Total concealment = ?

[Scarey Nerd]

I was looking at the Shadow Creature template from MotP, and checked its Errata, and it says that when in shadows a Shadow Creature gains total concealment. Is this a 100% miss chance, or does it mean something else?

[Boci]

It only a 50% miss chance, but they also need to know which square you are in before that comes up.

[Scarey Nerd]

It only a 50% miss chance, but they need to know which square you are in.

Ah, thank you :smallsmile:

[Thajocoth]

I was looking at the Shadow Creature template from MotP, and checked its Errata, and it says that when in shadows a Shadow Creature gains total concealment. Is this a 100% miss chance, or does it mean something else?

Total Concealment is -5 to be hit. Does not stack with Concealment (-2 to be hit). Stacks with Cover or Superior Cover (-2 and -5 to be hit as well).

[drakir_nosslin]

Total Concealment is -5 to be hit. Does not stack with Concealment (-2 to be hit). Stacks with Cover or Superior Cover (-2 and -5 to be hit as well).


Total Concealment
If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can’t attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.

So, it's 50% miss chance, like Boci said.

EDIT: And cover does not impose a penalty to the attacker, but gives +4 to AC to the defender. Total cover means that you don't have line of sight and normally can't attack at all.

[Yuki Akuma]

Total Concealment is -5 to be hit. Does not stack with Concealment (-2 to be hit). Stacks with Cover or Superior Cover (-2 and -5 to be hit as well).

Shadow Creature is 3.5, not 4e.

[drakir_nosslin]

Shadow Creature is 3.5, not 4e.

Ah, that explains the difference.

[Thajocoth]

Shadow Creature is 3.5, not 4e.

It'd be easier for everyone if people specified editions.

[Psyren]

It'd be easier for everyone if people specified editions.

On this board, unspecified generally (though not always) defaults to 3.x.

[RebelRogue]

On this board, unspecified generally (though not always) defaults to 3.x.
Honestly, that attitude can come off as a bit arrogant sometimes (not you, but in general), at least to me. I actually half-way suspected Thaj's answer to be a snarky response to this trend.

[Boci]

Honestly, that attitude can come off as a bit arrogant sometimes (not you, but in general), at least to me. I actually half-way suspected Thaj's answer to be a snarky response to this trend.

Its statistically correct. This reinforces the trend as people posting about 3.5 will be more likely to neglect to specify the edition than others. It may be arragant, but its true. If not told otherwise, assume 3.5 and you'll be right more times than wrong.

[BeholderSlayer]

Honestly, that attitude can come off as a bit arrogant sometimes (not you, but in general), at least to me. I actually half-way suspected Thaj's answer to be a snarky response to this trend.

It's not really a trend, it's the status quo.

[RebelRogue]

Its statistically correct. This reinforces the trend as people posting about 3.5 will be more likely to neglect to specify the edition than others. It may be arragant, but its true. If not told otherwise, assume 3.5 and you'll be right more times than wrong.
I do that for sure. It doesn't mean I'm not slightly bothered by it once in a while. Nothing major, just an occasional pinch of annoyance :smallbiggrin:

[Thajocoth]

I actually half-way suspected Thaj's answer to be a snarky response to this trend.

Nope. I simply didn't think about the fact that it could be another edition. I know nothing, really, of the older editions. Nothing here stated that this wasn't 4e. None of the details made it obvious that is wasn't 4e. If there was an obscure term or the post/title mentioned the edition, it would've occurred to me.

Meandering thought process, I think:
If it HAD occurred to me, and I looked up the 4e MotP and didn't see this template there (the only way I could've confirmed which edition it was), then I would have ignored the thread entirely. I would not have made a comment to the trend for the same reasons I will never be a businessman or politician or involved in office politics or do complicated things with money (like buy stocks). That is, unfortunately, the best way that I can explain why I don't do that kinda stuff... And I can't really explain all that well what "that kinda stuff" is either. Like... It feels like too complicated a thing to do or something, kinda. If that makes sense...

[Scarey Nerd]

I didn't post the edition in the thread because as far as I am aware, Shadow Creature is an exclusively 3.x template, and so would be using 3.x rules. Sorry to have caused any confusion there :smalltongue: