Ravenloft: Prisoners of the Mist

Suggestions, Feedback & Bug Reports (OOC) => Module Feedback and Suggestions => Topic started by: KoopaFanatic on May 15, 2009, 11:55:38 AM

Title: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: KoopaFanatic on May 15, 2009, 11:55:38 AM
The new @familiar command looks interesting, and it makes me wonder if it could be extended to druid/ranger animal companions?  Sure, companions can't talk per se, but it'd be nice to be able to emote their actions on occasion.  Maybe a separate command that only repeats strings that start (and end?) with [ or *?

Any thoughts?
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on May 15, 2009, 11:57:42 AM
Sounds like a good idea but im just a crazy paliden well used to be oaly so ehh. *With a pet dragon of course*
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Chrisman888 on May 15, 2009, 12:45:57 PM
IT'S PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN! PALADIN!

~ Chris  :twisted:
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Wids on May 15, 2009, 03:29:49 PM
The new @familiar command looks interesting, and it makes me wonder if it could be extended to druid/ranger animal companions?  Sure, companions can't talk per se, but it'd be nice to be able to emote their actions on occasion.  Maybe a separate command that only repeats strings that start (and end?) with [ or *?

Any thoughts?
What about my Druid/Wizard who has both a familiar and an animal companion, and is often seen travelling with both?  :?
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: KoopaFanatic on May 15, 2009, 03:43:22 PM
What about my Druid/Wizard who has both a familiar and an animal companion, and is often seen travelling with both?  :?

That would be the strongest argument for separate commands, I guess. :lol:
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Truth on May 15, 2009, 04:31:24 PM
what does this all do again? just outta curiousity?
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: failed.bard on May 15, 2009, 11:41:53 PM
@companion and @summons would both be nice additions, if all three (including the already present @familiar) could be implimented without conflicting.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on May 18, 2009, 12:09:56 AM
I SPELL PALIDEN HOW EVER I LIKE! RAWR!
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Falcifer on June 01, 2009, 06:02:33 PM
Actually, according to PnP, once your little Druid bumps into level 9 and recieves the Awaken spell, your animal companion can talk one of your languages. So, this would be handy.

But then, according to the Awaken spell, an Awakened animal cannot serve as an Animal Companion (Though could technically choose to follow the Druid or Ranger out of it's newfound free will and sentience).


And you still spelled Paladin wrong. Bad spelling is bad for brains.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on June 03, 2009, 10:27:30 PM
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Wids on June 03, 2009, 10:56:18 PM
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
You spelled "halberd" wrong, too.   :lol:
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Zarathustra217 on June 04, 2009, 05:51:53 AM
Generally, I'm all for trusting the players ability to roleplay, and I figure abuse should be considered OOC behaviour, so let's try this.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on June 10, 2009, 09:17:54 PM
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
You spelled "halberd" wrong, too.   :lol:

 :D Wids undermining me every step of the way....
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Wids on June 11, 2009, 09:47:48 AM
*Pulls out a halbard*
I will bleeden spell it how ever i like!
*Brandaishes it towards every one who says otherwise*
You spelled "halberd" wrong, too.   :lol:

 :D Wids undermining me every step of the way....
Undermining?  Nah, just being educational.  Smartz iz gud.  :teach:

I just thought of something, though: Has anyone ever tried a Druid/Ranger combo or a Sorcerer/Wizard combo?  Would such a combo allow you to summon two animal companions or two familiars?  If so, then how would these commands work with them?  :?
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Axel on June 11, 2009, 10:03:04 AM
I just thought of something, though: Has anyone ever tried a Druid/Ranger combo or a Sorcerer/Wizard combo?  Would such a combo allow you to summon two animal companions or two familiars?  If so, then how would these commands work with them?  :?

According to the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/) sorcerer and wizard levels stack for determining familiar abilities, i.e., a multiclass sorcerer/wizard can have one familiar, not two. The same is true for multiclass druid/rangers.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Wids on June 11, 2009, 10:16:47 AM
I just thought of something, though: Has anyone ever tried a Druid/Ranger combo or a Sorcerer/Wizard combo?  Would such a combo allow you to summon two animal companions or two familiars?  If so, then how would these commands work with them?  :?

