Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Francius 09-13-06, 10:58 PM	Hey everyone. I'd like a clarification about the Ranger's hide in plain sight and camouflage extraordinary abilities. Ok,so we have a combat scene starring a 17th level Ranger and a generic enemy and divided into 2 rounds(no surprise round involved): 1st normal round-The Ranger makes a single or full ranged attack by being visible and then moves and hides(in natural terrain without concealment and by being watched by the enemy whom attacked). The enemy can't see him and can't attack him. 2nd normal round-If in the 2nd round the ranger begins his turn hidden (from the previous round), unveils himself(a free action?),attacks and then moves and hides again would he incur the -20 penalty that sniping imposes? I believe not,since the ranger does not snipe, instead he attacks by being visible and then moves to another spot to hide again,he doesn't stay put in the same place from which he attacked... Anyone believes elseway?
Zobdek 09-13-06, 11:16 PM	I think you do impose the -20 penalty because I think it said you do in this faq http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a Not positive though, I am pretty sure I read it somwhere... Also logically why would it be easier to hide when you are 2 feet away from you enemy at one point, attack him, and walk away to hide, as opposed to when you are like 30 feet away shoot him with an arrow and attempt to hide before he sees who shot at him?
Francius 09-14-06, 08:33 AM	Also logically why would it be easier to hide when you are 2 feet away from you enemy at one point, attack him, and walk away to hide, as opposed to when you are like 30 feet away shoot him with an arrow and attempt to hide before he sees who shot at him? It's the same thing. I'm not arguing about hiding after a ranged or a melee attack.You can do both the same way. The general 3.5 FAQ says that if you start your turn hidden you take the -20 penalty while attacking in order to remain hidden and get the bonus that invisible attackers get. That's not what I asked though.I plan on attacking while being visible and then move to conceal myself with the Ranger's aforementioned extraordinary abilities.So basicaly I 'll ask it once again: 2nd normal round-If in the 2nd round the ranger begins his turn hidden (from the previous round), unveils himself(a free action?),attacks and then moves and hides again would he incur the -20 penalty that sniping imposes? I believe not,since the ranger does not snipe, instead he attacks by being visible and then moves to another spot to hide again,he doesn't stay put in the same place from which he attacked...
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 08:59 AM	ok, so, first round - in order to "move and hide", you could only use a standard action to attack. second round - you're hidden, you shoot, you wanna hide again - that's Sniping. -20. but I see your point here: if you weren't hidden, you could do what you did in the first round. now, the "unveiling" you're talking about, if that's not a free action, you'd have to use an action on it, hence making it impossible to do what you did in the first round. now, let's look at some of the wording from Sniping: "If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again." - ok, so, question is: does this imply the "unveiling" you're talking about? and "hide again", is that a move action, would it allow for one? question is whether what you're trying to do isn't actually what you're already doing with Sniping - meaning; you won't be able to avoid the -20 penalty. let's figure this out.
Dalthbar 09-14-06, 09:10 AM	1st normal round-The Ranger makes a single or full ranged attack by being visible and then moves and hides(in natural terrain without concealment and by being watched by the enemy whom attacked). 2nd normal round-If in the 2nd round the ranger begins his turn hidden (from the previous round), unveils himself(a free action?),attacks and then moves and hides again would he incur the -20 penalty that sniping imposes? So you want to attack, hide in round one and then attack and then hide again in round two. (and I'd assume round three, four, etc.). Action Usually none. Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action. However, hiding immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.In this case, your action is similar to sniping in that you want to be hidden, attack and then hide again. The "reveal yourself" bit isn't an action per se - attacking your opponent "reveals you". I would rule then that the action to hide is a move action - so you won't be able to make your full attack. So we'd have attack and hide (due to hide in plain sight) as move action for round one and then attack then hide again (as move action for round two. That's how I read it.
Francius 09-14-06, 12:37 PM	Thanks for the reply. ok, so, first round - in order to "move and hide", you could only use a standard action to attack. OR,take a full action and then move 5 feet to hide. second round - you're hidden, you shoot, you wanna hide again - that's Sniping. -20. but I see your point here: if you weren't hidden, you could do what you did in the first round. now, the "unveiling" you're talking about, is that's not a free action, you'd have to use an action on it, hence making it impossible to do what you did in the first round.. Can you pinpoint this spefically?(aka page from a rulebook where it's written?) I don't think that unveiling yourself is an action at all. The moment a ranger with camouflage wants to be visible again he can just step up from behind his cape(or whatever mean he's using to hide in a terrain that doesn't grant cover or concealment). Now, let's look at some of the wording from Sniping: "If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again." - ok, so, question is: does this imply the "unveiling" you're talking about? and "hide again", is that a move action, would it allow for one? Question is whether what you're trying to do isn't actually what you're already doing with Sniping - meaning; you won't be able to avoid the -20 penalty. Let's figure this out. Bear in mind though that "sniping" as described above is a general action for every character attempting a hide and shoot combo even without the Ranger's extraordinary abilities. That being said I asume that sniping let's you make a ranged attack and then hide again on the same spot you were hiding before the ranged attack.That means you take the -20 penalty to hide again in the same spot because you don't want enemies to see where you hit from. Now that's exactly where my question's core lies:I DO want my enemies to see me when I attack them.I'm a 17th lvl Ranger in a wilderness setting.After my ranged attack,thanks to camouflage and hide in plain sight,I could hide just by moving onto another spot and disappear then and there without any problem at all.I DO NOT want to snipe. Thus the main question would be:Is unveiling yourself after you've succesfully hidden an action?If yes,then what kind of action?
