Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Vestrial 01-19-08, 07:23 PM	Here is the scene: A halfling rogue and a human warrior batle an evil baddy. The human is engaged with the baddy in melee (or not, that part is really incidental imo), the halfling has thrown a couple daggers already. A large alter stands in between the halfling and the baddy (say, 3.5' tall, halfling is around 3'). The halfling moves up and ducks behind the alter, which provides full cover, hides(move action) then pops around the corner or over the top to chuck a dagger at the baddy, who happened to fail his spot check, thus denying his dex bonus. Looks something like this after the halfling moves into place: B A W A h Legit? I say yes, because Hide explicitely states you can make a hide check if you gain full cover. DM says no because the baddy 'knows' the rogue is there. I say there is no mechanic for 'knowing,' and 'surprise' is not a requisite condition for SA, it's simply a matter of contesting the hide roll. What say you?
PerennialRook 01-19-08, 09:17 PM	Yes, you can hide. To quote from the SRD, "You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you’re out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went." No, you can't get a sneak attack. Sneak attack requires that your opponent is flanked or denied their Dexterity bonus to AC. Nothing about hiding during combat will render your opponent an unaware combatant and cause them to lose their Dexterity bonus to AC, especially if they "know where you went." And if they know that you're a rogue, you can bet they'll be expecting it.
Vestrial 01-19-08, 09:22 PM	Interesting take. The problem I see is that perception has nothing to do with awareness. The target can be fully aware the attacker is present, if he cant perceive him, he loses his dex. So, if you grant that the halfling can hide, then he does, in fact, gain sneak attack. (assuming he wins the contested roll) Elsewise, precisely what is the benifit of hiding?
PerennialRook 01-19-08, 09:41 PM	The rogue isn't invisible and the defender isn't blind. These are as close as I could come to finding a rule that says the defender loses their Dexterity bonus to AC. The rogue may be hidden, but the defender is aware of the rogue. No way the defender lets their guard down.
ZiggZagg 01-19-08, 10:07 PM	Did the Halfling do all that in one round? Because that would be illegal to move (move action) up to the alter, hide in combat (which is another move action), and then pop up and attack (standard action). He would have been better off trying to move up and hide first, then the next round stand up, attack (standard action) and then try to hide again using the sniping rules (another move action)
Bopple 01-19-08, 11:04 PM	1) You are denied to Dex bonus, when you cannot see the opponent. 2) You cannot see hidden creatures. S) Therefore you are denied to Dex bonus against hidden creatures. Awareness has nothing to do with it. For example, invisible rogue can sneak-attack, even if the foe is aware of the invisible rogue.
PerennialRook 01-19-08, 11:16 PM	1) You are denied to Dex bonus, when you cannot see the opponent. 2) You cannot see hidden creatures. S) Therefore you are denied to Dex bonus against hidden creatures. Awareness has nothing to do with it. For example, invisible rogue can sneak-attack, even if the foe is aware of the invisible rogue. 1) Got a reference on that? I looked and I saw nothing about it in the SRD or my PHB. 2) You can't see air either, neither of which points have anything to do with the price of tea in China. S) Unless you are already in combat, aware of the attacker, and within 10' of them. The rogue has full cover, good for him (no line of sight, etc.). But hiding is by no means invisible.
PerennialRook 01-19-08, 11:26 PM	Awareness has everything to do with it. It is being caught unaware that denies them their Dexterity modifier to AC.
JamesMaissen 01-19-08, 11:37 PM	Okay. 1. The halfling moves so as to get full cover from the opponent. Check one. The halfling is now unobserved by the opponent. 2. The halfling continues moving so as to have line of sight to the opponent, all the while maintaining either cover or concealment. Check two. The halfling is allowed to hide. The halfling is allowed to maintain that hide against the opponent, but unless the halfling moved at half speed the hide check will be at penalty. Assuming the opponent doesn't see the halfling and the halfling makes the attack from within 30 feet then sneak attack applies (usual other caveats apply). At which point the halfling is *then* seen by the opponent, requiring the halfling to become unobserved (i.e. by moving to a place where they cannot be seen) before they can hide against that opponent again. Now if, for some reason, the halfling was able to move and then get a full attack (i.e. belt of battle) the subsequent attacks would *not* get sneak attack as after the first attack the halfling is then seen. In general.. if the opponent cannot see the attacker then they are denied their dexterity from the attack. -James
Bopple 01-19-08, 11:44 PM	1) Got a reference on that? I looked and I saw nothing about it in the SRD or my PHB. Like this? http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040224a Awareness has everything to do with it. It is being caught unaware that denies them their Dexterity modifier to AC. So are you arguing you retain your Dex bonus against foes with Greater Invisibility, after one hit?
PerennialRook 01-19-08, 11:52 PM	Like this? http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040224a So are you arguing you retain your Dex bonus against foes with Greater Invisibility, after one hit? This has never been about invisibility, this is about hiding. While the article is very informative, unless the rogue can attack from total concealment, then no dice (pun intended).
