Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?

djw175 posted:

So I think what we've learned is that Elven is not the language to speak when you're trying to hide information from this party.

Oh, Celio has no idea what languages everyone speaks! Elven is just the language he and Bastion use when they're just talking to each other.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


Are the various goblins who are standing around spectating my fight with the human dude out of range of a 15-foot-cube thunderwave (powered up by the mystical nature of this glade we're in)? They aren't really attacking me now and I'm honestly not sure if they would, but I think if they eat some thunder to the face that might either make them scamper off or turn and fight me. I don't want to hurt them but I'm pretty sure I have no way of not dying otherwise. It'll almost definitely make those predators that are approaching hone in on me faster though, unless they get spooked too...

Edit: a solo encounter at level 1 with both +5 bonus to hit and +4 bonus on his attack roll has a 50% chance to just flat-out one-shot me from full HP, assuming the hit lands.

Drone fucked around with this message at 07:33 on Sep 1, 2015

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011

Drone posted:

Are the various goblins who are standing around spectating my fight with the human dude out of range of a 15-foot-cube thunderwave (powered up by the mystical nature of this glade we're in)? They aren't really attacking me now and I'm honestly not sure if they would, but I think if they eat some thunder to the face that might either make them scamper off or turn and fight me. I don't want to hurt them but I'm pretty sure I have no way of not dying otherwise. It'll almost definitely make those predators that are approaching hone in on me faster though, unless they get spooked too...

It's plausible that the others are around 15 feet away in any direction (the fight hasn't been going that long, so they haven't formed a proper ring all the way around you yet), so let's say that you won't get the bystanders with your blast.

quote:

Edit: a solo encounter at level 1 with both +5 bonus to hit and +4 bonus on his attack roll has a 50% chance to just flat-out one-shot me from full HP, assuming the hit lands.

Apart from your Relentless Endurance, that's true. If I were just trying to kill you unfairly by throwing you up against a 4th level Ranger with no alternatives besides melee combat to the death, that would be a pretty dick move. But thus far Cain has survived against a CR5 and a CR3 creature, while the roc you stared down is nominally CR 11 (though granted, it was a hatchling). There are (or at least there were) certainly other actions that can be taken besides fighting. But then again, even if he knocks you unconscious, the predators might be sufficiently close that he will soon have other things on his mind besides finishing you off...

Edit: I take that back -- upon further reflection, I see that you actually do have a reasonable shot at dropping him despite the fact that he's 4th level, given that he's already wounded and you can cast Thunderwave twice.

Edit 2: That said, requiring you to get that lucky to stay alive, without providing any other way out, would still be a dick move. And since that's not actually what DM stands for, rest assured that I have no intention of just executing you arbitrarily if you don't happen to do things just right.

TychoBrahesNose fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Sep 1, 2015

DaemonWyrm
Jul 3, 2003

Why don't I hear any sleep screams?
Incidentally, DaemonWyrm, you rolled two Athletics checks when you should have rolled Athletics and Acrobatics. But your second roll is still a 15 (even without your proficiency bonus), so it’s all good.

Ah crap, I JUST noticed that. Are both Athletics and Acrobatics Dex based?

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?
Athletics is STR, Acrobatics is DEX, but they're often somewhat interchangeable depending on the DM.

It's like... Athletics is pushups and pullups, Acrobatics is backflips.

djw175
Apr 23, 2012

by zen death robot
Holy poo poo. Kalud might actually win.

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


Good Lord why won't you die

Kinda neat how it's worked out though, considering I made a series of stupid decisions to get in this position in the first place :v:

Edit: argh why the hell isn't Orokos letting me log in.

Drone fucked around with this message at 09:47 on Sep 2, 2015

Old Kentucky Shark
May 25, 2012

If you think you're gonna get sympathy from the shark, well then, you won't.


Elizara's got two spell slots she can use for healing; go ahead and assume that she uses them on two of the more badly wounded one of the more badly wounded and Nebra.

Old Kentucky Shark fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Sep 3, 2015

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?
Pfffhahaha "mobbed by angry poors." Truly the worst fate. :capitalism:

Old Kentucky Shark
May 25, 2012

If you think you're gonna get sympathy from the shark, well then, you won't.


Healing Word: 1d4+2 6 Nebra regains 6 HP and Ryujin can post again!

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011

So technically, Commander's Strike applies to Kalud's reaction to the human's previous attack, so it should be applied to the first roll rather than the second. Your 13+3 hits regardless, and the 5+3+2 would still miss...unless you want to try dropping an action point on top of it as well? There's still no guarantee of success even with an extra 1d6, but another hit sooner rather than later is certainly to your benefit.

