Ranger - Hide In Plain Sight


Rules Questions


Hi Guys,

as ranger with Hide in Plain Sight and Camuflage in my favored terrain can I stay adjacent to an opponent, go for full attack and hide with stealth? If I don't need move is stealth a "free" action?

rnd1)stealth->full attack->stealth
rnd2)stealth->full attack->stealth
rnd3)stealth->full attack->stealth
etc
Can I do this every round?
Ty


1. A stealth check requires movement
2. A stealth check requires concealment

You will have neither after full attacking in most circumstances.


Snowlilly wrote:

1. A stealth check requires movement

2. A stealth check requires concealment

You will have neither after full attacking in most circumstances.

The ranger in his favored terrain has concealment, so that isn't an issue.

RAW isn't entirely clear, but it's generally understood that some kind of action is needed to use stealth. Normally, it's done as part of movement.


Vaniglio wrote:

Hi Guys,

as ranger with Hide in Plain Sight and Camuflage in my favored terrain can I stay adjacent to an opponent, go for full attack and hide with stealth? If I don't need move is stealth a "free" action?

rnd1)stealth->full attack->stealth
rnd2)stealth->full attack->stealth
rnd3)stealth->full attack->stealth
etc
Can I do this every round?
Ty

You can make a 5' step on a full attack, which counts as movement, so it is entirely plausible that you can make a full attack and hide afterwards with your 5' step.

Most combatants know this, so they have at least a plausible explanation of being able to attack a square to hit you, however.

Note that only the 1st attack of the full attack qualifies for sneak attack damage (barring some exceptions) when performing this routine.


Quintain wrote:
Vaniglio wrote:

Hi Guys,

as ranger with Hide in Plain Sight and Camuflage in my favored terrain can I stay adjacent to an opponent, go for full attack and hide with stealth? If I don't need move is stealth a "free" action?

rnd1)stealth->full attack->stealth
rnd2)stealth->full attack->stealth
rnd3)stealth->full attack->stealth
etc
Can I do this every round?
Ty

You can make a 5' step on a full attack, which counts as movement, so it is entirely plausible that you can make a full attack and hide afterwards with your 5' step.

Most combatants know this, so they have at least a plausible explanation of being able to attack a square to hit you, however.

Note that only the 1st attack of the full attack qualifies for sneak attack damage (barring some exceptions) when performing this routine.

The problem is about use stealth After a full-attack, a not-spellcaster can't Never hit you if you improve stealth (You Need choose Square AND do 50% check to hit)

The Exchange

Look at sniping rules


Quote:


The problem is about use stealth After a full-attack, a not-spellcaster can't Never hit you if you improve stealth (You Need choose Square AND do 50% check to hit)

Why are you trying to attack something you can't see? If you know he's not using improved invisibility, simply move away out of line of sight. If he uses his attack of opportunity, he comes out of hiding, and you can have a readied action to attack back with that handy bag o' flour. If he doesn't he has to move to get to you and only gets one attack, not a full one. This also means more stealth checks, and you have the opportunity to ready an action to counter attack and again, that handy bag o' flour will work nicely.

Hide in plain sight isn't an automatic I win card.


Quintain wrote:
Quote:


The problem is about use stealth After a full-attack, a not-spellcaster can't Never hit you if you improve stealth (You Need choose Square AND do 50% check to hit)

Why are you trying to attack something you can't see? If you know he's not using improved invisibility, simply move away out of line of sight. If he uses his attack of opportunity, he comes out of hiding, and you can have a readied action to attack back with that handy bag o' flour. If he doesn't he has to move to get to you and only gets one attack, not a full one. This also means more stealth checks, and you have the opportunity to ready an action to counter attack and again, that handy bag o' flour will work nicely.

Hide in plain sight isn't an automatic I win card.

Bags of flour foil invisibility, but do nothing against actual stealth.


You can use readied attacks.

Liberty's Edge

Vaniglio wrote:

...

The problem is about use stealth After a full-attack, a not-spellcaster can't Never hit you if you improve stealth (You Need choose Square AND do 50% check to hit)

Unless he has True seeing, a spellcaster has no bonus in identifying the location of someone using stealth.

