| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Observe crappy drawing below:
Crappy Drawing, it's below what you had previously read
Now I have a PC (rogue/wizard) who wants to sneak attack every freakin' round. He's upset that he might have trouble doing that, at range. So... yeah.
So say red dot is monster/bad guy/small child that pickpocketed the rogue. The rogue sneaks up to the corner, corner A, and gets a surprise round against the red dot. He sneak attacks. He then wins initiative. He sneak attacks. A party member engages the red dot in combat (he's not in the diagram). The next round, the rogue wants to run across the hall to Corner B, make a stealth check once around the corner, and then pop out and sneak attack again.
Can he do that? Can he run back and forth, every round, from Corner A to Corner B and back ad infinLATIN until everything in the universe is dead?
If he can do this, what penalty does he take to his stealth check?
And if he can't do that, what can I tell him to make him happy?
|
Once someone has spotted you, you must do a bluff check to distract them to get a check at all (and a -10 at that). Even if you gain total cover, they can still guess that you're probably right around that corner and react appropriately (they can still see you for the duration of the actual attack).
In this case, the closest analogue to what he wants to do is "sniping" which allows one attack per turn with a -20 to the stealth check to remain hidden. However, if he's running between the corners, he's not sniping, he's just visible.
Ok, great, that's what I told him. Actually, that's almost word-for-word what I told him.
Now, how do I tell him that again in a manner that won't result in him trying to strangle me?
I know already he'll say something about it not being fair, or it being unbalanced for a ranged rogue, as cover isn't as useful as it should be and now Stealth has no point, and no use in combat.
Basically I need some coaching on how to explain to him, in gentle terms, why the system is the way it is. Or something reassuring or... something.
Ok, great, that's what I told him. Actually, that's almost word-for-word what I told him.
Now, how do I tell him that again in a manner that won't result in him trying to strangle me?
I know already he'll say something about it not being fair, or it being unbalanced for a ranged rogue, as cover isn't as useful as it should be and now Stealth has no point, and no use in combat.
Basically I need some coaching on how to explain to him, in gentle terms, why the system is the way it is. Or something reassuring or... something.
Maybe putting him in the shoes of an NPC that he can't stop from killing him due to an abuse of his interpretation of the rule. I am not saying kill him, but explain an example to him, and if that does not work run an unofficial combat. Use several rogues if you want. Most of the time a player thinks about what they can do to the NPC's, not what can be done to them. Once the shoe is on the other foot many of them come around.
|
..ad infinLATIN
I don't have anything useful to add, I just wanted to say this made me lawl.
Tell your player that Stealth isn't invisibility, it's getting the drop on someone. Once that someone is aware of you, it's hard to convince them you're not there again (or not a threat, or not going to stick a knife in 'em, whathaveyou).
|
|
Or just tell him to take levels in something that grants Hide in Plain Sight (like shadowdancer) if he really wasn't to be invisible all the time. Or heck, just buy a wand of greater invisibility, or ring of invisibility. Problem solved.
Either way, simply using the stealth skill without any magical, supernatural or extraordinary ability aiding it, is simply not going to make someone forget that you were there 2 seconds ago and are probably still there now. . .
. . . Except maybe that memory erasing spell in the APG that makes the target forget the last round. That one would work. Heck, go wizard/arcane archer to get the ability to channel spells through arrows and use it that way. Make for some funny fights. "Yeah, he totally forgot you were even attacking him, so he's just defending himself."
maybe if he keeps moving to NEW places to SA from. Like climbing to the roof top and attacking from there. Then move to a new vantage point that the target wouldn't expect him to strike from. This may cost him turns where he is not attacking to reposition.
This is how i and every DM ive met plays it. If they know that you're there, it's not much of a surprise if you *know* that they're behind a wall and are going to shoot at you. If he really wants to ranged sneak, he needs to spend every 2nd round hiding (at least). This is applicable once combat has begun.
Swings and roundabouts, like Ryan said, he'll get extra sneak attacks with melee (especially with TWF) but be more vulnerable.