I dunno, is it cheating to switch the Commander's Strike bonus to the other attack, now that we know what the results are?

djw175
Apr 23, 2012

by zen death robot

TychoBrahesNose posted:

So technically, Commander's Strike applies to Kalud's reaction to the human's previous attack, so it should be applied to the first roll rather than the second. Your 13+3 hits regardless, and the 5+3+2 would still miss...unless you want to try dropping an action point on top of it as well? There's still no guarantee of success even with an extra 1d6, but another hit sooner rather than later is certainly to your benefit.

I dunno, is it cheating to switch the Commander's Strike bonus to the other attack, now that we know what the results are?

I think Kalud needs all the help he can get.

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


TychoBrahesNose posted:

So technically, Commander's Strike applies to Kalud's reaction to the human's previous attack, so it should be applied to the first roll rather than the second. Your 13+3 hits regardless, and the 5+3+2 would still miss...unless you want to try dropping an action point on top of it as well? There's still no guarantee of success even with an extra 1d6, but another hit sooner rather than later is certainly to your benefit.

I dunno, is it cheating to switch the Commander's Strike bonus to the other attack, now that we know what the results are?

Ah okay, I just read "extra attack" and not the word "immediate", like it's a reaction attack or something.

And I totally forgot I could use action points that way. Should I just edit it into the post?

TychoBrahesNose posted:

I dunno, is it cheating to switch the Commander's Strike bonus to the other attack, now that we know what the results are?

You're the DM. I know I certainly won't mind but it could set a bad precedent. :v:

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011

Drone posted:

Ah okay, I just read "extra attack" and not the word "immediate", like it's a reaction attack or something.

And I totally forgot I could use action points that way. Should I just edit it into the post?

Yeah, sure, go ahead. I mean, you could always still miss, or even with a hit you could not do enough damage for it to matter anyway.

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


Edited in, probably still missed :v:

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?
Perception: 1d20+2 14
Insight: 1d20 10

FYI, if that Perception is a failure I'll probably burn an Action Point on it. It's just too close, darn it!

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011
It's less "failure" and more "beating higher DCs gets you more information". So it's up to you.

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


I'm gonna only have sporadic internet access for the next ~24 hours and not near a computer& rulebook, so I'll post first thing in the morning when I'm back.

But yay I didn't die!

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?

TychoBrahesNose posted:

It's less "failure" and more "beating higher DCs gets you more information". So it's up to you.

I'll go ahead and use an Action Point on that Perception roll.

Action Point to Perception: 14+1d6 19

djw175
Apr 23, 2012

by zen death robot
Hey sorry about not posting for a bit. I've kind of been getting run ragged by suddenly doing school stuff and haven't really had time to post. If things need to keep happening, I'd be okay if you autopiloted Reava a bit.

DaemonWyrm
Jul 3, 2003

Why don't I hear any sleep screams?
Does an animal handling check like you're talking about count as a "standard action"?

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011
Generally if I'm asking you to do it, it's passive, so no. If you're actively doing something (e.g., trying to use Animal Handling specifically to control the Displacer Beasts) though, then I 'd say yes.

Quorum
Sep 24, 2014

REMIND ME AGAIN HOW THE LITTLE HORSE-SHAPED ONES MOVE?
Is the package the changeling stole clearly evident on his person? If not, is it apparent where he put it? And in any case, how much effort would it require to swipe it and run like hell away from the horrible panther monster?

Waador
Sep 11, 2001

Smashin' down the light.
Pillbug

Quorum posted:

Is the package the changeling stole clearly evident on his person? If not, is it apparent where he put it? And in any case, how much effort would it require to swipe it and run like hell away from the horrible panther monster?
The wording was:
"As he walks around the crates to engage the dwarf, Celio sees no sign of the dwarf, but he does just catch a glimpse of a larger (if skinnier) pallid-skinned form wriggling through a rent in the carriage's side. It swiftly takes up a pack overstuffed with glamerweave fabric, topped off with a sheet of sailcloth wrapped around something about the size and shape of a human head."

Followed by:
Yes, that's Celio's Magic MacGuffin that the changeling is absconding with!

So, it sounded like the object was readily recognizable and strapped to the top of his backpack. I would assume he is running off with as much as he can carry, so the entire backpack might be heavy and a bit of an effort to remove from him, but I would suspect lifting your package off the top of the bundle would be an easier task?