According to the SRD (http://www.d20srd.org/) sorcerer and wizard levels stack for determining familiar abilities, i.e., a multiclass sorcerer/wizard can have one familiar, not two. The same is true for multiclass druid/rangers.
Does that hold true for the NWN engine, though?  We all know how Bioware deviated from the books here and there when putting NWN together....  :think:
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: failed.bard on June 11, 2009, 10:23:23 AM
Druid/rangers only get one at a time, same with Wizard/sorcerors.  A Ranger/sorceror like Grimshackle can summon a familiar and a companion at the same time.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Cor Reale on June 11, 2009, 11:43:18 AM
abuse of @animal is.... how exactly is a talking animal abuse? If a cat can speak cat druidic, or, and this has always bothered me, is druidic the language of all animals, cat, dog, bear, cow, mule, ox, horse, bull, etc.. if @animal [bear druidic, or bd] ouch! that fire hurt me, can we crawl out of here? Druids can know druidic, and rangers can too if I'm campaigning them, rangers can learn. It is not a give with rangers, and mine may be a bit daft to know the language, but as far as a learner of druidic bear, he can scrounge a few words out of emotions, and feelings. Druidic I've found is an empathetic langauge, as much as sign language is a somatic one. Spelling out words can be a fast scrawl of motions, but letters are understood all by themselves. In sign, a stream of motion is recognized as a word because of a commonly conceived spelling of the unspoken. In my own words, two dots of the hand for e. e. in feed is glanced over, yet the f and the d are caught on with an exactitude or the reader may mistake feed for feet, or beep. The word peat is too different. keep is not so different. It's like cloud watching and giving the sky all the attention instead of the clouds.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Axel on June 11, 2009, 01:01:02 PM
abuse of @animal is.... how exactly is a talking animal abuse? If a cat can speak cat druidic, or, and this has always bothered me, is druidic the language of all animals, cat, dog, bear, cow, mule, ox, horse, bull, etc.. if @animal [bear druidic, or bd] ouch! that fire hurt me, can we crawl out of here? Druids can know druidic, and rangers can too if I'm campaigning them, rangers can learn. It is not a give with rangers, and mine may be a bit daft to know the language, but as far as a learner of druidic bear, he can scrounge a few words out of emotions, and feelings. Druidic I've found is an empathetic langauge, as much as sign language is a somatic one. Spelling out words can be a fast scrawl of motions, but letters are understood all by themselves. In sign, a stream of motion is recognized as a word because of a commonly conceived spelling of the unspoken. In my own words, two dots of the hand for e. e. in feed is glanced over, yet the f and the d are caught on with an exactitude or the reader may mistake feed for feet, or beep. The word peat is too different. keep is not so different. It's like cloud watching and giving the sky all the attention instead of the clouds.
Druidic is the secret language of druids, not the language of animals. Animals can't speak in this fantasy world.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: DarkWyvern on June 11, 2009, 01:21:23 PM
For More Detail. Here's a Canon Explanation of the Druid Language:

Quote
The Secret Language
   
   All druids can speak a secret language in addition to other tongues they know. Using the optional proficiency system, the secret language does not require a proficiency slot.

The secret language of the druids has its roots in British tradition. A language called Thari, derived from Celtic roots, apparently was spoken as a secret tongue throughout the British Isles by a small number of traveling folk such as tinkers and bards. It later was adopted by some Gypsy clans in addition to Romany, their own Indic language. Thari may predate the Dark Ages, and some claim fluency in it even today. Certain researchers seeking the roots of Thari as a language distinct from Gaelic have linked its origins to both ancient Celtic craft guilds and to the historical druids. If the DM wants to name the druids' secret language, Thari possesses some historical relevance.
   
   Not only can druids use the secret language to provide passwords, they can speak this private tongue when they wish to baffle nondruidic eavesdroppers. It is a precise tool for discussing Nature; a druid can say "dense, old-growth pine forest" in one word rather than a whole phrase.
   The secret language has a specialized and detailed vocabulary limited to dealing with Nature and natural events; beyond this sphere, it is very basic. A druid could use the secret language to talk about the health of a person, animal, or plant; discuss the weather; or give detailed directions through the wilderness. The language also can describe druidic spells, ceremonies, powers, and any natural and supernatural creatures known to the druids. However, it contains no words for sophisticated human emotions, for most tools or artifacts (beyond those used for hunting, farming, or fishing), or for weapons and armor (other than items druids use). The language also contains few words that refer to concepts peculiar to sentient beings, like property, justice, theft, or war. Tense distinctions blur in this secret tongue; usually the concepts druids express bear a certain immediacy or timelessness.
   Finally, the secret language of the druids remains a purely spoken tongue. A few simple runes or marks (symbolizing danger, safe water, safe trail, and so on) exist for marking paths and leaving messages, but the language cannot communicate actual sentences and complex ideas in writing.
   Here's an example of how the secret language works in practice. Suppose two druids are discussing a magical item and want to converse entirely in the secret language, using no words borrowed from other tongues. One druid wishes to say:

   This magical long sword was a gift to Melinda, wife to King Rupert, from Rupert's    court wizard Drufus. The mage gave it the power to throw lightning bolts. But then King Rupert grew jealous of Melinda. He had her executed and took the blade for himself. After Rupert died, the sword was left buried in the dungeons under his castle.

