC to taste the air and notice he's there is base 15 so DC 18 (this one is a bit extreme but as far as I'm understanding you it could be allowed?)

Is this correct to what you're saying.
so now if Bob is invisible its
See DC 38, (But it's actually impossible since we can't see him?)
Hear DC 18
Smell DC 18
Taste DC 18

Dang, it this is how it works enough ranks into perception and you have a nose basically with Scent powers.

Now, The way I read it is, there is no one perception tied to notice a stealthed creature but all the senses. So you can't split it saying you're using different senses to get the same result as all of them combined. There isn't a listen DC and a Spot DC that are the same. And it's not having an identical hide and move silently. It's an all encompassing perception against an all encompassing stealth.

1. Stealth only modifies your ability to be seen and heard. The Stealth skill has no effect on an opposed Perception check to smell, taste, or feel the stealthed character..

2. The rules do not give much detail on smelling someone without the Scent ability. There is no base DC to smell the person next to you. There is a base DC to smell smoke. A GM is going to have to adjudicate what it takes to smell someone without Scent. Good luck.

Quote:

Is this correct to what you're saying.

so now if Bob is invisible its
See DC 38, (But it's actually impossible since we can't see him?)
Hear DC 18
Smell DC 18
Taste DC 18

The DC's would be

See DC 38
Hear 18
Smell ?????
Taste ?????

But let me clarify. If you hear the NPC, that is not the same as seeing them. I'd only know what direction they were coming from and I might allow a Knowledge check with some major penalty to identify what it was you heard. Are those hard soled shoes or hooves?

In my examples, the PC behind the door would say, "Hey, I hear something coming down the hall," and alert his friends.

If the NPC had just come out of the sewer, I might give the PC a chance to smell said NPC.

Quote:
It's an all encompassing perception against an all encompassing stealth.

The Perception chart list checks that isolate sight, sound, smell, and taste. Nowhere does it say that a Perception check versus a character using Stealth is not allowed to separate the senses. You roll one check and if Stealth modifiers apply to one sense and not another, then someone may be detected via that one sense.

Let me put it like this. An inviso'd Rogue is carrying a rotted fish and using Stealth. Do you think Inviso gives someone (without Scent) -20 to smell the fish?


Chess Pwn wrote:
I do, and reason is, when you're not invisible the difference between noticing and pinpointing is 0. AND true that "if the table was not for pinpointing you would only know someone that was stealthing was in the area if you beat the DC." This is what I mean, that if they are using stealth, you only know they are in the area by beating the Stealth+20 DC and pinpoint is an additional +20. This way it's even easier to notice a non stealthed invisible person because they'd likely have a penalty to that base 20. But if they are using stealth, it's against their modified stealth check. This way stealth while invisible is overall better than stealth. which is what you'd expect. It should in no way be easier to notice you stealthing if you can't be seen.

Let me put it this way. Do you think perception is designed to give you a general idea of where someone is or their exact location?


Krith wrote:
Wraithstrike said wrote:
So if an animal has scent then you can't use stealth against it?

Not if they have scent, only if they are able to smell you, according to RAW. Obviously the would be stealther would need to have a scent and be within range. But yes, if those two factors were present, you couldn't stealth according to RAW.

Per the Stealth rule:

"If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth.""

From Perception:

"Perception covers all five senses, including sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell."

Seems pretty clear you can't stealth if you're being perceived by smell, hearing, touch, sight, or taste.

Do you think that is RAI?


wraithstike wrote:
Let me put it this way. Do you think perception is designed to give you a general idea of where someone is or their exact location?

Wraithstrike perception does both. The check you are saying doesn't get modified, the DC 20 to notice an invisible character, is a Perception check. A perception check like any other, that would be modified by appropriate modifiers. I'm even saying that you could notice a creature further than 30ft by applying the appropriate +1/10ft rule in perception.

The table under invisibility is to list modifiers that are applicable to an invisible creature. Not a complete list, since it's still just a perception check which can be modified by perception modifiers.

The DC 20 to notice an invisible character says it is to have a general idea. Normally noticing a creature with perception is enough to know their exact location. But invisibility modifies that so there is a difference between noticing and pinpointing.


N N 959 wrote:
1. Stealth only modifies your ability to be seen and heard. The Stealth skill has no effect on an opposed Perception check to smell, taste, or feel the stealthed character..

Stealth check reads, "Your 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" This is it. This doesn't limit to anything. This is what a stealth check does. stealth is against perception to notice.

N N 959 wrote:
The Perception chart list checks that isolate sight, sound, smell, and taste. Nowhere does it say that a Perception check versus a character using Stealth is not allowed to separate the senses. You roll one check and if Stealth modifiers apply to one sense and not another, then someone may be detected via that one sense.

I agree that the list has some checks that Isolate a sense. And there are some that combine senses. No where in the rules does it say it's the same DC check for any sense. Take pickpocket, to notice you were pickpocted is an opposed slight of hand. I think this check includes sight, sound, and touch, at least. It's not three different DC for three different senses. you either use perception and succeed or you don't.

N N 959 wrote:
Let me put it like this. An inviso'd Rogue is carrying a rotted fish and using Stealth. Do you think Inviso gives someone (without Scent) -20 to smell the fish?

NO, they'd smell the fish, I already conceded that you're right that invisibility doesn't modify checks that clearly don't use sight. But have no idea the Rogue is there.

In summary, where does it say you can narrow your perception to notice a stealthed creature to a single sense? You're insistent that you can use perception as spot and listen. and stealth as hide and move silently. When those don't exist. there aren't two parts to them. They are one skill. You either succeed with perception to notice stealth or you don't.

101 to 150 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Stealth Conundrum All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.