alogen
2007-01-15 15:41:23 UTC
#66798
I thought about the invisibility potion, and I figured. Some monsters can attack you because you make noise. And yet, if they attack you they get the 50% chance to miss.
So technically, if you're hiding well enough, monsters should not see you, only hear you. So if a monster hears someone and attacks, it should attack "blindly" the creature that hides. That means, if the monster fails the spot check, it should get a 50% chance to miss.
So I suggest that if I'm hiding, and the monster failed spot check (I did not hid in plain sight), the monster should get 50% chance to miss.
chezcaliente
2007-01-15 22:16:53 UTC
#66864
isn't this how it works anyway? A character you have succeeded a listen check against still should have 50% concealment bonus if you haven't spotted them or they are magically invisible - unless you have the "Blind-fight" feat, which should allow you to re-roll your attack if you miss the first time when attacking a "heard" creature.
edit: actual effect of blind fight.
alogen
2007-01-15 22:23:10 UTC
#66867
I'm not sure, if it so, then nothing to suggest here. heh.
Hmm there is that -4 to ab, like darkness as well, no?
chezcaliente
2007-01-15 22:25:11 UTC
#66868
well i'm not certain about stealthed creatures that have been heard. But you would think the engine would treat them the same as invisibile creatures that have been heard... can anyone confirm?
Oroborous
2007-01-15 22:34:11 UTC
#66869
Stealth isn't invisibility though.
If you're stealthed, and someone hears you--odds are great they'll look at where you are and see you. Then hit you.
With invisibility, even if you yell "Happy Birthday Mother F---" and pee on their boots, they still won't see you--even if they look.
9lives
2007-01-16 00:31:18 UTC
#66904
Will they see the pee, as it leaves your inventory?
alogen
2007-01-16 08:46:40 UTC
#66967
But stealth is implemented differently, and I remember that somewhere on the forums here, it was already decided that if pc1 *hears* pc2, then pc1 cannot identify pc2 because pc1 can't see pc2.
If Oro's right, then pc1 should see pc2 eventually, no?
(Means, he could come closer, then say "Haha I see you, thief!", or something along these lines)
Nero24200
2007-01-16 10:57:46 UTC
#66986
Looking at the very spot where someone is hiding should give a bonus to spot, the game mechanics don't take direction into account for hide/move silently though
Kotenku
2007-01-16 11:31:35 UTC
#66989
I think they do, actually.
I'll find a quote later on, but I remember the discussion coming up on another forum. The NWN engine takes into account a great deal of things, from where one's standing, to light sources, and on, when dealing with Stealth.
alogen
2007-01-16 11:36:08 UTC
#66991
How could one spot someone from behind? I guess looking backward is automatically performed.
Nero24200
2007-01-16 12:18:22 UTC
#66993
How could one spot someone from behind? I guess looking backward is automatically performed.
That does happen, I've spotted characters that were behind me (even one or two in which my first thought is "How could I see them where they are?")
I can't be too sure, but I'm farily certain direction insn't taken into account regarding stealth, after all, with high sot characters, I have seen sneaky characters walk right up to other PC's, looking at them face to face, and still not be spotted.
spawnofweevil
2007-01-16 12:49:12 UTC
#67000
But stealth is implemented differently, and I remember that somewhere on the forums here, it was already decided that if pc1 *hears* pc2, then pc1 cannot identify pc2 because pc1 can't see pc2.
If by that you mean footsteps and rustling, yes, but I assume if you hear their voice, and you know them, it's fine to recognise them? I can usually tell who's on the other end of the phone, or standing behind me, by voice even without being told.
If not then I might as well delete my character now :(
alogen
2007-01-16 12:54:42 UTC
#67002
Yes, I did mean by footsteps and rustling (This excludes blind people with more then fine hearing, of course)
dragonsrider
2007-01-21 20:27:28 UTC
#67944
I think simple stealth doesn't prevent to be seen when someone hears you, on the contrary when you are invisible you remain invisible even if you make noise, if you are just hiding/moving silently the stealth should fade away when you are spotted because of the noise.
Howland
2007-01-21 20:52:54 UTC
#67945
Just so it's very, very clear if you "hear" someone you should not recognize exactly who they are if they remain fuzzy. You can attack them, you can demand to know who's there, you can drink potions of ESP - but if they are fuzzy, you can't recognize them.
As a DM, sometimes I see people "recognize" someone who's there when it's clear from comparing spot/listen to hide/ms that they only "heard" them. That's unfortunate, and may result in XP being taken away.
alogen
2007-01-21 21:05:14 UTC
#67948
Well, by the dms, if you're heard you still can't be seen.
(You're half visible be mechanics and it should be RPed that way)
JackOfSwords
2007-01-22 23:29:29 UTC
#68156
My own humble opinion is...
If you're standing close enough for a melee attack, then a successful spot or listen should pretty much end your stealth, and I can't see any valid justification for any attack penalties for anything more than perhaps the first round. You're simply too close to get away with much once they realize you're there and can direct their attention to you.
I'll be happy to change that opinion if anyone can provide a realistic scenario of how you can possibly be standing within 3 feet of someone who realizes you're there, and still hide from them without being invisible or otherwise magically concealed. (Even if you assume "I'm just that fast that I keep jumping behind the person when they turn!", that's already been factored in... it's called your AC bonus due to dexterity).
However, I can see a valid argument for ranged attacks, whether weapons or spells. That is, you may hear someone across the room, and therefore have an idea of where they are, but may not yet see them to get a decent shot.