DastardlyDan 01-19-08, 11:52 PM	PHB 3.5, pg. 76, under the Hide skill description: First line: Use this skill to sink back into the shadows and proceed unseen... 6th paragraph: You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you're out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went. So, in this example, the thief can effectively hide. Once he hides, he is unseen by the bad guy. Definition of unseen from this link: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/unseen unseen: adj. not observed From the Sneak Attack ability description, PHB 3.5 pg. 50: First Line: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from his/her attack... Logic would follow: If a rogue hides, they are unseen. If the rogue is unseen, the bad guy cannot effectively defend themselves from the rogue's attack. Therefore, the rogue's attack would then be a sneak attack. Now, there is a mechanic that allows the bad guy to make the rogue's sneak attack not work: Improved Uncanny Dodge. Improved Uncanny Dodge makes it so a rogue cannot sneak attack the character unless the rogue has 4 rogue levels higher than the levels of the character that provide the Uncanny Dodge ability. So if the bad guy in the example had Improved Uncanny Dodge, and the rogue wasn't 4 levels higher than the bad guy, then he would not get a sneak attack under any circumstances. The awareness you're speaking of is known as "situational awareness." It's the ability of your brain to keep track of things after they move out of your sight. This is largely a prediction made by your brain, though it can be influenced by other factors. Note that it's a prediction. It can still be wrong. Basically in this combat situation, the bad guy is fighting the human. He sees the halfling throw a couple daggers at him, but he is focused on keeping the human from hitting him with his sword. The halfing moves away from where the bad guy last saw him, and gets behind an object that obstructs the bad guy's view of the halfling. If the bad guy was even inclined to turn his back on the guy who's currently swinging a sword at him, there are still three major angles that the halfling's next attack could come from. In a nutshell, the bad guy knows the halfling's there and knows the halfling's going to attack him, but he has no way of knowning where the attack is going to come from...at best, he has an educated guess. The bad guy would not be able to effectively defend himself from the halfling in any way. The DM in this case is mistaken. Unless the bad guy has armor providing Heavy Fortification (100% chance to ignore critical hit or sneak attack damage) -or- the Improved Uncanny Dodge ability.
Bopple 01-20-08, 12:07 AM	This has never been about invisibility, this is about hiding. While the article is very informative, unless the rogue can attack from total concealment, then no dice (pun intended). Invisibility and blindness are the two most common sitations of being 'unseen'. That does not mean hidden creatures are not 'unseen'.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 12:17 AM	In the given example the defender has partial concealment from ranged attacks anyways, and would be "facing" in that general direction. In order to have clear line of sight to make a sneak attack, the rogue would have to move within 10' of the defender. Not to mention the same rules apply to the rogue tracking the defender. What happens when the rogue pops up and the defender took a 5' step? Oh noes! Since the rogue can't see through the alter, the defender is "invisible" too. Now what? Roll initiative again for the rogue "joining" combat? If the rogue is not fully concealed behind the alter when it attacks it is not invisible. According to the article, the rogue needs to be "invisible" to get a sneak attack off during combat.
JamesMaissen 01-20-08, 12:19 AM	This has never been about invisibility, this is about hiding. While the article is very informative, unless the rogue can attack from total concealment, then no dice (pun intended). Umm.. what do you think that the hide skill does? If the rogue is hidden then he's unseen. -James
DastardlyDan 01-20-08, 12:28 AM	In the given example the defender has partial concealment from ranged attacks anyways, and would be "facing" in that general direction. In order to have clear line of sight to make a sneak attack, the rogue would have to move within 10' of the defender. Not to mention the same rules apply to the rogue tracking the defender. What happens when the rogue pops up and the defender took a 5' step? Oh noes! Since the rogue can't see through the alter, the defender is "invisible" too. Now what? Roll initiative again for the rogue "joining" combat? If the rogue is not fully concealed behind the alter when it attacks it is not invisible. According to the article, the rogue needs to be "invisible" to get a sneak attack off during combat. Part 1: If the halfling moves out from behind the altar, the altar does not provide concealment. Also, where is the rule that says that he has to be within 10' of the defender to have line of sight? A rogue can sneak attack with a ranged attack up to 30'. Read the sneak attack description further. Part 2: The rogue would be able to assess the situation and make his attack. Something the defender could not do. Remember, the rogue is unseen after he hides. Part 3: Don't bother with the article, read the rules in the book first. According to the rules in the book, the rogue gets his sneak attack. If you can't see me, I'm unseen. Doesn't matter if it's because I'm using the Hide skill, behind something that blocks line of sight, or I'm invisible. I'm unseen, no matter how you look at it. That's what the Hide skill does.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 12:44 AM	The rogue can't sneak attack anything with concealment, according to the rules in the book. I've been looking at the rules in the book, and I can't find anything that says a creature hiding in combat gets a sneak attack. Could I get a reference?
