Invisibility + Fighter's Mark = ??

[Milambus]

No, he can have been pushed, slided, teleported, and end up exactly in the same square if he shifted.

And this could be the case even if the Fighter were not blind, however the game system tells us that the Fighter indeed does know when a move action is a Move and when it is a Shift, or else the Fighter would never be able to know which of his attacks he is making even when he could see the creature.

Hmm, thats a big run on sentence.

Basically the errata means that the Fighter is completely aware of the foe, and the actions it is taking, it just has total concealment from him (-5 to attack). This is what a successful perception roll means, that the Fighter is aware, he has perceived.

 

[Hypersmurf]

And this could be the case even if the Fighter were not blind, however the game system tells us that the Fighter indeed does know when a move action is a Move and when it is a Shift, or else the Fighter would never be able to know which of his attacks he is making even when he could see the creature.

But with the invisibility, all the fighter knows is the location.

He doesn't know what colour the opponent is wearing; he doesn't know what weapon the opponent is holding; he doesn't know what action the opponent is taking.

He knows the opponent is in this square; and now he knows the opponent is no longer in this square, but is in that square. He isn't aware that the shift is occurring; by the time he knows something is different - the only piece of information the errata grants him - the shift has already finished.

The errata only grants one piece of information - which square is the opponent in - nothing more; the fighter doesn't get every piece of data vaguely related to that piece of information.

-Hyp.

 

[DracoSuave]

Combine that with communication with party members who -can- see him however--it is unreasonable to think a fighter wouldn't be able to tell the difference. The enemy is trying to conceal information, the onus is on him to make the Stealth rolls necessary to do so. He -can't- stealth because he is being seen by an enemy, which means he has to lump it.

This all depends on what 'shift' means. It's been abstracted into a meaningless word, but what does it mean in the game world? It means a defensive style of movement that does not leave your defenses open. Defending in weaponplay isn't just 'keep the shield up' but also includes blows that prevent your enemy from having the chance to open your defenses. Those blows stop, then you know the enemy is open. If those blows don't stop however (shifting) you do. Invisible confers defensive advantages, but it is not perfect, not in a world with blindfighting and all sorts of mystical shinanegans.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Those blows stop, then you know the enemy is open. If those blows don't stop however (shifting) you do.

Given that an invisible creature does not provoke OAs, he is not open if he is moving; 'open' doesn't distinguish between movement and shifting for an invisible creature.

The fighter knows where the enemy is; he does not know what the enemy is doing.

If the immediate action can trigger whether or not the fighter is aware that the triggering condition has occurred, then the fighter should get his Combat Challenge attack even if the enemy is using Stealth... because whether the enemy is using Stealth or not, two things are true:
1. An adjacent enemy is shifting.
2. The fighter does not know that an adjacent enemy is shifting.

If 1. is all that is important for Combat Challenge to trigger, then it will trigger whether or not the enemy is using Stealth.

If 2. is also important, however, then Combat Challenge will not trigger whether or not the enemy is using Stealth, because knowledge of the enemy's location is insufficient for the fighter to be aware that the triggering condition has been met.

-Hyp.

 

[brendan candries]

An errata/houserule could be: "as long as you are able to make opportunity attacks" like found in Rain of Steel/Unyielding Avalanche/etc.