I was thinking of acting along the same lines but if you get to it first since you're closer I'll pursue something else of value with my turn.
---

On an unrelated matter, as we progress in the story and [presumably] get closer to leveling up, I need to figure out how I am going to progress in rogue and warlock levels. A few questions that I would benefit from knowing the answer to in advance when figuring that out are as follows:

> How are we going to handle stealth? I am mostly asking in terms of hiding in combat, but in general this would be good to know as well. Is it going to be a stealth check contested by their passive perception, or an active [but free] reactive roll? Just want to understand what the action economy looks like for something to fight me while I am hidden. Obviously if someone wants to burn their action in combat on an active perception check that's their prerogative, but I am mostly focused on what the default opposition will be. Knowing how it will work in the following three scenarios is probably all I need to have enough of an understanding to plan my levels accordingly:
1> Engaged in combat with a creature, I roll a 20 to hide, against a creature with passive perception of 12. Is there an active roll for their opposition if they don't burn an action in combat to get it?
2> Engaged in combat with a creature, I roll a 9 to hide, against a creature with passive perception of 12. However, I am outside the range of their darkvision, and they are in a light source, but I am not. Do they 'automatically' know my location, or are they just alerted to my presence but otherwise forced to guess a square to target if they want to attack from range?
3> Not engaged in combat but sneaking up on a creature that is actively keeping watch. (In this case I would assume I need to beat their passive and that they also probably spend each turn making an active check?)

> How are we going to handle targeting (which is alluded to in #2 above). Stealth becomes significantly less viable as a defense if we don't have tactical grid combat, depending on how it is abstracted, so would like to know what I am getting into. Essentially, if I am unseen, do they need to target a square (abstracting that with a 1dX roll?), or will it just be reduced to disadvantage on an attack without regard for targeting of squares?

> How are we going to handle the saving throws on minor illusion, silent image, and similar illusion spells (which use the same wording)? The way I read it, you need to physically interact with the illusion (i.e., be within 5' and burn an action, movement, or interaction) to automatically determine it is an illusion, or spend an action to study it in order to be allowed an active Intelligence (Investigation) check to determine it is an illusion from range. That said, I have seen other interpretations, so need to know how these spells are going to work before I build a character around them. A few questions to help guide my understanding would be:
A> An illusory wall is between NPC1 and Player1. NPC1 is 100' away, and hasn't touched the wall. He fires an arrow at the wall. This is not an explicit save condition of the spell, as the arrow has physically interacted with the wall, but NPC1 has not. What happens?
B> As above, but NPC1 is aided by NPC2 and NPC3. What happens for NPC1, NPC2, and NPC3?
C> As above, but NPC1 walks through the wall, immediately realizing it is an illusion, as that is an explicit save condition of the spell. What happens for NPC2 and NPC3?
D> NPC1 is trained in Knowledge (arcana), and correctly identifies a spell being cast as an illusion. How does this affect the explicit save conditions of the spell for NPC1?
E> NPC1 correctly identifies the spell as an illusion, and points this out to his allies, NPC2 and NPC3. How does this affect the explicit save conditions of the spell for NPC2 and NPC3?

My reading of it is that whether or not a person has 'saved' against the spell (through either stated save condition) is determined on an NPC-by-NPC basis, as with any other spell. "Physical interaction" is not a defined term, which introduces some vagueness to the spell line, however. I personally struggle with how physical interaction can be done at range, but that's an interpretation I've seen so would like to understand the mechanics in advance.

Waador fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Sep 15, 2015

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011
The updated map for this round should help visualising some of the scenario:


Waador posted:

pre:
Before I can act I will probably need the following information.
 > Am I still in stealth, or is the creature aware of me?

The creature is focused on Elizara and Celio, and is not presently threatening Bastion. I did mention in an earlier post that it was "eyeing Bastion warily", but since your previous Stealth check was significantly higher than its passive Perception, we'll say you're still stealthy. However, you will have to cross directly in front of its line of sight in order to get to the changeling, which would pretty much ensure that you get noticed.

pre:
> What is the distance between myself and the fallen changeling?
You are only about 20' from the changeling, so you could get there in one regular move action (Celio is even closer, and Elizara is effectively next to the changeling and would require no movement whatsoever to retrieve the pack.)

pre:
> What is the distance between the displacer beast and the three other people in the area?
The displacer beast has 10' reach with its tentacles, and is currently just beyond that range -- it is apparently just threatening now, not actually attacking.

