Pathfinder: Hellcat Stealth + Blend = invisibility?

[Footman]

Hello!
I have a question:
The Stealth rules state, that you need, to have cover or Concealment to use stealth. They also state that you cannot use Stealth while observed.

The Hellcat Stealth Feat:
Benefit: You may make Stealth checks in normal or bright light even when observed, but at a -10 penalty.
Normal: You cannot make Stealth checks while observed.

Blend Spell:
You draw upon your elven link to the wilderness to change the coloration of yourself and your equipment to match that of your surroundings. This grants you a +4 circumstance bonus on Stealth checks and allows you to make Stealth checks without cover or concealment, but only while you move no more than half your base speed or less. If you move more than half your base speed on your turn, you gain no benefit from this spell until the start of your next turn. If you make an attack, this spell ends (as invisibility).

If i'm not wrong, that means that you can use stealth anywehre anytime, since this combination removes all requirements you normally need to use Stealth.
(Still, you can only move at halve Speed, and you take a - 10 Penality)

So does that mean, that this combination works like an invisibility Spell? What happens if one Creature beats my Stealth with Perception? Can he clearly see me, or do i have concealment? If one enemy beats my Stealth do other enemys see me as well?

Please excuse my bad English. English isn't my first Language. Thanks for replays in Advance!

[Psyren]

Both of these allow you to stealth out in the open. You don't actually need them both, and combining them doesn't actually do anything; Blend basically makes Hellcat Stealth redundant unless you're trying to hide from someone that can defeat illusions, e.g. someone with True Seeing, in which case only Hellcat Stealth would apply (along with its -10 penalty, but better than nothing.)

[Footman]

Thanks for the anwser. I played a character with Hellcat Stealth once, and my GM ruled that Hellcat stealth only allows me use stealth if my character can find cover or concealment. (Like, he runs away from a Guard and can hide behind a Tree or something, but he can't do it if there is nothing wich he can use to hide).

Is there a detailed explaination of Hellcat stealth somewehre wich i can show to my GM?

[Psyren]

Thanks for the anwser. I played a character with Hellcat Stealth once, and my GM ruled that Hellcat stealth only allows me use stealth if my character can find cover or concealment. (Like, he runs away from a Guard and can hide behind a Tree or something, but he can't do it if there is nothing wich he can use to hide).

Is there a detailed explaination of Hellcat stealth somewehre wich i can show to my GM?

As the name implies, it's based on the actual Hellcat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/hellcat). It's a watered down, nonmagical version of their Invisible In Light ability.

Your GM is wrong - the whole point of the ability is to let you hide in plain sight. Even in the Stealth skill itself, the requirement to locate cover or concealment falls under the passage about being observed, which HS bypasses.

[icefractal]

Thanks for the anwser. I played a character with Hellcat Stealth once, and my GM ruled that Hellcat stealth only allows me use stealth if my character can find cover or concealment. (Like, he runs away from a Guard and can hide behind a Tree or something, but he can't do it if there is nothing wich he can use to hide).

Is there a detailed explaination of Hellcat stealth somewehre wich i can show to my GM?So he ruled that the feat did nothing at all? Because you can already make Stealth checks if you're concealed, it doesn't inherently have to be dark. The "normal or bright light" is a limitation on Hellcat Stealth, in that it doesn't work in the darkness (like the Hellcat's invisibility).

[Xethik]

I could see a ruling based on the following Vision and Light rule:


A creature can't use Stealth in an area of bright light unless it is invisible or has cover.

which means you still need invisibility or cover to make use of Hellcat Stealth. Removing this limitation is not mentioned by the feat. Which... makes Hellcat Stealth pretty bad.

[Psyren]

I could see a ruling based on the following Vision and Light rule:



which means you still need invisibility or cover to make use of Hellcat Stealth. Removing this limitation is not mentioned by the feat. Which... makes Hellcat Stealth pretty bad.

The feat quite literally says you can use Stealth in bright light. The OP even quoted it for you. Specific trumps general.

[Xethik]

The feat quite literally says you can use Stealth in bright light. The OP even quoted it for you. Specific trumps general.
I understand that. The only reason I could see an argument for it is that the "Normal" text for the feat implies this only changes the observed clause if you are in bright or normal light.


Normal: You cannot make Stealth checks while observed.

I'm playing Asmodeus' advocate. I treat Normal text as clarification points, not facts to base rulings on the feat or even other rules. This and the feat becomes near useless in this scenario.

