Author Topic: stealth versus detection spells  (Read 6728 times)

failed.bard

  • Guest
stealth versus detection spells
« on: June 22, 2008, 05:13:14 AM »
  Assuming I have all the numbers right here:

 Camouflage is a first level and gives +10 to hide.  One with the land is 2nd level and gives +4 to hide and move siletnly.  These spells stack.
 Clairaudience is 2nd level and gives +10 to search and listen.  True seeing is 4th/5th and gives +10 to spot.  These spells do not stack.

  Why do the stealth spells stack, when the detections ones don't?  Either both types should stack, or neither type.

Rex

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3948
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #1 on: June 22, 2008, 12:50:34 PM »
  Assuming I have all the numbers right here:

 Camouflage is a first level and gives +10 to hide.  One with the land is 2nd level and gives +4 to hide and move siletnly.  These spells stack.
 Clairaudience is 2nd level and gives +10 to search and listen.  True seeing is 4th/5th and gives +10 to spot.  These spells do not stack.

  Why do the stealth spells stack, when the detections ones don't?  Either both types should stack, or neither type.

Hell, I'll be mean and just say it.  Someone somewhere decided that Sneaks, should be undetectable.  By any means.

I do like that I am not the only one that  noticed the same thing.  The Detection spells SHOULD stack, like the stealth spells.  I wouldn't take away the stacking ability of the Stealth Spells because I am a firm believer in that Sneaks SHOULD be able to sneak. 

That's one of the cool things about sneakery.

But the detection spells and Items should stack just as well.

~Rex
Sometimes brutal violence is the only answer.

Badbelly

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 229
  • RP imposter
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #2 on: June 22, 2008, 01:48:27 PM »
My character Liam, has no issues detecting sneaks, I don't see where the problem is. If you wish to detect sneaks, you need only invest in the right skills and feats. Sytem is fine and should be left alone in my opinion.

Rex

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3948
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #3 on: June 22, 2008, 02:05:39 PM »
My character Liam, has no issues detecting sneaks, I don't see where the problem is. If you wish to detect sneaks, you need only invest in the right skills and feats. Sytem is fine and should be left alone in my opinion.

System is broken and it takes Broken Builds in order to counter it.  If Sneak Stuff, Stacks, So should Detection Stuff.  Plain and Simple.

~Rex
Sometimes brutal violence is the only answer.

Nefensis

  • MIA
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 7171
  • Gaming wench )0(
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #4 on: June 22, 2008, 02:16:12 PM »
For purpose of fairness i think they should stack, unless the spell description says clearly it dosnt.  OR make one with the land not stackable with camouflage.

Stela Cojocaru - barovian snake
Crina Ovidiu - barovian guard

Ren13

  • New to the Mists
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #5 on: June 22, 2008, 04:59:22 PM »
since all players already get a d20 added to spot and the sneaker doesnt get the same to hide (due to bioware cock up) the unstacking of spells is a minor issue

archonzero

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • ArchonZero's Gallery Art
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #6 on: June 22, 2008, 05:16:13 PM »
Agreed with Ren on this.. players only need invest in one skillset +d20 roll to counter the move/hide ability.  Which means a sneak cannot sneak until at min 10th level (without any gear) even then they are still chance to be spotted by a player under 5th level with a lucky d20 roll.  Consider this a anti-sneak character 1st level build can start the game with an effective 16 spot and law of averages will dictate the +10 on a d20 giving them an effective 26 spot chance at level 1.  Bioware has made spotting sneaks broken, with a level one character capable of defeating a level 8-10 rogues sneakery (in theory, no gear straight stats).  Sorry Rex, while on some level I agree with you, I think increasing the spotting ability in PoTM with the already generous background talents to giving 3-6 ranks in certain skillsets already defeats sneaks, forcing them to stack as many bonuses that they can in order just to be capable of sneaking.

-----
Jai'Dynn Za'Raa - Shadow Huntress

Rex

  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3948
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #7 on: June 22, 2008, 05:21:17 PM »
I seem to recall seeing more then a few d20 rolls pop up on my screen when sneaking with my sneak.  If Stealth adders Stack, then so Should the search/Spot material unless, as pointed out, the spell specifically states that it doesn't stack.  Sorry but like a few other people I'm tired of the Invisable man.  My +22 spot Ranger, can't find the Stealth Guy of the same level standing next to him fully half the time.