Francius 09-14-06, 12:45 PM	In this case, your action is similar to sniping in that you want to be hidden, attack and then hide again. The "reveal yourself" bit isn't an action per se - attacking your opponent "reveals you". I want to be hidden,reveal myself for the attack,then move to another spot and hide again.I don't want to stay put on a place and then attack without being noticed for as much as the check permits. I would rule then that the action to hide is a move action - so you won't be able to make your full attack. Actually,the skill "hide" is a free action as part of a character's movement."Sniping" makes hiding after a ranged attack a move action.Otherwise hiding is a free action.That is why I want my ranger to hit with his bow and then keep moving to hide again on another spot.Only a character with camouflage and hide in plain sight could do that.
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 12:52 PM	OR,take a full action and then move 5 feet to hide.ah ok I thought you wanted to move more. fair enough. Can you pinpoint this spefically?(aka page from a rulebook where it's written?)I'm going by what is said here: http://d20srd.org/srd/skills/hide.htm - forget what I said; the Sniping wording is where it's at. Now that's exactly where my question's core lies:I DO want my enemies to see me when I attack them.I'm a 17th lvl Ranger in a wilderness setting.After my ranged attack,thanks to camouflage and hide in plain sight,I could hide just by moving onto another spot and disappear then and there without any problem at all.I DO NOT want to snipe.well, if your actions are equivalent to what's involved in Sniping... it's the same thing. which brings us to: Thus the main question would be:Is unveiling yourself after you've succesfully hidden an action?If yes,then what kind of action?thing is, going by the wording "you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again" - it seems you've already un-hidden... or, by your terms, you've "unveiled" yourself. I don't think you can escape the -20 penalty. ;) but let's continue this if need be. actually, Dalthbar pretty much already said this I think. :)
Francius 09-14-06, 01:18 PM	ah ok I thought you wanted to move more. fair enough. I'm going by what is said here: http://d20srd.org/srd/skills/hide.htm - forget what I said; the Sniping wording is where it's at.:) Come on now pal,I have the PHB here with me. well, if your actions are equivalent to what's involved in Sniping... it's the same thing. which brings us to: thing is, going by the wording "you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again" - it seems you've already un-hidden... or, by your terms, you've "unveiled" yourself. Actualy,even if my actions seem like I'm performing some kind of sniping in game terms I am not.Why?Because I have the luxury of posessing those two aforementioned Ranger's abilities. I've read the 3,5 FAQ though and I think I am correct: A character with the hide in plain sight class feature (described on page 48 in the Player’s Handbook) can make a Hide check even if she’s being observed. This doesn’t require any extra action to accomplish (unlike the sniping maneuver). The character could attack a foe, then move to a place with sufficient cover or concealment to allow a Hide check, making the Hide check as part of movement. The character doesn’t need Spring Attack to pull this off, although that feat would allow her to move (potentially from a place of hiding, although that’s not necessary), make an attack, and then move again to a place of hiding. Still, unless the character has cover or concealment for her approach, she’s not considered to be hidden when she delivers the attack. What's your take here? I don't think you can escape the -20 penalty. ;). I think you do. It's the camouflage and hide in plain sight abilities that make me so interested in obtaining the Ranger's class levels.Attacking and then hiding anywhere and anytime it's a thing that can done only with those two abilities(without using magic).It's the most interesting feature of the Ranger class.
Finarin Panjoro 09-14-06, 02:30 PM	I would say that a ranger with both camoflage and HiPS can do what you're suggesting. He could be hidden, fire (revealing himself) as a standard action (perhaps a manyshot), and then move, hiding again without penalty (as long as he's in appropriate terrain). The only time I would see a ranger taking the -20 penalty is if he wished to be considered hidden AS he attacks. That is so that he can gain the benefits of being invisible while striking (+2 to hit, deny dex to AC) or when sniping and NOT moving to a new location (in which case I would also consider him hidden during the attack).
Francius 09-14-06, 02:48 PM	I would say that a ranger with both camoflage and HiPS can do what you're suggesting. He could be hidden, fire (revealing himself) as a standard action (perhaps a manyshot), and then move, hiding again without penalty (as long as he's in appropriate terrain). The only time I would see a ranger taking the -20 penalty is if he wished to be considered hidden AS he attacks. That is so that he can gain the benefits of being invisible while striking (+2 to hit, deny dex to AC) or when sniping and NOT moving to a new location (in which case I would also consider him hidden during the attack). Clear as a crystal. I presume the same exact things about a high level sneaky Ranger. The only time I would see a ranger taking the -20 penalty is if he wished to be considered hidden AS he attacks. I think then you've read the 3.5 FAQ too,no?