See invisibility don't help against stealth.
Glitterdust work, but it work for everyone, as it decrease the result of the stealth check.
A bag of flour do nothing against stealth.
There is a alchemical item that work similarly to glitterdust, bit I don't recall its name.

- * -

About the OP question.
It is not really clear if a 5' step is enough to allow you to use stealth.

PRD wrote:
Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

So:

- if you don't have attacked you need to move, but apparently you don't need a move action;
- if you make a ranged attack you need a move action to use stealth (but you get the benefit of sniping too, i.e. the location from which you attacked remain obscured [note that the text of Sniping isn't clear at all about you using a move action, it don't cite the need to use any action]);
- melee combat don't have that limitation about needing to use a move action, but that is a bit weird, as your position is even more evident.

Note that, as you need to move to use stealth, and you are using a 5' step, the guy you just attacked know perfectly in what square you are.
You move carefully to avoid the AoO, so he know that you are only 5' away, you don't hide until you have moved, so he know the direction in which you moved.
So he know that you moved 5' in that direction and you did hide after doing that. Barring abilities that allow you to move more than 5' with a 5' step, or ways to move as a swift action, you are in a specific square.
He will suffer from a 50% miss chance, but he know your location without the need to pinpoint you.


Remember, that 2 things are needed to use stealth:

1) Concealment or cover
2) Being unobserved

Regardless of the initial setup, attacking breaks stealth on the first attack. So you would lose any benefits from stealth after the first attack anyways. Secondly, after your stealth is broken you are being observed. You cannot use stealth while being observed, so you can't make a stealth check to hide again without doing something else (such as creating a diversion to hide using bluff).


Claxon wrote:

Remember, that 2 things are needed to use stealth:

1) Concealment or cover
2) Being unobserved

Regardless of the initial setup, attacking breaks stealth on the first attack. So you would lose any benefits from stealth after the first attack anyways. Secondly, after your stealth is broken you are being observed. You cannot use stealth while being observed, so you can't make a stealth check to hide again without doing something else (such as creating a diversion to hide using bluff).

Except the Ranger at that level has Hide in Plain Sight.


thejeff wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Remember, that 2 things are needed to use stealth:

1) Concealment or cover
2) Being unobserved

Regardless of the initial setup, attacking breaks stealth on the first attack. So you would lose any benefits from stealth after the first attack anyways. Secondly, after your stealth is broken you are being observed. You cannot use stealth while being observed, so you can't make a stealth check to hide again without doing something else (such as creating a diversion to hide using bluff).

Except the Ranger at that level has Hide in Plain Sight.

Man, I remembered Hide in Plain Sight as removing the need for Cover/Concealment, not as removing the observed part.

So then unless I'm missing something else while the ranger could make the check while observed, they still need something to hide behind from the opponent.


Claxon wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Claxon wrote:

Remember, that 2 things are needed to use stealth:

1) Concealment or cover
2) Being unobserved

Regardless of the initial setup, attacking breaks stealth on the first attack. So you would lose any benefits from stealth after the first attack anyways. Secondly, after your stealth is broken you are being observed. You cannot use stealth while being observed, so you can't make a stealth check to hide again without doing something else (such as creating a diversion to hide using bluff).

Except the Ranger at that level has Hide in Plain Sight.

Man, I remembered Hide in Plain Sight as removing the need for Cover/Concealment, not as removing the observed part.

So then unless I'm missing something else while the ranger could make the check while observed, they still need something to hide behind from the opponent.

That's what the Ranger ability Camouflage gives them in favored terrain. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Crap, that's what I get going from memory.

Alright, then it boils down to this.

The ranger can ignore the needs for cover/concealment, and being unobserved. But stealth still requires moving, though what type of movement isn't clarified.

As a GM, I definitely rule no to stealth after making a 5ft step, and we already have a very long thread about 5ft steps and stealth.

So the way it would work is:
Standard action (or full attack) which breaks stealth, continue to make all attacks (if more than 1 is available), then either 5ft step (or move action depending on ruling) to resume stealth again.

So this whole argument is about whether or not a 5ft step is sufficient movement.

Let's not rehash the argument, but rather can someone find the old thread and link it for the OP's sake and leave it at that.


In all honesty, this is a 17th level Ranger getting to pull a pretty useful trick - that isn't game breaking compared to what casters at that level are pulling. Won't even work on a lot of enemies.

