Shapechange: Dragon gets real true seeing

[Troukk]

It penetrates stealth no matter how high the number is. It kind of breaks the whole stealth/detection system in my opinion.

Any chance the Dev team would consider nerfing Red Dragon's true seeing to something like a bonus to Spot or something?

[ILLY6666]

It penetrates stealth no matter how high the number is. It kind of breaks the whole stealth/detection system in my opinion.

Any chance the Dev team would consider nerfing Red Dragon's true seeing to something like a bonus to Spot or something?

Dragons have blindsense, that is what is represented. Your stealth score is irrelevant.

[EO]

Strange. This used to be fixed.  I’ll look into it.

[Philos]

Yeah, it'll even detect GS when hostile. Honestly a little broken.

[Mayvind]

Dang you Troukk !

[Ercvadasz]

There are a few creatures like this the most memorable is the crawling ivy. And some insects.
I think it is called tremorsense.

[derkotushka]

Perhaps oozes, leeches, scorpions and other dragons should be fixed too then?
Because they see hidden characters no matter how high hide/ms and it breaks stealth/detection system in my opinion.

Not sure when it was fixed but as long as I play in POTM it always was thing what dragon-shape see hidden/under GS characters and it was always used for this.
It is not looks broken, it is looks how it intend to work.
It is advantage of 9th spell which wizards/sorcerss not so easy can get.

[Norture]

You also cast dragon form in the outskirts and play it off as no big deal.

[Philos]

The notion is that we don't want to afford Blindsight to Player Characters. A bonus to detection is much more reasonable.

[booksarefun666]

You also cast dragon form in the outskirts and play it off as no big deal.

[Arawn]

Don’t call other players out here.

[Cursed Ink]

Being able to one button negate the entire skill set and focus of a class I believe is overpowered. I agree with Philos, a bonus to detection is powerful enough without being about to negate the entire role of a set of classes.

[APorg]

Paper is overpowered, says the rock. Scissors are just right.

I guess those of us who don't want to resort to the absurd equipment arms race to hit those 80+ scores or whatever can just resort to caltrops and good ol' running.

[Iridni Ren]

Being able to one button negate the entire skill set and focus of a class I believe is overpowered. I agree with Philos, a bonus to detection is powerful enough without being about to negate the entire role of a set of classes.

Well, the thing is when player1 builds PC1 *knowing* that such an ability exists, and player2 builds PC2 *knowing* that such a button exists, it's a little unfair ex post facto to change the rule because player1 then complains.

If PC1 can win in 90 percent of situations against other builds because stealth allows her to choose the time and place of PVP but loses against PC2 because her "entire role" is negated--actually it's negated only in a very limited,  specific situation--then the class still seems quite strong. The question is whether those having this ability are likewise vulnerable in certain situations.

As derkot rightly points out, common oozes have this same ability. Does that make them over-powered?

Rather than perennially nerfing everything that seems worth having and thereby making a flatter game, why not look for such as opportunities to make something else desirable? For example, how about a magic item that counters this ability or is especially devastating to reptiles (including dragon forms)?

Rock-scissors-paper is a completely balanced game, yet paper always beats rock. Of course rock thinks paper needs to be nerfed

POTM is a more interesting and longer playable game for having greater situational complexity than rock-scissors-paper. So looking at ways of enhancing other builds and paths rather than continually nerfing existing items and builds is IMO a better approach.

Haha, aprogressivist. Great minds think alike

[Arawn]

Some creatures also divide into multiple monsters and rust swords. Does that mean that it would not be unbalanced to make elves corrosive and able to reproduce through division like starfish?

Rock-paper-scissors is a philosophy, not a hard rule. We’re not bound to, say, make detection always beat stealth (also, the metaphor seems a bit confused; what’s the third element here?). We want to give people choice in developing their builds, rewarding investment with greater abilities. Giving all wizards the ability to immediately beat stealth entirely both 1) doesn’t require any investment beyond simply leveling up and 2) leads to ridiculous things like people transforming into dragons in inn rooms, which is a borderline exploit.

The dev team gave time and consideration to our original decision, which was to change this in line with all other truesight-granting abilities, and we will correct the current issue in line with that decision. You’re welcome to give feedback that suggests it would be more balanced or more useful to give the ability back, but the change has already been made; this is a bug and is being fixed as such.

[Iridni Ren]

Rock-paper-scissors is a philosophy, not a hard rule. We’re not bound to, say, make detection always beat stealth (also, the metaphor seems a bit confused; what’s the third element here?).

Rather, the metaphor is to make a complex situation simpler to grasp

The argument is not that stealth should always win or that detection should always win; that is the definition of an unbalanced game. Rather, my argument (at least) is that the greater the variety of situations when one or the other is viable, the more interesting and longer-lived the game.

"The third element" might be seen as what I proposed: creating an alternative equipment item that allows even dragon sight to be obscured.

Stealth PC wins 90 percent of the time, but loses to dragon sight, but dragon sight can be defeated by "Dragonsbane Cloak" (for example).

[Arawn]

Rock-paper-scissors is balancing three elements. There are only two here. Making either stronger than the other (however you want to quantify that)  is by definition unbalanced.

Creating a whole new set of gear just to counterbalance one high-level wizard ability is basically a solution looking for a problem, since we’d already fixed it.

[APorg]

1) doesn’t require any investment beyond simply leveling up

Some Shapechange forms are immune to sneak attacks and critical attacks, simply for levelling up; I don't think that's a very good line of argument.

