Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 4358753" data-attributes="member: 71699">You have an evil mind, but I'm with you on that. Did you notice those Kobolds have +9 to +11 Stealth? BTW I found myself making more rolls than you describe for Perception checks.&nbsp;&nbsp;Warrior of the Wild FTW <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> If the 'Redbeard gambit' is supported by Dev, that will be the best feat ever.&nbsp;If you follow RAW precisely, then you can afford to let Rogues throw in Stealth off a tart's backside in a strong gale. If not, you have to consider the quality of defence they achieve: -5 to be hit, automatically missing if the wrong square is picked, with -10 effective on the Perception check to know the right square.&nbsp;I throw dice when an enemy has to make a partially-informed guess about something to do with players. Even if I pick only two candidate squares that gives a 50% miss chance, unless I skew it. And this all brings back the consistency issue...&nbsp;-vk</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 4358753, member: 71699"] You have an evil mind, but I'm with you on that. Did you notice those Kobolds have +9 to +11 Stealth? BTW I found myself making more rolls than you describe for Perception checks. [B]Warrior of the Wild[/B] FTW ;) If the 'Redbeard gambit' is supported by Dev, that will be the best feat ever. If you follow RAW precisely, then you can afford to let Rogues throw in Stealth off a tart's backside in a strong gale. If not, you have to consider the quality of defence they achieve: -5 to be hit, automatically missing if the wrong square is picked, with -10 effective on the Perception check to know the right square. I throw dice when an enemy has to make a partially-informed guess about something to do with players. Even if I pick only two candidate squares that gives a 50% miss chance, unless I skew it. And this all brings back the consistency issue... -vk [/QUOTE]

Verification