~Rex
Sometimes brutal violence is the only answer.

ethinos

  • Keepin' it hardcore since 2nd edition AD&D
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3707
  • When in doubt, fireball.
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #8 on: June 22, 2008, 05:28:02 PM »
since all players already get a d20 added to spot and the sneaker doesnt get the same to hide (due to bioware cock up) the unstacking of spells is a minor issue

You got any proof of that?
Torgan Ironshield: Battlerager and smith
Wirth Darmington II: Roguish noble
Kurgh: A simple herdsman

archonzero

  • Dark Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 569
    • ArchonZero's Gallery Art
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #9 on: June 22, 2008, 05:36:49 PM »
  Ask any DM Ethinos.  I already have and yes they get it.  It's not presented in the CL.  I had a 34 hide at 7th level and a level one player with a 14 spot saw me.  I was told he made a 20 on his spot check roll (which is not shown in the logs, much the same as how the search rolls are hidden).

-----
Jai'Dynn Za'Raa - Shadow Huntress

Delphinidae

  • Phasing in and out of PoTM
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 2381
  • My poor wererats get no love.
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #10 on: June 22, 2008, 06:48:21 PM »
On rare occasions I have seen the opposing Hide/MS rolls of PCs versus my PC on the right window. It only did them when I was near Radu and opened the door of the Lady's Rest, but what archonzero says is right. DC is set as d20 + opposing PC's Spot/Listen ranks vs. your Hide/MS ranks (no +d20 there).

You can also see the d20 + Spot/Listen Ranks vs player's Hide/MS ranks when you sneak pass monsters.


Ongoing Plots
Legacy of Blood
The Eye of the McGraths

ethinos

  • Keepin' it hardcore since 2nd edition AD&D
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3707
  • When in doubt, fireball.
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #11 on: June 22, 2008, 08:05:20 PM »
Can Soren fix something like this, so that its a proper opposed roll? Because the server isn't balanced, and favors sneakers. Not only that, but "casual" sneaky folks are wasting skill ranks (and sometimes at cross-skill costs).
Torgan Ironshield: Battlerager and smith
Wirth Darmington II: Roguish noble
Kurgh: A simple herdsman

Blacky Rose

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2008, 09:13:13 PM »
Camouflage also stacks with Mass Camouflage and both stack with One With the Land providing a total of +24 to Hide and +4 to Move Silently skills.

Mass Camouflage is a 4th level spell and requires 15 Ranger levels or a Rogue with decent Use Magic Device skill so it is not available for most characters before medium levels.
Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.

Delphinidae

  • Phasing in and out of PoTM
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 2381
  • My poor wererats get no love.
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2008, 09:23:47 PM »
I used to be a sneak, and that's just too nasty. Mass camouflauge and camouflage shouldn't stack at all.


Ongoing Plots
Legacy of Blood
The Eye of the McGraths

Ryltar/ Robert Archer

  • The Cult of the Morninglord
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3028
  • The Chuck Norris of RP -Eraldur
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2008, 09:49:47 PM »
as someone who is a sneak agreed that camafloud and MASS camo should not stack dont see why camo and one with land cant though but mass camo perhaps mass camo could be adjusted to just do what camo does but on an area of effect?

oh and blacky rose all someone needds to cast ranger scrolls is one lvl of ranger

Badbelly

  • Undead Slayer
  • ***
  • Posts: 229
  • RP imposter
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #15 on: June 22, 2008, 10:26:44 PM »
My character Liam, has no issues detecting sneaks, I don't see where the problem is. If you wish to detect sneaks, you need only invest in the right skills and feats. Sytem is fine and should be left alone in my opinion.

System is broken and it takes Broken Builds in order to counter it.  If Sneak Stuff, Stacks, So should Detection Stuff.  Plain and Simple.

~Rex


So taking skills and feats in spot and listen make a broken build? I don't thinks so. If you wish to be a good sneak, you need to dedicate yourself to that course, likewise if you want to be a good anti-sneak. The mod is already too suited for the lone ranger- do it alls, The more things are specialized the better, makes for better RP and a more balanced world. lets make changes that encourage a diverse group of PCs, instead of the one we have now where half the builds on the server are basically the same.

failed.bard

  • Guest
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #16 on: June 22, 2008, 10:31:04 PM »
My character Liam, has no issues detecting sneaks, I don't see where the problem is. If you wish to detect sneaks, you need only invest in the right skills and feats. Sytem is fine and should be left alone in my opinion.

System is broken and it takes Broken Builds in order to counter it.  If Sneak Stuff, Stacks, So should Detection Stuff.  Plain and Simple.

~Rex


So taking skills and feats in spot and listen make a broken build? I don't thinks so. If you wish to be a good sneak, you need to dedicate yourself to that course, likewise if you want to be a good anti-sneak. The mod is already too suited for the lone ranger- do it alls, The more things are specialized the better, makes for better RP and a more balanced world. lets make changes that encourage a diverse group of PCs, instead of the one we have now where half the builds on the server are basically the same.