Bopple 01-20-08, 12:53 AM	Structure like altar does not confer concealment. It gives you cover. You can hide behind the center of the altar where it gives you Total Cover(you need Total Cover to avoid observation). Since it's total cover, you cannot make an attack, at all. So you can move hidden to the corner of the altar where it gives you (Partial) Cover, and make sneak-attack. Edit) BTW, few DM's would give you Total Cover for 5'x10'x3.5' altar, unless you sit, even if it were a halfling. Then it would require another move action or two.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:04 AM	I'm going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Where I would be right with you if the opponent were not in combat and already aware of the rogue, I just can't overlook those two basic elements. The alter gives cover AND concealment, to both the rogue and the defender. In order to be hidden the rogue must have concealment and in order to make a sneak attack the defender can't have concealment. These two last points are what make this particular situation especially impossible. What you're saying is, if I can find a place to get full concealment (like behind a fence or hedge) I can pop up from behind it and sneak attack as many times as I want during a combat as long as I go out of the defender's view once between each attack. We're not playing peek-a-boo with a two-year-old here.
DastardlyDan 01-20-08, 01:05 AM	I've been looking at the rules in the book, and I can't find anything that says a creature hiding in combat gets a sneak attack. Could I get a reference? I posted it once. Look here: PHB 3.5, pg. 76, under the Hide skill description: First line: Use this skill to sink back into the shadows and proceed unseen... 6th paragraph: You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you're out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went. So, in this example, the thief can effectively hide. Once he hides, he is unseen by the bad guy. Definition of unseen from this link: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/unseen unseen: adj. not observed From the Sneak Attack ability description, PHB 3.5 pg. 50: First Line: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from his/her attack... Logic would follow: If a rogue hides, they are unseen. If the rogue is unseen, the bad guy cannot effectively defend themselves from the rogue's attack. Therefore, the rogue's attack would then be a sneak attack. I agree that the halfling would have to move out from behind the altar, otherwise the altar provides the bad guy with concealment. But once the halfling uses the altar to hide, he does not need to stay behind the altar to be hidden. The altar conceals the halfling. The halfling's ability to use the Hide skill is what makes him unseen. Remember, the halfling is hiding with the Hide skill, not the altar. The Hide skill cannot be used while being actively observed. Therefore, the halfling needs to get out of sight for long enough to use his Hide skill. Once he has successfully used his Hide skill, he no longer needs the altar. He can move out from behind the altar and still be "hidden" by the Hide skill. Everything I'm quoting is from the Sneak Attack ability and Hide skill descriptions in the Player's Handbook. I've even given page numbers in a previous post. How much more reference do you need? Edit: Note that when I'm saying "conceal," my intent with the word is to say that the bad guy can't see what he is doing. I'm not talking about the game mechanic of concealment.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:08 AM	Take a 5' hallway. A rogue is positioned around a corner where it can get full concealment, a fighter blocks the passageway ahead so that the BBEG can't get past. The rogue is now free to make sneak attacks every other round as it ducks behind the corner again and again?
Bopple 01-20-08, 01:13 AM	The alter gives cover AND concealment As you said, you must not overlook basics. Hard structure does not give you concealment. Concealment is created by immaterial things like fog, darkness, illusions and so on.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:13 AM	The altar conceals the halfling. The halfling's ability to use the Hide skill is what makes him unseen. Remember, the halfling is hiding with the Hide skill, not the altar. The Hide skill cannot be used while being actively observed. Therefore, the halfling needs to get out of sight for long enough to use his Hide skill. Once he has successfully used his Hide skill, he no longer needs the altar. He can move out from behind the altar and still be "hidden" by the Hide skill. Whoa, what? No, a degree of concealment is required to remain hidden. You can't be hidden in an open square in full view of an opponent, that requires actual invisibility. If the rogue is not hidden then the sneak attack doesn't work. If the rogue stays behind the concealment then the defender is also concealed, once again negating sneak attacks.
Zelck 01-20-08, 01:15 AM	This is definitely legit. If the halfling takes a 5' step to the right, he can get cover while obtaining both line of sight and line of effect to the baddy (although he'll probably suffer a cover penalty for trying to shoot through W). All you need to hide is cover, and all you need to make an attack is line of effect. Concealment is not an issue here because line of sight is established and there's nothing to break it. Thus, the halfling will be unseen for the first attack and it should be a sneak attack.
DastardlyDan 01-20-08, 01:15 AM	Take a 5' hallway. A rogue is positioned around a corner where it can get full concealment, a fighter blocks the passageway ahead so that the BBEG can't get past. The rogue is now free to make sneak attacks every other round as it ducks behind the corner again and again? No, but that is a different situation. The rogue needs to be able to get to the bad guy. With your 5' hallway and the allied fighter in between the rogue and the bad guy, the rogue can't do anything helpful. If you take the allied fighter out of the equation, then it works like this: Rogue ducks behind corner and uses his Hide skill. After doing so, he moves out from behind the corner. He now has direct line of sight and line of effect to the bad guy. He is still hidden, since he is close to an object that creates a shadow (the wall). He gets a sneak attack against the bad guy. Then yes, if the bad guy is dumb enough to stay put, then the rogue could then duck back behind the corner and use his hide skill to do it all over again. In the example originally presented, the halfling has the ability to move after he has used his Hide skill. He can then move into a more advantageous position to attack the bad guy. So long as he is close to an object that creates a shadow big enough for the halfling to Hide in, he is unseen by the bad guy. Since he is unseen, he can make a sneak attack.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:17 AM	As you said, you must not overlook basics. Hard structure does not give you concealment. Concealment is created by immaterial things like fog, darkness, illusions and so on. The only way to have cover and not concealment is if you were behind some sort of invisible force wall or something. Concealment is just something that prevents sight. Cover prevents physical objects from passing through. I was a scout in the Army, I know all about cover AND concealment.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:19 AM	Let me clear this point up. To remain hidden you still have to have some sort of concealment. You cannot be hidden in plain sight, you have to have a "hiding place."
