| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The hidden condition makes creatures flatfooted to you for any purposes.
Spell attacks aren't technically strikes so it sounds like the target wouldn't be flat footed.You said it yourself. Only not 'technically' they just aren't.
The only expection in similar situation I know is low-level Invisibility spell - it explicitly allows to first make an action (not excepting spells) and only then lose invisibility.
The contention is now whether Flat-Footed applies to spells, it's the fact that you can't remain Hidden after you begin the action for casting the spell. Hidden makes them flat-footed but you aren't Hidden as soon as you begin casting the spell. Only Strikes seem to explicitly have a provision for the target remaining flat-footed to you until you complete the action.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Hide action says, "You cease being hidden if you do anything except Hide, Sneak, or Step." The Sneak action says, "You cease being hidden if you do anything except Hide, Sneak, or Step." The moment the wizard starts a Cast a Spell activity, then he ceases to be hidden due to Hide or Sneak. For that matter, a ranger using Hunter's Aim, which is a two-action Strike that gives a +2 circumstance bonus, would also not be hidden. Once the wizard is no longer hidden, which happens before the spell attack roll, he can no longer catch his target flat-footed.
By the rules as written, all that remains is to discuss other ways, such as Invisibility, to remain hidden.
But I would rather discuss houserules. With two rogues and a ranger in my party, I found some unrealistic cases and decided to make some houserules. For example, Recall Knowledge, which involves quietly thinking about what the character observes, also ends the hidden condition from Hide. A ranger Hunting Prey would no longer be hidden, too. That made no sense to me, so I told my players that actions that involved remaining still and quiet would also not end the hidden condition from Hide and Sneak.
The halfling scoundrel-racket rogue Sam took Sorcerer Dedication at 2nd level and learned two cantrips, Produce Flame and Telekinetic Projectile. He stopped Striking from hiding with his shortbow to gain 1d6 piercing + 1d6 precision damage, because the 1d6+4 piercing damage from his Telekinetic Projectile was just as good, and better when it became 2d6+4 at 3rd level. At 4th level he learned Magical Trickster, which enabled sneak attack damage on a spell attack against a flat-footed foe. But Magical Trickster did not let him catch a foe flat-footed due to hiding, which was a shame. Rather than deny a rogue his sneak attack, I declared that I had added a line to Magical Trickster, "If you Cast a Spell or Activate an Item while hidden to spell attack a creature, the creature remains flat-footed against the spell attack, and you then become observed."
That mattered for 4th and 5th levels. At 6th level Sam gained Dragon Claws via Basic Bloodline Spell and thus had a magical attack that could be safely used while flanking for sneak attack. At 10th level, the other rogue in the party took Precise Debilitation via her thief racket, so her targets were often stuck flat-footed to everyone.
Gonzo the gnome wizard is not attempting a sneak attack. He merely wants the -2 penalty to AC on a flat-footed opponent. He invested no feats in attacking flat-footed opponents nor in hiding better. I would not give Gonzo a freebie. Despite the flaws in the Hide action, I believe that catching someone flat-footed while openly casting a spell requires an investment that represents extra training and practice. Instead, I would modify the wizard class feat Conceal Spell so that the Conceal Spell metamagic action did not break the Hidden condition and a concealed spell could catch a foe flat-footed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once the wizard is no longer hidden, which happens before the spell attack roll, he can no longer catch his target flat-footed.
I'm not sure I agree with this order of operations.
"You cease being hidden if you do anything except Hide, Sneak, or Step."
Before you cast your spell you, by definition, haven't taken any action that would remove your hidden condition.
So the wizard is hidden.
They then cast Produce Flame against the target and make an attack roll.
Now, they've performed an activity not on the aforementioned list... so they are no longer hidden.
There is no "when you cast the spell but before you make the roll" point in time because the attack is part of the spell as one discrete activity.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Recall Knowledge not breaking stealth isn't even a houserule. Its just applying the "The GM might allow you to perform a particularly unobtrusive action without being noticed, possibly requiring another Stealth check" that's already part of the rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Once the wizard is no longer hidden, which happens before the spell attack roll, he can no longer catch his target flat-footed.I'm not sure I agree with this order of operations.
Well, I guess we still need the full quote:
If you successfully become hidden to a creature but then cease to have cover or greater cover against it or be concealed from it, you become observed again. You cease being hidden if you do anything except Hide, Sneak, or Step.
If you attempt to Strike a creature, the creature remains flat-footed against that attack, and you then become observed. If you do anything else, you become observed just before you act unless the GM determines otherwise. The GM might allow you to perform a particularly unobtrusive action without being noticed, possibly requiring another Stealth check.
Oh yep, missed that line. THanks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no "when you cast the spell but before you make the roll" point in time because the attack is part of the spell as one discrete activity.
I have no problem with this statement. My disagreement is that I believe that "when you cast the spell" is when the hidden condition ends.
The hidden condition ends when the new activity begins, not during that new activity nor after that activity. The moment the wizard says, "I cast," he is conducting a Cast a Spell activity and the hidden condition from Hide ends, before he names the spell, before he selects a target, and before he makes a spell attack.
If the hidden condition endured during the new activity, then Hide and Sneak would not need the sentence, "If you attempt to Strike a creature, the creature remains flat-footed against that attack, and you then become observed," because that would be the default. (Unless it means that Strike makes the character become observed sooner than the default, which is not my interpretation).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Recall Knowledge not breaking stealth isn't even a houserule. Its just applying the "The GM might allow you to perform a particularly unobtrusive action without being noticed, possibly requiring another Stealth check" that's already part of the rules.
