Shadowdancer's Hide in plain Sight

[Thanee]

Anyone remember those stories of ninjas approaching guards in hallways, blightly lit, floors designed to make noise when you apply presure, no shadows what so ever, ninja walks a straight line to the guard...and the guard STILL doesn't see them? Wouldn't the ability be similar?

Yep, because ninjas also have magical abilities...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

For one thing, Hide in Plain Sight does not tap the Plane of Shadow. HiPS does not mention in its text as having the Shadow descriptor, but for more proof, the Manual of the Planes does not list HiPS in the extensive listing of official D&D spells and abilities that utilize the Planes. 3.5 did not override the MotP's listing in this regard, so HiPS is definately still not a Shadow effect. Just FYI, there is no way that HiPS taps into the Plane of Shadow. The Shadowdancer's own skill with using magic for stealth is what makes HiPS function.

Ok. That part with the plane of shadows (in my initial post), now really is just flavor text... if the MotP does specify, that this cannot be the case, that's really no problem at all... the point is, that I think, the shadowdancer needs "shadow" to create something in a magical way to be able to hide. He can do that anywhere within 10 ft. of some shadow.

It's the proximity to the shadow (the shadowdancer's feeble magics do not work without such a source, unlike real magic from wizards, for example), which is important.

Hide in Plain Sight also is not an illusion.

Agreed.

Now, since it cannot be illusory nor shadowstuff-based, how to adjudicate Hide in Plain Sight? It's not invisibility either, and is not mentioned nor described as mind-affecting or the like, so leaves few options.

Like the one I am using (w/o the PoS flavor )?

Obviously, activating HiPS causes the character to seemingly disappear, since it works even when being observed by other folks, but that's just a trick of the supernatural effect.

Yes, a magical trick.

The Shadowdancer thusly seems to disappear, but really could be found hiding in whatever shadow is nearby, ...

Uhm... no. The shadowdancer does not move from the spot.

...so someone looking into that shadowed area (via a successful Spot check) would notice the Shadowdancer hiding there.

Again, no, ...

Yet, the Shadowdancer remains physically outside the shadow, so how does this work?

That's the question.

The only logical recourse I can offer, given the terribly sparse wording of the ability and the already-disproved commonly-held possibilities, is that the Shadowdancer stays where they are and moves as desired, ...

Uhm...

...while the supernatural Hide in Plain Sight ability distorts reality to make the Shadowdancer appear in the nearby shadows, without actually moving the Shadowdancer into those shadows.

So it's an illusion then, yes? That's what illusions do.

If it not actually moves the shadowdancer, but just let's the shadowdancer appear to have move... then it should be labeled as an illusion.

It is not, as you said yourself, thus this makes no sense.

Unlike invisibility, light doesn't just go around the Shadowdancer and flex back into its normal path as though uninterrupted, it actually impacts the Shadowdancer and thus makes them visible (sight is really just eyes picking up the light reflected off of things), but instead of reflecting/refracting off of them as normal to be seen by others, it first gets bent around 10 feet away into the shadows, then bent back into its normal path of refraction, etc.

So again, it works similar to invisibility... an illusion?

Since it's more of a very minor, weak, spacial-bending magic, it's universal instead of illusory.

Ah, right.

A rather minor, reality-distorting, weak, spacial-bending magic, which is not just an illusion, yet is able to let something appear as it not really is...

Wait... True Seeing says, it let's you see all things as they really are...

Hmm... then it should work just fine, no?

True Seeing reveals invisible creatures, illusions, and such, and penetrates darkness, so you could presume that it would reveal the Shadowdancer hiding in the dark shadow behind another creature or object..... But then, you have to remember; the definition of a shadow is not merely a darkened area or the absence of light, it is an area where little or no light reaches because of an opaque (non-transparent) obstacle blocking the light's path. A shadow is the dimly-lit area behind something that light is striking, so the Shadowdancer isn't really 'hiding' in the shadow behind his or her ally; that's silly, shadows aren't dark enough to hide anything by themselves;

Well, according to the RAW you can hide in a shadow. So this point is moot.

...only things that are already very small/thin and darkly-colored will be hidden by a mere shadow;

Yes, a bright orange cape would not be the best kind of garb then.

That's what circumstance modifiers are for... -10 would sound appropriate then, I think.

But back to the topic...

...you need true darkness to actually hide something, and you only get that when an area is isolated from light sources.

Uhm... "true darkness" in D&D provides shadowy illumination.

The Shadowdancer is hiding behind his or her ally, or behind that corner of the building, or in that deep pit over there.

No, he's not, he's standing in the open. At least according to the RAW.

He/she's physically standing in plain sight, but appears to be hiding behind the cover of some object/creature/terrain feature.

So? If he's standing in full view, True Seeing detects him... that "appears" part is exactly what True Seeing is meant to see through.

Or is it that fabulous illusory non-illusion again?

Your True Seeing can no more see the Shadowdancer hiding behind that orc than your True Seeing could see a stirge clinging to the orc's back, because True Seeing doesn't give you X-ray vision to see behind obstacles.