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 02:50 PM	Actualy,even if my actions seem like I'm performing some kind of sniping in game terms I am not.Why?Because I have the luxury of posessing those two aforementioned Ranger's abilities.my emphasis was supposed to show what was going on when you were performing Sniping. I've read the 3,5 FAQ though and I think I am correct: [...] This doesn’t require any extra action to accomplish (unlike the sniping maneuver). [...] Still, unless the character has cover or concealment for her approach, she’s not considered to be hidden when she delivers the attack.the "extra action" they're talking about must be the move action it takes to perform Sniping: "However, hiding immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action." ok, so, there are still some problems. I can see you're trying to avoid the -20 penalty by simply not shooting from a hiding place (due to "unveiling"). but since sniping already involves revealing yourself (otherwise, why write "immediately hide again" under sniping?), what I'm suggesting is that you're doing the equivalent of sniping, just described a bit differently. the fact that the ranger gets to cut off a movement action from his hide attempt doesn't indicate that you can somehow use this to avoid the penalty from sniping. I think they're just mentioning the sniping maneuver because it's a case where you must use that action to hide. however, I don't get the next part of the quote from the faq. they're suddenly talking about cover/concealment, even though a ranger with camouflage doesn't need that. so what's up with that? anyways, back to you.
Francius 09-14-06, 03:01 PM	ok, so, there are still some problems. I can see you're trying to avoid the -20 penalty by simply not shooting from a hiding place (due to "unveiling"). but since sniping already involves revealing yourself (otherwise, why write "immediately hide again" under sniping?), what I'm suggesting is that you're doing the equivalent of sniping, just described a bit differently. the fact that the ranger gets to cut off a movement action from his hide attempt doesn't indicate that you can somehow use this to avoid the penalty from sniping. I think they're just mentioning the sniping maneuver because it's a case where you must use that action to hide. Then,as you say too, if the Ranger doesn't need to use a move action to hide after shooting,he can move his speed to another square and attempt there a new hide check. See?This way the ranger isn't immediately hiding again after his ranged attack.If he did,he would have to spend a move action and remain put in the same exact place from which he fired the arrow. In our case the Ranger just fired a shot(thus unveiling himself and his original hiding position) and THEN he moved 5 or more feet to a new position and attempted a new hide check. Finarin Panjoro said it too. Anyway I'll post the whole Q&A from the 3.5 so you can have a broader view to judge: Can a character with Spring Attack who begins her turn hidden move up to a foe, attack him, then return to a position of hiding? Is she considered to be hiding (that is, invisible to the foe) when she makes the attack? What if the character has the camouflage or hide in plain sight class features? Normally, a character can’t make a Hide check right after attacking a foe, since that foe’s attention is now focused on her (even if the attacker started her turn hidden or invisible). The sniping option (on page 76 in the Player’s Handbook) allows a character to make a move action to hide immediately after making a ranged attack against a foe at least 10 feet away, but this doesn’t apply to melee attacks (even those made with reach). Even if the character has Spring Attack, she simply can’t make a Hide check while she is being observed. As far as your second question goes, unless the character’s approach remains entirely in an area where she can hide (that is, an area with sufficient cover or concealment to attempt a Hide check), the character is not considered to be hidden still when she makes the attack. Conceivably, your character might begin her turn hidden in overgrowth, move up through the undergrowth to attack a target, then move back to a hiding place within the plants, having never left the area of concealment. In this case, she’d be considered hidden when she made the attack, although she’d have a –20 penalty on her Hide check. The third part of your question changes the situation entirely. Separately, both the camouflage and hide in plain sight class features make this tactic more useful, but together, they’re incredibly effective. A character with the hide in plain sight class feature (described on page 48 in the Player’s Handbook) can make a Hide check even if she’s being observed. This doesn’t require any extra action to accomplish (unlike the sniping maneuver). The character could attack a foe, then move to a place with sufficient cover or concealment to allow a Hide check, making the Hide check as part of movement. The character doesn’t need Spring Attack to pull this off, although that feat would allow her to move (potentially from a place of hiding, although that’s not necessary), make an attack, and then move again to a place of hiding. Still, unless the character has cover or concealment for her approach, she’s not considered to be hidden when she delivers the attack. The camouflage class feature (also on page 48 in the Player’s Handbook) allows the character to make a Hide check in any sort of natural terrain, even if it doesn’t provide cover or concealment. This means that the character could begin hidden, move up to a target across open terrain, and make an attack while still being considered hidden (although she’d still suffer the –20 penalty on her Hide check). Even if the character has Spring Attack and moves away after the attack, she can’t make a Hide check to hide after the attack. Put all three of these elements together—such as in the hands of a high-level sneaky ranger—and here’s what you get: 1. The character begins his turn hidden (as long as he’s in natural terrain, he doesn’t even need cover or concealment). 2. He moves up to a foe across natural terrain and makes an attack (making a Hide check with a –20 penalty to be considered hiding when he attacks). 3. He then moves back from the foe and makes a new Hide check to disappear from view (again, he doesn’t need cover or concealment while in natural terrain). 4. The foe then, if still standing, says, “Hey, what hit me?!” Back to you.