In the secret language, the story might come out something like this:

   This magic scimitar was for the Tall Golden Female, mate of the Man-Leader, from the Wielder of Magic from the Vale of the White Eagles. He put the call lightning power in it. But the Man-Leader wanted it. He killed the Tall Golden Female and    took it for himself. He died. The scimitar stayed in the cave under his big stone man-den.

   See the difference? There's no word for long sword, so our druid has substituted "scimitar." (All druidic weapons have names.) The idea of a gift is described in more basic terms. In addition, the concept of naming has no place in this Nature-oriented language; people and creatures are known by description, status, or place of origin.
   Wizard becomes the more generic "wielder of magic." Lightning, a natural phenomenon, has an equivalent in the secret language. But the secret language cannot convey a human emotion such as Rupert's jealousy, so the druid has had to substitute less precise phrasing. Similarly, the private tongue does not cover execution or murder, so the druid used the more generic "killed." Finally, no druidic term corresponds to dungeon or castle, so the druid has had to use other words-"cave under his big stone man-den"--to convey that image. Of course, a druid not worried about being overheard might mix the secret language and normal speech in a single sentence.
   The secret language helps bind the worldwide druidic order together. Druids from different circles (See Chapter 3: The Druidic Order) or branches all speak the same secret language. However, they may have developed their own regional accents or dialects. These could enable a listener to identify the region the druid comes from, or provide a clue to the speaker's branch.

   In a Spelljammer® or Planescape® campaign and through the use of certain spells and magical items, druids from different worlds can meet. The DM should decide whether their secret languages resemble each other enough to allow communication.

   Finally, the druid's secret language, while private, is not supernatural--theoretically, others can learn it. However, because the tongue provides druids with code phrases or passwords, they simply will not teach it to nondruids. The great druid of the region will punish any who break with this tradition.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Wids on June 11, 2009, 01:55:13 PM
Druid/rangers only get one at a time, same with Wizard/sorcerors. 
That, I wasn't sure about.  :?

A Ranger/sorceror like Grimshackle can summon a familiar and a companion at the same time.
That, I did know (http://www.nwnravenloft.com/forum/index.php?topic=16158.msg184430#msg184430).  Preachin' to the choir here, padré.  :P
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Cor Reale on June 11, 2009, 02:52:20 PM
abuse of @animal is.... how exactly is a talking animal abuse? If a cat can speak cat druidic, or, and this has always bothered me, is druidic the language of all animals, cat, dog, bear, cow, mule, ox, horse, bull, etc.. if @animal [bear druidic, or bd] ouch! that fire hurt me, can we crawl out of here? Druids can know druidic, and rangers can too if I'm campaigning them, rangers can learn. It is not a give with rangers, and mine may be a bit daft to know the language, but as far as a learner of druidic bear, he can scrounge a few words out of emotions, and feelings. Druidic I've found is an empathetic langauge, as much as sign language is a somatic one. Spelling out words can be a fast scrawl of motions, but letters are understood all by themselves. In sign, a stream of motion is recognized as a word because of a commonly conceived spelling of the unspoken. In my own words, two dots of the hand for e. e. in feed is glanced over, yet the f and the d are caught on with an exactitude or the reader may mistake feed for feet, or beep. The word peat is too different. keep is not so different. It's like cloud watching and giving the sky all the attention instead of the clouds.
Druidic is the secret language of druids, not the language of animals. Animals can't speak in this fantasy world.

You say animals can't talk. Well, I see none of you are witches!
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on June 12, 2009, 10:09:49 PM
Animals can talk if a werewolf and a were raven and anyother were creature can talk then with enough magic and a awken scroll you can make any animal talk . :|
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: ethinos on June 12, 2009, 10:18:19 PM
Animals can talk if a werewolf and a were raven and anyother were creature can talk then with enough magic and a awken scroll you can make any animal talk . :|

That isn't a good comparison at all. Actually, it's a really bad one. A werecritter has human intelligence. An animal does not. Intelligence is important when considering the ability for speech.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: DarkWyvern on June 12, 2009, 10:23:09 PM
Animals can not talk. They have animal communications between their own kind. The only possible "Familiars" that could speak are the Raven, and that's more "Mimicry" of what they hear, the Imps, Mephits and maybe the pseudo dragon if it's int is above 10.

