Are there any advantages of having high hide and move silnetly as opposed to invisibility and greater invisibility?
HIPS and Invisibility
Débuté par
Skadison
, sept. 27 2011 02:14
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 02:20
The Fred
-
- Members
- 2 516 messages
Well, if you have HiPS you can keep hiding repeatedly. Invisibility is limited by how many times you can cast it.
#3
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 02:24
Kaldor Silverwand
-
- Members
- 1 598 messages
Invisibility doesn't prevent perception based on sound. Move Silently should help in that regard (I'm not saying that all the perception scripts check for it though).
#4
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 02:37
Skadison
-
- Members
- 74 messages
Kaldor Silverwand wrote...
(I'm not saying that all the perception scripts check for it though).
Could you elaborate?
#5
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 03:43
Arkalezth
-
- Members
- 3 193 messages
Except for warlocks.The Fred wrote...
Well, if you have HiPS you can keep hiding repeatedly. Invisibility is limited by how many times you can cast it.
HiPS is instant, invisibility takes a full round to cast. Detection is also different.
#6
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 04:43
Seagloom
-
- Members
- 7 094 messages
Invisibility did not prevent enemies with high ranks in listen from finding their target. At least that was true early in NWN2's patch cycle. I vaguely recall this being "corrected" after quite a few complaints about it. Could be wrong, though.
Invisibility is useful enough if that is all your character has. Hide and move silently are better since there are fewer ways your character can be spotted, it activates faster, and there are no usage limits.
Invisibility is useful enough if that is all your character has. Hide and move silently are better since there are fewer ways your character can be spotted, it activates faster, and there are no usage limits.
#7
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 08:19
dunniteowl
-
- Members
- 1 559 messages
And the Spell: True Vision (Sight) can see through invisibility, but, because HiPS is non magical, you still have to make a successful spot check to spot a person hiding.
I think the every heartbeat nature of a lot of scripts when it comes to checking for perception events is what makes the HiPS and general hide checks so eventually made. The reality is that, from a verisimilitude point of view (in other words, logical checks that make sense concerning perception in general) perception checks should only be made when someone is actively listening on a heartbeat cycle (every 6 seconds without fail) and in all other cases, when the conditions for perception improve, or if the perceptive target (the hiding thing, creature, person) change in a way that making another check makes sense.
As an example, in the game now, even if you stand still and make no movement with a character, someone running a normal script for perception is going to get a new check on you every 6 seconds. It'll be modified by a percent chance to spot, but it's going to be made. Sooner or later, you're going to get spotted, it's just a matter of averages and time.
In a 'proper' sense, unless the hiding object moves and that movement could reasonably be heard (ie: the sound made is louder than the ambient noise level) then a check should not be made. Otherwise, checks should be made on a different level of chance to spot and only when something changes enough to make that reasonable.
Like the character doing the spotting comes closer, the hiding character moves (and this should include: Stepping motions (forward, sideways, back;) gross movement, even when concealed such as opening your inventory (the equivalent of taking your pack off and rummaging around, right?) changing weapons, putting weapons or items away and vice versa, casting any spells (movement and vocal (somatic) ) that require chanting or gestures, etc.
That'd be a fairly complex script, to be sure, though. So right now, you have to deal with perception events and the weighted calls for things like distance, alertness, vision and hearing of the percieving creatures/objects and the scale/skill plus modifiers of the target to be percieved.
As it stands, I do believe that Kaedrin had something to do with some better stealth, hiding and spotting scripts, but don't quote me on that. It may have been Kaldor or Kamal. You note the Kuh sound? That's what I recall about that and someone who might have done some work on it -- a Kuh sound echoes in my mind. Sorry, best I can do atm.
dno
I think the every heartbeat nature of a lot of scripts when it comes to checking for perception events is what makes the HiPS and general hide checks so eventually made. The reality is that, from a verisimilitude point of view (in other words, logical checks that make sense concerning perception in general) perception checks should only be made when someone is actively listening on a heartbeat cycle (every 6 seconds without fail) and in all other cases, when the conditions for perception improve, or if the perceptive target (the hiding thing, creature, person) change in a way that making another check makes sense.
