Is your stealth based PC a shadowdancer?

[Orchid]

*coughs* Some people manage to do it very well without even using stealth.. *coughs*

Of course, but not every char want to do it by that way. And there should be always choices...

And would that make invested stealth skills pointless?

[mortzestus]

*coughs* Some people manage to do it very well without even using stealth.. *coughs*

Of course, but not every char want to do it by that way. And there should be always choices.

Well, i guess that's why Aerill said "some".

[Orchid]

*coughs* xxxxxx *coughs*

Needed to say something for that cough

[Pekarion]

yes comick, I wub y00

[storminj]

I think you mean any door, right? Avlis rules are that you are not to sneak through a door that someone else has opened, not just plot doors.

viewtopic.php?t=27277

Just in case someone else gets misled reading the above

If you go to the original thread I beleive there are some exceptions to this rule. If it is a door that does not autoclose and the PC does not bother closing it this rule obviously does not apply. The whole point is that if someone would take the effort to close doors behind them there is no physical way someone could sneak through.

As for other doors that you need to close manually or let close manually especially regular room doors you could get through as long as someone is not trying to close behind. If they walk through a regular house not bothering closing doors you do not have to wait for doors that may or may not autoclose becuase he is a inept thief.

As for glitterdust spell it would be great but I do not think it should add to spot but instead be a one time area effect negative to hide spell. That way you would have to suspect someone hiding in a area and actually have to hit them. I would be wary not to have it reflex dependant for most rogues worth their salt would have unbelievably high reflex saves.

[Aerill]

*coughs* xxxxxx *coughs*

Needed to say something for that cough

LMAO.

I really start to think people have understood it in a very wrong way.

[CPU]

I always love this. Basically, the best Shadow Dancer is one that doesn't use his main defining ability, Hide in Plain Sight! Yes, become a Shadow Dancer, just never use it's abilities!

HiPS is not broken, The Team has declared this in a previous post. It is also not an exploit to use ones abilities as they given in game - and one the Team clearly believes belongs in game (they would have been nerfed it long ago if this were not true). It does not matter if you feel or think that HiPS is broken or an exploit. HiPS is niether broken nor an exploit. The Team says it is not.

It is NO different then if you wanted to make up dark skinned Elf, and subrace it as an Avlis Drow. - it's still not an Avlis Drow - no matter how much you want it to be different, the Team has taken a clear stance on it. End of discussion. No one questions the Teams wisdom on these such matters. I do not understand why so many of you still make claims against HiPS. The only opinions that ever matters on issues discussed by the Team, are the opinions of the Team. And they have spoken. Stop presenting your opinions as fact. You are wrong.

If you want to be holier-then-thou, fine, don't take the SD PrC. But could you please refrain from constantly hacking apart the PrC and those players that take it? Using HiPS it does not make you any less of an RP'er then the completely based Stealth player. It is an insult to all the players with SD's out there.

[Aerill]

If you want to be holier-then-thou, fine, don't take the SD PrC. But could you please refrain from constantly hacking apart the PrC and those players that take it? Using HiPS it does not make you any less of an RP'er then the completely based Stealth player. It is an insult to all the players with SD's out there.

This thread was not supposed to be a dead horse rehash....

First, look at the date of the last post made on this exact topic or at least the one you have quoted, and ask again who is bringing up the dead horse.

Having said that, I still do not think I am wrong, however seeing as some people feel insulted by it, I have refrained from continuing this argument. Bioware have screwed up, but they have done so with many other things too. Nothing is going to be done about it so it's time to move on.

But thank you for bringing it back.

EDIT: Okay, you have removed the quote already while I typed.

[storminj]

I have to say one thing I do not like about HIPS and being a SD from plain rogue.

If you are in a group of people as a Rogue you can go into stealth mode and not worry about people fingering you for something that is suppose to be a secret cause you will not dissapear even if breifly.

If you area SD in a group you have to consciously stop yourself and examine the suroundings compared to the position of your group or someone will think they have IC information about your character. Worse still is that you quick slot your stealth ability and accidentally hit it instead of knockdown or what have you and poof like Bilbo putting on the ring you dissappear from sight.

