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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8212460" data-attributes="member: 71699">What matters is whether the set attempt() == the set result(). Consider an attempt that I can succeed or fail at - like climbing a perpendicular wall? I cannot fail to make the attempt, but I can fail to climb the wall. In that case, it seems like result() has different contents than attempt().It might be like saying - you can only attempt to turn yourself into a goldfish when it is raining, but rain or shine once you are a goldfish you can remain one. This is peculiar, but I am not arguing for realism here, only for what the RAW could possibly entail.Typically what becomes accepted as absurd is just what happens to satisfy the beliefs and expectations of some or other empowered group. But in RPGs, we already have absurd results - a person can turn into a fish - and at our table we are the decisively empowered group. I point this out not to say that I disagree with the absurdity, but rather that I disagree that such an argument is necessarily persuasive.You have not left your hiding spot, because your hiding spot extends into lightly obscured squares. One way to think about it is as two new conditions that a creature can possess. The first is "can hide" - a creature possessing this condition can make an attempt to hide. The second is "can remain hidden" - a creature possessing this condition can remain hidden. A creature may possess none, one or both of these conditions.However, inadvisable they may be, it would be straightforward to create such mechanics in a tool like Unreal or Unity. One way would be to have something check what tile a creature is in, and update the condition based on properties of that tile. There could be other properties - "half move", "zero move" and so on, and perhaps volumetric effects - e.g. fog or lighting - would be taken into account. The point is, from the perspective of a consistent set of game mechanics there is nothing impossible going on here.Which as it happens is a point already conceded, in supposing that there can be creatures that can remain hidden in squares that are lightly obscured. Seeing as a skulker can sneak directly toward a searcher if lightly obscured, it seems mistaken to argue that it's impossible for creatures to do so. Rather one should argue that skulker shouldn't be robbed of meaning... which so far everyone agrees with.</blockquote>

Verification