Shadowdancers

[Gargoyle]

Then what is it? A transmutation effect? Why doesn't it make the SD incorporeal, two-dimensional, etc.?

Daniel

It really doesn't say. I don't think it fits neatly into one school of magic.

If you go with the optional rule that there is a -20 penalty for hiding after attacking (from Song and Silence referenced above), and take that a little further by saying you can hide after being seen (ie while "in plain sight") by taking a -20 penalty to the Hide check, you can say that HIPS just eliminates that penalty with magic. It boosts your Hide skill in a specific circumstance by +20. To put that into a school of magic, I'd have to say that it would be transmutation or illusion. But it doesn't alter your body (that would also be transmutation) or appearance (that would be illusion). It certainly doesn't make you incorporeal, two-dimenstional, or even invisible (Invisible creatures cannot be seen with Spot, even though you can become aware of the presence of something, but are vulnerable to see invisibility and the like). The ability description would say as much (or should).

All we know for sure is that it just boosts your Hide skill (though not directly) because of your affinity to shadow. It lets you use Hide in a way that you couldn't before. Items that boost skills can be illusion (cloak of elvenkind, requires the invisibility spell to create) or transmutation (ring of jumping requires the jump spell). Or they can fit into no particular school (ring of swimming requires the creator to have 5 ranks of swim skill). I'd call it primarily illusion if I had to choose, given the proximity of illusion and shadow magic, and that the cloak of elvenkind is the closest magic item or effect to it. But it's not "an illusion" any more than a cloak of elvenkind is...

All IMO of course.

 

[Quickbeam]

WizarDru:
Thanks for the clarification -- evidently I read too far into your remarks and found a criticism where one did not exist.

ashockney & Gargoyle:
My issue of Dragon arrived last night, so I'll be sure to check out the sage Advice section before our game tonight.

Kamikaze Midget:
I like your take on the HiPS ability...nice descriptive!


Thanks again for all the detailed info and firsthand perspectives on shadowdancers and HiPS. While this particular player is a bit of a powergamer, I know his intent isn't to warp the rules. Nor does he plan to abandon SD as a class now that he can HiPS (thankfully). I just wanted to see if the Hide/Sneak Attack/Hide sequence was viable under the PrC without hasted actions or severe penalties applying.

 

[WizarDru]

QB, no problem. Believe me, I don't think there is a 'correct' play-style, except for not having fun. The rules set is simply too big for any of us to truly know it beyond doubt (except maybe Monte, Skip or Caliban ). Believe me, I've seen folks immediately go to the 'you must be a bad DM' button a little quickly, myself (such as when I displayed my dislike for parts of 'Nightfang Spire').

As for SD, I admit it's a little less sexy after the first level (which is why I tinkered with it for my campaign), but Shadowjump and having an obedient scout/flanking assitant is nothing to sneeze at, either. With SD, you get a limited short range DimDoor of your very own. As with most rogue situations, choosing your tactical battlefield is key.

 

[mythago]

On the min-maxing player problem, remember that this is a PRESTIGE class. It has a lot of prerequisites to take it. It also requires the DM to permit the class in the context of his or her campaign.

A common DM rule for prestige classes is that many of them are limited in who will teach them and under what circumstances. "Okay, I take a level of Shadowdancer!" No, you have to find someone who will teach you the mystic ways of shadow, and how are you gonna find one of these secretive people in the first place?

In my own D&D game, the GM made me spend weeks (of game time, not real time) playing cat-and-mouse with the shadowdancer who ended up training me. Eventually I learned that he is a sort of demigod, and becoming his prentice a) meant choosing sides in the gods' war and b) attracting the attention of a number of other, shall we say, powerful interests. When your master plays chess, you may end up a pawn...

Then what is it?

Weird freaky shadow-power juju. But I wouldn't call it an illusion in the sense that certain magic spells are illusions.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I would say this is one of the few examples of the core rules not giving quite *enough* description.

It descibes what you do, but not how you do it.

This leaves a lot of room for DM interpretation. Usually a good thing, but, as we can see, sometimes it ends up going a bit overboard and limiting or extending the ability based on DM interpretation.

Glad to be of descriptive service, my friend!

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I played a min/maxed archer version of this, with shot on the run so i'd be hidden move, shoot, hide/move in one round. And it wasn't close ot unbalncing. Sure I took a lot less hits, but I didn't dish out absurd damage.(basically I got a sneak attack every round so arrow+6d6 or roughly 40 points of damage a shot at 16th level.(usually only 1 shot a round) Big frippin deal, sure it was a cool harrier type character, but as a massive broken damage dealer hah. Yeah like any rogue if you catch people flat footed and succeed in getting off a full attack it could get brutal.(160 points of daamge instead of 40) but that still isn't absurd daamge at 16th level, others can deal it and deal it more consistently.

 

[Orias]

Re: Re: Re: HiPS

There is too much incentive to just take one level.

That's why people need to play believable characters & have reasons for taking the classes that they do. If anyone in any of my games would pick up one level "just cause" with no real reason behind it, I would deny it, saying "where were you able to learn how to do all these uber-sweet things?"

 

[Gargoyle]

Re: Re: Re: Re: HiPS

That's why people need to play believable characters & have reasons for taking the classes that they do. If anyone in any of my games would pick up one level "just cause" with no real reason behind it, I would deny it, saying "where were you able to learn how to do all these uber-sweet things?"

While there is nothing wrong with that approach, I think min/maxing is part of the game for my players, and part of the fun. So I let them get away with it a bit, rather than encouraging them to roleplay more. It makes them really good playtesters, if nothing else.

 

[mythago]

Which is fine, but I think you (generic-you) need to pick one. You can't let your players be minmaxers and then complain when they get too good at it...

 

[Gargoyle]

Which is fine, but I think you (generic-you) need to pick one. You can't let your players be minmaxers and then complain when they get too good at it...

This is true. I've caught myself starting to complain, and then realizing that if I wanted no min/maxing and lots of roleplaying, I should have started the campaign that way.

Players deserve to have their expectations met. Luckily for me, even though my game is primarily "powergaming", they still do good roleplaying now and then. It's all about compromising your game style so that everyone has fun most of the time.

Next campaign, though, I'm going a little heavier in the roleplaying direction. There will certainly be some min/maxing, but it won't be as overt, and I'll make sure they understand that before they begin. I'm going to try to make it less deadly too. The current campaign is pretty deadly and I think min/maxing is something of a defense mechanism against early or unheroic PC death more than anything.