And where exactly is the object in front of the shadowdancer, who is standing in the open?

The Shadowdancer simply cannot be hiding in the orc's shadow itself, because shadows alone aren't dark enough to hide in, but the Shadowdancer can use their mystical ability to Hide in Plain Sight, appearing to be standing right behind the orc, mimicking the orc's movements perfectly to where the orc blocks your view of them.

Without moving near the orc, who could be 10-15 ft. away... not bad!

You could still spot that stirge or Shadowdancer if you moved around to a better angle where you could see slightly behind the orc, and notice that thing hiding on its back, the sleeping stirge.

Yeah, if the stirge was simply hiding.

The HiPS ability merely needs suitably large enough shadows nearby so that they can be used as a conduit for the magic, ...

There I agree.

...traveling along the path of the shadow to the object/creature casting that shadow, in order to properly bend light just right so as to make the Shadowdancer appear to be hiding behind the orc/whatever, the proper distance away, in the proper shape/dimensions.

Well, see above.

This is the only logical way I can see Hide in Plain Sight working, given its sparse text and what marginally-related hard and fast rules and examples are given in the PHB, DMG, and MM.

You don't find it "logical" (well, as logical as a magical effect could be), that the shadowdancer creates something using the proximity of the shadow as a conduit for the magic of the supernatural ability, which allows him to hide on the spot?

Without moving, without a Wish-like ability to distort reality, without appearing somewhere else, but still being where he is, yet using no illusory magic whatsoever?

Anyways, hope the above doesn't come along as too snippish, I just don't find it very convincing (the whole "appears to be" thing).

But it's good to see, that you basically come to the same conclusion, that the text alone does not suffice to explain the ability properly and completely, and that a DM has to add something (mostly flavor) to make it work in a believable and consistent way, while interacting with other abilities, such as True Seeing. This can take many forms... and depending on the specifics, True Seeing might work, or it might not.

I'm just objecting if people say, that according to the RAW, True Seeing does not work against HiPS, since the RAW simply does not cover that case properly. It's undefined.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

Yes, the problem lies in the way they left this to the imagination, doesn't it?

Yes, absolutely. It fails to explain the ability, and only lists some mechanics, which are - obviously - not able to cover every situation.

But if you check my previous post, I provide a conveniently rules-conforming flavour text summary of how the shadowdancer uses shadows to hide.

...let's say that the shadows spiral out and engulf the shadowdancer with inky, murky, non-illusionary shadow-stuff (but not magical darkness)...

That's about the same I am proposing... just that I do not go to lengths to say, that it is darkness, yet no darkness, that it is an illusion, yet no illusion. I just take it for what it is, a shadow/darkness effect created by magic.

That to me is the most simple and most straightforward explanation, which is consistent with the RAW (filling in some blanks, of course).

"A shadowdancer can use the Hide skill even while being observed." Check!
"As long as she is within 10 feet of some sort of shadow, ..." Check!
"...a shadowdancer can hide herself from view in the open..." Check!
"...without anything to actually hide behind." Check!

(Note: That "anything to actually hide behind" is created by the ability, so does not have to be present. Not even a shadowdancer can actually hide with nothing to hide behind... it's just, that no external condition (other than proximity to shadow), i.e. concealment, is needed, the shadowdancer brings his own.)

"She cannot, however, hide in her own shadow." Check!

True Seeing neither lists HiPS in the example list of things it does see through, nor in the example list of things it does not see through, so we can choose. I choose "yes".

Instead, let us assume that he's using magic to manipulate his environment (more like a transmutation than an illusion) in order to make up for his lack of concealment. There, better now?

Well, even then I would say True Seeing works, since it pierces any kind of darkness, and this includes any kind of shadow, mundane and magical (and also any kind of concealment granted from that, obviously).

I would agree with you, if the ability would create some kind of physical object (it might, for all we know), then True Seeing would not work.

But that's not stated, so is as much a guess as anything else.

Bye
Thanee

 

[mikebr99]

Hey Thanee.
I agree with you almost completely (all 7 pages worth!)... except, way back in your 1st post:

<snip>
- When attacking (in an obvious way), the shadowdancer is also revealed as normal when hiding, there is no way to avoid this, except using the sniping rules. However, the shadowdancer can attack (standard action) and then hide again (move action (see below), without a -20 penalty), which is obviously superior to using the sniping rules, because the shadowdancer can use the Hide skill under observation.
<snip>
Bye
Thanee

The way I read the Hide skill... and the Sniping mechanic specifically, is that during the Sniping action (comprised of an attack & move equiv. hide check at -20, and maybe a 5ft. step if that wouldn't take you out from behind cover/concealment) you never become un-hidden at any point. That is why it is so hard to complete... ie. -20 DC.

So... the HiPS ability never comes into play... as you've beat the DC and shot the guy, without ever being seen. YMMV


Mike

 

[Scion]

I agree with you almost completely (all 7 pages worth!)... except, way back in your 1st post:

you agree with him that when useing the hide skill you arent actually hiding?