[Orchid]

I did bring this thread alive by speaking about cantrops, so blame on me. I don't care

[Fuzz]

My point with Glitterdust has very little to do with HiPS persay... I just remember someone in some thread (was pretty sure it was this one, a few pages back) suggesting it. And it's a damn nice idea. I play a stealthy char, and I spy on people regularly. Several people can vouch for that. Would the addition worry me? Slightly.

But really... anyone that makes the argument that it's too hard for stealth based PCs to be stealthy must be playing another game, because I'm just not seeing it.

True Seeing is one spell, and only 4 classes get access to it. Only one of these classes actually gets Spot as a class skill, and that class also gets TS the latest. (Bards) The Spot bonus it gives is high, sure... but seriously, do you know how many +Hide items there are out there? A ridiculous number. Getting a +15 Hide robe is not a problem anymore, due to a certain merchant on a certain world (STILL) selling them for pretty much nothing. Getting +10 Hide cloaks is also not a big issue.

When it comes to Amplify, it has nothing to do with anything. I suggest you read the PnP rules, as you'd see Glitterdust ONLY affects Hide, not MS. It also only lasts 1 round/turn. It's also a level 2 spell. What else are level 2 spells? Pretty much ALL the good buffs. So really, if a wizard wants to be paranoid and lose a buff to memorize glitterdust... more power to them. Bards and Sorcs get hit even harder, since they have a limited number of spells. It also gives Arcane casters one more thing that Clerics don't have, which is good. (Since Clerics are still almost as good casters as mages in many respects, depending on Domains)

What's the primary purpose then? Suppose it was a craftable jewelcraft (need shiny golds bits, we do) or alchemy thing, with not-impossible-but-not-exactly-easy-to-find ingredients. Bag would have a set limit on how long it lasts, (1 round/level, after all) and would be pretty costly, though not super rare and REALLY hard to get... just expensive. If you're an old AD&D player, you remember the flavor text for spells... Glitterdust had an interesting one. Originally, it was a novelty spell for celebrations. One day a crafty rogue figured out its utility, and learned to package the spell in a bag. Why would a rogue do this... hey, it's actually probably most useful for heavy rogues/stealthy chars.

There aren't that many Spot/Listen items in the game. They also operate at the expense of other skills, like Hide and MS. Say you're sneaking into a house, and you think someone's following you... throw down a bag to try to ferret them out. Maybe a law officer catches you... throw down a bag and hope it blinds him/her so you can run and escape.

So what does Glitterdust do? It adds tactics and strategy to an area of the game that is currently REALLY lacking in it. I know a TON of great stealthers, with methodical tactics, and great RP. I also see a ton of jackass stealthers, who don't take precautions and rely on the skill as a security blanket to give them lattitude at doing things that would negatively affect their PC RP-wise. Would Glitterdust break stealth? Hell no. Would it be a great RP device? Yes.

... Hell, if anything, Shadowdancers have the best deal with Glitterdust, since they can appear, make the person waste their bag, (since it has a pretty small area of effect... think the size of a fireball blast) HiPS up and then bide their time. It's not about nerfing stealth, or making it harder for stealthers. It's about injected some added strategy where it is lacking, and bringing the game closer to PnP.

[Aerill]

True Seeing is one spell, and only 4 classes get access to it. Only one of these classes actually gets Spot as a class skill, and that class also gets TS the latest. (Bards)

Actually bards in NWN do not get True Seeing at all...

When it comes to Amplify, it has nothing to do with anything. I suggest you read the PnP rules, as you'd see Glitterdust ONLY affects Hide, not MS. It also only lasts 1 round/turn. It's also a level 2 spell. What else are level 2 spells? Pretty much ALL the good buffs.

Amplify is a 1st level Bard only spell, though it doesn't change your point anyway.. There's enough good spells on level 1 too.

[Fuzz]

True Seeing is one spell, and only 4 classes get access to it. Only one of these classes actually gets Spot as a class skill, and that class also gets TS the latest. (Bards)

Actually bards in NWN do not get True Seeing at all...