Finarin Panjoro 09-14-06, 03:13 PM	I think the ranger could avoid the -20 penalty while sniping. His shot just wouldn't gain the advantages of being hidden when he fires. The advantage of sniping to me is that afterwards the target doesn't know where you shot from. That seems to imply that you're hiding WHILE attacking when sniping. So its the same thing. In melee or ranged, if the ranger wants the benefit of being hidden to apply to the attack (+2 to atk, deny dex to AC, position not revealed) then he has to take the -20 to the attack. If he plans to re-hide after attacking without the benefits, then he doesn't have to take the penalty.
Francius 09-14-06, 03:23 PM	That seems to imply that you're hiding WHILE attacking when sniping.. Well,the sniping option states that you must immediately hide again after firing, so that would imply that when you fire you're unveiled and then must hide again. But even so,if you succeeded on hiding again after shooting, then the enemy didn't notice you so you actually remained hidden for the whole maneuver and you got the bonuses for attacking invisible. By reading the FAQ though,even if you failed on the hide check at -20 penalty to conceal yourself while attacking,you can move to a new position and make a new hide check just as if nothing happened and without making the check at a -20 penalty again.
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 03:26 PM	1. The character begins his turn hidden (as long as he’s in natural terrain, he doesn’t even need cover or concealment). 2. He moves up to a foe across natural terrain and makes an attack (making a Hide check with a –20 penalty to be considered hiding when he attacks). 3. He then moves back from the foe and makes a new Hide check to disappear from view (again, he doesn’t need cover or concealment while in natural terrain).this part is a bit odd. I can only assume the attacker is considered hidden throughout his attack. why would he then need a hide check in #3? besides, this is melee; the whole answer is, which I noticed now. I'm not sure it's helping that much. now, back to your situation. stated shortly, you want to move instead of taking a -20 penalty. is this a fair "conversion"? or let me ask you this: will a ranger be performing a sniping maneuver if he's standing still? considering the words "immediately hide again" - do you really think it's supposed to work in such a way that it gets easier to hide if you're moving (and btw. there are rules for penalties for hiding while moving)? back to you.² ;)
Francius 09-14-06, 03:38 PM	this part is a bit odd. I can only assume the attacker is considered hidden throughout his attack. why would he then need a hide check in #3? besides, this is melee; the whole answer is, which I noticed now. I'm not sure it's helping that much. You didn't read at all Finarin's posts. Because if the ranger attacked hidden he then would get the bonuses for attacking invisible(+2 to hit, deny dex to AC). By reading the FAQ though,even if you failed on the hide check at -20 penalty to conceal yourself while attacking,you can move to a new position and make a new hide check after the attack just as if nothing happened and without making the check at a -20 penalty again. now, back to your situation. stated shortly, you want to move instead of taking a -20 penalty. is this a fair "conversion"? or let me ask you this: will a ranger be performing a sniping maneuver if he's standing still? considering the words "immediately hide again" - do you really think it's supposed to work in such a way that it gets easier to hide if you're moving (and btw. there are rules for penalties for hiding while moving)? Actualy it's not a rules conversion. I want to clear out what I'm entitled to do by using the Camouflage and HiPS abilities combined and do it to their full potential. The sniping maneuver IS DESIGNED to be used while one's motionless from what I understood by the PHB explanation. It says that in order to snipe you must already be hidden, fire then immediately hide again. That would be the case of a character that can't hide while being watched or can't hide in a place that doesn't grant cover or concealment. The Ranger doesn't snipe.He fires while visible,then moves to another spot and hides, just as he did in the first round.Only that in the first round he didn't begin hidden.We're trying to repeat the same maneuver here.Now,unveiling himself before firing,is it an action at all? I don't think so. Be sure to read Finarin's post too. Back to you.
Archtyrant Terevoth 09-14-06, 03:49 PM	Well here's the thing, since the ranger is revealing himself when he attacks, as opposed to staying hidden while sniping, the enemy knows what square he's in. So while he may move somewhere and hide, the enemy will know what square he is in, even if he is considered invisible.
Zobdek 09-14-06, 03:50 PM	From the FAQ I think that you could hide without the -20, but your foe should probably know what square you are in, therefore he could attack you with a 50% miss chance. On the other hand when you snipe, your foe does not know where you are when you hide again, so he now has to guess which square you are in.
Finarin Panjoro 09-14-06, 03:50 PM	I think we can all agree that in a single turn a ranger 17 could use a standard action to attack (many shot, whatever) and then a move action to hide without penalty even while being observed. Does it make any sense then to say that a ranger 17 who is already hidden can't do the same thing? It also seems to me that if a ranger attacks, and then hides and moves he would disappear from the square in which he attacked, not the square that he moved into. Thus the enemy would not know which square he is in after the attack. I gather this from the looking at the FAQ quote posted above.
Francius 09-14-06, 03:53 PM	Well here's the thing, since the ranger is revealing himself when he attacks, as opposed to staying hidden while sniping, the enemy knows what square he's in. So while he may move somewhere and hide, the enemy will know what square he is in, even if he is considered invisible. Exactly. Still the Ranger is considered as having total concealment and if the enemy wishes to attack the square the Ranger occupies, he would have to succeed in the 50% percentile dice roll to hit and then at another 50% dice roll to damage him. Now that's playing it "sneaky".