This board is scary at times, truely scary.

Hide skill = hiding. Hide in plain sight = hiding. Hiding = hiding.

 

[Nail]

you agree with him that when useing the hide skill you arent actually hiding?

Errr, not as I read his post.

Since hiding can be done in both magical and non-magical ways, I don't see any problem interpreting True Seeing as being able to see a Shadow Dancer using a magical (Su) ability.

Still, a strict constructionalist approach to the SRD would say the True Sight could not see the hidden Shadow Dancer. And the HiPS Ranger is right out, regardless of our semantics.

This board is scary at times, truely scary.

Don't bother me right now....I working on a mage spell that duplicates HiPS. I'm gonna call this new 2nd level Sor/Wiz spell: "Hidden because I'm not listed in the description of True Sight".

 

[Scion]

Errr, not as I read his post.

So you read, 'simply hiding is not the same as hiding' as something different than what I said? Very odd Especially as it doesnt even read as saying something outside of the rules, merely a common mode of speaking. There isnt any reason to think that 'simply hiding' means that only the baseline hideskill with no modifications from any other sources. Such as spells, powers, feats, whatever.

There really isnt any difference in that case if someone had a supernatural ability to cut the penatly for snipping in half or has the supernatural ability to hide in some other special case. Just because it happens to need a shadownearby is meaningless since it doesnt mention anything that falls into the categories given by truesight.

Since hiding can be done in both magical and non-magical ways, I don't see any problem interpreting True Seeing as being able to see a Shadow Dancer using a magical (Su) ability.

If those magical or nonmagical ways fall within the bounds of what true seeing can peirce? Sure, go for it. Such as a darkness spell or something. Which the shadow dancers ability is nothing like.

Seriously, there really isnt any reason to assume true seeing can foil it. Hiding is listed specifically as foiling true seeing and hide in plain sight merely modifies when hide may be used. Nothing about becoming shadowy, illusory, invisible, or anything like that. Simply hiding.

Still, a strict constructionalist approach to the SRD would say the True Sight could not see the hidden Shadow Dancer. And the HiPS Ranger is right out, regardless of our semantics.

Since they both have effectively the same effect with a similar requirement why? Why is one exempt while the other is not? Because one is magical? Doesnt matter, they both do the same thing and true sight doesnt specify that it works on them.

Things as they actually are, if people wish to say that means seeing the shadowdancer then it must also work on the ranger.

Don't bother me right now....I working on a mage spell that duplicates HiPS. I'm gonna call this new 2nd level Sor/Wiz spell: "Hidden because I'm not listed in the description of True Sight".

Hey, depending on how it hides you go for it. There are lots of spells that can still keep one hidden from true sight, and one that specifically mentions that it solely works against true sight could certainly be of a lower level than true sight.

Gah, I am out of here for now, the amount of, 'but hiding doesnt actually mean hiding' through several pages of this thread is just plain depressing. When something is specifically called out and people still say that it isnt true.. wow.. just plain wow.

 

[Thanee]

The way I read the Hide skill... and the Sniping mechanic specifically, is that during the Sniping action (comprised of an attack & move equiv. hide check at -20, and maybe a 5ft. step if that wouldn't take you out from behind cover/concealment) you never become un-hidden at any point. That is why it is so hard to complete... ie. -20 DC.

That's how I see it as well, actually. I think I mentioned that somewhere later.

So... the HiPS ability never comes into play... as you've beat the DC and shot the guy, without ever being seen.

The point I meant there is, that the shadowdancer can effectively snipe not using the sniping rules without the -20 penalty to the Hide check.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darkness]

Yep, because ninja's also have magical ablities...

Ninjae are simply totally sweet. They laugh at D&D's feeble power classifications. Of course, you can't hear them laughing - they're that stealthy.

 

[Thanee]

Since they both have effectively the same effect with a similar requirement why? Why is one exempt while the other is not? Because one is magical? Doesnt matter, they both do the same thing and true sight doesnt specify that it works on them.

One question... would you allow a medium-sized ranger to hide on a huge 1"-high grass area (he's not wearing appropriate camo-clothing and the area is completely flat) while surrounded by a horde of people who watch him?

By the rules he can do that. And if noone makes a Spot check against his Hide check, noone will know where he is.

It's quite obviously completely ridiculous, that he can do that.

That's about the same with the shadowdancer... unless you interprete the ability in some way like the way I have explained above, which in turn leads me to the conclusion that True Seeing will foil that ability, the shadowdancer's hiding ability is just plain ridiculous and humanly (or nonhumanly ) impossible.

Therefore (to me) it can only be the magic, which hides the shadowdancer, not the skill. The skill is just used as a mechanic, but the actual hiding is done with magic, because there is otherwise no way to hide.

There isnt any reason to think that 'simply hiding' means that only the baseline hideskill with no modifications from any other sources.

Don't know about you, but to me the ability is first and foremost a supernatural ability (just what it is, at least it is labeled as that), not a skill. It only makes use of a skill as a mechanical tool.

Bye
Thanee