Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CajunAzn" data-source="post: 5075264" data-attributes="member: 87718">So we have differing opinions! But I'm not the one saying that my way is the only "right" way to see things. I'm trying to show that the meaning of rules, have to be interpreted in order to apply them. Therefore differing interpretations leads to different implementations...  Please read my posts to Abdul. Clearly I indicated the lines of sight must remain blocked...in your fan example, the hide check would be for synchronzing your body to movements with the blades of the fan. If you succeed then, you're adept enough to do it, provided the fan stays where it is. In the previous posts I also explain how the movement of allies in the front, is actually an effective screen for allies in the back: Imagine you are facing off with an enemy party. The fighters storm forward, in full armor, brandishing deadly weapons. Are you honestly telling me your going to be looking in the back, for someone that might be try to hide? Even if you do catch a glimpse (ie. that one unblocked line of sight) you're not going to have clear fix on his position, especially if he's trained in stealth. I have a feeling you kind of just jumped in without taking the time to read the points that have been given. I know it's a long thread but thats the only way we can have meaningful discussion. === What we are specifically debating is: "Do you start applying the no-creature-cover rule at the precise instant that the player succeeds his stealth roll based on said creature?" If you don't mind being an unreasonable and "rules-lawyering" type DM, then ok, take away the stealth the players just rolled for, regardless of believability, fairness and fun. But, I was hoping this discussion could lead to a better conclusion than that.</blockquote>

Verification