Who watches the watchmen?

[Shrouded Wanderer]

I'm gonna go ahead and take on the oncoming torrent of hate and say I like it. Makes sense. You can usually tell if someone's spots you when sneaking about.

Maybe for a level 1 commoner. PC's are far beyond that.

PCs are beyond that if they actually have ranks in Bluff. Otherwise they are exactly like commoners in that regard. PCs are not better at sneaking than a commoner if they both have 0 ranks in hide and move silently.

This is exactly right.
A PCs skills are only beyond a commoners skills if that PC has trained in that aspect. This happens in real life as well.

I think this whole thing serves as an indicator that some skills should have a little bit of a bump for people that wish for this stuff to not happen. It serves to have people continue to put skill points into things they wont generally put skillpoints into instead of just the mechanically advantaged ones like Discipline, tumble, spellcraft, concentration, hide or move silently.

Generally speaking I find most people ignore a fair swath of skills because they dont offer them a mechanical advantage. Now they do. Change is good.

[Inf]

Hi everyone. Thanks for the feedback. Apologies for not giving more details on the mechanics of this change. I'll note them here with the intent of putting them on the wiki if it sticks around.

How it works
If a character in Stealth is seen or heard by another PC? The "hidden" PC gets to roll an opposed Spot vs Bluff. If they pass, they get a message in their combat log stating who noticed them. Since both of these skills are untrained? Anyone can make these rolls.

• They cannot roll this check if the PC that noticed them is not in line of sight. This includes stealth, invisibility, and line of sight barriers (like buildings).

• This does not affect how Spot and Listen work. It's an extra event that happens post-seeing or hearing someone.

• This check does not happen for DMs, NPCs, or other characters in your party.

• A PC can only be informed of being noticed once every round. This was mainly done to prevent spamming someone if they walk through a crowded area.

Feedback: loss of agency
I didn't consider this. I assumed that any given PC would want to attempt to not show signs of noticing someone. Since you can emote that yourself or say it if you do. This is something I could fix however; with a toggle, something like that? So if this is a big concern it's possible to change.

Feedback: other skills should count. Perform? Discipline?
Looking at multiple skills and taking the highest makes sense to me. I don't have a strong opinion about what that list of skills should be.

Feedback: why does Disguise not work this way?
I wanted to change this initially as well. My reason for leaving it the same is the Disguise message is an OOC way for you to know if someone actually broke your disguise. That way you know metagaming isn't happening. With stealth? You know because they're interacting with you.

If you notice any strange behavior related to this or if anything stated above isn't the case? Please let me know so I can address it.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

I appreciate the effort, but I really have no idea what anyone could have been thinking when they made this change. It's absolutely ludicrous. You just gutted detection, which was already at a disadvantage through the virtue of the fact that gearing equally against stealth requires wisdom to be your primary stat (detracting from your ab and ac except in very niche monk zen archer builds) by requiring a two for one skill investment.

The argument that it makes sense is complete nonsense- it carries as much weight as me saying we should see forges and workstations people carry in their pocket advertised, so rogues can know who to best pick pocket for rare materials, it doesn't make sense that they can hide that from rogues, right?

You have effectively forced every spotter who has a primary wisdom stat to try to squeeze a useable bluff (...charisma, so niche multiclassed clerics only) score into their build to not be instantly ganked.

Numerically, you have required a three to two skill exchange and TWO primary attributes on a spotter, versus a stealther who can stack everything on DeX

I hope you're prepared for the deluge of reports about spotters getting one lined, because when you make it this easy, it's guaranteed to happen.

[Archnon]

Hi everyone. Thanks for the feedback. Apologies for not giving more details on the mechanics of this change. I'll note them here with the intent of putting them on the wiki if it sticks around.

How it works
If a character in Stealth is seen or heard by another PC? The "hidden" PC gets to roll an opposed Spot vs Bluff. If they pass, they get a message in their combat log stating who noticed them. Since both of these skills are untrained? Anyone can make these rolls.

• They cannot roll this check if the PC that noticed them is not in line of sight. This includes stealth, invisibility, and line of sight barriers (like buildings).

• This does not affect how Spot and Listen work. It's an extra event that happens post-seeing or hearing someone.

• This check does not happen for DMs, NPCs, or other characters in your party.

• A PC can only be informed of being noticed once every round. This was mainly done to prevent spamming someone if they walk through a crowded area.

Feedback: loss of agency
I didn't consider this. I assumed that any given PC would want to attempt to not show signs of noticing someone. Since you can emote that yourself or say it if you do. This is something I could fix however; with a toggle, something like that? So if this is a big concern it's possible to change.