Zelck 01-20-08, 01:22 AM	Whoa, what? No, a degree of concealment is required to remain hidden. You can't be hidden in an open square in full view of an opponent, that requires actual invisibility. If the rogue is not hidden then the sneak attack doesn't work. If the rogue stays behind the concealment then the defender is also concealed, once again negating sneak attacks. From the Hide skill description: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/hide.htm) "You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. Total cover or total concealment usually (but not always; see Special, below) obviates the need for a Hide check, since nothing can see you anyway." Emphasis mine. To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC). When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from your square to the target’s square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks. Again, he can move 5' to the right and gain cover from B (and W for that matter), because B cannot draw four lines from any corner of B's square to all four corners of h's square without passing through A, which provides cover. To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment. When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has concealment if his space is entirely within an effect that grants concealment. When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you use the rules for determining concealment from ranged attacks. In addition, some magical effects provide concealment against all attacks, regardless of whether any intervening concealment exists. If h moves 5' to the right, you can take the top right or bottom right corner of h's square and draw four lines connecting it to all four corners in B without passing through an object that grants concealment (W probably gives cover though). Thus, B does not benefit from concealment against h.
Zelck 01-20-08, 01:24 AM	The only way to have cover and not concealment is if you were behind some sort of invisible force wall or something. Concealment is just something that prevents sight. Cover prevents physical objects from passing through. I was a scout in the Army, I know all about cover AND concealment. Sigh. Time to bring out this image again. http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/7971/god20kills20a20catgirlhk3.jpg We're playing D&D here, which has rules that are different from the ones in real life. The rules in D&D clearly state that Cover does not automatically grant Concealment.
Bopple 01-20-08, 01:25 AM	The only way to have cover and not concealment is if you were behind some sort of invisible force wall or something. Concealment is just something that prevents sight. Cover prevents physical objects from passing through. I was a scout in the Army, I know all about cover AND concealment. No, you don't. Cover and concealment does not have anything to do with each other. Actually, Total Cover and Total Concealment are mutually exclusive. Total Cover: If you don’t have line of effect to your target he is considered to have total cover from you. 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.
DastardlyDan 01-20-08, 01:28 AM	Player's handbook pages 150, 151, and 152 talk all about Cover and Concealment. Cover allows you to make a Hide check. You can also use the Hide skill in concealment. Cover also blocks line of effect. Note that cover doesn't always block line of sight. If I have a Force Wall up, it gives me cover, but you can still see me. The Force Wall keeps you from physically touching me and affecting me with spells. Now, a solid object like the altar, would provide BOTH cover and concealment. BUT the halfling can move out from behind the altar (negating the cover) and still remain hidden (while concealed in shadows, fog, or the like) Cover: Blocks line of effect, but not always line of sight. Allows you to Hide. Concealment: Blocks nothing, but gives you a percentage chance that anything that needs an attack roll will miss because you can't clearly make out your target. Shadows, fog, or the like provide concealment. Concealment also allows you to use the Hide skill. Cover keeps you from touching me, concealment keeps you from seeing me. Keep that in mind. I can be in concealment and attack you while you don't have concealment. I'm in the shadow, but you're not. I get sneak attack, and you bleed a lot.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:38 AM	Wow. I guess you really do learn something new everyday. Thanks for the correction about cover and concealment. I always thought about concealment in the classical sense.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:43 AM	I still don't get where an opponent in combat and not surprised is denied their Dexterity modifier to AC.
Zelck 01-20-08, 01:53 AM	Real life analogy: bad evil terrorist dude is in a building fighting vs. good soldier people. Bad evil terrorist dude knows they're in the building, but he's in a church-like building, let's say, where there's plenty of cover (pews). He's looking around nervously, and suddenly sees a grenade midair flying at him, and an arm retracting back behind some cover. He probably can't react in time, but you'd probably know better than I :).
Warweaver 01-20-08, 02:05 AM	Essentially, a rogue must get behind something large enough to act as total cover so that they can function as "not observed" and get to make a hide check. You make Hide checks as part of a move, at half speed (or faster with penalties) - it is up to the DM whether you can make one in the same move as running behind the altar (since you don't have total cover yet), or must use a move action after getting behind it to get the bonus. Either way, while behind total cover you cannot attack, as the Big Bad has total cover from you too. However, once you've made your Hide check you can move (via 5-ft step or further at half speed) to a spot with (regular) cover or concealment, and maintain the Hide. Rules in the PHB define which sides of the altar relative to Big Bad would grant cover, and while the altar itself does NOT grant concealment of any kind, the shadows it casts might (also kinda up to DM, unless you're the one holding a torch and then, no). Once you're behind cover (but not total cover), you can make a sneak attack. Even if you do a full attack, only the first strike "surprises" the Baddie from your direction, so only the first attack denies him his Dex bonus. After that attack, you are no longer Hiding - and must get back behind total cover/concealment to get another Hide roll. The only exception to this is the Sniping rule (after your single attack take a move action, do -20 on a Hide check, and if successful, you're still Hiding).
