|
Invisibility is magic. It gives you magic bonuses.
Glitterdust is magic. It gives you magic penalties.
When stealthing behind a closed door, It's kind of interesting that Invisibility makes it easier to be quiet and Glitterdust makes it harder to be quiet. In the end, it's magic. It doesn't need to make realistic sense. It isn't broken as it is, and the conditions are clearly defined.
I don't believe we need errata for this.
Why on earth would stealthing behind a closed door be affected by glitterdust or even invisibility... detecting would be a sound based perception check?
If someone is blind they are invisible to you surely? Is that not the definition?
Blinded or fighting vs insisible reduces AC by 2 (or grants +2 to hit) and means you lose dex.
When you say +20 to stealth I am confused... if someone is behind a pillar they can't be spotted with sight. When they came into sight you would see how successful their stealh was.
As for pinpointing. Unseen targets are invisible?
|
|
Why on earth would stealthing behind a closed door be affected by glitterdust or even invisibility... detecting would be a sound based perception check?
The spells affect broad Stealth, which covers hiding and moving silently.
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.
I wasn't aware that invisibility affected listen based perception tests.
If you are in a room and someone is sneaking across in sight and another is invisible then the person who is invisible has an obvious advantage and would benefit from the +20
If they are sneaking past a blind guard (or sleeping or pitch black room) they would both benefit.
It does cover moving silently, but the invisibility doesn't apply to silent moving, that doesn't make any sense.
I wasn't aware that invisibility affected listen based perception tests.
If you are in a room and someone is sneaking across in sight and another is invisible then the person who is invisible has an obvious advantage and would benefit from the +20
If they are sneaking past a blind guard (or sleeping or pitch black room) they would both benefit.
It does cover moving silently, but the invisibility doesn't apply to silent moving, that doesn't make any sense.
sorry but that's the rule. You have a blanket +20 to your stealth check which is countered by their perception check. This is taking into account all the effects that happen to it, this already cover the "you're just trying to listen to find if someone is there and not trying to see them."
|
I think the problem here stems from the fact that perception covers seeing and hearing. If you don't like the "magic bonus" explanation, consider this:
If you are in a fog your other senses are probably heightened, since you know your sight is useless. If you hear a twig snap in the fog, you might still fire an arrow toward where you heard the sound. But if you are an on duty guard under a clear sky, and you hear a twig break nearby, you are going to use your eyes and look for the source of the sound. Upon not seeing any enemies, you might perceive that nothing was there.
I agree the system is not perfect, but if you are doing a lot of sneaking through the fog, just pick up some fog-cutting lenses and sneak attack that fool. Or play 3.5.
When stealthing behind a closed door, It's kind of interesting that Invisibility makes it easier to be quiet and Glitterdust makes it harder to be quiet. In the end, it's magic. It doesn't need to make realistic sense. It isn't broken as it is, and the conditions are clearly defined.
I play it that if you have a door between you, you get the same +20 bonus (because you're not visible) and it doesn't stack with the bonus for the Invisibility condition, and that the glitterdust penalty to stealth only applies if you have some possibility of line of sight. Probably not RAW, but I don't care. It's simple enough to run, and reduces the whole "wizards are better than rogues at being rogues" disparity.
Definitely makes sense. My understanding was that while the is a single perception skill it can be use for individual tests - taste, sound etc. Just as while the stealth skill covers hiding and moving silently it can be used for either.
I don't subscribe to magic bonuses it makes you invisible that's all, fog and darkness would be treated the same.
This is one of the instances where the amalgamation of Listen and Spot into Perception makes things actually harder to judge at the table. If the invisibility condition would state something like "+20 bonus to Stealth against sight-based Perception checks", half of this mess would be gone in an instant. I'm not afraid to make a ruling at my table, but I'd really love to see an article like Illuminating Darkness about the whole concealment/invisibility/perception topic.
well, what's the DC then to spot someone using your other skills? the reason it's a +20 is because it's taking into account that you're using other senses to locate them instead of primarily sight.
If the invisibility condition would state something like "+20 bonus to Stealth against sight-based Perception checks", half of this mess would be gone in an instant.
Perception checks are generally "all senses-based" - otherwise we'd have to make multiple rolls to oppose every Stealth check. "Roll a d20 - you can't see anything. Now roll another - you can't hear anything either."
My rule is that if a creature is impossible to see for any reason, that's a 20 penalty to perceiving it - and after that any further visual penalties don't count. If there are other penalties to noticing it (like a Silence spell) that adds more penalties on top.
I just rule that magical invisibility also muffles your footsteps, and then the generic Stealth bonus makes sense in my head. :)
I am posting this as a spot where we can all hit the FAQ button and get this answered once and for all.
The main question being, if you are visually unable to see your target, are they considered to have the Invisibility condition or no? If no, why not? And why would the Invisibility spell grant a +20 bonus to Stealth but someone Stealthing against someone in total darkness or if their foe is blinded does not also receive the bonus? Does being Invisible also grant dampened effects from your movements and smell too? I don't understand what makes the spell Invisibility so much more beneficial than being inside thick fog and totally concealed or against a blinded target.
This essentially means it's easier for someone to perceive (and even pinpoint) someone if they are blinded or if they are inside thick fog than it is if the target were invisible. Even though both are the same exact thing --- they are visually and entirely hidden.
Side Note A: If targets Stealthing in total concealment or against a blind target does happen to have the same benefits of being Invisible, does that mean someone with darkvision against non-darkvision foes can run into darkness and gain the +20 bonus to Stealth? What about someone who ran around a large pillar or corner of a building, being unseen due to Total Cover and, thus, unseen would they also get a +20 to Stealth?
Side Note B: Clarification on the whole "Pinpointing" and "Immobile" bonuses. When do you exactly use these? Only against unseen targets? Only against invisible?
Yes, a lot of clarifications need to be made but I think Paizo is long overdue for answering this. WotC did it easily in 3.5 by simply having the Invisibility condition count towards those with Total Concealment and against blinded targets, why isn't Paizo doing the same?
I think based on the spell description it is meant to be interpreted by a GM on what is appropriate.
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). If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving.
So now lets see what being blind does:
The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. "
Now lets see what being invisible does:
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.
Invisibility does not, by itself, make a creature immune to critical hits, but it does make the creature immune to extra damage from being a ranger's favored enemy and from sneak attacks.
A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack. It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity.
So to answer your questions, perception relies on many factors, sight, smell, touch, etc
if you are visually unable to see your target, are they considered to have the Invisibility condition or no?
No, visually unable to see your target gives them total concealment.
The 20+ bonus for moving while using stealth refers to moving IN FRONT OF SOMEONE who relies on sight to see/hear you.And why would the Invisibility spell grant a +20 bonus to Stealth but someone Stealthing against someone in total darkness or if their foe is blinded does not also receive the bonus?
Remember that perception checks can be made as a reaction to observable stimuli. The +20 Stealth bonus impplies that there are normal conditions where creatures can see normally.
If you are in complete darkness and no one has dark vision, invisibility would be useless. Because a blind creature merely treats all creatures as they had total concealment.
However, if the room is dark, and everyone had darkvision then invisibility just makes it harder to see in these conditions.
just think of this scenario as well:
A rogue is sneaking around a castle, trying to get some nice loot.
A guard is coming his way and he stealths behind a pillar.
The act of stealthing and positioning, requires him to muffle his sounds as best as he can, and his body as best as he can from view.
He trips over a cat on his way to the pillar, and his stealth alerts the guard, the guard rushes over there and notices the rogue.
Second scenario:
A smarter rogue is sneaking through a castle for some loot.
A guard is coming his way, he tries his best to muffle his sounds and hide behind a pillar. He ALSO trips over a cat. This alerts the guard who rushes over there. Invisibility gives the rogue a +40 if he stays still. The guard has no observable stimuli except scent and hearing. He curses the cat, and continues on his rounds.
Agree with Fernn with one addition. Blindness does materially the same thing as invisibility. If you are in complete darkness without dark vision you are blind effectively and would suffer all the penalties. In darkness I would still allow you to pinpoint an enemy by sound as per invisible people.
Fog doesn't really work that way as in most cases fog allows you to at least partially see someone standing within 5 ft of you. Even if something with reach attacks you you will see the limb/weapon coming towards you.
Fog also generally muffles noise and smell as well as sight.
So it seems to be, according to what is being said and what is stated RAW, that the easiest way to defeat Invisiblity in a mundane manner is to just close your eyes? Now that you are blind, an Invisible creature loses the +20 bonus?
I think what a lot of people are saying is that if your eyes are closed, everyone gets a +20 stealth bonus against you.
|
|
Yeah but arguments on here have stated that by RAW you don't count unseen enemies as having the Invisible property.
Correct. Enemies you can't see due to Blindness have Total Concealment. Enemies that are invisible to you also have Total Concealment. Blindness and Invisibility affect characters differently, but are similar in that both grant your opponent Total Concealment.
Total concealment is only part of it. Blindness also means you lose Dex bonus to AC and take a -2 penalty to AC. That is the reverse of the benefit that invisibility grants. They are functionally and materially two sides of the same coin.
It is perfectly reasonable to offer the +20 bonus to someone sneaking past a blind person or someone in pitch darkness. Setting skill DCs is at GM discretion with advice in the skills section.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Talking to my group, we think that it is better expressed as a -20 penalty to the opposed perception check. Rather than a +20 to stealth. They are materially the same thing but the effective condition is blindness.