Feedback: other skills should count. Perform? Discipline?
Looking at multiple skills and taking the highest makes sense to me. I don't have a strong opinion about what that list of skills should be.

Feedback: why does Disguise not work this way?
I wanted to change this initially as well. My reason for leaving it the same is the Disguise message is an OOC way for you to know if someone actually broke your disguise. That way you know metagaming isn't happening. With stealth? You know because they're interacting with you.

If you notice any strange behavior related to this or if anything stated above isn't the case? Please let me know so I can address it.

This was an awesome response, for the record, and thanks for putting in the work on this and being open to suggestions! I think it is a super cool feature and one that will eventually find its way into a nice spot!

The one thing I was wondering is why name the person doing the spotting. I think if you got rid of that, a lot of this criticism would go away. It could just read something fun like,
"Some light caught on your weapon, surely someone in the room saw that" ....or.....
"That stone creaked under your foot, surely someone in the room heard that"

Come up with 3 or 4 of these for fun and have it say that instead of naming the person. Then, there is no outing spotters, no metagaming the portal/player list, or even metagaming pickpocketing. Further, spotters are still incentivized to invest in a skill to get the jump on the sneaker.

[Orian_666]

I like and happily welcome this new feature

[DangerDolphin]

If it's going to exist in any form, I think that this check should be weighted rather heavily in favor of the spotter as opposed to the stealther. It should also use the Perform skill if the PC has no Bluff; expecting people to buy both skills, just to spot stealthers without being "outed" as a spotter is unreasonable.

I think this is a good change, but i also agree with the original post. Allow perform too and weight it towards the spotter.

I don't think we should allow discipline for this, as it's already a 'required' skill that almost everyone has.

Also, was a little spammy in game when I tested it (With invis as I don't have stealth skill)

[TimeAdept]

I'd recommend stepping away from this as a power balance thing - this is just common sense. Generally speaking you'd know, if you're trying to hide, when someone has seen you.

Absolutely not. It is not difficult to look around and not pay attention to anyone in particular, but still know that those people are there. It is a very widely used skill, and I suspect pretty much everyone in any service or retail industry in the world is an expert at it. I guarantee you I am not an expert in bluffing, but I and my employees could tell you where each and every customer in the store generally is, and honestly without even paying much attention.

Even more so for trained superheroic people doing it on a daily basis. When you have 100 spot, everything is just mundane and routine to you. It's not "Whoa, that dude over there is being sneaky!" its "oh, ok, shadowdancer, standing in plain sight, and I'm already looking away...."

The agency used to be in the hands of the detector on whether or not to act on the information - now the agency is in the hands of the hider. This is an important distinction because these two sides have very different goals:

The goal of the hider is to not get caught, at all costs, since being caught ends whatever they are doing, either through PVP (that they start or otherwise), or through escape. It puts an aggressive and tense onus on the hider to react to the information IMMEDIATELY to preserve themselves. They are by default the "Aggressor" in the hide/spot dichotomy and their goals and reactions by necessity are formed off of this base. Reacting to this immediately states into record that yes, he saw me, yes I know, and yes I am reacting, and now we are doing something about it.

The goal of the detector is to do business at usual. They are the "Defender" in the situation, and when the agency is in their hands, they can react, rather than act. They can choose to act as if they had not seen the person, either in truth (the player is choosing to cooperatively further a narrative) or in falsehood. (the character is choosing to not react at that moment... for IC reasons.) The character can also choose to immediately react, which puts the situation at the above, in largely the same situation - a hider is going to immediately know through IC cues if they've been spotted, a PC will move, a spell will get cast, and the situation will be at the same point - only even in these situations, things tend to be a little less aggressive, because we're reacting, not acting. Acting is "agressive", reacting is "Defensive".

This split and move of the agency is overall going to be bad for both sides, because there's no longer the agency to do "business as usual". One side is now informed of a mechanical canon that used to be able to be reacted to in pure roleplay and narrative.

----

This doesn't even count the ways stealth can now use this to compile a perfect list of everyone they know can see them, and just avoid them at all costs, but it looks like this was discussed already, so I won't go too indepth into it.

----

I concede Disguise's use of the remark because it's largely an OOC mechanic to help stop metagaming, just like the (Disguise) tag itself is. However, because there's no name, there's no entered record in canon of WHO broke the disguise. Both sides can continue on, as if it had never been broken. (In a side note, I do think disguise examining should be an active "thing" so you can examine a description without automatically trying to break a disguise, but that's me)

I don't believe this new Hide/Spot mechanic functions the same way.

Now I know who to avoid or who to approach or that I have been found.

