Post/Author/DateTime	Post
RainerNader 01-07-08, 12:20 PM	Hey guys, There's a bit of confusion on my group's end on how hiding and sneak attacks are resolved. Basically, here was the scenario - the party was attacked by a band of goblins. There was some cover nearby in the form of tables, so my character (the rogue) ran behind one of the tables. This gave him cover (ie. +4 to AC). So I asked the DM if my character could then use the cover to make a Hide check, pop out, and shoot the goblins. This is where we all got confused, because the PHB says you can make Hide checks as long as you have cover, but it also says you can't Hide if you're being observed, so we weren't sure what qualified as "being observed." There was also the question if my character could keep on using the same cover to keep hiding behind. Would my character be able to Hide, pop out, and shoot every single round?
Marcus Majarra 01-07-08, 01:34 PM	The character would be unable to perform such sniping tactics, since he can't start hiding unless his opponents are unable to observe him. Once he's hiding (which requires for him to be out of sight or out of notice of the opponents), he can perform sniping tactics normally.
PenderGrass 01-07-08, 01:44 PM	It is totally possible for your PC to move behind the table, become unobserved, Hide, and then start sniping. Just because he is hidden behind the table, doesn't mean your opponents will become confused - as they will know you are hiding behind the table. Having them toss alchemist fires over the top of the table onto where they assume you are would be a totally acceptable tactic. Remember, that you will be taking a -20 to hide with your sniping. EDIT - Forgot the step of Hiding in the first sentence. :dragon: *****
celloshane 01-07-08, 02:14 PM	This depends partly on the exact scenario that led up to the combat, and also on how much cover the tables provided. If you were clearly observed before the combat started, you could not make a hide check. You would simply stand behind the table and shoot gaining +4 AC from the table. However, there is a loophole here. If the table was large enough to provide full cover that precludes a hide check. What that means is that if you would be completely covered by the table, or could take an action to be completely covered (say kneeling) then you don't need to make a hide check because enemies could not possibly see you. If the cover is big enough that you could move from your original location, then you could reasonably make a hide check to pop out and shoot an arrow (gaining a sneak attack), the DM might feel obligated to give enemies a circumstance bonus to spot checks. An example: You and your party are in a bar when some goblins walk in and start causing trouble. Some people run out the door and knock tables over on their way. You could choose to duck behind the small corner table you were sitting at, or run over to the large 10' X 4' table that the farmers were at. -If you use the small table, you'll stand behind it and plink away with an AC bonus. -If you use the large table, you'll crouch down behind it and have full cover and you can crawl around behind the table and possibly take some pot shots. You might even be able to sneak over behind the bar and attack from an unexpected direction. (Goblin says "Hey I better kill that guy behind the table before he starts shooting me" when you jump up from behind the bar and put an arrow in his back.) As for popping out and shooting every round, you need to look at the rules for Sniping. I forget which page those are on in the PHB.
RainerNader 01-07-08, 02:46 PM	Hey guys, It sounds like before my character can even attempt any sort of Hide check, he needs to be unobserved. So if he's currently being observed, he needs to get behind total cover to block line of sight. Is that correct? So in celloshane's example, let's say there is indeed a large overturned table that can provide full cover for my character. So, does it take one round or two rounds before he can actually attack? In other words, does my character move behind the table, hide (since hiding is part of movement), and then pop out and shoot in one round? Or does he move behind the table and hide in one round, and pop out and shoot in another round? Also, when I asked, "can he keep doing this every round," I know there is a special rule for sniping. But basically what I meant was, could my character keep repeating the actions above over and over again, which I don't think is the same as "sniping." Thanks for the help guys... we really appreciate it!