JamesMaissen 01-20-08, 02:22 AM	I still don't get where an opponent in combat and not surprised is denied their Dexterity modifier to AC. Okay, you are confusing being *flat-footed* with being *denied DEX*. When you start combat you are flat-footed until your initiative comes up (there are a few other times that you are considered flat-footed, but that's neither here nor there). So say that you are surprised at the start of combat. Then it would last through out the surprise round, then after you roll initiative at the start of the 1st round it would last until your turn in the initiative of the 1st real round comes up. There are many conditions that can cause your PC to be denied their DEX from an attack. 1. Flat-footed. If your PC is flat-footed they are denied their DEX. 2. Attacked by an unseen foe. If your PC is blind, or the attacker is hidden from you, or the attacker is invisible, or other like situations you are denied your DEX. 3. Your opponent in melee successfully feints against you, then you are denied your DEX for their next melee attack. 4. Your PC failed a swim check (and doesn't have a swim speed). 5. Your PC is climbing without a climb speed. These are just off the top of my head (1 & 2 can be obviated by uncanny dodge, 4 & 5 by having the proper movement modes, etc). There are many ways to skin a cat. Now all that said, I think a good number of posters here should take the time to completely puzzle out the rules for cover and concealment, and then how they apply to hiding. To hide: 1. Must be 'unobserved'. If the creature desiring to hide is being seen then it cannot try to hide. It can solve this dilemma in a few ways, some include: a. Going behind full cover, so as not to be seen. b. Going to a square that offers full concealment (or creating such a square). c. Creating a diversion to duck behind something. d. Going invisible (i.e. getting full concealment). e. Blinding the observer (again getting full concealment). 2. Maintain either cover and/ or concealment to the observer. While hiding one must have at least cover to hide behind, or concealment to hide with in... otherwise the observer automatically sees them just as if they weren't trying to hide in the first place. So in the case that started this.. (ignoring questions as to should the alter give cover and to what degree) 1. The halfling rogue moves to a place that would give him full cover to his opponent. 2. Now that the halfling is unseen by his opponent, the halfling can start hiding from his opponent as part of his movement. 3. While the halfling moves he must maintain cover or concealment to his opponent at all times. In this case it's said that he can step out into a square that gives him cover from his opponent and that suffices. 4. The opponent gets to make a reactive spot check to see the halfling now that the halfling only has cover to hide behind (rather than something completely blocking view). The spot check is opposed by the halfling's hide check (the later at -5 as the halfling is moving at full speed, the former possibly decreased based on respective distances). 5. If the opponent fails the opposed roll then the halfling is currently unseen by the opponent. Despite the fact that the opponent knows the halfling is somewhere, they don't know exactly where. 6. The halfling makes an attack against the opponent. If the halfling was unseen this attack is at +2 and the opponent is denied his dex against the attack (class abilities and feats not withstanding). Again despite the opponent knowing that something is out there, he's not seeing it coming so to speak. If all of the criteria for a sneak attack is met then the halfling gets the 'happy' dice. 7. At this point, after the first attack, the halfling is 'observed' by the opponent. Should a friendly druid or wizard happen to cast 'snake's swiftness' at this point (granting another attack immediately) the halfling could make the granted attack, but would not get sneak dice as their opponent currently sees them. 8. Should the halfling desire to do this again they will have to start all over. Does this make sense? -James
Bopple 01-20-08, 03:24 AM	It's partially authors' fault. First of all, Hide rule is ambiguous and written ill. Secondly, they should have differentiated Cover/Concealment from Source of Cover/Concealment. And they also should have categorized them as [Cover = Partial Cover + Total Cover] and [Concealment = Partial Concealment + Total Concealment]. Cover = Cover + Total Cover just sounds stupid and can mislead many.
Tsuul 01-20-08, 03:55 AM	Legit? Did the halfling use the sniping rules? Or any -20 penalty to his hide check to remain hidden while making the attack? <ninja smoke>
ibayboy 01-20-08, 07:50 AM	Now, there is a mechanic that allows the bad guy to make the rogue's sneak attack not work: Improved Uncanny Dodge. Improved Uncanny Dodge makes it so a rogue cannot sneak attack the character unless the rogue has 4 rogue levels higher than the levels of the character that provide the Uncanny Dodge ability. So if the bad guy in the example had Improved Uncanny Dodge, and the rogue wasn't 4 levels higher than the bad guy, then he would not get a sneak attack under any circumstances. This is incorrect. The mechanic you are thinking of is just Uncanny Dodge. This lets you retain your Dex when Flatfooted or struck by an invisible opponent. It is not overcome by a rogue 4 levels higher. Imp. Uncanny Dodge lets you avoid being Flanked, except by a rogue 4 levels higher than the class/es that granted you Imp Uncanny Dodge. What he said... Excellent rundown of the hide rules, IMO. Have a :cookie: on me.