This Is Bad.

[Marsi]

[...]

Regardless of how this change goes, I think it's awesome you're open to feedback. I know that isn't required of you, so big, big kudos.

[Void]

Duplicate threads:
viewtopic.php?f=37&t=28200&p=223658#p223658

[Void]

Hi everyone. Thanks for the feedback. Apologies for not giving more details on the mechanics of this change. I'll note them here with the intent of putting them on the wiki if it sticks around.

How it works
If a character in Stealth is seen or heard by another PC? The "hidden" PC gets to roll an opposed Spot vs Bluff. If they pass, they get a message in their combat log stating who noticed them. Since both of these skills are untrained? Anyone can make these rolls.

• They cannot roll this check if the PC that noticed them is not in line of sight. This includes stealth, invisibility, and line of sight barriers (like buildings).

• This does not affect how Spot and Listen work. It's an extra event that happens post-seeing or hearing someone.

• This check does not happen for DMs, NPCs, or other characters in your party.

• A PC can only be informed of being noticed once every round. This was mainly done to prevent spamming someone if they walk through a crowded area.

Feedback: loss of agency
I didn't consider this. I assumed that any given PC would want to attempt to not show signs of noticing someone. Since you can emote that yourself or say it if you do. This is something I could fix however; with a toggle, something like that? So if this is a big concern it's possible to change.

Feedback: other skills should count. Perform? Discipline?
Looking at multiple skills and taking the highest makes sense to me. I don't have a strong opinion about what that list of skills should be.

Feedback: why does Disguise not work this way?
I wanted to change this initially as well. My reason for leaving it the same is the Disguise message is an OOC way for you to know if someone actually broke your disguise. That way you know metagaming isn't happening. With stealth? You know because they're interacting with you.

If you notice any strange behavior related to this or if anything stated above isn't the case? Please let me know so I can address it.

The biggest issue you have with the implementation is loss of agency. You godmod watchers into reacting and godmod them into trying to conceal that reaction. Both are not exactly great, because it is player who should decide whether they react to someone or not. This should be decided by the player, not by the script.

It might make sense to limit this mechanic to "watchers" in active detect mode.

Also, discipline should have nothing to do with this.

[DangerDolphin]

The biggest issue you have with the implementation is loss of agency. You godmod watchers into reacting and godmod them into trying to conceal that reaction. Both are not exactly great, because it is player who should decide whether they react to someone or not. This should be decided by the player, not by the script.

You say that, but on the other hand I could argue that a 0 Bluff / 0 Perform character has no business doing clever espionage moves like pretending never to notice anyone sneaking around them and then cleverly planting false information (As has been suggested above in this thread)

This change does create a clear mechanical distinction between the sharp-eyed but unsubtle guard sentry and the suave urban spy who invested her skills in deceit and subtlety.

[Void]

The biggest issue you have with the implementation is loss of agency. You godmod watchers into reacting and godmod them into trying to conceal that reaction. Both are not exactly great, because it is player who should decide whether they react to someone or not. This should be decided by the player, not by the script.

You say that, but on the other hand I could argue that a 0 Bluff / 0 Perform character has no business doing clever espionage moves like pretending never to notice anyone sneaking around them and then cleverly planting false information (As has been suggested above in this thread)

This change does create a clear mechanical distinction between the sharp-eyed but unsubtle guard sentry and the suave urban spy who invested her skills in deceit and subtlety.

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I called it godmoding, because there's an assumption that the character is continuously looking for threats and then attempts to conceal having them spottting.

Just because your PC can beat sneaker's skill roll, that absolutely does not mean the PC actually spots the sneak. Because the spotter can have their eyes closed, be distracted, or look the other way. The script godmods them into looking for targets actively, all the time.

And just because spotter has spotted a sneak, that does not mean they'll try to employ bluff to hide that. They instead can (and usually do) stare the sneak down and clearly indicate that they're found.

Both of those occurences should be decided by the player, and not by the script.

---

Making any assumption regarding "PC doing X" is incorrect, because it shouldb e up to PC to decide whether they're doing X or not. Disguise is done well in that matter. Because trying to break through disguise requires player input and does not happen automatically. The player has to examine the target for the check to happen.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

The biggest issue you have with the implementation is loss of agency. You godmod watchers into reacting and godmod them into trying to conceal that reaction. Both are not exactly great, because it is player who should decide whether they react to someone or not. This should be decided by the player, not by the script.

You say that, but on the other hand I could argue that a 0 Bluff / 0 Perform character has no business doing clever espionage moves like pretending never to notice anyone sneaking around them and then cleverly planting false information (As has been suggested above in this thread)

This change does create a clear mechanical distinction between the sharp-eyed but unsubtle guard sentry and the suave urban spy who invested her skills in deceit and subtlety.