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 04:01 PM	You didn't read at all Finarin's posts.I beg to differ. Actualy it's not a rules conversion.ok, that wasn't the sort of conversion I was talking about. I was talking about the courses of action taken. wait a moment - Be sure to read Finarin's post too.I have, and I will. :) - ok, so, what still annoys me is how it can be suggested that it's easier to hide when doing a "shoot-then-move-then-hide" maneuver than when doing a "shoot-from-hidden-then-remain-in-place-then-hide-again" maneuver. it should at least be the same penalty... also, the mechanics of sniping are based on the idea of "someone shooting and then hiding". isn't that what's going on here? sure, sniping requires that you're hidden to start with, but would it get easier if you weren't?
Francius 09-14-06, 04:08 PM	- ok, so, what still annoys me is how it can be suggested that it's easier to hide when doing a "shoot-then-move-then-hide" maneuver than when doing a "shoot-from-hidden-then-remain-in-place-then-hide-again". it should at least be the same penalty. does it really make sense otherwise?? Yes it does 'cause for the Ranger it doesn't matter at all to begin hidden,fire and then hide again than to begin unhidden,fire and then hide.With his abilities it's the very exact same thing. Also,when sniping successfuly the enemy can't tell where the shot came from and thus can't tell your hiding position at all,instead when you fire unveiled and then hide he can at least have a 50% chance of hitting the square you occupy.(total concealment percentile roll). -also, the mechanics of sniping are based on the idea of "someone shooting and then hiding". isn't that what's going on here? sure, sniping requires that you're hidden to start with, but would it get easier if you weren't? Yes it would. This action looks like sniping but it actually isn't,because after shooting,you move and go hide in another place. You could say that sniping in D&D is like sniping in real life:snipers reamain put and hidden in the same place while shooting at their target. ;)
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 04:35 PM	uhm... hidden is concealment all of a sudden? wait... where does it say that? I can't seem to find it. we're trying to avoid getting shot at during the enemy's turn, right? I mean, that seems to be the goal here. in one case, we did that with the sniping maneuver. in another case, we did that by moving and hiding. it's not the "excact same thing" for the ranger; a ranger could snipe, and he'd still have a -20 to his hide check (that's how it works!). a ranger could supposedly also - as suggested in this thread - "move and hide, avoid the -20 penalty, and still avoid being targetted by the enemy". this is where it sounds odd to me; why should we suddenly get to achieve the goal so much easier? and even getting the benefit of changing position? :confused:
Francius 09-14-06, 04:55 PM	uhm... hidden is concealment all of a sudden? wait... where does it say that? I can't seem to find it. we're trying to avoid getting shot at during the enemy's turn, right? I mean, that seems to be the goal here. in one case, we did that with the sniping maneuver. in another case, we did that by moving and hiding. it's not the "excact same thing" for the ranger; a ranger could snipe, and he'd still have a -20 to his hide check (that's how it works!). a ranger could supposedly also - as suggested in this thread - "move and hide, avoid the -20 penalty, and still avoid being targetted by the enemy". this is where it sounds odd to me; why should we suddenly get to achieve the goal so much easier? and even getting the benefit of changing position? :confused: Yeah,being hidden grants you total concealment(PHB 8-6 table page 151, and concealment rule page 152)....don't tell me you didn't know that.Otherwise,what benefits a hidden character would get? Yes,we are trying to make it hard for the opponent to hit us. Though with the sniping maneuver we have a "slightly" different result than with hiding as part of a move action after an attack: With SNIPING you get the bonuses for attacking with total concealment (thus by being an invisible attacker) and the enemy can't spot the location you're hiding in and therefore he can't attack you on his turn.He could only try to attack a square he thinks you occupy. With moving and hiding after shooting by being visible you can move and hide (without taking the -20 penalty to the hide check) after attacking, providing yourself with total concealment so that the enemy will have to succeed in both the 50% percentile rolls to hit and damage you.But when you attack you are visible and you don't get any bonuses to the attack. See?They are different. Sniping is harder to accomplish but grants you more advantages while moving&hiding after firing unveiled is easier to accomplish yet it gives you fewer bonuses... Is it getting any clearer now?
rironin 09-14-06, 05:03 PM	OP: I agree with you and several other posters. I have always thought that the main advantage of sniping was that you stayed hidden the whole time, assuming you make the -20 Hide check. So if you made the check, your opponent would wind up with an arrow in his back pointing a certain way, which might give him a rough idea of where the attack originated, but apart from that, no idea. You're talking about something totally different in my view. You're not gaining the benefit of sniping so you certainly shouldn't get the penalty for it.