pre:
> What level of effort is required to retrieve Celio's package from the changeling?
   Interact can normally be used to pick up a dropped item or withdraw it from a backpack, but want to confirm.
You can pick up the pack off the inert changeling with a regular Interaction, but it is bulky (due to being overstuffed with loot), and heavy (due primarily to the MacGuffin, not the fabric). Removing just the MacGuffin (whether in its sailcloth wrapping, or not) from the pack would require an additional action of some sort.

pre:
Essentially, trying to determine which of the following to do, and the risk of each:
 > Dash [action] to the changeling, retrieve Celio's package [interact], and then move away without provoking.
At present, you will not provoke attack from it by moving to the changeling -- and in fact, if you stay along the side of the carriage, you would have both Celio and Elizara between you and the beast.

pre:
> Wait in stealth for Celio and the others to draw away the cat, so I can deal with the package.
Possible, but just looking at the map it appears they have a 50/50 shot of drawing it towards you rather than away from you.

pre:
> Dash [action] to Councilor Thurik, to get him to safety before he gets eaten.
Last you saw him, Councilor Thurik was actually on the completely other side of the carriage, and so should be safe for now -- at least from this particular displacer beast. Selflessly focusing on the safety of the most important person (politically, anyway) within 100 miles or so has the added advantage of increasing Bastion's distance from the thing that is threatening to eat them all.

pre:
> Bravely engage in melee combat.
A clearly brilliant tactical maneuver, if I do say so myself.

Epicurius
Apr 10, 2010
College Slice
Sorry. Realized just now I never actually rolled for initiative.

Initiative: 1d20+1 10

So that puts me just before the Displacer Beasts?

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011

Waador posted:

On an unrelated matter, as we progress in the story and [presumably] get closer to leveling up, I need to figure out how I am going to progress in rogue and warlock levels. A few questions that I would benefit from knowing the answer to in advance when figuring that out are as follows:

> How are we going to handle stealth? I am mostly asking in terms of hiding in combat, but in general this would be good to know as well. Is it going to be a stealth check contested by their passive perception, or an active [but free] reactive roll?

Generally, if you are using an action yourself to hide, it seems unfair to allow the other side anything for free besides the standard passive response.

quote:

Just want to understand what the action economy looks like for something to fight me while I am hidden. Obviously if someone wants to burn their action in combat on an active perception check that's their prerogative, but I am mostly focused on what the default opposition will be. Knowing how it will work in the following three scenarios is probably all I need to have enough of an understanding to plan my levels accordingly:
1> Engaged in combat with a creature, I roll a 20 to hide, against a creature with passive perception of 12. Is there an active roll for their opposition if they don't burn an action in combat to get it?

This is the most obvious application of my general ruling mentioned above. If you are using an action yourself to hide, it seems unfair to allow the other side anything for free besides the standard passive response. However, if they already know that there's someone hiding nearby (e.g., you've shot an arrow at them already), I'd probably at least give them Advantage on their active Perception rolls/give you Disadvantage on your Stealth roll. In some cases (e.g., they're staring straight at you or engaged directly in melee combat with you from 5' away) I'd rule that Stealth just fails, period, unless there is something magical/unnatural at play.

quote:

2> Engaged in combat with a creature, I roll a 9 to hide, against a creature with passive perception of 12. However, I am outside the range of their darkvision, and they are in a light source, but I am not. Do they 'automatically' know my location, or are they just alerted to my presence but otherwise forced to guess a square to target if they want to attack from range?

I haven't seen specific rules covering such a scenario; if they exist, please point them out to me so I can check my own thoughts against what the designers have already come up with. But off the top of my head, I'd say they don't know precisely where you are (on account of not having sufficient visual capabilities) but the Stealth was a failure, so they know someone is there.

quote:

3> Not engaged in combat but sneaking up on a creature that is actively keeping watch. (In this case I would assume I need to beat their passive and that they also probably spend each turn making an active check?)

That's how I would interpret this situation too, though active checks every round for 8 hours would be exhausting -- I'd probably give them Disadvantage on the active check if I were feeling generous toward you.

quote:

> How are we going to handle targeting (which is alluded to in #2 above). Stealth becomes significantly less viable as a defense if we don't have tactical grid combat, depending on how it is abstracted, so would like to know what I am getting into. Essentially, if I am unseen, do they need to target a square (abstracting that with a 1dX roll?), or will it just be reduced to disadvantage on an attack without regard for targeting of squares?