I'm not sure what you're talking about.

I called it godmoding, because there's an assumption that the character is continuously looking for threats and then attempts to conceal having them spottting.

Just because your PC can beat sneaker's skill roll, that absolutely does not mean the PC actually spots the sneak. Because the spotter can have their eyes closed, be distracted, or look the other way. The script godmods them into looking for targets actively, all the time.

And just because spotter has spotted a sneak, that does not mean they'll try to employ bluff to hide that. They instead can (and usually do) stare the sneak down and clearly indicate that they're found.

Both of those occurences should be decided by the player, and not by the script.

---

Making any assumption regarding "PC doing X" is incorrect, because it shouldb e up to PC to decide whether they're doing X or not. Disguise is done well in that matter. Because trying to break through disguise requires player input and does not happen automatically. The player has to examine the target for the check to happen.

In DnD, when your character makes a roll, it is not Godmoding. Its making a roll.

If my DM tells me I need to Roll to conceal an action, whether it is to perform slight of hand or if its to conceal the fact that I just passed a perception roll and I see a thief or assassin sneaking up on me.


Perhaps id like to use that instant to wait until the assassin or thief is close enough to attack, but thats going to require a bluff roll. Thats not godmoding. That's mechanics.


Godmoding implies you are being forced to do something by another player. When its a DM thats storytelling and mechanics.


If my character has 0 bluff id assume id be pretty bad at concealing my "poker face"

[Void]

In DnD, when your character makes a roll, it is not Godmoding. Its

The script has no brain and is incapable of interpreting character's decisions. It is not equivalent to a dm.
It also forces a reaction and makes decision for a watcher. And that's why it is godmoding.

Here's what is happening from watcher's perspective.

Script: "Roll spot".
Watcher: "Hey, I'm staring at the wall with eyes closed right now?"
Script: "No you're not. You're watching for suspicious people".
Watcher: "???"
Script: "You've spotted a suspicious person! Roll bluff"
Watcher: "Why?"
Script: "Because you don't want to let them know that you've noticed them!"
Watcher: "The heck? I want to let them know, in fact I'll just go to them and give them a mouthful about sneaking in the marketplace and..."
Script: "You succeeded on the roll! You've cleverly concealed your gaze and totally didn't notice them, because of your awesome lying skills!"
Watcher: "...."

I think that's not how it should be done.
--------

Disguise is handled much better, because you need to examine theem, and by examining you're making a decision -- whether you try to pierce the disguise or not.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

In DnD, when your character makes a roll, it is not Godmoding. Its

The script has no brain and is incapable of interpreting character's decisions. It is not equivalent to a dm.
It also forces a reaction and makes decision for a watcher. And that's why it is godmoding.

Here's what is happening from watcher's perspective.

Script: "Roll spot".
Watcher: "Hey, I'm staring at the wall with eyes closed right now?"
Script: "No you're not. You're watching for suspicious people".
Watcher: "???"
Script: "You've spotted a suspicious person! Roll bluff"
Watcher: "Why?"
Script: "Because you don't want to let them know that you've noticed them!"
Watcher: "The heck? I want to let them know, in fact I'll just go to them and give them a mouthful about sneaking in the marketplace and..."
Script: "You succeeded on the roll! You've cleverly concealed your gaze and totally didn't notice them, because of your awesome lying skills!"
Watcher: "...."

I think that's not how it should be done.
--------

Disguise is handled much better, because you need to examine theem, and by examining you're making a decision -- whether you try to pierce the disguise or not.

Yet the stealther is the one noticing the watcher.

Whether the stealther notices their eyes, or a twitch of the head.

The stealther is the one that gets a message.

All this does is supply the exact same message that disguisers get with the same exact roll, in essence.

Unless you are also arguing that that message should also be removed?

[Void]

Whether the stealther notices their eyes, or a twitch of the head.

That's godmoding. By the way, even if they were turned into statue the script will sitll fire and produce results.

All this does is supply the exact same message that disguisers get with the same exact roll, in essence.

It does not, because disguise breach requires a choice, but in case of detection script the choice is made for you. It is a big difference.

Unless you are also arguing that that message should also be removed?

This message and mechanic only makes some sense if the watcher is in active detect mode. Then they ARE actively looking for trouble, at least. However, even in this case having script assume their reaction doesn't smell right.

And honestly, thsi stuff should be handled by sense motive roll instead.

[Shrouded Wanderer]

Whether the stealther notices their eyes, or a twitch of the head.