As an example, in the game now, even if you stand still and make no movement with a character, someone running a normal script for perception is going to get a new check on you every 6 seconds. It'll be modified by a percent chance to spot, but it's going to be made. Sooner or later, you're going to get spotted, it's just a matter of averages and time.
In a 'proper' sense, unless the hiding object moves and that movement could reasonably be heard (ie: the sound made is louder than the ambient noise level) then a check should not be made. Otherwise, checks should be made on a different level of chance to spot and only when something changes enough to make that reasonable.
Like the character doing the spotting comes closer, the hiding character moves (and this should include: Stepping motions (forward, sideways, back;) gross movement, even when concealed such as opening your inventory (the equivalent of taking your pack off and rummaging around, right?) changing weapons, putting weapons or items away and vice versa, casting any spells (movement and vocal (somatic) ) that require chanting or gestures, etc.
That'd be a fairly complex script, to be sure, though. So right now, you have to deal with perception events and the weighted calls for things like distance, alertness, vision and hearing of the percieving creatures/objects and the scale/skill plus modifiers of the target to be percieved.
As it stands, I do believe that Kaedrin had something to do with some better stealth, hiding and spotting scripts, but don't quote me on that. It may have been Kaldor or Kamal. You note the Kuh sound? That's what I recall about that and someone who might have done some work on it -- a Kuh sound echoes in my mind. Sorry, best I can do atm.
dno
#9
Posté 27 septembre 2011 - 11:35
kamal_
-
- Members
- 5 258 messages
HiPSters liked cheap grog and used armor before it was cool.
#10
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 04:06
mungbean
-
- Members
- 66 messages
It is the nature of the gaming environment that class abilities and skills work mechanically as spell like abilities, ergo any version of an ability which is class or skill based is always going to be what the magic is trying to copy. Magic just lets anyone do it, but there's no substitute for the real thing.
Surely every DM uses elven encounters this way, you enter the enchanted forest, catch glimpses of flittering shadows out the corner of your eye but can make no discernable target and have to beat their hide/sneak rolls to change that.
Hey but gonna be a continual thing, the heartbeat scripting of perception checks is rational to me. You know when there's things hiding, it's really just a question of when you can catch the bugger and get a clean shot at him. But you always know, walking up the driveway when someone is in your house.
Surely every DM uses elven encounters this way, you enter the enchanted forest, catch glimpses of flittering shadows out the corner of your eye but can make no discernable target and have to beat their hide/sneak rolls to change that.
Hey but gonna be a continual thing, the heartbeat scripting of perception checks is rational to me. You know when there's things hiding, it's really just a question of when you can catch the bugger and get a clean shot at him. But you always know, walking up the driveway when someone is in your house.
#11
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 04:24
dunniteowl
-
- Members
- 1 559 messages
mungbean, point taken, though that's a lot different than, say, a thief using HiPS to sneak past the guards in a mansion to get at the treasure room (or some other similar thing) or a scout using stealth and shadow to make it past a checkpoint.
In your description, that's the kind of thing that keeps folks alert, on edge and strained to near breaking, so the checks on a heartbeat like that would totally make sense.
In my examples above the ones exercising the greater caution and skill, normally, would be the ones doing the sneaking/hiding. Unless there were other conditions, the guards in either circumstance might be more lax than usual or less so, though in either case, their initial checks would only be relevant as I described -- which, if they are constantly moving, would apply like before.
So I guess you could say we generally agree. It's when holding still or moving at such a low noise level that I think the counter should shift for lowered perception checks to simulate easier chance of success for the one doing the hiding.
dno
In your description, that's the kind of thing that keeps folks alert, on edge and strained to near breaking, so the checks on a heartbeat like that would totally make sense.
In my examples above the ones exercising the greater caution and skill, normally, would be the ones doing the sneaking/hiding. Unless there were other conditions, the guards in either circumstance might be more lax than usual or less so, though in either case, their initial checks would only be relevant as I described -- which, if they are constantly moving, would apply like before.
So I guess you could say we generally agree. It's when holding still or moving at such a low noise level that I think the counter should shift for lowered perception checks to simulate easier chance of success for the one doing the hiding.
dno
#12
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 05:38
Kaldor Silverwand
-
- Members
- 1 598 messages
Skadison wrote...