Fighters do not get spot or listen as class skills, and only 2 skill points per level.  They will never be able to detect even a moderate sneak.  The gear is unbalanced, the DPs are unbalanced.  The whole hide in plain sight computer engine handling of stealth is unbalanced.

  Regardless, this topic is purely about the spells, whether it's balanced to have one type stack, and the other not.  The skills and items have been discussed ad naseum already.

EO

  • Assistant Head DM/Developer
  • Head DMs
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 15285
  • The one and only, the one everyone wants to be!
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #17 on: June 22, 2008, 10:48:26 PM »
A fighter is not supposed to spot a sneak.

A sneak is not supposed to beat a fighter in pure melee.

What is unbalanced?

Ryltar/ Robert Archer

  • The Cult of the Morninglord
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3028
  • The Chuck Norris of RP -Eraldur
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #18 on: June 22, 2008, 11:02:58 PM »
A fighter is not supposed to spot a sneak.

A sneak is not supposed to beat a fighter in pure melee.

What is unbalanced?

ok i'll go off with my own build with calson he's a ranger rouge backgrounds with stealth and child of the wild (i was told child of teh wild gives bonus to listen but i'm not certain) he's got 16 wis half-vistani and every feat for stealth and listen plus he has a helm of the bat which gives +5 and has no DP's in total he's got unbuffed a 36 listen and he rarely can spot folks his same lvl of stealth focus which ok fair enough is hit or miss but when i look at the amount of stealth gear, scrolls, vs detect gear either spot/listen, and scrolls that wont stack the way teh stealth scrolls do well....honestly there's teh problem if you ask me

failed.bard

  • Guest
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #19 on: June 22, 2008, 11:06:45 PM »
A fighter is not supposed to spot a sneak.

A sneak is not supposed to beat a fighter in pure melee.

What is unbalanced?

  Sneaks do beat fighters in pure melee.  That's the problem.

EO

  • Assistant Head DM/Developer
  • Head DMs
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 15285
  • The one and only, the one everyone wants to be!
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #20 on: June 22, 2008, 11:08:54 PM »
With 36 listen at your level, you could have seen Julia and most sneaks of the same level as you. Of course, you could add the DP's, but guess what, there is a DP that gives spot/listen as well, so it's a moot point.

Anyhow, rather tired of that debate. It's a pointless one and arguments were stated in other topics and it is a result of ignorance more than anything since most don't know how the system works or what it's like on both sides and make bold claims based on hearsay most of the time.

---

edit: And no, a pure sneak doesn't beat a fighter in melee. What beats a fighter in melee is a fighter/rogue, but that's both a melee build and a stealth build and is usually the best build you can make for a fighter and for a rogue, hence why most of our rogues and fighters tend to be fighter/rogues.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2008, 11:10:38 PM by EO »

Ryltar/ Robert Archer

  • The Cult of the Morninglord
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 3028
  • The Chuck Norris of RP -Eraldur
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #21 on: June 22, 2008, 11:11:34 PM »
With 36 listen at your level, you could have seen Julia and most sneaks of the same level as you. Of course, you could add the DP's, but guess what, there is a DP that gives spot/listen as well, so it's a moot point.

Anyhow, rather tired of that debate. It's a pointless one and arguments were stated in other topics and it is a result of ignorance more than anything since most don't know how the system works or what it's like on both sides and make bold claims based on hearsay most of the time.

while i understand what your getting at eo on topic here if you compare JUST scrolls of stealth that DO stack VS the scrolls that do spot/listen i'm pretty sure of course you can correct me if i'm wrong the stealth scrolls will give more bonus's then the spot/listrne scrolls

because last i checked amplify and clarivoyance dont stack so just by using the camo/mass camo/one with land trio of scrools a stealth can out hide a listener

EO

  • Assistant Head DM/Developer
  • Head DMs
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 15285
  • The one and only, the one everyone wants to be!
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #22 on: June 22, 2008, 11:14:36 PM »
Amplify and clairvoyance do stack actually.

Chrisman888

  • The Man Of The Hour
  • Dark Power
  • ******
  • Posts: 1486
  • Current Character: Horatiu Milosovici
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #23 on: June 22, 2008, 11:17:10 PM »
Didn't someone say when you roll spot/listen it add D20, and hide/ms DOES NOT?

So if that's true, if you have 36 spot and I have 36 hide, you will spot me every single time. So really I think hide/ms should always be higher then spot/listen. Thus being more... items and scrolls to use to get it more higher then spot/listen, because if there was no hide/ms skill + items, and no spot/listen skill + items. Then spotters.. would win.. all the time.

DM Shadowspawn

  • Guest
Re: stealth versus detection spells
« Reply #24 on: June 22, 2008, 11:21:22 PM »
Both sides add 20. Spot/Listen and hide/MS