That being said, I could see a DM being frustrated with the feat's strength and uses an interpretation based on this to effectively nerf the feat while still playing a game without homebrew nerfs or bans. A "The feat only removes the Stealth rule of hiding while being observed and does not alter other scenarios in which you could use the Stealth skill" approach, which is too dismissive for me. The opposite end of the spectrum is allowing a Barbarian to Stealth while raging if he is in bright light, an overly permissive evaluation of the feat.

[Psyren]

I understand that. The only reason I could see an argument for it is that the "Normal" text for the feat implies this only changes the observed clause if you are in bright or normal light.

I understand where you're coming from with this reading, but the feat says "even when observed." Meaning it works whether you're observed or not. I am using the body of the feat, rather than the Normal text.



That being said, I could see a DM being frustrated with the feat's strength and uses an interpretation based on this to effectively nerf the feat while still playing a game without homebrew nerfs or bans.

This would sound like a very passive-aggressive GM to me.

[Xethik]

This would sound like a very passive-aggressive GM to me.

I don't disagree. :)

EDIT: Though the intent could be slightly less malicious. Not nerfing the feat, but just applying that sort of lens to all rule questions.

[BoutsofInsanity]

I have no idea narratively how this works. For hellcat's sake, what is this feat?

[Psyren]

I have no idea narratively how this works. For hellcat's sake, what is this feat?

How does a Ranger or Rogue's Hide In Plain Sight work? Feats are Ex, they can break the normal rules of physics.

With HS, the rogue is unconsciously able to position himself in a bright room so that the light actually obscures him to any observers. He only needs to do so for an instant, then he can pull off the Batman Bye-Bye.

[icefractal]

I understand that. The only reason I could see an argument for it is that the "Normal" text for the feat implies this only changes the observed clause if you are in bright or normal light.I think that's intentional - the feat doesn't work in the dark. Which is applicable if your foes have Darkvision.

But the GM's reading makes the feat literally useless - if you already have concealment, you can hide without any feats whatsoever, bright light or not.

[Xethik]

I think that's intentional - the feat doesn't work in the dark. Which is applicable if your foes have Darkvision.

But the GM's reading makes the feat literally useless - if you already have concealment, you can hide without any feats whatsoever, bright light or not.

Yes, agreed with your point. I guess the emphasis is important in my text. What I was trying to say was


The only reason I could see an argument for it is that the "Normal" text for the feat implies this only changes the observed clause ifwhen you are in bright or normal light.
A bad reading could theorize that the only requirement being changed is the observed clause, not the requirement of not stealthing in bright or normal light without cover/concealment.

[Psyren]

A bad reading could theorize that the only requirement being changed is the observed clause, not the requirement of not stealthing in bright or normal light without cover/concealment.

Which, again, is defeated by the "even" clause (making it inclusive rather than exclusive.) In other words, the feat lets you hide in light, period, including when observed.

[Xethik]

Which, again, is defeated by the "even" clause (making it inclusive rather than exclusive.) In other words, the feat lets you hide in light, period, including when observed.
Yeah. I think even there really breaks down that argument. It's not very defendable.

[Necroticplague]

How does a Ranger or Rogue's Hide In Plain Sight work? Feats are Ex, they can break the normal rules of physics.

With HS, the rogue is unconsciously able to position himself in a bright room so that the light actually obscures him to any observers. He only needs to do so for an instant, then he can pull off the Batman Bye-Bye.

I never thought of it as anything that kind of physics-bending, even if the rules do allow for it. I always figured it was just figuring out the art of making yourself have so little presence that things overlook you, much like how you overlook the less interesting parts of the environment. So they physically see you, but you don't register as any more notable than the air or the wall. That's why there's a -10, because that crap's hard. Know some people who can pull off a similar trick.

[Psyren]

I never thought of it as anything that kind of physics-bending, even if the rules do allow for it. I always figured it was just figuring out the art of making yourself have so little presence that things overlook you, much like how you overlook the less interesting parts of the environment. So they physically see you, but you don't register as any more notable than the air or the wall. That's why there's a -10, because that crap's hard. Know some people who can pull off a similar trick.

The reason I see it as being a bit more involved than that is twofold. First is the name of the feat, which implies you're literally emulating a Hellcat's ability, but to a lesser extent - not bending light around yourself, but angling yourself so that the lighting around you (which there has to be) obscures you.

Second, is the fact that this feat doesn't work outside of the light. If it truly is about dampening your presence (which, incidentally, is a different feat altogether) then that ability should work equally well no matter the light level. But Hellcat Stealth is useless in dim light or darkness (at least, provided whoever you're attempting to hide from can see within those conditions to begin with.)

Put those two things together and, at least to me, the feat involves the skillful use of ambient light to obscure (which would require a lot of it, like this feat does), rather than reducing one's presence (which logically, should work at any light level.)