Kaldor Silverwand wrote...
(I'm not saying that all the perception scripts check for it though).
Could you elaborate?
The standard perception script used by creatures is nw_c2_default2. That script checks both whether the creature perceived was seen or was heard. I don't know if those functions take into account ranks in Move Silently and Hide. Hopefully they do.
Regards
#13
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 08:13
Arkalezth
-
- Members
- 3 193 messages
I remember this being mentioned in a patch, but does it really work? I've recently played two warlocks with Walk Unseen (the equivalent to invisibility) and 0 Hide/MS, and I've never been detected without magical means (True Seeing, See Invisibility, etc). So either I'm extremely lucky, it doesn't work as intended, or mage's invisibility works differently from warlock's.Kaldor Silverwand wrote...
Invisibility doesn't prevent perception based on sound.
#14
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 04:53
Kaldor Silverwand
-
- Members
- 1 598 messages
Arkalezth wrote...
I remember this being mentioned in a patch, but does it really work? I've recently played two warlocks with Walk Unseen (the equivalent to invisibility) and 0 Hide/MS, and I've never been detected without magical means (True Seeing, See Invisibility, etc). So either I'm extremely lucky, it doesn't work as intended, or mage's invisibility works differently from warlock's.Kaldor Silverwand wrote...
Invisibility doesn't prevent perception based on sound.
I don't know the answer. The perception script checks to see how a person was perceived, but I don't know what tests are done to determine whether or not the perception script should even fire. The event script is really intended to determine what action should be taken by the creature because of perceiving someone. I don't know where or how the actual testing of perception itself is done.
Regards
#15
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 06:12
Arkalezth
-
- Members
- 3 193 messages
No idea. In any case, in my experience you can only be seen with spells or spell-like abilities. I've just remembered that I had the same experience with a wizard and normal Invisibility, so it's definitely not a warlock thing.
#16
Posté 28 septembre 2011 - 06:58
painofdungeoneternal
-
- Members
- 1 799 messages
Invisibility now provides a type of silence as well, it's based on the 4th edition rules, and the fact players were complaining when they thought creatures were able to see them. There was some disagreement on this, but i have to say i've yet to see a complaint from players since this was put into effect. Generally the complaints are triggered by hearing that invisibility is working different in some forum post.
However, to get it working like PNP, it is easier to add triggers and other things ( like when you move or open a door, it triggers a check for those nearby to maybe listen to you, and provide feedback to the player so they realize their feet are rustling or their armor is clanking and thus everyone is able to spot them ). Or even footprint vfx following creatures who are invisible but not doing so well at move silently. So while i don't think how it works is perfect, it actually is in the direction needed to get things perfect.
True seeing, unless modded detects everything. Generally you change it for players so it gives see invisible and a boost to spot, and let dragons and the like keep True True Seeing.
As for the difference, invisibility is magic, hiding is a natural ability of sneaking, and both are very similar but a thief can use invisibility in addition to his hiding. Note that thieves can cast spells from scrolls or wands, even ones restricted to only being used by certain classes.
However, to get it working like PNP, it is easier to add triggers and other things ( like when you move or open a door, it triggers a check for those nearby to maybe listen to you, and provide feedback to the player so they realize their feet are rustling or their armor is clanking and thus everyone is able to spot them ). Or even footprint vfx following creatures who are invisible but not doing so well at move silently. So while i don't think how it works is perfect, it actually is in the direction needed to get things perfect.
True seeing, unless modded detects everything. Generally you change it for players so it gives see invisible and a boost to spot, and let dragons and the like keep True True Seeing.
As for the difference, invisibility is magic, hiding is a natural ability of sneaking, and both are very similar but a thief can use invisibility in addition to his hiding. Note that thieves can cast spells from scrolls or wands, even ones restricted to only being used by certain classes.
#17
Posté 03 octobre 2011 - 05:47
The Fred
-
- Members
- 2 516 messages
I wish we had more control over perception etc. so you could rewire who can see who at any time. Stuff like Nondetection and Spell Immunity could work then (I think you can be immune to True Seeing, but in NWN2 it's considered to be an effect applied to the seer, not the hider so I think it doesn't work like that).
