In Pathfinder, you can't see the Sun


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

201 to 227 of 227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The vampire issue is a old issue, such as if you are in space when does a vampire take damage from the sun and when do they not.
Yes the same thing goes for were-creatures in space if they are some how linked to the cycle of a celestial body (moon) or celestial alignment (series of moons, from a book I once read in which were's were affected differently based on the number and the alignment of moon's in the sky).
MDC


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Sideromancer wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Obviously, we can't see the sun because a lion ate it.
I really desperately need to stat that lion out now
Been done, complete with alchemical relations to metals

I was about to thank you and everything...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
The Sideromancer wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Ventnor wrote:
Obviously, we can't see the sun because a lion ate it.
I really desperately need to stat that lion out now
Been done, complete with alchemical relations to metals
I was about to thank you and everything...

At no point did I say it's been statted in PF. ;)


People* keep missing that the sun is not really the issue. The fact that, according to PF, baseball spectators cannot possibly notice any of the players -- that's the issue. The sun is just an amusing way to spotlight this problem.

*Except thejeff, who has in this case been unfailingly clear and remarkably patient.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
People* keep missing that the sun is not really the issue. The fact that, according to PF, baseball spectators cannot possibly notice any of the players -- that's the issue. The sun is just an amusing way to spotlight this problem.

Even beyond that, since you can handwave that as "baseball players aren't hidden, so they're not fine details and can always be seen", but then that means you can't ever miss anything.

So what happens when there's a question of whether you can pick something out or not? On the baseball field, it's not possible. Everything is either handwaved as obvious or not possible to roll for.

Regardless of the how big the thing is or how perceptive you are, there's a 200' gap between "Can't miss it" and "Can't see it". For most people, that's well within longbow range.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Nighttime: The sun makes a successful Stealth check using the Earth as cover.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

...but with a high perception check you can notice the sun's reflection on the moon and deduce that it's there.

Which means it doesn't get a surprise round.


I'm just having fun. Rules are easy enough to handwave. :P


Yeah I wasn't actually taking this seriously. hence all the Matrix references.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

The Matrix is a very serious movie.

I assume, I've never actually been able to watch it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Has anyone solved the alignment riddle yet.


Visual range perception modifier I'm considering: Penalty = (sqrt(# of 10 foot increments) rounded down. So 0-9 feet = -0, 10-39 = -1, 40-89 = -2, etc. I think that square root of distance basically corresponds with increasing difficulty in seeing things.

This would still give you a penalty of 211,847 for an object at a distance of 1 AU so giving really, REALLY huge bonuses for massive objects would still be called for. Or maybe for intense illumination of the object.


captain yesterday wrote:
Has anyone solved the alignment riddle yet.

Everyone is Lawful Smith.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The house-rules I am using work as normal up to 80ft and then go -4 for each doubling of the distance, with a -2 for halfway between each doubling. So that would be -8 at 80, -10 at 120, -12 at 160, -14 at 240, -16 at 320, -20 at 640 (or 1/8 miles), -24 at 1/4 miles, -28 at 1/2 miles, -32 at 1 mile, and so on. Sniping at 1/4 of a miles is the equivalent of sneaking normally 40ft away. Also, if I just calculated it right, you would get a -138 penalty to see the sun, and a -160 penalty for seeing the nearest star from earth. That seems reasonably sane AFAICT.


Ventnor wrote:
Obviously, we can't see the sun because a lion ate it.

Dang, that look on the suns face while the lion tries to eat it.


Snowblind wrote:
The house-rules I am using work as normal up to 80ft and then go -4 for each doubling of the distance, with a -2 for halfway between each doubling. So that would be -8 at 80, -10 at 120, -12 at 160, -14 at 240, -16 at 320, -20 at 640 (or 1/8 miles), -24 at 1/4 miles, -28 at 1/2 miles, -32 at 1 mile, and so on. Sniping at 1/4 of a miles is the equivalent of sneaking normally 40ft away. Also, if I just calculated it right, you would get a -138 penalty to see the sun, and a -160 penalty for seeing the nearest star from earth. That seems reasonably sane AFAICT.

Andromeda galaxy, 2.5Mly, -220 to see, easily visible if you know where to look.

Proxima, -160 to see, invisible to the naked eye of any human.

It can't be based just on distance. That way gets silly.


The Andromeda galaxy is a million trillion miles across. So all we need is for this house rule to state that objects of this size give a +220 bonus to spot.


They just don't have big enough size categories made yet all i'm saying.

How deep does the rabbit hole go?


Bluenose wrote:
Snowblind wrote:
The house-rules I am using work as normal up to 80ft and then go -4 for each doubling of the distance, with a -2 for halfway between each doubling. So that would be -8 at 80, -10 at 120, -12 at 160, -14 at 240, -16 at 320, -20 at 640 (or 1/8 miles), -24 at 1/4 miles, -28 at 1/2 miles, -32 at 1 mile, and so on. Sniping at 1/4 of a miles is the equivalent of sneaking normally 40ft away. Also, if I just calculated it right, you would get a -138 penalty to see the sun, and a -160 penalty for seeing the nearest star from earth. That seems reasonably sane AFAICT.

Andromeda galaxy, 2.5Mly, -220 to see, easily visible if you know where to look.

Proxima, -160 to see, invisible to the naked eye of any human.

It can't be based just on distance. That way gets silly.

Andromeda - unless you have the right telescope you can't tell it's a galaxy - can you?

Some sort of Perception chart is required* - taking in to account object size, distance, effects that give bonuses and penalties, details you can actually make out. Shouldn't be too hard.

*Or the GM can just call it there and then.

Cheers
Mark


For a realistic rule, doubling the size of the object should provide a bonus that exactly cancels out the penalty for doubling the distance from the object... unless there are atmospheric conditions that provide an absolute limit to visibility.


Of course Pathfinder makes compromises between realism and fun too. Do we really need a rule to tell us the sun is there?

So is it the red or the blue pill?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd like to see more size categories above Colossal, and distances like close/short/medium/long/extreme/continental/solar system/transgalactic, and to get the final DC, you'd maybe multiply the size modifier by the distance DC.

So, to notice a Medium batter (x1) from the stands (Medium range; DC 10) would maybe be a DC 10 check, but for him to read the newspaper you're holding (diminutive; x4) from that same distance would be a DC 40 check. We'd have to play with the scaling and so on, but that might be a simpler and better way to go.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Look, is this a Pathfinder thread, or a Kirthfinder thread? ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'd like to see more size categories above Colossal, and distances like close/short/medium/long/extreme/continental/solar system/transgalactic, and to get the final DC, you'd maybe multiply the size modifier by the distance DC.

So, to notice a Medium batter (x1) from the stands (Medium range; DC 10) would maybe be a DC 10 check, but for him to read the newspaper you're holding (diminutive; x4) from that same distance would be a DC 40 check. We'd have to play with the scaling and so on, but that might be a simpler and better way to go.

But--but-- DC 40? That's too anime! If you add more size categories above colossal, the game automatically becomes indistinguishable from 4e!


Sarcasm Dragon wrote:
But--but-- DC 40? That's too anime! If you add more size categories above colossal, the game automatically becomes indistinguishable from 4e!

Gnomes exist. Pathfinder has always been anime.


You guys took some pill anyways >.>


Vidmaster7 wrote:
You guys took some pill anyways >.>

Here's what I think of your pills

201 to 227 of 227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / In Pathfinder, you can't see the Sun All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.