Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Brokenkingdom" data-source="post: 4315082" data-attributes="member: 69861">Dually noted.However from the only THREE times in the ENTIRE PHB that they mention shadow walk (literally &quot;shadow walk&quot; is only in the book 3 times, twice mentioned in passing) the only description of shadow walk pertains to &quot;walking in the shadows&quot;. Going by the ONLY description of something that MIGHT pertain to it we are left to ASSUME the squares in which the warlock resides while under concealment are shadowy and thus obscured.Still, the fact remains that the warlock is under concealment and therefore still allowed to make a stealth check AND if made within the same move action he/she WILL incur a -5 penalty for walking more then 2 squares while attempting to stealth. Super edit go!: As far as I can tell the number of situations that it would make a difference (outside of flavor text) are severely limited. I can only see something like, if the warlock is concealed from shadow walk and a small enough creature ends it's turn inside the same square as said warlock and then someone tried to attack that creature.And as far as -2 to hit being a defense bonus type dealy, until you provide an ability that garnishes bonuses for the warlock being concealed (From what I can tell there are none, but don't quote me) we can logically come to the conclusion that either they added it in for no reason at all OR that they had added it in as a -2 to hit pseudo-defense bonus. Which would you put YOUR money on? I'd go with the one that makes sense.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Brokenkingdom, post: 4315082, member: 69861"] Dually noted. However from the only THREE times in the ENTIRE PHB that they mention shadow walk (literally "shadow walk" is only in the book 3 times, twice mentioned in passing) the only description of shadow walk pertains to "walking in the shadows". Going by the ONLY description of something that MIGHT pertain to it we are left to ASSUME the squares in which the warlock resides while under concealment are shadowy and thus obscured. Still, the fact remains that the warlock is under concealment and therefore still allowed to make a stealth check AND if made within the same move action he/she WILL incur a -5 penalty for walking more then 2 squares while attempting to stealth. [I]Super edit go!: As far as I can tell the number of situations that it would make a difference (outside of flavor text) are severely limited. I can only see something like, if the warlock is concealed from shadow walk and a small enough creature ends it's turn inside the same square as said warlock and then someone tried to attack that creature.[/I] And as far as -2 to hit being a defense bonus type dealy, until you provide an ability that garnishes bonuses for the warlock being concealed (From what I can tell there are none, but don't quote me) we can logically come to the conclusion that either they added it in for no reason at all OR that they had added it in as a -2 to hit pseudo-defense bonus. Which would you put YOUR money on? I'd go with the one that makes sense. [/QUOTE]

Verification