Lyndis 01-20-08, 12:22 PM	Think about it this way. In movies like Aliens or Predator, or even Aliens vws Predator, the humans are often aware that there is something out there. Maybe they can even hear some noises now and then. However, they still have no effing idea where the attack will come from, and they get skewered. They can't apply their dex to attacks that they can't see coming! Same thing in DnD. If a Rogue is in a spot where he can attack and then hide, then he can keeo sneak attacking. It doesn't happen very often unless the rogue is has a Hide in Plain Sight ability, but it can with the right terrain.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 01:37 PM	I still don't agree with the peek-a-boo sneak attacks during combat. Now that the rules are clarified all of my rogues will be carrying tower shields to Hide behind. There is already an in combat use of sneak attack. It's called flanking. Use it.
thejibboo 01-20-08, 02:02 PM	"If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage. Basically, the rogue's attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC..." PHB pg. 50, emphasis added I read this as intentionally leaving some good wiggle room for DM interpretation. I would allow sneak attacks in situations like the target being entangled, where they haven't specifically lost their dex bonus to ac (-4 to AC) but they are "unable to defend effectively." The word "basically" leads me to believe that those are the most common causes that someone would be unable to defend themselves effectively, but by no means the only possibilities. I think someone already made a good argument for this specific sneak attack being explicitly allowed under the rules (the cover vs. concealment post) but even if the target is not specifically denied dex bonus or flanked, the rules leave some other possibilities open to the DM's discretion.
Lyndis 01-20-08, 02:09 PM	I still don't agree with the peek-a-boo sneak attacks during combat. Now that the rules are clarified all of my rogues will be carrying tower shields to Hide behind. There is already an in combat use of sneak attack. It's called flanking. Use it. If your rogue is willing to live with non-proficiency penalties on top of the armor check penalties of using a Tower Shield, go ahead.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 02:42 PM	If your rogue is willing to live with non-proficiency penalties on top of the armor check penalties of using a Tower Shield, go ahead.Dropping an item is a free action, and if I'm not using it as a shield I don't get the penalties. The only time I would use the shield would be to gain the cover needed to grant me sneak attacks, then "drop" the shield as a free action and make my attack.
Lyndis 01-20-08, 02:50 PM	So you'd need a move action to use the shield to grant cover. Then you'd drop it...and then you get one attack that's a sneak attack? Then you'd need to pick up your shield in order to do it again. Doesn't sound very efficient to me. Plus, you've used up your move action, so unless a 5 foot step will bring you within range of the enemy, you can't even make the attack unless you're using a bow or something.
PerennialRook 01-20-08, 03:54 PM	I was kidding about the tower shield. You would let someone sneak attack from behind a tower shield? You would let someone hide behind a tower shield? "I wonder what that tower shield is doing standing upright in the middle of this well lit room?"
Lyndis 01-20-08, 04:50 PM	I can see it if there's a raging battle going on in the room, and the rogue uses something like the shield to hide, and then sneak across to the enemy before stabbing some kidneys. Now, if the rogue was the only one in the room besides the enemy, and the enemy is actively watching the shield, the enemy will get a large circumstancial bonus to his Spot. Remember, for every 5 feet you move, your Hide check takes a -5 penalty. So, sneaking from your tower shield to someone 20 feet away and trying to stab him is very difficult.
Bopple 01-20-08, 05:57 PM	That is why they should have differentiated Cover/Concealment from Source of Cover/Concealment. Hiding behind Cover/Concealment from his own body, shadow or gears is just stupidly stupid.
gixanthrax 01-20-08, 06:03 PM	Great summary. fortunately for my Character ( whispergome with dark and shadow template on it)i hardly ever have to bother about finding cover or the like, because we are playing underdark. Now after having gained enough class levels to obtain athird feat i chose Spring attack(after dodge and mobility), so hilarity ensues. The fun part: 75 feet movement speed. So in standard battles my tactic is to approach using hide and MS, hit the big baddy using sneak attack, move away again and try to stay hidden. Now i have a qustion: when Iam 15 feet away of the enemy after having attacked him, can i HIPS as part of my moving away without the -20 penalty. I mean i got a +27 to hide and MS so the -20 penalty is not that much of a problem... Unfortunately, our DM recognised the power of this char( i should not have told him that my next feat was going to be "Darkstalker") and all of a sudden in nearly every battle we have, there is at least on cleric around who throes in one or the other Daylight spell. But if i have enough money i will buy a wand of darkness to counter this....