Randomly targeting squares with a 1dX roll seems reasonable to me -- the more area you have in which to hide, the less likely they are to be able to hit you (unless they have an area-effect attack), which doesn't seem to me to be captured sufficiently by the Disadvantage mechanic. To me, this is perfectly analogous to looking for a secret door on the north wall when it is actually located on the south wall -- no matter how high your roll is, if you're looking in the wrong place, you're not going to succeed.

quote:

> How are we going to handle the saving throws on minor illusion, silent image, and similar illusion spells (which use the same wording)? The way I read it, you need to physically interact with the illusion (i.e., be within 5' and burn an action, movement, or interaction) to automatically determine it is an illusion, or spend an action to study it in order to be allowed an active Intelligence (Investigation) check to determine it is an illusion from range.

The text from Minor Illusion states: Physical interaction with the image reveals it to be an illusion, because things can pass through it.

I do not construe that narrowly, in the sense of "Noticing that your hand passes through it when you attempt to touch it." I take it to more broadly mean "anything that you would deem surprising based on any of your relevant senses." So "noticing that the arrow you fired at the wall doesn't hit it" would count, as that fulfills the "things can pass through it" criterion. Similarly, "being downwind of something that should have a smell, but doesn't" would count (at least for creatures that regularly rely on their sense of smell). So in this case, "interacting" with an illusion is different from Interaction as defined in a technical sense in the rules.

quote:

That said, I have seen other interpretations, so need to know how these spells are going to work before I build a character around them. A few questions to help guide my understanding would be:
A> An illusory wall is between NPC1 and Player1. NPC1 is 100' away, and hasn't touched the wall. He fires an arrow at the wall. This is not an explicit save condition of the spell, as the arrow has physically interacted with the wall, but NPC1 has not. What happens?

Something has interacted with the wall, affording NPC1 the opportunity to notice something out of the ordinary. To me, that allows a saving throw, though being 100' away might complicate matters -- the archer might wonder whether the arrow really did reach the target, or if he just lost sight of it, for example. Maybe "interacting" at extreme ranges means Disadvantage on the save? I'd probably rule on that on a case by case basis.

quote:

B> As above, but NPC1 is aided by NPC2 and NPC3. What happens for NPC1, NPC2, and NPC3?

Defined "aided", if you mean something different from E>, below.

quote:

C> As above, but NPC1 walks through the wall, immediately realizing it is an illusion, as that is an explicit save condition of the spell. What happens for NPC2 and NPC3?

As NPCs 2 and 3 would presumably know that people don't normally walk through walls, I would make this a save condition as well. But failing the save might mean they attribute the magical effect to NPC1 rather than to the wall, for example. In any case, the rules explicitly state NPC1 realizes the wall is an illusion.

quote:

D> NPC1 is trained in Knowledge (arcana), and correctly identifies a spell being cast as an illusion. How does this affect the explicit save conditions of the spell for NPC1?

If they know with certainty that an illusion spell is being cast and they suddenly see a wall spring into existence, anything with Intelligence above 2 (which is sort of implicit in having a Knowledge skill to begin with) would be able to draw the logical inference that the wall is an illusion. Their senses will still rebel against what they "know", so they might still flinch if they decide to run full-tilt at the (apparently) solid wall, but I would at least give them Advantage on any relevant saving throw, if not rule that the illusion is ineffective against them, period.

This seems like it could render a lot of illusionary magic utterly useless, but the number of people trained in Arcana who could successfully identify the specific spell being cast is not very large, and I think such fortuitous circumstances warrant some benefit. But this is something I'm definitely willing to alter if it really screws with what should otherwise be an effective character build (That said, I would make the same ruling for NPCs casting spells at the PCs, so perhaps this isn't so disadvantageous after all...).

quote:

E> NPC1 correctly identifies the spell as an illusion, and points this out to his allies, NPC2 and NPC3. How does this affect the explicit save conditions of the spell for NPC2 and NPC3?

Off the top of my head, I would say that triggers a saving throw for NPCs 2 and 3, since they have reason to believe something out of the ordinary with respect to the wall. But then again, real walls can also be summoned by magic, so maybe the lingering doubts about NPC1's assessment mean they have Disadvantage on their save? I don't know, this is starting to get overly complicated/speculative to me. In any case, if NPCs 2 and 3 are the sort of minions who would charge at a(n apparently solid) wall if NPC 1 told them to, then their believing in the solidity of the wall or not would be irrelevant. But that is highly dependent on the specific relationship between the NPCs and is well beyond any general rule that I would expect to be written down.

quote:

My reading of it is that whether or not a person has 'saved' against the spell (through either stated save condition) is determined on an NPC-by-NPC basis, as with any other spell. "Physical interaction" is not a defined term, which introduces some vagueness to the spell line, however. I personally struggle with how physical interaction can be done at range, but that's an interpretation I've seen so would like to understand the mechanics in advance.