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 05:07 PM	Yeah,being hidden grants you total concealment(PHB 8-6 table page 151, and concealment rule page 152)....don't tell me you didn't know that.Otherwise,what benefits a hidden character would get?ok, please, indulge me: quote the excact place that says hiding grants concealment. (I'm ill at the moment, and it's clogging my mind. sorry 'bout that.) Sniping is harder to accomplish but grants you more advantages while moving&hiding after firing unveiled is easier to accomplish yet it gives you fewer bonuses...but, would you say you could still use the move-hide maneuver even if you started hidden?... btw. "unveiled" is not really an official game term. careful with that! dangerous! hehe... Is it getting any clearer now?getting there! :D hope it's not too boring. ;)
DarknessEternal 09-14-06, 05:30 PM	Still the Ranger is considered as having total concealment and if the enemy wishes to attack the square the Ranger occupies, he would have to succeed in the 50% percentile dice roll to hit and then at another 50% dice roll to damage him. Not entirely correct; there is only one roll made for concealment/total concealment. That is on the to-hit roll. If you hit, you deal damage normally.
Francius 09-14-06, 05:32 PM	From the skill's description:"You need cover or concealment to make a hide check.If you find concealment then you can make a hide check..." What does that say to you?You've found concealment and hidden successfuly.So, aren't you now behind concealment? Thus, aren't you concealed now or what? From the PHB page 152:Total concealment:If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight(for instance if he's in total darkness or invisible,or if you're blinded),he is considered to have total concealment from you. And since invisible in this case is like being totaly hidden from your opponent and grants you the same effect as per the 8-6 table on page 151 then yes,being hidden grants you concealment. Otherwise,again,what benefit would a hidden character get? When I say unveiled, I mean being visible or not hidden just like anyone else.Give me a break on that,it's not a game term but you did understand what I meant in the first place. but, would you say you could still use the move-hide maneuver even if you started hidden?... The 3.5 FAQ says you can. You make the hide check at a -20 penalty only if you want to remain hidden while attacking or in the sniping case that you hide immediately as a move action and not as part of your movement. See?They are different. Sniping is harder to accomplish but grants you more advantages while moving&hiding after firing unveiled is easier to accomplish yet it gives you fewer bonuses... Few...every other poster agreed with me except you...you keep asking me the same questions... :blink: ...:D
Francius 09-14-06, 05:39 PM	Not entirely correct; there is only one roll made for concealment/total concealment. That is on the to-hit roll. If you hit, you deal damage normally. Uhm...perhaps I should state it more correctly. Concealment miss chance:Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of concealment.If the attacker hits,the defender must make a miss chance percentile roll to avoid being struck.(to expedite play make both rolls at the same time).....a successful attack on an occupied square by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance(instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment)
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 05:58 PM	forgive me, Francius, but I went ahead and contacted customer support... so far, the verdict is you can't do what you have in mind. I'll try being a little more specific in an update question to get further clarification on this. I'm not being stubborn, I just really don't get it, lol. :) as for concealment - why does camouflage say "even if the terrain doesn’t grant cover or concealment" if hiding counts as concealment itself? and yeah I was being pedantic about "unveiled". but hey, you can take it! ;)
Tsuul 09-14-06, 06:13 PM	See?They are different. Sniping is harder to accomplish but grants you more advantages while moving&hiding after firing unveiled is easier to accomplish yet it gives you fewer bonuses... Using the hide rules the way you guys use them, I'll try to answer. Sniping is only considered harder vs. moving-and-fireing because the Sniping rules don't take into consideration Hide boosting abilitites like HiPS or Camo. They are powerful abilities and should grant additional benefits. That benefit is the use of the move action to Hide and Move. (to expedite play make both rolls at the same time)There is only one roll. The one the defender makes. The first sentance explains what is going on, the second gives the mechanics. In both sentances is it the defender who has the control of the miss chance, the attacker never rolls to see if his attack misses.
Tsuul 09-14-06, 06:21 PM	Also it should be noted that the "unveiled" / attack / move + hide combo has a flaw. Readied actions to attack.
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 06:23 PM	no please, Tsuul, by all means - use the rules from the book, if you see some deviation here (and please state where it's off). also, we're not concerned with "flaws" (or at least, I'm not) - just with how this is supposed to work. as you can no doubt tell, some* don't get it - yet. (*: yeah that would be me. :P)
Tsuul 09-14-06, 06:30 PM	no please, Tsuul, by all means - use the rules from the book, if you see some deviation here (and please state where it's off)I ment that I have a different interpretation reguarding most hide rules then most. Different enough that most people consider them to be house rules... So I am trying to stick with the prevailing uses in my replies which is what you guys are also using.