I guess my houserule is merely a promise that I will always allow remaining hidden while Recalling Knowledge without requiring another Stealth check.
This flexibility could allow Gonzo the gnome wizard's GM to allow remaining hidden while casting a spell. The player just needs to explain why the spell components are particularly unobtrusive.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty much. And thats what brings you back to Conceal Spell and Silent Spell. Proclaiming your verbal components in a loud, clear voice while obvious glowy manifestations of magic appear in the air around you is clearly not unobtrusive. Saying nothing as you gesture, and those glowy manifestations are suppressed might be.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only off the table for getting a target to be flat-footed by Hiding. Grappled or Prone targets, targets that have been hit with Bottled Lightning, targets that took a sword crit, targets that your Investigator ally hit with Shared Stratagem, frightened targets if you have Dread Striker and all sorts of other targets are still flat-footed to spells.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I play the target is flat-footed against the first attack by spell or weapon. I don't discern between the two myself. A spell attack is a strike as far as I see it for the intention of attacking from a stealthy position. Once they hit, any further attacks are not against a flat-footed target unless using invisibility or something.
That's how I play it. Seems lame to make a caster who successfully uses Stealth not to benefit from doing so.
If the caster successfully used Stealth, they act first.
That is a pretty big benefit.
Why do they go first? Does it say that somewhere?
As far as I understand initiative, if you use stealth and lose your roll because someone rolled a higher perception roll than they go first.
If you roll a Stealth check and succeed, you just remain hidden and get to scout or what not.
You both have to succeed at your stealth check and have it be higher than the initiative check of the enemy to gain the benefits of Stealth in combat.
That's how I run it. There are no surprise rounds in PF2 from what I understand. The advantage of using Stealth is using it for your initiative roll in place of Perception, which can often be higher for casters but isn't guaranteed to go first.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC if you win Initiative by rolling Stealth and beating your opponent's Initiative (based on Perception), you act first because they did not see you coming.
But that is true of rolling initiative with any ability. Going first is based on the die roll.
I make the target flat-footed against the first attack if they win with Stealth and have worked to hide or sneak even with a spell attack.
A rogue gets their whole round of attacks as flat-footed, but a normal character using Stealth only gets one surprise attack.
|
IIRC if you win Initiative by rolling Stealth and beating your opponent's Initiative (based on Perception), you act first because they did not see you coming.But the Stealth roll is against their perception DC. So you can be undetected from them but still act after them. Since you are not unnoticed they still know that you are there.
Thank you for the correction. I always miss that part.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The nice thing about stealth for initiative on most casters is that you can improve your stealth easier than your perception.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the Casting Spells rules:
"When you Cast a Spell, your spellcasting creates obvious visual manifestations of the gathering magic, although feats such as Conceal Spell and Melodious Spell can help hide such manifestations or otherwise prevent observers from noticing that you are casting."
Rules about the Verbal component:
"A verbal component is a vocalization of words of power. You must speak them in a strong voice, so it’s hard to conceal that you’re Casting a Spell. The spell gains the concentrate trait. You must be able to speak to provide this component."
So, do you think casting a very obviously visible spell that requires you to speak in a strong voice would keep you Hidden?
So, do you think casting a very obviously visible spell that requires you to speak in a strong voice would keep you Hidden?
Nope. That being said, I don't think that's what the majority of people here are even discussing. The question is whether you have the time to cast the spell while hidden and have the target(s) of the spell be flat-footed to the attack before becoming observed as it's all apart of the same activity. After all, I would say someone swinging a sword in your face is also pretty hard to conceal, but we are told that you can still do it before becoming observed.
All that being said, I don't have a strong opinion one way or another on the topic at hand. I just don't think it's helpful to misrepresent the opposing position, regardless of its validity.
Well stabbing someone from the shadows while flailing your arms and yelling just before hand is different than just stabbing them.
2 actions isn't that long. A round is 6 seconds. Everyone takes their turn within that six second round. So all actions are very quick including casting spells. I tend to see a spell as cast very quickly, so quite capable of surprising someone with a hit.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Casting a spell is LITERALLY and in every way louder, more visible, and easily detected than firing an ancient and explosively loud firearm that was crafted by an inept level 1 goblin using rusty nails and driftwood, that's by design.
No, you can't stay hidden and cast a spell and that's working as intended. Magic is extremely flashy and noticeable, I can't say why that's the case, or if options will later appear that change this but at this point, if you want to avoid this your only real hope is to homebrew.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Blatant hyperbole aside, Themetricsystem is still technically correct. Hiding and then making a Strike with a shoddy firearm, you would still have the enemy flat-footed against the attack. Hiding and then making a spell attack, you become observed and the flat-footed condition ends first before the spell attack roll is rolled.
But in both cases you are no longer hidden after the actions happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IT's the line I missed earlier that Errenor pointed out:
If you do anything else, you become observed just before you act
Strictly scrutinizing this, you can't benefit from the flat-footed condition because you are no longer hidden when you cast a spell.
Themetricsystem is slightly incorrect here. It's not that spells are too loud or obvious that's the problem, you actually lose the hidden condition before you cast the spell.
I'm not going to stop allowing a stealthy caster from getting the flat-footed condition on the first attack myself. I have not found a problem with it. Thus I will default to the "If the GM allows it..." clause in the Hide portion of Stealth. It's up to the GM.