Shit, good call. That just strengthens my point, since they actually DO get Spot.

When it comes to Amplify, it has nothing to do with anything. I suggest you read the PnP rules, as you'd see Glitterdust ONLY affects Hide, not MS. It also only lasts 1 round/turn. It's also a level 2 spell. What else are level 2 spells? Pretty much ALL the good buffs.

Amplify is a 1st level Bard only spell, though it doesn't change your point anyway.. There's enough good spells on level 1 too.

I meant Glitterdust is a level 2 spell. Change in discussion focus halfway through there.

But yeah, Amplify has no place in a discussion about Glitterdust, TS, or hide.

[Anniko]

*is walking along, shoots an arrow into the shadows and keeps going, a scream is heard from inside the shadows*

[mortzestus]

Actually bards in NWN do not get True Seeing at all...

Shit, good call. That just strengthens my point, since they actually DO get Spot.

Bards don't get spot either. They get listen instead.

[Liartes]

*pulls the arrow out of his gut and sneaks into backstab position*

[Orchid]

[Watches how Liartes and Anniko plays by standing in the safety of the shadows, smiling]

[Gorgon]

I brought up amplify because this thread is about stealth (and SDs), not hide. Things get lost after 6 pages.

After taking a close look at the glitterdust spell description, I could live with it if it gets added. Small area of effect and the fact that it doesn't automatically make hidden pcs visible is realistic. I misinterpreted the way it works, and not everyone has the books to glance at all the time.

[storminj]

I have to say I agree with Fuzz *shudders* but glitterdust would add alot more strategy to the game of hide and seek. I could see every class using this is some fasion.

J/K Fuzz usually hits the nail on the head

[Bear]

I have to say I agree with Fuzz *shudders* but glitterdust would add alot more strategy to the game of hide and seek. I could see every class using this is some fasion.

Couple of things that folks should consider about glitterdust.

1. Glitterdust is a spell only available to 3 classes (Bards, Sorcerors and Wizards). It's not available to everyone as proposed. Clerics, Rogues, Fighters, Rangers, etc., etc., etc., who could use a craftable Glitterdust item would be given something that is not available in PnP.

2. Glitterdust is a 2nd level spell. My PnP DM's interpretation of the spell is that it shows invisible individuals, but not those "hidden". She made this decision b/c glitter dust says it shows invisible folks, but doesn't mention anything about those hidden. She claimed that if the folks at WoTC wanted it to show hidden individuals they would have said so right after they mentioned invisibled. She also said that it was unfair that a 40th level rogue completely dedicated to stealth could be "outed" so easily by a 2nd level spell. Although others can understandably disagree, this makes some sense to me. Frex, take a 30th level ranger that has hidden himself by covering himself in bushes and tall grass. When a 3rd level wizard shows up and casts glitterdust in the area, it will land on the bushes and tall grass -- not the ranger. In NWN it is not possible to cover yourself in grass and bushes, so you're kinda screwed.

3. Glitterdust also has a "blinding" effect for everyone (including caster) in its area unless they save v. will. Are you proposing a similar effect here, or just the benefit of the spell?

4. Has anyone heard of a similar spell on another world, or has somebody with coding experience taken a look at whether this is even possible? In my experience with NWN engine there are so many bloody things hard-coded into the system that it's entirely possible that you could not create a spell to "out" stealted characters. The only way I can see to do this is to give folks Old-school True Seeing for a brief period of time. However, this kinda defeats the entire point of modifying True Seeing in the first place, and in some respects is moving 3 steps backwards b/c now everyone (not just high level spell casters) will have access to this craftable object (through sales or crafting).

5. If you are looking for a good RP way to "detect" whether a stealthed rogue is nearby, or if you are looking for a great way to force rogues to use strategy that item already exists in game -- Caltrops. Even a stealthed based character cannot walk over caltrops without you noticing. Simiply lay down the caltrops in a hallway, and then walk away. If you are being followed, you will know about it. Perhaps we can just get a team ruling that if somebody takes damage from caltrops you can assume you've seen the caltrops move, and know you are being followed or that somebody is in the area. This seems like the easiest solution to me if all you are looking for is someway to "notice" stealthed characters, and to force them to use strategy.