Tell him to explain his theory on the forum, and we'll explain why it won't work.
Ok, great, this is good stuff. I think I'm on the same page as you guys.
Perhaps you should be a LITTLE fast and loose with the stealth rules. Like maybe if he keeps moving to NEW places to SA from. Like climbing to the roof top and attacking from there. Then move to a new vantage point that the target wouldn't expect him to strike from. This may cost him turns where he is not attacking to reposition.
I was already going to allow him to do that. That wasn't good enough for him. He wanted to sneak attack, dart across to somewhere else with cover, make another stealth check, and then, next round, sneak attack again. Bloody annoying. I told him that if the enemy knew where he was, knew that he was going to likely pop up and fire off a shot at him, then the enemy wasn't going to be flat-footed against that attack. Dude was trying to say that with the stealth rules, and being able to make stealth checks when you have any cover, you should be able to make an attack after the stealth check during which the target of the attack has no idea where you are... despite the fact that they saw you duck behind that overturned desk.
The guy already plans on going Arcane Trickster and picking up spells like invisibility, greater invisibility, etc I don't see why he's throwing such a fit, personally.
I know he's going to complain about the usefulness of stealth in combat, though. Say that it's a useless skill. Say that there are balance issues. Say that melee rogues at least add strength damage to their attacks, and firing into melee and against creatures with cover will cause him to miss more often, so to be balanced he should be doing more damage, not less.
Maybe I can get him to post on the message boards once and state his case, and if he won't I'll gladly relay his case to the populace and allow feedback from people who have been playing Pathfinder longer than I have.
Thanks again, guys. This was an awesome response, more than I hoped for.
|
|
despite the fact that they saw you duck behind that overturned desk.
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth.
Yeah, explicitly disallowed by the rules. Since he moved across the room without cover, he began to be "observed" and must then cease to be observed (either via distraction or distance) before making a new stealth check. Since any sense counts, hearing you around the corner does too.
If he did this with a silence spell going he would technically be allowed to do this particular act (since he gets total concealment from both sound and sight, the only two senses most opponents will have sharp enough to really count). If he was out of sight (and quiet) for at least one full round and the "observer" was busy fighting during that round, I'd say it's fair to give him a stealth check and thus a chance at a sneak attack (getting it on alternating rounds).Remind him that Stealth is only one skill, and having a skill maxed out is only worth the same as about one feat (and even that only at high-ish level) and thus shouldn't be expected to be awesome-tastic in all situations. It's the same cost to him as getting Knowledge (Irrelevant), Appraise or Swim for crying out loud.
Also, tell him to try sniping. If he's a god of stealth he can pull it off against many if not most opponents*. Just don't forget to apply distance and distraction penalties to the opposed party! That should be worth about -7 in most cases. With 5 ranks, a +4 dex mod and skill focus he'd have a -5 against a -7+opponents perception. Not a bad chance at all. Throw in a cloak of elvenkind and the opponent has to have a +7 perception mod just to have an even shot of seeing the rogue. And this is just to hold him off until he gets great invis for the +20 bonus.
*I saw a 20 dex goblin rogue with Skill Focus and Stealthy once... scary stuff. Dude had a double-digit modifier *after* the sniping penalty by level 5, and was impossible to find by 10 with a post-penalty mod of +20ish
*slams head against the wall* sigh. If your PC is willing to take a move action every turn just to try and get sneak attack then just tell him to take improved feint. Bam, sneak attack *almost* every round.
Stepping out from behind the corner pretty much automatically makes you seen.
In fact, due to the line of sight rules, the moment you move up the the square immediately behind the corner, you are in the subject's line of sigh and are automatically seen.
|
|
Since any sense counts, hearing you around the corner does too.So if I hear an invisible attacker I'm not denied my dex against his attacks? I'm not sure that I buy that one.
-James
No, this is only for once you've already begun to be observed. Being invisible means you are most certainly stealthing (and are hard to see even if you aren't).