Ethinos hits on the nose. Intelligence plays the role.

Animal Companions can't talk anything but animal speech.

Certain Familiars can speak.


And, even animal Empathy isn't "Talking" to animals. It's soothing or charming them


Quote
A successful check allows a character to charm or dominate certain creatures.

    * Ability: Charisma

    * Classes: Druid, Ranger, Shifter

    * Cross-Class: No

    * Requires Training: Yes

    * Check: Animals and dire animals have a difficulty class of 15 + the creature's hit dice. For beasts and magical beasts, the DC is 19 + the creature's hit dice. If the check succeeds, the creature is dominated.

    * Special: If the character fails their check by five or more, the creature will go hostile.

    * Use: Select this skill (from the quickbar) and then select the target creature. Dominated creatures will be commanded as if they were henchmen. The creature will remain dominated for one turn per level of the character using the skill.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on June 13, 2009, 08:15:55 AM
Animals can talk if a werewolf and a were raven and anyother were creature can talk then with enough magic and a awken scroll you can make any animal talk . :|

That isn't a good comparison at all. Actually, it's a really bad one. A werecritter has human intelligence. An animal does not. Intelligence is important when considering the ability for speech.

Please take note that not all weres are humans a good many are just animals and nearly all weres can talk.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Axel on June 13, 2009, 09:02:41 AM
Please take note that not all weres are humans a good many are just animals and nearly all weres can talk.

Okay, I'll take note. Now, what is your point? That were-creatures are able to speak says nothing about animals being able to speak in general.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Minstrel on June 13, 2009, 10:52:52 AM
Uhm... What about Awakened animals? They can speak one language from whoever awakened them, plus one more language of their awakener for every positive point of Int bonus.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: ethinos on June 14, 2009, 12:27:25 AM
Actually, werecritters didn't start off as half-animals unless Ravenloft has a weird take on it. They all can change into animal or hybrid form. They also started out with a human (or similar demihuman) intelligence. Otherwise, all werewolves and the like started off as a normal person at some point. Critterweres are different, such as wolfweres. The are wolves that can turn into humanlike forms. I don't remember their Int scores, but they may not be of humanlike intellect. Someone needs to point me to some online bestiary if there was ever an exception to this rule.

Oh, and since we don't have Awakened animals here, that argument is a rather moot point. Pretending that your animal companion is Awakened would be cheesing.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Emomina on June 14, 2009, 01:31:48 AM
According to Denizens of Dread (Ravenloft's monster manual), Wolfweres have an INT of 14, and speak Sylvan and the local domain language.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Wids on June 14, 2009, 01:34:50 AM
Oh, and since we don't have Awakened animals here, that argument is a rather moot point. Pretending that your animal companion is Awakened would be cheesing.
What about the temporary effects of a certain 5th Level Druid spell, then?
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: KoopaFanatic on June 14, 2009, 04:59:11 AM
What about the temporary effects of a certain 5th Level Druid spell, then?

Argument for:  Awaken (NWN) is clearly inspired by Awaken (d20), which expressly allows the target to speak a language.
Argument against:  Awaken (d20) provides bonuses to Int and Cha, while Awaken (NWN) provides bonuses to Str, Con, and Wis.  Also, in d20 an awakened creature can't be a companion at all...

Still, within the context of NWN I can't see how it would hurt to allow companions under the effect of Awaken to talk.  It's not like the druids can possess their animals and send them off on some message-delivering chore :)
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: ethinos on June 15, 2009, 01:27:22 AM
What about the temporary effects of a certain 5th Level Druid spell, then?

The Awaken spell in NWN is a simple buff spell that neither raises intelligence nor confers the ability to speak. Even if it did raise the Int to something capable of speaking (8 or so), that doesn't automatically grant the knowledge of speech. You'd need to learn one first, and to be honest, I am not even sure most animals even have the right vocal functions to even reproduce the sounds for human-like speech. Animals won't be speaking anytime soon in PotM.

Whether its brie, or monterey jack, or swiss, cheese is cheese.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: failed.bard on June 15, 2009, 02:57:13 AM
Awaken
Transmutation
Level: Drd 5
Components: V, S, DF, XP
Casting Time: 24 hours
Range: Touch
Target: Animal or tree touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

You awaken a tree or animal to humanlike sentience. To succeed, you must make a Will save (DC 10 + the animal’s current HD, or the HD the tree will have once awakened).