Just my 2 cents.

Thanks,

Bear

[Fuzz]

1. Glitterdust is a spell only available to 3 classes (Bards, Sorcerors and Wizards). It's not available to everyone as proposed. Clerics, Rogues, Fighters, Rangers, etc., etc., etc., who could use a craftable Glitterdust item would be given something that is not available in PnP.

Yup, except for the lack of an item. in 3rd Edition they outline Glitterdust bags, as well as one of hte AD&D supplementals, from what I can remember of the initial conversation Liartes and I had when he first suggested it months ago.

2. Glitterdust is a 2nd level spell. My PnP DM's interpretation of the spell is that it shows invisible individuals, but not those "hidden". She made this decision b/c glitter dust says it shows invisible folks, but doesn't mention anything about those hidden. She claimed that if the folks at WoTC wanted it to show hidden individuals they would have said so right after they mentioned invisibled. She also said that it was unfair that a 40th level rogue completely dedicated to stealth could be "outed" so easily by a 2nd level spell. Although others can understandably disagree, this makes some sense to me. Frex, take a 30th level ranger that has hidden himself by covering himself in bushes and tall grass. When a 3rd level wizard shows up and casts glitterdust in the area, it will land on the bushes and tall grass -- not the ranger. In NWN it is not possible to cover yourself in grass and bushes, so you're kinda screwed.

Also a 3E thing... comes with a -40 to Hide in the area of effect, not an infallible "you cannot hide at all" setup... suppose your hide is in the 80s with items and spells... -40 is still more than enough to hide you from someone with no Spot. Keep in mind it ONLY affects Hide, and the ONLY thing that can counter Hide is a Spot roll.

3. Glitterdust also has a "blinding" effect for everyone (including caster) in its area unless they save v. will. Are you proposing a similar effect here, or just the benefit of the spell?

The blinding effect is integral to the spell... without it, it'd be dirty. It also comes with Spot, Search and Concentration penalties, but I think those are more of a house rule in 3E.

4. Has anyone heard of a similar spell on another world, or has somebody with coding experience taken a look at whether this is even possible? In my experience with NWN engine there are so many bloody things hard-coded into the system that it's entirely possible that you could not create a spell to "out" stealted characters. The only way I can see to do this is to give folks Old-school True Seeing for a brief period of time. However, this kinda defeats the entire point of modifying True Seeing in the first place, and in some respects is moving 3 steps backwards b/c now everyone (not just high level spell casters) will have access to this craftable object (through sales or crafting).

An implementation is already floating around on teh vault... not that hard to code, and new spells are easy enough to add, just need a tlk fix, so this is the sort of thing that would be in a sweeping UniversalHak patch.

5. If you are looking for a good RP way to "detect" whether a stealthed rogue is nearby, or if you are looking for a great way to force rogues to use strategy that item already exists in game -- Caltrops. Even a stealthed based character cannot walk over caltrops without you noticing. Simiply lay down the caltrops in a hallway, and then walk away. If you are being followed, you will know about it. Perhaps we can just get a team ruling that if somebody takes damage from caltrops you can assume you've seen the caltrops move, and know you are being followed or that somebody is in the area. This seems like the easiest solution to me if all you are looking for is someway to "notice" stealthed characters, and to force them to use strategy.

Also true, and is also an option... Glitterdust has other applications, which was hte point of suggesting it... it does a lot more than lower people's Hide and expose invisible people. It's weaker than caltrops in many respects, since there's the chance to blind yourself as well as the short duration. In a bag form, it would only be a level 3 variant fo the spell, which amounts to 18 seconds ingame. Compound the fact that the area is small, and if they move out of it, there are no lingering effects in teh least, and really, it's not nearly as powerful a spell as most people are thinking. It's some fluff to add a new angle. Really, the blinding effect available to any class with simple/rogue/monk proficiency is the handiest thing about the spell, but even that is pretty low DC (DC14 at level 3 with no spell mods) and thus not a game-breaking thing.