I agree that NPC1 successfully saving does not mean that NPCs 2 or 3 automatically get the benefit (though as I already said, NPC1's insistence on its illusory nature could trigger subsequent saving throws by the others). I also see no problem with "interaction" encompassing more than "tactile interaction", since there are lots of senses that could be relevant in recognizing an illusion.

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


You aren't running one of the house rules where short rests can regenerate a spell slot or two, are you? I'm kind of at a loss for stuff to do during my turn that isn't just RP'ing my way over to Calum and giving him some emotional support.

Waador
Sep 11, 2001

Smashin' down the light.
Pillbug
Thanks for this, it helps clarify how to progress. I normally wouldn't worry if I were playing a cleric or druid or something where I can just switch up my spell slots if I decide I don't like how a particular spell works, but with warlock invocations being what they are understanding how things work before taking them seemed like the wiser course. Same for whether a second level in rogue for cunning action was worthwhile.

TychoBrahesNose posted:

I haven't seen specific rules covering such a scenario; if they exist, please point them out to me so I can check my own thoughts against what the designers have already come up with. But off the top of my head, I'd say they don't know precisely where you are (on account of not having sufficient visual capabilities) but the Stealth was a failure, so they know someone is there.
Yeah, the problem with stealth is that the rules aren't organized very well. As I understand it, a few things would happen at once when the scenario described occurs:
> The roll of a 9 (stealth) vs. a passive perception (12) should mean that the creature detects me. Precisely how they detect me is, of course, dictated by the situation. If I am sneaking up on them, this probably means that a surprise round is no longer possible unless circumstances change. If we are already in combat, although the situation might dictate they don't know my precise location, they probably have a fair idea of my general location (i.e., "I just heard a sound to my right!" or "I just heard a sound from behind that bookshelf!"). Interestingly, the mechanics behind being 'aware' of a foe and 'seeing' a foe are very different.

> In the example given, I am outside of the range of their darkvision, and they are in a light source, but I am not. This results, effectively, in the area beyond their darkvision being heavily obscured, as defined on page 183 of the PHB:
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. A creature in a heavily obscured area effectively suffers from the blinded condition (see appendix A)."
This then immediately applies the blinded condition versus anything outside the range of their darkvision, even if they can hear or smell it (to use the most common examples), which itself is defined on page 290 of the PHB:
"Blinded: A blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight. Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage."

This situation is further defined on page 194 of the PHB, which states:
"Unseen attackers and targets: When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target’s location correctly. When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses."

Taking all of that information together, you get something approximating the following:
1> There is a significant distinction made in the rules between sight (seen vs. unseen) and all other senses (hearing, smelling, and so on). Regardless of whether you can detect a creature with hearing, smell, or similar, if a creature can't see an opponent, there are a number of disadvantageous conditions applied. Relevant key quotes from the rule sources include:
"When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll."
"When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."

As an example, an elf with 60' darkvision is facing a drow with 120' darkvision in a cavern. The drow is able to reliably keep the elf within his sight, without ever entering his range of darkvision, as they have the same speed. Although the elf can hear the drow's footsteps and the sound of his bow firing (and feel the impact of the arrows), he is not able to see the drow. As a result of this, the drow's attack rolls are made at advantage, and any retaliatory attack rolls by the elf are made at disadvantage. This is because the drow is attacking an opponent that can't see him. Similarly, the elf is attacking a target that he can't see.

2> All is not lost for the elf, however. The rules are clear that when an attack is made, the firing position is revealed to observers nearby, inclusive of the person being attacked. The relevant key quote from the rule sources for this is:
"If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses."

To further the example, this means that the elf should be able to retaliate with some degree of effectiveness. If the drow is in a sniping position from which he has not moved, the elf should be able to return fire with an attack roll at disadvantage.

3> However, although the DMG and sections of the PHB indicate that tactical grid combat is optional, it does appear to be assumed with regard to targeting. This makes it even harder for the elf to target the drow, as pinpointing his exact location requires a bit of guesswork. The relevant key quote from the rule sources for this is:
"This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target’s location correctly."