The thread is starting to get interesting. James up there is pretty much voicing what my player is going to say.
And I'm sure that my player will argue that upon making a stealth check he can shoot from cover without being seen, denying his opponent his Dex bonus to AC, and getting Sneak Attack off for that one attack, at which point he'll be visible. Isn't that the point of Stealth, after all?
|
|
The thread is starting to get interesting. James up there is pretty much voicing what my player is going to say.
And I'm sure that my player will argue that upon making a stealth check he can shoot from cover without being seen, denying his opponent his Dex bonus to AC, and getting Sneak Attack off for that one attack, at which point he'll be visible. Isn't that the point of Stealth, after all?
Well there's an entirely different issue with shooting from those locations, for one: The opponent has total cover to him, so he can't shoot. He has to be occupying the open area in the middle to shoot. Allowing him to shoot around the corner is, of itself, a DM allowance.
On the assumption that shooting around the corner is being treated as partial cover, he still gets a sniping stealth check to avoid being seen.However, this allowance opens up the issue that he does have full cover and maybe the guy isn't that good at hearing and doesn't know when he'll fire next, meaning that they would be flat-footed. I would argue that if you fail the sniping stealth check they know where you're firing from and would look for it unless sufficiently distracted.
Fun fact: Archery wasn't ever used once melee combat started. This is reflected in the game as it really is hard to avoid the 6' mound of flesh in front of you while hitting the 6' mound of flesh immediately on the other side of him when both of them are moving around like they're at a seizure party. Once he has the main 4 feats, however (point blank, precise, improved precise, deadly aim) he can become an *extremely* deadly character, even without sneak attack.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
If one is unobserved one can make a stealth check as part of a movement. Once he is around the corner (B in this case, but he could have just backed up along the side of corner A until he was completely out of sight) he is out of sight and can make a stealth check.
At corner B (or A) he has cover relative to the red dot, so can remain hidden from them if they lose an opposed perception/stealth roll. At this point he can make a ranged attack denying the red dot their dex bonus (and thus gain sneak attack). At which point he is seen and has to go to a location where he is not in order to hide again.
The only penalty he suffers is that due to the amount of movement he's taking.
Moral: Don't get locked into a position from which things can pop in and out at you.
No, this scenario is the whole reason that this mechanic exists:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.
The italicized part is the fluff or description of the scenario and ability. The bold section is the actual mechanic. You are using the fluff/description portion of that entry and completely ignoring the mechanic listed to allow you to perform that maneuver.
...
StabbittyDoom is correct when he says: if the Rogue wants to attempt a Stealth check to gain Sneak Attack, he must spend a full round getting into position. He will use his Standard Action to Bluff and his Move Action to run behind the corner and make a Stealth Check. If the Stealth Check is successful he may be able to come out from behind the corner and gain Sneak Attack in the next round. After which he will require another full round to regain Stealth. If your player isn't happy with that answer then he needs to acquire HiPS, and the Shot on the Run feat wouldn't hurt either. The only other option is Sniping, which isn't possible in that scenario as far as I can tell due to the angles of the walls.
...
And that IS playing Stealth fast and loose, because by a very strict reading of RAW he might not be able to get Sneak Attack at all after the surprise and first rounds. It would depend on the lighting conditions in his section of the hallway and the lighting conditions in the guard's section of the hallway.
...
With that in mind. Don't forget that with his ally engaged in melee with the guard, his attacks suffer a -4 penalty to hit the guard. In addition, depending on where the guard and his ally are positioned, his ally might be granting soft cover to the guard. With Precise Shot and Improved Precise Shot these things are negated. Also remember, if the lighting conditions in the guard's section of the hallway are "dim light" the guard has concealment from that as well. Any cover or concealment prevents a Rogue from accurately delivering Sneak Attack damage.
Well there's an entirely different issue with shooting from those locations, for one: The opponent has total cover to him, so he can't shoot. He has to be occupying the open area in the middle to shoot. Allowing him to shoot around the corner is, of itself, a DM allowance.