That's godmoding. By the way, even if they were turned into statue the script will sitll fire and produce results.

All this does is supply the exact same message that disguisers get with the same exact roll, in essence.

It does not, because disguise breach requires a choice, but in case of detection script the choice is made for you. It is a big difference.

Unless you are also arguing that that message should also be removed?

This message and mechanic only makes some sense if the watcher is in active detect mode. Then they ARE actively looking for trouble, at least. However, even in this case having script assume their reaction doesn't smell right.

And honestly, thsi stuff should be handled by sense motive roll instead.

One way that this could be fixed would be by allowing the roll only if the character examines a stealthed character. But that would also be rife for exploitation.


As well. Most people I know use detect mode to walk around, as it makes sense to do so. Perhaps if they were set to -walk mode then they shouldnt check either. But then, id propose, that their passive spot be lowered, as detect mode is, by definition, some one taking extra care to look for hidden things.

[Babylon System is the Vampire]

Some of the tweaks in here seem pretty good, but I have no issue with this at all for the reasons expressed by a few already. Namely, that it makes sense that you would notice someone who's eyes dart immediately in your direction.

And while I get the whole "you are rping for me" thing, I think the argument is a bit over the top and things that stop people from being super at everything because that's whats in their head rather then on their character sheets are good additions.

3rd edit, can the next change be anyone with sub ten charisma in your area and you get a message saying "this person smells bad", or "this person seems like a miserable sod"? Yeah, I didn't think so, but it was worth a shot!

[Void]

One way that this could be fixed would be by allowing the roll only if the character examines a stealthed character.

That would be reasonable enough. It already works this way, when stealthed character is disguised.

[Sockss]

Maybe for a level 1 commoner. PC's are far beyond that.

PCs are beyond that if they actually have ranks in Bluff. Otherwise they are exactly like commoners in that regard. PCs are not better at sneaking than a commoner if they both have 0 ranks in hide and move silently.

This is exactly right.
A PCs skills are only beyond a commoners skills if that PC has trained in that aspect. This happens in real life as well.

I think this whole thing serves as an indicator that some skills should have a little bit of a bump for people that wish for this stuff to not happen. It serves to have people continue to put skill points into things they wont generally put skillpoints into instead of just the mechanically advantaged ones like Discipline, tumble, spellcraft, concentration, hide or move silently.

Generally speaking I find most people ignore a fair swath of skills because they dont offer them a mechanical advantage. Now they do. Change is good.

My point was mainly that attributing human characteristics to superhuman and non-human individuals is silly.

Though I didn't go far enough with that. I disagree that a commoner wouldn't be able to not give a tell when the listen/see something, especially when they're constantly doing so, very experienced at doing it and also always expecting something so I doubt they'd be surprised to see a halfling hiding behind a barrel. Detecting things is a mundane experience for PC's with ranks.

RE: Mechanical advantage. The mechanical advantage here is firmly in favour of the sneaker, which isn't needed.

Sneakers won't play any differently, so there's no mechanical advantage in having bluff, but sneakers will be able to pinpoint some people who are able to detect them without them performing a hostile action on them - which gives them an advantage.

Remember, I have 50 persuade, please roll to see if you agree with me.

[Kalopsia]

Perhaps it's be a good idea to add several situational penalties to make the skill check less reliable for stealthers, unless they're also very dedicated spotters.

My suggestions:
- Sneaking characters get a -10 penalty on the opposed check to reflect the fact that they're "passively" observing several people while trying to remain unseen. (This would be a general penalty that's always active)
- They get an additional -10 penalty on their check if they're trying to detect a successful Listen roll.
- Increased penalties the greater the distance to a spotter/listener. Observing eye movement gets more difficult the further you're away. Perhaps past a certain distance the roll could even fail automatically.

[Chosen Son]

There should be a delay on the character spotting the pc, and the stealther getting to know. Players cant write anywhere near as fast as they can talk, and if a meeting is being observed and someone sees them a 6s delay would let them type out a warning, for example. It would also prevent it from being used in pvp by hips/corner sneak pcs that are already a blight to find out if someone has spotted them or not.

[Void]

I have not seen this thing actually fire, but that's due to high skill level on characters I have.

[Nitro]

If stealthers get a popup saying they notice someone noticed them, the person noticing the stealther should get a popup saying they notice the stealther noticing that they noticed the stealther.

That makes about as much sense as the stealther noticing someone noticed them.

[Apothys]

Relax everyone this is a great change. A change has been made and your only looking at worst case scenarios as you perceive them.

Lets give it time to play out and see if it actually causes real problems