To continue the example, there is no issue if the drow is firing at the elf from a sniping position, and not moving. The drow is perhaps choosing to do this because he has some amount of cover from his location, or some other reason. If that is the case, the elf continues to make attacks at disadvantage, because the firing position of the drow is automatically revealed when he makes an attack, even if the elf can't see the drow. Unfortunately, if the drow moves after shooting, the elf now is assumed by the combat guidelines to have to guess the square of his attacker. If he can't see him, he may be able to narrow down the direction he went with his hearing, or other senses. A creature with a speed of 30' could retreat to a significant number of potential squares on his turn immediately after firing, making it almost impossible for the elf to land a retaliatory strike. This is probably abstracted by a die roll, starting with the number of squares the drow could possibly occupy (we can assume 20 for this example), and perhaps he targets the right square on a roll of 20 on a 1d20. If he can narrow down the direction the drow went, that might improve to a 1d12, and if it is a tight corridor or other confined area, the squares may be further reduced to 1d8 or 1d6 possible options. Nonetheless, even if the elf does target the correct square, he still has to make his attack rolls at disadvantage, meaning his chances of surviving the combat are quite poor.

In fact, the only hope the elf has may very well be to ready an action to immediately return fire when the drow reveals his position. This interrupts the drow's turn after he fires, but before he can move, ensuring the elf can target the correct square. The attack roll is still at disadvantage as the opponent is unseen, but at least the elf now has a fighting chance. If he is more experienced than the drow, or perhaps has better equipment, he might even claim victory over his opponent.


The mechanism to abstract the targeting is, of course, the hardest part. It requires some effort to determine the number of potential squares the enemy could possibly occupy, and might involve a few knowledge, perception, or similar rolls to accurately understand the area, the speed of the attacker, and other relevant factors. Overall based on your response I think we're on more or less the same page with regard to what to expect from stealth, which is comforting.

TychoBrahesNose posted:

That's how I would interpret this situation too, though active checks every round for 8 hours would be exhausting -- I'd probably give them Disadvantage on the active check if I were feeling generous toward you.
In retrospect, yeah, I hadn't considered that actively making a check every round for hours would drive someone insane. Disadvantage or advantage on their check (or their passive) depending on the circumstances is probably the right abstraction. Not sure if you've run into it before, but passives are modified by +/- 5 if a creature would otherwise have advantage or disadvantage on the check. This is covered on page 175 of the PHB, which reads: "If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score."

TychoBrahesNose posted:

Defined "aided", if you mean something different from E>, below.
In this context I think I just meant that there are three enemies, and only one is taking action. So the archer shoots through the wall, and his two swordsman bodyguards observe it.

Overall based on your responses to the illusion line of questions, it sounds like the trigger is going to allow saves against the spells, rather than immediately shutting them off for observers, which seems fine to me. I don't have any issue at all with an archer firing an arrow into a wall, and either making a with-advantage or with-disadvantage (depending on distance or other factors) investigation check against my spell save DC to begin seeing through the illusion. My only concern was if we were going to fall towards a ruling where one archer fires an arrow through a wall, and without any save he and his five swordsman companions immediately see it as an illusion, and then can see through it.

Mentally, I sort of equate it to hypnotic pattern: one person can make the save, and nine others can fail. That one person who makes the save can then absolutely help his failed-save companions out of the condition, but that takes time and effort (and wastes their actions). But that one guy making the save doesn't automatically render everyone else free of its grasp without him doing something about it.

The arcana piece I struggle with personally, as well. On one hand, if I know which spell was just cast, I am going to react to it accordingly. But knowing it is an illusion isn't necessarily the same as having met the save condition of the spell, so while I may not be afraid of the illusory displacer beast, and will walk through it, I don't know if I should be able to see through it the moment it is cast. Maybe identifying the spell allows an immediate free saving throw? That way you have the knowledge of what it is, and might even immediately overcome it, but could still end up thrown off by the magic.

Where that becomes important is probably if successive illusions are cast. The first time, nobody might know what is going on, but the second time, most enemies are going to have their suspicions. Until they validate those suspicions with a save, though, the spell still plays with their senses, even if their mind is telling them something else. Kind of like stage magic, I suppose: you know the magician isn't actually a sorcerer, or cutting that woman in half, but that doesn't mean your eyes aren't deceived while you observe what is going on.

Anyway all of this seems likes it makes sense to me, thanks for taking the time to respond.

djw175
Apr 23, 2012

by zen death robot
Anyone have any save spells that they want to use against the displacer beast I'm next to? Just asking to know what disadvantage I should give it.

DaemonWyrm
Jul 3, 2003

Why don't I hear any sleep screams?
Oh no! Colum is at -2!

He (will probably) died how he lived, shouting at monsters while hungover.

I gotta look up the unconscious rules when I get home.

Drone
Aug 22, 2003

Incredible machine
:smug:


DaemonWyrm posted:

Oh no! Colum is at -2!

He (will probably) died how he lived, shouting at monsters while hungover.

I gotta look up the unconscious rules when I get home.