Vestrial 01-20-08, 06:50 PM	There is already an in combat use of sneak attack. It's called flanking. Use it. Because all rogues must use 2wf, and love standing toe-to-toe (or toe-to-back, as it were) with the baddies. I really dont understand why you are so opposed to the 'peek-a-boo' technique. The rogue has to give up his full attack in order to pull it off, so no rapid shot or interative attacks. In exchange he gets to apply his SA to one attack. Seems totally reasonable to me. Not to mention, forbiding this tactic pretty much screws over the ranged rogues, since it is one of the few ways of gaining sneak attack once the combat is under way. Why the hate for the ranged rogues? ;p Oh, and tower shield is so inneficient. Carry a king-size blankie. Cut holes in it for eyes even, permanent cover! (just stab the baddie through it. Sure, you ruin your blankie in a few combats, but they arent too expensive) Good discussion guys. I take comfort in knowing everyone that is actually quoting and analyzing the rules agrees with the halfling. I think this thread illustrates the problem with trying to intuit rules from rw experience. I agree that, intuitively, it seems a bit odd to 'hide' when you're in somebody's field of vision. But in the rw, 'sneak attack' usually = one-shot kill. Think of this as compensation for nerfing SA... ;)
gixanthrax 01-20-08, 07:20 PM	I´m just thinking.... What if my rogue had pounce? If my hide checks are high enough i could make a full attack seiries of SAs, use spring attack to get away, hide , stay one round out of battle(or how long does it take to be out of combat to be allowed to start it as a new cobat to use pounce again??? mhm
magicdm 01-20-08, 09:33 PM	I'm the DM in question. I just have to sit back and laugh my butt off that this issue has generated such a heated debate between two boards! (A similar post to Vestrial's was made by me at the EN World boards so we could cover more ground in trying to find an answer.) It seems like it should be so simple! Nevertheless, after reviewing the situation and each reply carefully, I've changed my original stance. It was this reply that brought me to my senses: "The Hide skill cannot be used while being actively observed. Therefore, the halfling needs to get out of sight for long enough to use his Hide skill. Once he has successfully used his Hide skill, he no longer needs the altar. He can move out from behind the altar and still be "hidden" by the Hide skill." Then JamesMaissen came in with his excellent step-by-step analysis and sealed the deal for me. Here's how I see it. Halfling moves behind altar (Move Action). Halfling ducks down and gets full cover (Move Action). A Hide check is made (free action as being part of the ducking down/move). On his next turn, Vestrial then pokes up, generating a Spot check from the Bad Guy. If the Bad Guy fails the Spot check, Vestrial gets his sneak attack (though now the Bad Guy knows Vestrial's there). Vestrial can even take a -20 on that Hide check and immediately duck back down (as per Sniping rules). I'm pretty positive this is almost exactly what Vestrial wanted to do in the first place, though after carefully looking at how long it takes to do things in the rules, I think my group was doing the "ducking down behind cover" as a free action when it shouldn't be. Heck, a sneak attack after 1 round of preparation? That I can live with. So here's another question: Can the halfling move behind the altar, duck down, and Hide as one fluid move action instead of two?
Warweaver 01-20-08, 11:11 PM	So here's another question: Can the halfling move behind the altar, duck down, and Hide as one fluid move action instead of two? This is what the rules in the PHB do not seem to cover. They say you can make a Hide check as part of a move action, and Sniping requires a move action by itself - but it doesn't specify whether you can make a check if you weren't behind total cover or total concealment at the start of your move. I'm inclined to allow it, but maybe there's some errata or Q&A that cleared it up. Note that you cannot make a Hide check when you're behind regular cover or concealment and you're being observed - it has to be total cover/concealment. Also, once you're behind total cover you don't have line of effect either - you have to get back out of it somehow to hit them. Once you're behind total cover and made the Hide check, you can't just waltz out into the open (even if it to just make one sneak attack) - if you do, you automatically count as observed again. You have to stay in a spot that has (regular) cover or concealment, and the Big Bad still gets his Spot check to try and catch what you're doing. If he fails, you can make an attack (or a full attack) - either way only the first attack gets SA damage, and you now automatically count as observed - to Hide again, you'll have to a) do all of the above to get behind total cover again, or b) take the -20 for Sniping when you attack. What does this tell us? 1) The tower shield thing doesn't work. You can't hit them behind total cover, and once you drop it, you're automatically not Hiding and observed. Maybe you could get your DM to let you pull some sneaky "I'm leaning it down enough for regular cover" thing, but not only would that be strenuous to do in battle, the RAW doesn't support it. 2) Sneak attacks after being seen are *tough* to do - a lot tougher than flanking. But they can be done. Sidenote: Remember, for every 5 feet you move, your Hide check takes a -5 penalty. Close but not quite. You can move at half your speed when Hiding with no penalty. If you move greater than half but less than your full speed, the Hide check has a -5 (which is probably what you saw). You take a -10 when trying to Hide after a Bluff check, or -20 when Hiding while running, charging, or attacking (sniping). Hope this helps - I'm just going from the PHB rules.