Francius 09-14-06, 06:35 PM	forgive me, Francius, but I went ahead and contacted customer support... so far, the verdict is you can't do what you have in mind. I'll try being a little more specific in an update question to get further clarification on this. I'm not being stubborn, I just really don't get it, lol. :) as for concealment - why does camouflage say "even if the terrain doesn’t grant cover or concealment" if hiding counts as concealment itself? How did you contact them?They rarely answer.Can you give me a clue so I can do it myself too? Also,since they answered you, show me some of the results. As for concealment,I already said you need it to make a hide check NORMALLY. In the Ranger's specific case you don't need concealment to attempt a hide check.But here's the catch.Even if you don't have concealment you can hide and thus be considered as having total concealment.Nice huh? Always a hidden character is considered to have total concealment.ALWAYS. and yeah I was being pedantic about "unveiled". but hey, you can take it! ; Dude,I'm giving you lessons here.You keep asking I 'll keep bringing it on.I think I've covered all of your questions up to now.No sweat ;) :D
Francius 09-14-06, 06:42 PM	Using the hide rules the way you guys use them, I'll try to answer. Sniping is only considered harder vs. moving-and-fireing because the Sniping rules don't take into consideration Hide boosting abilitites like HiPS or Camo. They are powerful abilities and should grant additional benefits. That benefit is the use of the move action to Hide and Move.. Agreed.One more point for Francius. There is only one roll. The one the defender makes. The first sentance explains what is going on, the second gives the mechanics. In both sentances is it the defender who has the control of the miss chance, the attacker never rolls to see if his attack misses. Ok,where did I say that the defender isn't in charge of the miss roll? More specificaly the defender makes two rolls to determine whether he was hit or not.. As per RAW there are really two rolls to be made.Both by the defender.Two rolls nonetheless. If the attacker hits with his attack roll,he still has to wait for two percentile rolls to see if he actually dealt damage.
Tsuul 09-14-06, 06:57 PM	Ok,where did I say that the defender isn't in charge of the miss roll? More specificaly the defender makes two rolls to determine whether he was hit or not.. As per RAW there are really two rolls to be made.Both by the defender.Two rolls nonetheless. If the attacker hits with his attack roll,he still has to wait for two percentile rolls to see if he actually dealt damage.I'm just trying to figure out where you are getting two rolls from. The attacker attacks as normal and if he hits, the defender rolls a misschance to avoid being struck. Concealment Miss Chance: Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. If the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance percentile roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack. The first sentance explains what is going on, the second gives the mechanics.
Dark1ord 09-14-06, 07:19 PM	How did you contact them?They rarely answer.Can you give me a clue so I can do it myself too?ooh, easy one! :D well, one way is to scroll all the way down, now, and press "Contact Us". it'll redirect you to the right place (I guess they'll put in the direct address sooner or later). I always get answers, and I get them pretty quickly. oh, you have to sign up. no big deal. Also,since they answered you, show me some of the results.well, it's not always that I care to quote the answers completely. most of the time it's just a matter of conveying a "yes" or "no".
Dark1ord 09-15-06, 11:23 AM	(you still reading, Francius? ;)) ok, so, as far as I can tell from the customer support answers - although not entirely satisfying - it's... possible. now, throughout this thread, I was just trying to find reasons for why it couldn't be possible. so now we have: Sniping - from hiding: shoot, hide again at -20. Woodland Archer/Moving Sniper - Snipe, next round: Snipe, move. "The Unveiling Trick" aka. "The Francius Maneuver" (cool names, yeah? ;)) - shoot, hide (maybe move), next round: "unveil", shoot, hide (maybe move). (moving while hiding may cause a hiding penalty, depending on speed, although Moving Sniper seems to remove this. anyways, that's another story.) so, basically, the Francius way (don't try this at home, kids; it's only for rangers with camouflage and hide in plain sight) will let you pop up here and there and fire arrows - and remain hidden inbetween. that's cool, I can dig it. fantasy powers and all. :)
Francius 09-15-06, 01:04 PM	(you still reading, Francius? ;)) ok, so, as far as I can tell from the customer support answers - although not entirely satisfying - it's... possible. now, throughout this thread, I was just trying to find reasons for why it couldn't be possible. so now we have: Sniping - from hiding: shoot, hide again at -20. Woodland Archer/Moving Sniper - Snipe, next round: Snipe, move. "The Unveiling Trick" aka. "The Francius Maneuver" (cool names, yeah? ;)) - shoot, hide (maybe move), next round: "unveil", shoot, hide (maybe move). (moving while hiding may cause a hiding penalty, depending on speed, although Moving Sniper seems to remove this. anyways, that's another story.) so, basically, the Francius way (don't try this at home, kids; it's only for rangers with camouflage and hide in plain sight) will let you pop up here and there and fire arrows - and remain hidden inbetween. that's cool, I can dig it. fantasy powers and all. :) Dude,talking to you was a blast. ;) What happened on this thread can be resumed as a pick up hit&answer tv show.My fingers hurt from the keyboard mashing yet I can say I emerged victorious. :D Hey,you gave me a good challenge. :cool: I hope I presented you with a clear response for every answer you posed me,but since the "customer support" guys in the end stated that the "Francius maneuver" is doable (you bet), I can happily conclude this thread by posting a final resuming chapter(below).
