Stealth rules.

I'm currently having a debate with one of my fellow players. He claims that if a rogue makes a stealth check, he can remain stealthed even if he is standing in their line of sight without cover or hide in plain sight.

By RAW no however since pathfinder has no facing rules this means you can simply sneak up on something and attack it if its not super dark, foggy, really high grass, or some other way your getting cover or concealment.

So you're saying that if a rogue makes his stealth check he can move out of cover and stand in front of the person they're attacking and remain hidden *granted they don't attack*

Not by RAW my post should have you can't unless its one of those things.

The moment you lose the conditions that allow you to hide, you are no longer hiding.

By raw 2 conditions are needed to be stealthed.
1. You can't be observed
2. You need Cover/concealment, which usually covers the 1st condition.

Some conditions such as dim light, give you for example concealment and you can stealth wherever in that area, but in area of normal light stealthing infront of target is futile since you are being observed by target. Target also autodetects you when you get into melee range. There are some feats which remove or make Stealth easier to use.

Stealth isn't invisibility.

So, sneaking uo behind a guard in a corridor is impossible? I generally agree with the lack of facing in Pathfinder for ease of use, but stealth is the ne thign where I wish it applied. Of course, then you'd have all sorts of inconsistencies. It's a sticky situation. I allow stealth based on facing in my games. It's just a stealth check, no special modifiers or anything. Being behind someone counts as a condition for stealth equivalent to cover or concealment.

By default, yes, if you leave your cover, you are no longer Stealthed but you can always try a distraction on that guard.

I'd allow stealth if the guard isn't facing him because you aren't being observed. Remember, stealth is not just hiding, but it is also moving silently. And remember, perception is not just looking, but also hearing and smelling. I feel that people forget that Stealth is also for moving silently and not just hiding.

Yes ^^^ The key is being observed or not. Just because the rules don't have facing, doesn't mean the DM doesn't know which direction the guard is facing (and the player can know simply by looking). The rules are there to mediate uncertainties, not to replace common sense.

If a rogue was hidden and fired an arrow at a character with uncanny dodge, would he retain his dex bonus against that attack?

The rules are there to mediate uncertainties, not to replace common sense.

The alternative is really crazy **** like not being able to see the sun, or a man who isn't hiding at the end of a long hallway.

The game does not have facing and it is assumed that you are seeing in all directions at once.

The games generally handles this by using langauge such as line of sight or "if you can draw lien from A to B so while the GM can say the guard does not see in a certain direction it is only a houserule since rules only about line of sight.

Ciaran: Uncanny dodge allows you to retain your dex modifier in such situations.

Depending on how dark it is/what the environment is like, I can see his point, ie its really dark and you're moving low and slow or its dark in a forest or jungle environment and you have some sort of camo. If he means he wants to be able to walk right up to someone whose looking his way in a 10 foot wide moderately lit hallway, then the answer is lol no.

There are alternate stealth rules out there. The Paizo guys put some up in the Paizo blog.

Pathfinder has no facing for combat purposes so you need cover or concealment.

However "If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth" (PF RPG p106) so if sneaking up on a guard who is distracted by the fact that they are looking for intruders approaching from the other direction, then you could potentially sneak up and make an attack (in what would be the surprise round of combat). Once in combat though you would then need cover or concealment.

This is all IMHO of course.

The moment you lose the conditions that allow you to hide, you are no longer hiding.

One small addition here.. this is all relative to a given observer.

Thus you could be benefiting from stealth against some foes but not others.

Stealth is the skill that allows one to remain unobserved rather than a skill that makes one disappear.

-James

Dunno about RAW, but we generally say if you can make it from one piece of cover/concealment to another in one move action, you just have to make a Stealth check to do it when the guard's not looking. Or if you're trying to sneak attack, you just have to be able to get to the target in one move.

Ravingdork wrote:

The moment you lose the conditions that allow you to hide, you are no longer hiding.

One small addition here.. this is all relative to a given observer.

Thus you could be benefiting from stealth against some foes but not others.

Stealth is the skill that allows one to remain unobserved rather than a skill that makes one disappear.

-James

Quite right.

does the spell Blur provide enough concealment to allow someone to stealth?

unless you have hide in plain sight ;-)
then you can go in hiding even when observed