Lyndis 01-20-08, 11:19 PM	You need to read up on the newer rules then. You can sneak between cover by using Hide, at -5 penalty for each 5 ft moved. The rules were first introduced in Complete Adventurer I think. And if you don't care about hiding afterwards, you can sneak from cover to your target using the same rules. The new rules are also reposted in Rules Compendium
Warweaver 01-21-08, 04:35 AM	Ah found it, thanks. The CAd rules are interesting - I like them. You'd think sneaking up on someone in the open or from cover to cover would be broken, but it's definitely hard to do. Not only do you take a -5 to the Hide check for every 5 feet you want to go through, you can only move 5 feet through open space per 5 ranks in Hide. So to dart across a 15-ft open space between two low walls (cover), or to sneak up on a guy 15-ft from your hiding spot without being seen, you need 15 (!) ranks in Hide and take a -15 on the check. Harsh but fair.
Divisionbyzer0 01-22-08, 03:05 AM	Here is the scene: A halfling rogue and a human warrior batle an evil baddy. The human is engaged with the baddy in melee (or not, that part is really incidental imo), the halfling has thrown a couple daggers already. A large alter stands in between the halfling and the baddy (say, 3.5' tall, halfling is around 3'). The halfling moves up and ducks behind the alter, which provides full cover, hides(move action) then pops around the corner or over the top to chuck a dagger at the baddy, who happened to fail his spot check, thus denying his dex bonus. Looks something like this after the halfling moves into place: B A W A h Legit? I say yes, because Hide explicitely states you can make a hide check if you gain full cover. DM says no because the baddy 'knows' the rogue is there. I say there is no mechanic for 'knowing,' and 'surprise' is not a requisite condition for SA, it's simply a matter of contesting the hide roll. What say you? DM is wrong. Dasterdly Dan has given the most reasonable response.
Captain_Kobold 01-22-08, 09:00 AM	Great summary. fortunately for my Character ( whispergome with dark and shadow template on it)i hardly ever have to bother about finding cover or the like, because we are playing underdark. Unless I'm missing something, shouldn't that make it harder to find cover? Practically everything down there has Darkvision, meaning you can't use shadows to hide in, and the things that don't generally have blindsense/sight. Now i have a qustion: when Iam 15 feet away of the enemy after having attacked him, can i HIPS as part of my moving away without the -20 penalty. I mean i got a +27 to hide and MS so the -20 penalty is not that much of a problem... HiPS lets you make a hide check while being observed, so I would say that you would not suffer the -20 penalty to make the hide check. You might suffer a penalty to your hide from movment maybe? HiPS does not change the other requirements for hiding though. You would still need to reach suitable cover or concealment in order to hide. If your opponent does not have darkvision, getting out of their light radius will do. If they have darkvision, you will need something to hide behind.
gixanthrax 01-22-08, 10:31 AM	A light radius does not bother me at all, as long as it's not from a daylight spell. Is there a ruling anywhere saying that darkvision cancels the effectiveness of HIPS or shadowblend(90 % concealment always except when in bright daylight or under the influence of a daylight spell)? Because my char has both abilities... As for the scent/tremorsense/ blindsight problematic : I'm going to choose darkstalker as my next feat. Fortunately we are currently playing not in the underdark, becuase we were derailed on a mission, but we are to go underdark within one of our next sessions again...
Captain_Kobold 01-22-08, 12:10 PM	Is there a ruling anywhere saying that darkvision cancels the effectiveness of HIPS or shadowblend(90 % concealment always except when in bright daylight or under the influence of a daylight spell)? Because my char has both abilities... Oooh. Tricky. . . :thinks: Darkvision does not cancel the effect of the HiPS ability. The two rules do not directly interact. HiPS does not change the requirements to make a hide check unless is specfically states that it does not in the wording of that class/template. It merely allows you to make a hide check while observed without having to cause a distraction. You need cover or concealment in order to make a hide check, even with the standard HiPS ability. Within the darkvision radius of an opponent, there is no concealment provided by natural darkness or dim light conditions. This rules out just the HiPS ability. In conjunction with the Shadowblend ability it gets a little trickier. However I think it is still a lighting effect, and thus penetrated by darkvision. Characters with darkvision (dwarves and half-orcs) can see lit areas normally as well as dark areas within 60 feet. A creature can’t hide within 60 feet of a character with darkvision unless it is invisible or has cover. I would suggest teaming up with your casters and using sight-obscuring spells such as the fog ones to give you concealment against foes with darkvision. By the way, where is the Shadowblend ability from? Any ability that gives a 90% miss chance to all attacks against you except in a few circumstances seems amazingly good.
gixanthrax 01-23-08, 03:52 AM	The 90% concealment(together with some other nice benefits) comes from the Shadow Template ( Manual of the planes p.190) My char uses this version of the template because we did not have Lords of Madness(p.167) at Hand while we were creating my character. In LoM the template grants even100% concealment, although the LA rises from 1 to 2.
Lyndis 01-23-08, 10:21 AM	Use the Shadow template from Tome of Magic for +1 CR.
gixanthrax 01-24-08, 08:04 AM	Use the Shadow template from Tome of Magic for +1 CR. ähm. I was talking about LA, not CR. The shadow template is to be found where i have posted before. In Tome of magic, there is no shadow template, only the dark template is to be found there. If you head taken time to read the whole thread, you might have found out that my character already got the dark template and the shadow template. The question was where my char got concealment from,thats why i pointed out where he could find the shadow template.