But, since apparently any suggestion I make is revolting, and ever actually agreeing with any of my suggestions is a reviled thing, I guess I'll just retract it entirely, since it must be a pretty bad idea since I'm one of the few that likes it.

Not trying to be rude, I just find the trite commentary wholly unneccesary, especially when several of the handful of suggestions I have made in the last year and a half have actually been implemented in some form.

[Liartes]

The Above Post

I'm Liartes, and I approve this message.

[Bear]

Yup, except for the lack of an item. in 3rd Edition they outline Glitterdust bags, as well as one of hte AD&D supplementals, from what I can remember of the initial conversation Liartes and I had when he first suggested it months ago.

Cool. I remember something like that from 2nd ed.

Also a 3E thing... comes with a -40 to Hide in the area of effect, not an infallible "you cannot hide at all" setup... suppose your hide is in the 80s with items and spells... -40 is still more than enough to hide you from someone with no Spot.

Spot mod or negative hid mod is the only way to do this and would also alleviate the necessity to create an old school true seeing effect.

The blinding effect is integral to the spell... without it, it'd be dirty. It also comes with Spot, Search and Concentration penalties, but I think those are more of a house rule in 3E.

Agreed. That would be the only way to do this.

An implementation is already floating around on teh vault... not that hard to code, and new spells are easy enough to add, just need a tlk fix, so this is the sort of thing that would be in a sweeping UniversalHak patch.

Cool, it will be interesting to see how they do this.

Also true, and is also an option... Glitterdust has other applications, which was hte point of suggesting it... it does a lot more than lower people's Hide and expose invisible people. It's weaker than caltrops in many respects, since there's the chance to blind yourself as well as the short duration. In a bag form, it would only be a level 3 variant fo the spell, which amounts to 18 seconds ingame. Compound the fact that the area is small, and if they move out of it, there are no lingering effects in teh least, and really, it's not nearly as powerful a spell as most people are thinking. It's some fluff to add a new angle. Really, the blinding effect available to any class with simple/rogue/monk proficiency is the handiest thing about the spell, but even that is pretty low DC (DC14 at level 3 with no spell mods) and thus not a game-breaking thing.

Yup, another option. I would still like to see a team ruling that damage from caltrops means that you notice somebody is around. If I remember correctly the damage shows up in the right hand box which is supposed to be OOC. However, I think it reasonable to say that b/c somebody took damage you noticed the caltrops moving or something. Would at least give folks an option now, instead of waiting for something to come up in the future.

But, since apparently any suggestion I make is revolting, and ever actually agreeing with any of my suggestions is a reviled thing, I guess I'll just retract it entirely, since it must be a pretty bad idea since I'm one of the few that likes it.

Ahhhh ok. If you are directing this at me, the only other time that I have responded to one of your posts is when you made the flat statement that shadow dancing was broken, could be used when time stopped, petrified, etc. That wasn't what our results showed when we tested it.

Not trying to be rude, I just find the trite commentary wholly unneccesary, especially when several of the handful of suggestions I have made in the last year and a half have actually been implemented in some form.

Look - I'm just trying to add something to the discussion and make the world a better place for all of us -- Make sure we've considered all the angles of the situation. I appreciate your response to the first part, as it helps clarify what's going on. However, I don't need greif from you if that's what you indented.

Thanks,

Bear

[Fuzz]

Ahhhh ok. If you are directing this at me, the only other time that I have responded to one of your posts is when you made the flat statement that shadow dancing was broken, could be used when time stopped, petrified, etc. That wasn't what our results showed when we tested it.

Wasn't directed at you.

Not trying to be rude, I just find the trite commentary wholly unneccesary, especially when several of the handful of suggestions I have made in the last year and a half have actually been implemented in some form.

Look - I'm just trying to add something to the discussion and make the world a better place for all of us -- Make sure we've considered all the angles of the situation. I appreciate your response to the first part, as it helps clarify what's going on. However, I don't need greif from you if that's what you indented.

See above, wasn't directed at you.