darokinblade 01-07-08, 04:01 PM	The player could try to confuse the foes using Bluff. That would allow him/her to be unobserved for a time long enough to make a hide check, But just being behind the table and having cover does not afford him the hide. Once you are hidden, if you make an attack, you come out of hiding. Thats how it works. If you attempt to remain hidden, this is called 'sniping' even if it is not exactly your definition of sniping. For DnD purposes, Sniping is attacking from hiding, and attempting to remain hidden. You must use a move action to remain hidden, and make a hide check at -20 to do so. If you do not, your foes see you immediately after your attack. It sounds like before my character can even attempt any sort of Hide check, he needs to be unobserved. So if he's currently being observed, he needs to get behind total cover to block line of sight. Is that correct? So in celloshane's example, let's say there is indeed a large overturned table that can provide full cover for my character. So, does it take one round or two rounds before he can actually attack? In other words, does my character move behind the table, hide (since hiding is part of movement), and then pop out and shoot in one round? Or does he move behind the table and hide in one round, and pop out and shoot in another round? Yes. He would need to move behind the corner (move action) and then hide (another move action). Round 1. Then peek out and shoot (standard action). then move to behind the wall again (Move action). The next round they can hide (move action) and peek out and shoot (standard action) but then they are exposed, and since they have nothing left they are left there until the next round. If the DM allows it, peeking around a corner from hiding can be part of the attack, but this would still be considered sniping and would require a -20 penalty to the hide afterward. A lot of observed/unobserved rules are difficult to determine except on a case by case basis. Generally, if there is a LOS (line of sight) and they have attacked, they are seen. If they made hide checks, they aren't seen. Once seen, they need to not be seen (unobserved) to make another hide check. And that is a bit tougher without total darkness or corners to run around. To play devils advocate, I wonder how other DMs rule Darkness in this situations. Does it provide enough concealment to allow a hide check? EDIT: As a note, the Hide skill says you must have cover or concealment at the beginning of your move to make the hide check. It also says in the Rule Compendium that you must we within a number of feet equal to your ranks in the skill to be able to, so at 1st level a rogue with maxed Hide must be within 4 feet of cover to make a hide check.
RainerNader 01-07-08, 04:35 PM	Darokinblade, Thanks for such a detailed response, I think it has given me some clarification. However, I have two questions... He would need to move behind the corner (move action) and then hide (another move action). Round 1. Then peek out and shoot (standard action). then move to behind the wall again (Move action). The next round they can hide (move action) and peek out and shoot (standard action) but then they are exposed, and since they have nothing left they are left there until the next round. If the DM allows it, peeking around a corner from hiding can be part of the attack, but this would still be considered sniping and would require a -20 penalty to the hide afterward. This sounds very logical, except in the PHB, the action required to Hide is described as "Usually none. Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action." But in the example above, you had Hide checks as their own action. Sooo... is there something I'm missing? To play devils advocate, I wonder how other DMs rule Darkness in this situations. Does it provide enough concealment to allow a hide check? Well, from what everyone is saying, if you're being observed, you need total concealment. But Darkness only provides regular concealment -- you can still still observe enemies and target them normally. So Darkness shouldn't allow Hide checks, right?
darokinblade 01-07-08, 05:02 PM	From the SRD: You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. This sounds very logical, except in the PHB, the action required to Hide is described as "Usually none. Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action." But in the example above, you had Hide checks as their own action. Sooo... is there something I'm missing? If they do not have cover/concealment, they cannot make a hide check, so they must move to where they do have cover or concealment, then make the hide check from that location.
Lamire 01-07-08, 11:46 PM	Looks like you already got some good advice on this subject and Darokinblade pretty much laid it out. Your rogue just needs to find total cover so he's no longer being observed (a good rule of thumb is, "could the enemy target him with a line of sight effect like magic missile?"), and then he can make all the hide checks he wants. Darokinblade pretty much laid it out. The only thing I'd point out is that, at least in my games, a hide check is *part* of movement and is not its own separate action. So your rogue could run behind the corner, pop out and shoot in one round, and then run behind the same corner, pop out and shoot the second round, and so forth. Just keep in mind that in between turns, he has used his move action to move/hide and his standard action to attack, so he is effectively "stuck" here. All those sneak attacks are bound to get someone's attention... To avoid that, as several other people pointed out, your rogue doesn't even need to keep moving back forth from behind cover and can simply snipe every round, but that is a -20 penalty to his hide check.
1 ton ghost 01-11-08, 02:54 PM	i know it's redundant but bear w/ me: -Hide and MS are part of character movement, not Move Actions themselves. -Bluff to create a diversion, then Hide and Move Sil. -"open ground" between you and cover/concealment is -5 to stealth skills/5ft simply moving into a deadzone where you're unseen isn't enough. enemy knows you're there and won't be suseptible to SA as they're aware. Sniping is relatively useless in close quarters unless you're like Mask, some super sneak that can afford to eat the -20. it's designed for long range combat; the extra distance and cover you're afforded slag the Hell out of a Spot check, so -20 isn't really the full 20. well, it is, it's your counter-Spot that sucks.