You'll get stabilized if I have anything to say about it. :colbert:

Ryuujin
Sep 26, 2007
Dragon God

djw175 posted:

Anyone have any save spells that they want to use against the displacer beast I'm next to? Just asking to know what disadvantage I should give it.

How are you giving it disadvantage? Not Hex I hope.

djw175
Apr 23, 2012

by zen death robot

Ryuujin posted:

How are you giving it disadvantage? Not Hex I hope.

I thought Hex did it, but looking it up that's only ability checks, not saves so oh well. I'm gonna use it for the extra damage anyway.

Waador
Sep 11, 2001

Smashin' down the light.
Pillbug

djw175 posted:

I thought Hex did it, but looking it up that's only ability checks, not saves so oh well. I'm gonna use it for the extra damage anyway.

No joke I love the number of hexes up in this party. I would recommend hexing strength or dexterity in this scenario. An athletics check to grapple the beast and another to prone it will reduce all of its future attacks to disadvantage, and also set its speed to 0, which will render it significantly less dangerous. Most things have terrible athletics scores relative to a player trained in it, so once it is hexed it's pretty much guaranteed to lose in a wrestling match.

Obviously, someone will have to actually grapple the thing, but ...well, that's what 1d6 commoners are for.

Ryuujin
Sep 26, 2007
Dragon God
This is also why a bard or rogue who has a good strength and Expertise in Athletics can just dominate grappling matches, especially if the Rogue gets to level 11 so that they cannot roll below a 10 on the d20 roll for ability checks they are proficient in. A build I have looked at is a character with 20 Strength at 15th level with Expertise in Athletics, 15th level mostly because by that point the character would have a +5 Proficiency and would be able to get 11 levels of Rogue, 1 level of Knowledge Cleric and 3 levels of Lore Bard to have proficiency in all but one skill. With +5 Proficiency, +5 Str modifier, and Expertise in Athletics they would have a +15 to Athletics, and thus their minimum roll would be a 25 on Athletics checks, most things in the Monster Manual cannot even reach a 25 Athletics or Acrobatics check, and those that can would have some difficulty, and you could still of course roll better than a 10 on the d20 and get better than a 25 Athletics.

Also Hex is still a great spell, especially for Warlocks who can refresh it on a Short Rest, get scaling spell slots so it will eventually last longer than the short rest needed to recover it, and who eventually get multiple attack rolls with Eldritch Blast. And in a party with a Grappler? Hex is even more awesome.

Waador
Sep 11, 2001

Smashin' down the light.
Pillbug

Ryuujin posted:

Also Hex is still a great spell, especially for Warlocks who can refresh it on a Short Rest, get scaling spell slots so it will eventually last longer than the short rest needed to recover it, and who eventually get multiple attack rolls with Eldritch Blast. And in a party with a Grappler? Hex is even more awesome.

Given the number of warlocks in the party, this is actually probably an important thing to confirm. Are we able to maintain concentration on a spell while taking a short rest? The PHB and DMG seem to leave this to DM interpretation. I think it's mostly clear-cut that you can't maintain concentration while asleep, but a short rest just requires 'no strenuous activity', which is a bit different.

The game seems to assume that you can, with various spells having 8H, 24H, or permanent duration so long as concentration is maintained, which sort of implies to me that you can take short rests while maintaining concentration, but it isn't explicitly stated.

There is also a very niche case for elves maintaining concentration in trance that might be worth figuring out in advance. The text on trance seems to suggest they are 'aware' of their surroundings while taking a long rest, but the way I read it seems to suggest they would be spending their concentration on the meditative trance, rather than an active spell, which would continue to preclude concentration during a long rest for elves. I could see someone taking a different view on either point, though.

Waador fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Sep 17, 2015

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011
Yeah, at the moment I'd go with allowing concentration during a short rest, if the spell itself lets you maintain it for >1 hour. Though with Hex in particular, I'd be curious why you'd be maintaining a combat spell for that long -- presumably short rests occur at the end of battles, so either the target is dead, or you are. I guess maybe if either side ran away, but wanted to fight more later...?

I would not allow elves to maintain concentration during their trance.

Ryuujin
Sep 26, 2007
Dragon God
Well Hex in particular gets a longer duration at a higher slot, and does eventually get to 24 hours. The main thing is with Hex is that when your target goes down you can then move it to another target with a bonus action without using another spell slot.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

TychoBrahesNose
May 24, 2011
Just waiting on Drone, djw175, Ryuujin, and epicurius before we get around the batting order to the displacer beasts (and my update) again.

  • Locked thread