He's put in 17 levels to get this far. Let him have his fun.


Yeah, at 17th level this seems nice but hardly on par with other abilities, like say 9th level spells. :)


thejeff wrote:

In all honesty, this is a 17th level Ranger getting to pull a pretty useful trick - that isn't game breaking compared to what casters at that level are pulling. Won't even work on a lot of enemies.

He's put in 17 levels to get this far. Let him have his fun.

The ruling has implications for other classes and abilities at lower levels.

I would never allow it short of specific clarification that said it was intended to work from a 5ft step.

Also, just because wizards are broken doesn't mean we should break other things too. Of course, I do things to reduce and rein in how broken high level spell casters are, so maybe I'm just different.


Well, is a 5' step 'movement' or not? If someone takes a 5' step within grease, does he need to make an acrobatics check?


If you're asking me to explain my rule it is:
"A 5ft step doesn't count as movement for being able to use stealth."


A 5' step is movement. The rule says you need movement, it does not say that it requires a move action.

Movement insofar as Pathfinder is concerned is any change of position of 5' or greater on a 5' grid.

Example: standing up from prone conforms to the dictionary definition of movement, but is a "move equivalent action" and thus not "movement".

The bag of flower won't exactly prevent the use of stealth, but unless the enemy has some sort of trackless step ability (which rangers may have -- I don't play them much, so haven't memorized the class), it will allow you to accurately pick the square you can attack. So it eliminates at least one of the problems targeting an unseen enemy.


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Even if your GM lands on a 5 foot step not being sufficient movement for a stealth check, a quickrunner shirt will let you get two rounds of stealth off. At L17 a lot happens in 2 rounds of full attacks, and you should definitely buy that item.

thejeff: In most fights it isn't game breaking. It allows the ranger to contribute as a valuable team member, which is all any player wants. It's potentially game-breaking in that a single ranger could go ahead of the party and win many combats with this technique working alone. That becomes game-breaking, and less fun for everyone - so it probably requires an understanding between DM and PC that the PC will just agree not to use this tactic for extended solo assaults.


Quintain wrote:

A 5' step is movement. The rule says you need movement, it does not say that it requires a move action.

Movement insofar as Pathfinder is concerned is any change of position of 5' or greater on a 5' grid.

Example: standing up from prone conforms to the dictionary definition of movement, but is a "move equivalent action" and thus not "movement".

The bag of flower won't exactly prevent the use of stealth, but unless the enemy has some sort of trackless step ability (which rangers may have -- I don't play them much, so haven't memorized the class), it will allow you to accurately pick the square you can attack. So it eliminates at least one of the problems targeting an unseen enemy.

Technically, the rule does not say you need movement. "Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. "

It's not specified how it's handled in the non-usual cases, other than sniping.

It's also not clear exactly how Camouflage works in a given terrain, so the bag of flour trick might or might not succeed. It's not like he disappears and you see his footsteps in the flour, right? He's hiding. Somehow.


drsparnum wrote:

Even if your GM lands on a 5 foot step not being sufficient movement for a stealth check, a quickrunner shirt will let you get two rounds of stealth off. At L17 a lot happens in 2 rounds of full attacks, and you should definitely buy that item.

thejeff: In most fights it isn't game breaking. It allows the ranger to contribute as a valuable team member, which is all any player wants. It's potentially game-breaking in that a single ranger could go ahead of the party and win many combats with this technique working alone. That becomes game-breaking, and less fun for everyone - so it probably requires an understanding between DM and PC that the PC will just agree not to use this tactic for extended solo assaults.

At 17th level? Against opponents built for a whole party?

Some fights he'll easily solo, but if his trick ever fails he dies. Probably that round. And it will fail. A lot.


I'm with both theJeff and drsparnum on this.

Letting the Ranger17+ do full-attack & hide-in-plain-sight in one round is not game breaking.

Compare that to a 17th level caster's capabilites in one round, such as Wierd + quickened-D-door... or quickened enervation + Timestop (reposition while casting more spells)... or Cold Ice Strike + Teleport... or Implosion + Quickened Meld into Stone (Clerics too)... Who's the "hit & fade" master now?

Even Rogues can do the FA + HIPS ... and by jove they need it to be even remotely relevant.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Ranger - Hide In Plain Sight All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.