Francius 09-15-06, 01:10 PM	This is the final review of what we figured out during this thread,based only on core D&D 3.5 rules, without improvising or houseruling even a catwalk and by finaly acquiring the WoTC's "customer support" guys' approval: :teach: :teach: :teach: A 17TH lvl Ranger with both the Camouflage and Hide in plain sight extraordinary abilities,when he adoperates a bow or a crossbow,of any size and genre,added to his disposal are these 2 maneuvers: Sniping:You have to begin already hidden,attack as a standard action and then hide again (on the same spot) as a move action by taking a -20 penalty to the hide check. Benefits of sniping:You get the bonuses for attacking with total concealment (thus by being an invisible attacker) and the enemy can't spot the location you're hiding in and therefore he can't attack you on his turn.He could only try to attack a square he thinks you occupy. Attacking by being visible and then hiding:You attack either as a standard action or as a full attack action and then you move your speed (either 5 feet or your whole base speed depending by the attack you made) and make a hide check as part of your movement. Benefits of attacking by being visible and then hiding:You can move and hide (without taking the -20 penalty to the hide check) after attacking, providing yourself with total concealment so that the enemy will have to get past the 50% percentile roll to hit and damage you. You can then keep repeating the same maneuver round after round without making a hide check at a -20 penalty to remain hidden while attacking.If you do so you are considered normaly visible while shooting and after the attack you can move to another spot and try a new hide check without the -20 penalty that sniping imposes.
Dark1ord 09-15-06, 01:41 PM	What happened on this thread can be resumed as a pick up hit&answer tv show.My fingers hurt from the keyboard mashing yet I can say I emerged victorious. :D Hey,you gave me a good challenge. :cool:cool, I didn't even know it was a game/fight. ;) (minor issues: you should probably remind readers that moving while hiding might give hiding penalties, as usual. oh, and, as for concealment, it really is just one roll. "both rolls" refer to the attack roll and the percentile roll. the SRD says: (http://d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#concealment) "If the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance percentile roll to avoid being struck".) -hey, I know how the ranger does this! he full attacks, then steps aside and pretends he's a tree - that's camouflage+hide in plain sight for ya!... :D
DarknessEternal 09-15-06, 02:50 PM	You can move and hide (without taking the -20 penalty to the hide check) after attacking, providing yourself with total concealment so that the enemy will have to get past both the 50% percentile rolls to hit and damage you. There's still only one roll for concealment though. The SRD can't say it any more simply than it already does.
Tsuul 09-15-06, 03:26 PM	Bumping DarknessEternal's above post. Also you can't hide during a 5' step. It's movement in the realy real world, but DnD pays for everything with actions. Hiding takes up either a move action, or is part of movement [action]. A 5' step is "no action" action (PHB 141). Rules of the Game: All about movement (part 3) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040622a)
Dark1ord 09-15-06, 03:53 PM	There's still only one roll for concealment though. The SRD can't say it any more simply than it already does.I already stated this, but... thanks for repeating, I guess. ;) Also you can't hide during a 5' step. It's movement in the realy real world, but DnD pays for everything with actions. Hiding takes up either a move action, or is part of movement [action]. A 5' step is "no action" action (PHB 141). Rules of the Game: All about movement (part 3) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040622a)something's off here. the article describes hide both as not an action, a move action (in the case of sniping), and as part of a move action... besides, we've already seen this, from the FAQ: "A character with the hide in plain sight class feature (described on page 48 in the Player’s Handbook) can make a Hide check even if she’s being observed. This doesn’t require any extra action to accomplish (unlike the sniping maneuver)". I'm not certain what they intend, here. but at most, it means the loss of a full attack. who cares when you can still pretend you're a tree? :D EDIT: it's not off. ;)
Francius 09-16-06, 04:06 AM	Actualy,YOU CAN attempt a hide check with a 5 foot step. A 5 foot step may not be an action in itself when adoperated with a full round action(full attack), but is otherwise a movement that actualy covers distance.So it is a movement.Thus, since you can make a hide check as a free action as part of movement(and not only as part of a move action) ,you are able to take a 5 foot step and hide. Anyhow,the Ranger does not need a move action to hide after he has fired with a ranged weapon (the 3.5 FAQ says it clearly) so he can still use a full attack action,move 5 feed on a side(not a move action in this case) and attempt a hide check in the same way.
Dark1ord 09-16-06, 07:52 AM	A 5 foot step may not be an action in itself when adoperated with a full round action(full attack), but is otherwise a movement that actualy covers distance.So it is a movement.Thus, since you can make a hide check as a free action as part of movement(and not only as part of a move action) ,you are able to take a 5 foot step and hide.totally agree with that. the SRD is nodding, too. Anyhow,the Ranger does not need a move action to hide after he has fired with a ranged weapon (the 3.5 FAQ says it clearly) so he can still use a full attack action,move 5 feed on a side(not a move action in this case) and attempt a hide check in the same way.actually, that part of the FAQ isn't referring specifically to ranged attacks (as it might sound like, here); it's more generic. it simply states that a ranger can attempt a hide check even while he's being observed, and that this doesn't require a move action like with sniping. btw. I still think you should go back and change the wording on the concealment issue. "final review" and all. :)
Francius 09-16-06, 02:55 PM	btw. I still think you should go back and change the wording on the concealment issue. "final review" and all. :) I did it using a single action only to erase it. I erased "both rolls" and substituted it with just a single percentile die roll... (or was it a free action the one I made?):confused: :)
Dark1ord 09-17-06, 12:53 AM	I did it using a single action only to erase it. I erased "both rolls" and substituted it with just a single percentile die roll... (or was it a free action the one I made?):confused: :)yeah, I dunno... it's said that "nothing is free", so... guess you made a standard action. or maybe a move action, since you were all over the keyboard and stuff. :D