Where do you get that from? I'm not seeing that in the rules. If he chooses the corner of the wall, for example, he can shoot down the hallway, though anything also adjacent to the wall would have cover due to the bordering wall. Is that not the correct way to play it?
|
|
Well there's an entirely different issue with shooting from those locations, for one: The opponent has total cover to him, so he can't shoot. He has to be occupying the open area in the middle to shoot. Allowing him to shoot around the corner is, of itself, a DM allowance.Where do you get that from? I'm not seeing that in the rules. If he chooses the corner of the wall, for example, he can shoot down the hallway, though anything also adjacent to the wall would have cover due to the bordering wall. Is that not the correct way to play it?
Doh, sorry, I guess it does only count as regular cover (my head's not in the game today). This means he has two different sources of cover working against him at +4AC to the opponent for each... ouch.
EDIT: Wait, so that means he never got full cover from his opponent and is still actively observed via sight. Yeah, he definitely has to use the sniping rules.
Well there's an entirely different issue with shooting from those locations, for one: The opponent has total cover to him, so he can't shoot. He has to be occupying the open area in the middle to shoot. Allowing him to shoot around the corner is, of itself, a DM allowance.Where do you get that from? I'm not seeing that in the rules. If he chooses the corner of the wall, for example, he can shoot down the hallway, though anything also adjacent to the wall would have cover due to the bordering wall. Is that not the correct way to play it?
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of 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.
As you can see, you're right.
Also, here's a reference grid for I made for everyone to...well...reference.
If PC 2 open fired on NPC 2, he could choose the upper-left corner of his square and trace lines to all four corners of NPC 2's square without any obstructions at all.
EDIT: On second thought, one of the four lines appears to be passing through a border. Hmm...now I'm not so sure.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
As you can see, you're right.
Also, here's a reference grid for I made for everyone to...well...reference.
If PC 2 open fired on NPC 2, he could choose the upper-left corner of his square and trace lines to all four corners of NPC 2's square without any obstructions at all.
EDIT: On second thought, one of the four lines appears to be passing through a border. Hmm...now I'm not so sure.
Upon further review of the Cover / Partial Cover example tables, I retract my statement about the target having Cover. I think he is in the open as far as the angles of the walls are concerned. However, it is still a very difficult shot here is why:
A party member engages the red dot in combat (he's not in the diagram). The next round, the rogue wants to run across the hall to Corner B, make a stealth check once around the corner, and then pop out and sneak attack again.
So, one of the Rogue's allies closed on the enemy to engage in melee combat, thus introducing two problems for the ranged Rogue. He will suffer a -4 for shooting into melee combat, unless he has Precise Shot. He will also suffer an additional -4 due to his companion being directly between him and his target, thus providing the target soft cover.
Soft Cover: Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Stealth check.
Now, if your Rogue has Precise Shot and Improved Precise Shot he will not suffer either of these penalties and as such can make his attacks from those positions with ease. However, after the initial attacks he will still have trouble pulling off the Stealth maneuver. He will either have to Snipe at a -20 penalty, which will allow him one Standard Action per turn. Alternately he will have to Attack, then on the next turn use Bluff and Stealth -10 to reacquire a stealth position, which will allow for a full attack every other turn, the first of which will gain Sneak Attack damage.
I don´t think stealth grants Sneak Attacks at all. It only helps to get a surprise round in which you can Sneak Attack because your opponents are "Flat-Footed".
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target...Obviously there are two possibilities to get a Sneak Attack
1 Your target would be denied a dexterity bonus to AC.
2 You are flanking your target.2 is irrelevant for this, so you want your target to be denied it's dexterity bonus. There are several conditions that do this. Take a look at Table 8-6 "Armor Class Modifiers" in the Core Rule Book or the PRD for some. Additional ways are invisibility (8-4 Attack Roll Modifier) and feint. There sure are some other ways.
The point is there's a difference between invisibility and using stealth.
-You can't use stealth while attacking.