Anathema 01-11-08, 04:16 PM	Combat being abstract like it is, this is the ruling that comes to me. In order to be suseptible to a sneak attack (which is what I presume you are trying to do), your target must be flat-footed. In order to be flat footed they have to be totally unaware of an attack coming their way. Assuming an extreme example of a barren room except for cover in the center, and only you and your target in the room, you would not be able to hide in such a way as to have your enemy drop his guard to the point that he is flat-footed and you could sneak attack him. That's the extreme example, though, and I'm sure the combat that this was in is a little more dynamic. Hiding (and moving silently) is inherently an opposed roll. You don't have to hide as long as there is noone making spot checks. In the frenzy of battle, it is an acceptable thought to me to take cover behind an object and have your enemies forget that you're there while focusing on another combatant. I would adjudicate this by giving the enemy you attempt to shoot a bonus (or penalty) on his spot roll depending on what the exact situation is. If this is your first time doing this and you haven't attacked anybody yet, then he might get a penalty or at least no bonus; if you've attacked him one or more times from behind the same cover, it may be impossible to further hide from that specific enemy. I don't think there is a black and white ruling on this one. Those are just my thoughts.
Simonides 01-15-08, 03:53 PM	Again, with combat being abstract... If the opponent is aware of an incoming attack, he will take steps to avoid it (dodge and block). That is the idea behind the Dex bonus and dodge bonuses to AC and why they don't apply to being flat-footed. The question then is 'how aware' is 'aware enough?' If an adventurer walks into the aforementioned bare room with cover in the middle in the middle of a hostile dungeon, he is probably ready for an attack. And yet, if he fails his Listen/Spot, he will still be caught flat footed when the hidden rogue jumps out with all the sneakattacky badness therunto pertaining. Also consider the size of a five foot square and how much space a hiding person might take up in that area. Is five feet of difference in the direction of the incoming attack enough to make a difference to someone trying to block or dodge it? I would guess it was. A sneak attack is precisely aimed at a vulnerable, vital area. The whole flat-footed denied Dex bonus requirement allows the rogue to pick the right the spot and aim carefully. It doesn't matter what spot the rogue shoots for, he is going to pick the most exposed, vulnerable spot. Back to the bare room with the cover in the middle and the poor fighter who *knows* someone is hidden behind the cover. Can the rogue peek out, pick an unguarded spot, and shoot the fighter even though the fighter is pretty sure the rogue is somewhere within about 5 feet - 15 feet of that cover (depending on the setup, a five foot square that is blocked can provide cover to up to three spaces directly behind it). I'd say yes. It is an abstract, umm, kinda-sorta yes, but it is a yes. The Hide skill requires only cover or concealment. The Hide skill assumes that the character knows a thing or two about going unnoticed. On a dark night or in fog or rain in the middle of a combat, any combattant can lose track of another's precise location. People forget that a pitched battle is pretty chaotic and distracting because we are looking from above and we have a grid and pretty miniatures and there is no facing in 3.5. Every time you duck your head behind your shield to keep from getting your nose maced in, you run the risk of losing track of some detail. Even if the person is obviously hiding behind the pillar in the room, the precise location is vague enough for the sneak attack to work.
Nom 01-15-08, 11:52 PM	He would need to move behind the corner (move action) and then hide (another move action). Round 1.Actually, if he's completely out of LoS then he has total concealment and/or cover and we don't care about hiding. This isn't to say he's unlocatable (magic or a high enough listen check) nor that the bad guys don't know approximately where he is, but he is "unobserved". From here, he has the option of moving back into a position where LoS exists. If he successfully makes a Hide check while doing so, he ends up in a position where he can see the bad guys but they have not noticed him. That is, he is Hidden. A hidden character can attack normally or he can snipe. In either case, he gets the benefits of invisibility relative to his foe on his first attack. Normally, he is then immediately spotted. If he instead chooses to snipe, he can take a single attack and then spend a move action to hide again. The hiding check suffers a -20 penalty, but if successful is not spotted by his target and remains hidden. I wonder how other DMs rule Darkness in this situations. Does it provide enough concealment to allow a hide check?Darkness provides shadowy illumination which provides concealment. As long as you are not observed, you can hide in (or behind) the shadowy illumination. Once spotted, a Bluff check or breaking LoS is required to re-hide (Hide in Plain Sight or other special abilities notwithstanding).
weasel0 01-16-08, 01:51 AM	Ugh. "Shadowy Illumination" It's a fog cloud like spell that clerics and bards can cast, won't blow away, and is inky-cloudy instead of whispy-cloudy. Like a squid's ink cloud in water... only in air. The old 3.0 version was "darkness" not "shadowy illumination".
Nom 01-17-08, 01:08 AM	... and was nerfed because it turned D&D into Kriegspiel.