All Shapechange requires its user to commit to the new form. This invites IC retaliation (re: bounty on dragon's head) and is also a weakness (since most gear is un-equipped while Shapechanged). If you Shapechange and lose your save gear while being stalked by a high DC Evoker/Necromancer mage/cleric, you're dead. It's not zero-cost.

2) leads to ridiculous things like people transforming into dragons in inn rooms, which is a borderline exploit.

It's possible for a character with good enough stealth (i.e. 25 points or more over his quarry) to stand over their shoulder and eavesdrop on conversations. It's possible for a character with Greater Sanctuary to do the same (assuming they hostile first).  You can be in the same inn room and a Rogue, without even relying on Invisibility, can be stood behind you. Considering these facts -- not merely of OOC rules but their repercussions into the IC logic of the world -- people resort to absurd counter-measures because stealth is absurdly represented in the game. Seems a little one-sided to put the blame for that all on, well, one side.

[Arawn]

But neither of those abilities completely invalidates the combat abilities of others, unlike True Sight, which simply invalidates Stealth. Advantages good, boosts good, auto victory, unbalanced. And “commitment” hardly describes shapechanging to check for stealthers and then switching back.
 
And certainly, there are things we could do to make stealthers need to work more within the constraints of IC. But that’s not the issue here, nor does it make the behavior I described here any more reasonable. It deserves its own separate discussion.

[Better Dread than Dead]

Well, a rogue in PnP would be able to perch or hang off of ledges to eavesdrop, to run along rooftops, stand along windowsills, or otherwise make use of their environment to actually hide themselves. You can't really do that too well in NWN. Moreover, most rogues who aren't shadowdancers I've known and encountered who like eavesdropping on conversations make themselves invisible first, either through use of a spell, scroll, or potion; in part because most recognize a perfectly mundane rogue shouldn't be able to just listen in.

The rat-race goes both ways, incidentally. Most characters aren't ever going to get high enough Hide or Move Silently to beat out a dedicated detection build (or just a Bard with half-decent Listen and Amplify, if we're being honest with ourselves here), with how starved rogues have been for loot, lately. The last sneaky character I had, had pretty high Hide and Move Silently, yet at the time I closured her, she could still be caught through traditional detection.

[APorg]

But neither of those abilities completely invalidates the combat abilities of others, unlike True Sight, which simply invalidates Stealth. Advantages good, boosts good, auto victory, unbalanced.

Except the Stealther is not defeated by being spotted -- he merely loses his advantage of surprise. In fact the Stealther has less to lose here than the detector -- if the detector can't see the Stealther, he might be potentially ganked. So if the concern is that auto victory is unbalanced, then...

And “commitment” hardly describes shapechanging to check for stealthers and then switching back.

This is only a problem for the stealther if he's literally breathing down the caster's neck. A stealther who maintains a healthy distance can retreat, re-stealth, and the caster has lost a spell slot.

I mean, whenever I played a stealther I always had to take healthy precautions because her stealth wasn't that great. Giving stealthers certain inherent weaknesses forces them to take more precautions.

And certainly, there are things we could do to make stealthers need to work more within the constraints of IC. But that’s not the issue here, nor does it make the behavior I described here any more reasonable. It deserves its own separate discussion.

Except it's not, really, a separate issue. You can't apply one standard to detectors without immediately applying it to the very thing they are detecting. You can't separate what these powers do, from the tactics they counter. Shapechange is used as a counter-measure precisely because having an edge of 25+ stealth is an auto-win for stealthers.

I appreciate that the dev team want to solve one problem at the time. But these discussions merit a holistic approach to balance otherwise we're merely going around applying patches to the loudest complaint.

[APorg]

The rat-race goes both ways, incidentally. Most characters aren't ever going to get high enough Hide or Move Silently to beat out a dedicated detection build (or just a Bard with half-decent Listen and Amplify, if we're being honest with ourselves here), with how starved rogues have been for loot, lately. The last sneaky character I had, had pretty high Hide and Move Silently, yet at the time I closured her, she could still be caught through traditional detection.

What I'm trying to say is, if Stealth had more reasonable counter-measures, it wouldn't be necessary to make loot rare.

[snowfox]

You can bring the true-seeing granted by dragon shape into line with the same-named spell, if you believe it's too great an advantage. But in that same line you should consider ways to make Greater Sanctuary detectable by players, for characters who invest perhaps heavily into a skill or something, because that is similarly unbalanced in its current form.

[EO]

Stealth -has- a countermeasure, it’s called Detection skills. Considering you need at least 20 more stealth skills than detection skills, stealth is already disadvantaged.

If you don’t want to be spied on bring a bard or ranger or rogue with you or invest in detection, use detection spells (True Seeing, Insight, Amplify, Clairvoyance). Also True Seeing reveals every hidden or invisible creature, not just those standing next to you.

[Arawn]

As Dread pointed out, rogue stealth is the engine’s clunky way of representing something quite complicated in reality. Changing into a dragon is, well, changing into a dragon.

Rogues detected are engaged in hostile action and therefore exposed to PvP, and rogues PvPed without the element of surprise are usually dead, especially if caught by a wizard of the appropriate level to change into a dragon (or if the wizard is, indeed, already a dragon).

On top of all that, as Dread and EO also pointed out, dedicated stealthers lose to dedicated detectors at even levels of investment already.

And finally—resorting to borderline-OOC mechanics is bad, whether prompted by borderline-OOC mechanics or not.

Balancing stealth against detection is an age-old concern for the development team—but emphatically, both should require and reward investment. Shapechanging is free from the perspective of leveling and points distribution. Stealth is not.