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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="IceBear" data-source="post: 122908" data-attributes="member: 1118">Fine, I guess I like things in my game to make sense.  There are no monsters in my campaign world that can't justify their survivability.  Just because something can't Hide doesn't mean that it leaves signposts everywhere stating here I am.  As you stated, since it doesn't have a Hide skill it's chance of successfully hiding is next to impossible.  In my opinion something that is out of sight from you can't be seen....bottom line.  Now, if you said something like, I'll make it a Spot check DC10 to notice the signs of it's passage I'd actually be more accepting of it (I still think that search or wilderness lore would be better).  I just wouldn't make in an opposed check.  As you said, my example with a beholder is different.  I knew that.  I was just trying to show you how it's not fair to use an opposed check.  What if the ice worm was 100ft down?  Would you give it a bonus on it's opposed Hide check to see if it's better at hiding it's signs this time.  What if it's all ice and no snow?  Again, I think the DC would be different.  That's why I say using an opposed Spot vs Hide is wrong in this case.  I would either determine a fixed DC and allow them to spot the signs or use a Wilderness Lore check.I pointed out how you were stepping on the toes of tracking because in an earlier post you were saying that you could trace the distrubances in the snow to the location of where it was.Finally, just because you spot a disturbance in the snow (and I'm not convinced there would be a very noticeable one) so what?  Unless the PCs make a Wilderness Lore check they won't know what it means.A Hide check is not used to mask all trace of your passage, so again, an opposed Hide vs Spot doesn't seem right.  You say that comparing the movement of a 20ft creature 10ft under ice and snow to general passage is a stretch.  So do I!  So why in this case would you use an opposed check?  If someone ran through snow to go three rooms into  a cave would you use an opposed check then?  If they ran over stone would you use an opposed check?  It just seems in this case you've arbitrarily decided to use an opposed check where in other cases you wouldn't (and if you would use the same check for snow and stone then somethings not right).Anyway, this is going nowhere real fast and in the end it doesn't matter so I think this is it for me.IceBear</blockquote>

Verification