The awakened animal or tree is friendly toward you. You have no special empathy or connection with a creature you awaken, although it serves you in specific tasks or endeavors if you communicate your desires to it.

An awakened tree has characteristics as if it were an animated object, except that it gains the plant type and its Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores are each 3d6. An awakened plant gains the ability to move its limbs, roots, vines, creepers, and so forth, and it has senses similar to a human’s.

An awakened animal gets 3d6 Intelligence, +1d3 Charisma, and +2 HD. Its type becomes magical beast (augmented animal). An awakened animal can’t serve as an animal companion, familiar, or special mount.

An awakened tree or animal can speak one language that you know, plus one additional language that you know per point of Intelligence bonus (if any).

XP Cost
250 XP.

In 3.5 PnP, the awaken spell also allows a tree to speak, and they definately don't have the right vocal capacity for it.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: ethinos on June 15, 2009, 03:25:14 AM
In 3.5 PnP, the awaken spell also allows a tree to speak, and they definately don't have the right vocal capacity for it.

I never said that the 3.5ed Awaken spell didn't allow for speech. In fact, I never mentioned it or its effects. What I was talking about was strictly the NWN version which operates simply as a buff spell. The parts about the vocal capability only applied when I mentioned if the Int score somehow got raised to a level that would support complex speech, since the NWN version does not confer any ability to speak in its description.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: DarkWyvern on June 15, 2009, 10:58:54 AM
It's simple folks. We don't have awakened companions here.

Druid/Ranger Companions are natural animals of the wild that are befriended by the druid ranger. They make animal noises (Communication) but they do not speak like a normal person.

While the 3.5 Awakening spell may allow the companion to speak, the spell in game which we use does not. It effects Strength, Constitution, Wisdom (Which does not effect speech) and a bonus to attack. Therefore, using it and using the @companion to make your companion talk will be considered cheesing. So please don't do it. :D


Thank you.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: failed.bard on June 15, 2009, 11:20:16 AM
  This may not be the right thread for it, but is there a way to make emote animations work through the @ commands?  With a familiar you can possess and do i that way still, but with companions and summons you can't.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: DarkWyvern on June 15, 2009, 11:49:36 AM
Yes you can do the @companion then post *Growls low* and such things as that.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on June 15, 2009, 11:54:48 AM
Dragons dont growl they rawr!
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Kaspar on July 09, 2009, 09:42:50 AM
  This may not be the right thread for it, but is there a way to make emote animations work through the @ commands?  With a familiar you can possess and do i that way still, but with companions and summons you can't.

Necroing this thread. I think this idea here would be a really good addition.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: Smitehammer on July 09, 2009, 02:54:09 PM
You can already do that.  type @animal and emote something, the little words pop over the companion's head.

This won't get put in, but is there any way we could ever get 'possess companion'?  Here's the thing.  Stealthy druid, the stealth buffs and the stealthy feat, and a panther familiar - with high hide and move silently.  We should be able to go anywhere and stealth it up, but I can't get the panther to enter stealth mode, so it's sort of worthless as a sneak.

The 'possession' might be taken advantage of, of course, but even if people used them to convey messages to other druids or whatnot, what difference is that from "Lassie", as long as only emotes are used?

If possession's not an option, how about putting the companion in the same mode as the owner?  If I'm stealthed, he's stealthed.  When I unstealth or tell him to attack, he unstealths and restealths upon finishing the attack.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: failed.bard on July 09, 2009, 03:01:36 PM
  Animations.  The question is/was, is there a way to make the animations play?
  I am fully aware you can put ** and [] around what you make the summons say in order to write an emote, but currently, only familiars can play the animations, and you're required to posess them and emote directly to get them.
Title: Re: How about @familiar for animals companions?
Post by: LoLJohnFerro on July 12, 2009, 10:24:44 PM
You can already do that.  type @animal and emote something, the little words pop over the companion's head.

This won't get put in, but is there any way we could ever get 'possess companion'?  Here's the thing.  Stealthy druid, the stealth buffs and the stealthy feat, and a panther familiar - with high hide and move silently.  We should be able to go anywhere and stealth it up, but I can't get the panther to enter stealth mode, so it's sort of worthless as a sneak.

The 'possession' might be taken advantage of, of course, but even if people used them to convey messages to other druids or whatnot, what difference is that from "Lassie", as long as only emotes are used?

If possession's not an option, how about putting the companion in the same mode as the owner?  If I'm stealthed, he's stealthed.  When I unstealth or tell him to attack, he unstealths and restealths upon finishing the attack.


Just bring this back this is a good idea btw and should be looked into I hate having a panther with out being able to stealth it.