-You are not invisible because of the stealth skill.It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.Your only benefit is that the opponent is not aware of you. If you choose to attack a combat starts. You get a surprise round and can Sneak Attack because your enemy is Flat-Footed. Now you can choose to Snipe with the stealth skill if you have concealment or cover. If you are successful your opponent don't know where you are. If you win Initiative you can attack again with Sneak Attack because he's still flat-footed. You can again choose to snipe to hide your location. But he won't become flat-footed because of stealth. Since it's his turn now he's no longer flat-footed. Probably he will be angry and search the surrounding for you. You can attack him now but you won't score a Sneak Attack.
You can make a stealth check if you have concealment. Now if the character is looking at you then you may have to make a bluff check to get him to look away, and then make the hide check. An example would be if both of you are inside of a fog spell, and you have an ability that makes it so the concealment does not affect your vision so you can still sneak attack him.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I don´t think stealth grants Sneak Attacks at all.
This has come up in past threads. THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR. While I don't think PF has posted anything official about it, 3.5 FAQ did answer this question. As a rule of thumb, 3.5 rules and FAQ have generally been carried over to PF unless specifically noted.
If a rogue has successfully hidden behind some bushes and fires an arrow at a target less than 30 feet away from her, does she deal sneak attack damage?
Yes. The rules don’t come right out and say this, but a character who has successfully hidden from an opponent is considered invisible for the purpose of rendering that foe flatfooted, and thus deals sneak attack damage.
If the FAQ is to be believed, the real question still remains:
how do you get stealth in combat?
If the FAQ is to be believed, the real question still remains:
how do you get stealth in combat?
Sniping. or Gtr Invisibility.
As soon as there's line of sight - stealth is nil.
|
|
If the FAQ is to be believed, the real question still remains:
how do you get stealth in combat?Sniping. or Gtr Invisibility.
As soon as there's line of sight - stealth is nil.
Yuppers. I tend to think of stealth as an out-of-combat ability that helps you get surprise rounds as an added bonus.
Well, unless you twink our your stealth, then it's decent in-combat since you can snipe like crazy. And by that point you're more-or-less a ghost outside of combat.
If the FAQ is to be believed, the real question still remains:
how do you get stealth in combat?
There are a couple ways to make Stealth viable in a combat scenario. The most potent option is generally HiPS but there are other options.
Sniping. or Gtr Invisibility.
Sniping, Yes. Greater Invisibility, No. Sniping is a good way for a Rogue to maintain a single Sneak Attack each round and stay hidden. It is definitely sub-optimal due to the difficulty in staying hidden (-20 Stealth) and the fact that you only get one attack each round. If you throw on Greater Invisibility, you already get Sneak Attack from being invisible and denying your enemies their Dex bonuses to AC. You have no need to even attempt Stealth at this point. Just run around and invisibly back stab to your heart's content.
As soon as there's line of sight - stealth is nil.
Yes and no. If you are in dim light or close to cover, you can use the Bluff/Stealth maneuver even after having been seen. It is also a matter of interpretation and opinion if coming out of concealment or out from behind cover automatically means you are visible. Some people are of the opinion that while you must START your Stealth under cover/concealment, you may move out from it without being automatically seen. Most people who think this accept that you cannot maintain Stealth without cover/concealment but if you begin your turn under Stealth you can cross areas without cover/concealment unseen. Possibly even close distance from your unseen position to an enemy and pull off a melee Sneak Attack before being seen. There were rules for doing this in the Complete Adventurer. But people who accept that it is possible generally roll it into part of normal Stealth, instead of alternate, add-on rules. Generally the limit of maintaining Stealth without cover/concealment is that if you end your turn without regaining it you will be perfectly visible. But let’s say you move from one point of cover to another within your move action. You would roll Stealth for that movement, and if no one beats it with Perception, then you were unseen as you crossed that gap in cover. Obviously if you move into the clear and then attack, you are visible and then require a bluff/stealth to be unseen again.
I have added this thread to the Consolidated Stealth Threads (for easy FAQ clicking). Feel free to click over and hit the FAQ buttons.