It just seems weird to me that the fighter would gain any new information from the rogue sneaking away, especially depending on what was making them hidden in the first place.
For me, it's more a question of time than a question of information. You hear the Invisible creature next to you so you assume it's here and can strike it. 3 seconds later, if you haven't heard a sound, you know the creature may have moved. Sure, it may still be at the same place but now you have no certainty.
It's the same for the Wizard example. The Wizard casts Invisibility, the Fighter assumes it's because the Wizard wants to escape the fight. So the Fighter runs to the door as it's the closest choke point, hoping to arrive there before the Wizard.
For me, it's perfectly logical and in line with the rules.
I see that I have overestimated the size of this boulder. Either way I suppose the source of at least part of the confusion lies in that Pathfinder seems to use the same condition, Hidden, to represent both the circumstance where you spot a movement that gives away a target's location, and the state where you technically know where a creature is only by its last known location.
I move that the latter case might be better understood as the result of being told that the target is now Undetected. Nothing about Sneak says that the creature did not end up sticking with their original hiding spot behind the boulder. If there had been a 'beat' since my target ran behind cover, and i have no further indicator of their presence, it would seen reasonable for me to considerthem Undetected. Of course, disproving this only requires moving to a position from which the boulder does not provide cover, I which case it is a logical leap to realize that the target may have used that blip in time to find a more secure hiding spot.
Mind you, in the case of a bush, where foes would definitely need to Seek to prove one way or the other, somebody assuming that 'Undetected' means 'they moved over there' is just asking for their GM to mess with them by having enemies re-hide in the same bush with Sneak--unless there us perfectly reasonable context again, such as the presence if obvious objectives such as an escape door etc.
This does leave aside the question of succeeding at Hide and then ending one's turn at that moment rather than pursuing deeper obfuscation. In this case I suggest that we bit imagine a creature who has succeeded at hiding is only detectable because last-known-location, but perhaps because their lack of time or effort has left some other tell for their location--functionally the same as if they failed a Sneak to move to the same spot (except your players might hear the Sneak stepping out if their square and then back into it if you prefer to be rigorous about the need to Stride during Sneak)
|
I'm really confused now, I thought OP was asking about a Hidden creature which is what I was answering... Hidden does not mean Undetected. I think people are getting all mixed up between the varying different states of Concealment, Hidden, Undetected, Detected, and the like and many here are talking past each other instead of actually communicating on the point of discussion.
AoO goes off just fine, the Fighter knows the opponent is in the Square they're in, and unless they gain the Undetected condition without taking an Action that provokes an AoO and they are perfectly able to target them with effects, spells, and attacks so, yeah nothing about Hidden prevents that, it merely imposes a Flat Check in order to succeed, nothing about the Sneak Action can break the order of operations here as far as I can tell.
Maybe I misunderstood the question?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm really confused now, I thought OP was asking about a Hidden creature which is what I was answering... Hidden does not mean Undetected. I think people are getting all mixed up between the varying different states of Concealment, Hidden, Undetected, Detected, and the like and many here are talking past each other instead of actually communicating on the point of discussion.
AoO goes off just fine, the Fighter knows the opponent is in the Square they're in, and unless they gain the Undetected condition without taking an Action that provokes an AoO and they are perfectly able to target them with effects, spells, and attacks so, yeah nothing about Hidden prevents that, it merely imposes a Flat Check in order to succeed, nothing about the Sneak Action can break the order of operations here as far as I can tell.
Maybe I misunderstood the question?
The question was whether or not a successful sneak would stop the fighter from getting their aoo. The answer is yes, because during a successful sneak movement, you are undetected.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm really confused now, I thought OP was asking about a Hidden creature which is what I was answering... Hidden does not mean Undetected. I think people are getting all mixed up between the varying different states of Concealment, Hidden, Undetected, Detected, and the like and many here are talking past each other instead of actually communicating on the point of discussion.
AoO goes off just fine, the Fighter knows the opponent is in the Square they're in, and unless they gain the Undetected condition without taking an Action that provokes an AoO and they are perfectly able to target them with effects, spells, and attacks so, yeah nothing about Hidden prevents that, it merely imposes a Flat Check in order to succeed, nothing about the Sneak Action can break the order of operations here as far as I can tell.
Maybe I misunderstood the question?
The basic issue is if the you succeed at the Sneak check, they are 'You’re undetected by the creature during your movement and remain undetected by the creature at the end of it' and therefore can't actually be targeted by a Opportunity Attack...
This is complicated a bit by the fact that you don't make your check until the end of your action, but the results retroactively apply to the entire action.Source Core Rulebook pg. 252 2.0Move, Secret
...
Success You’re undetected by the creature during your movement and remain undetected by the creature at the end of it.
...
Failure A telltale sound or other sign gives your position away, though you still remain unseen. You’re hidden from the creature throughout your movement and remain so.
Critical Failure You’re spotted! You’re observed by the creature throughout your movement and remain so. If you’re invisible and were hidden from the creature, instead of being observed you’re hidden throughout your movement and remain so.
Seems pretty clear to me that if the GM succeeds at your (secret) check, you become Undetected before they can take an Opportunity Attack, which in turn makes you un-targetable...
Core Rulebook pg. 623 2.0 When you are undetected by a creature, that creature cannot see you at all, has no idea what space you occupy, and can't target you, though you still can be affected by abilities that target an area. When you're undetected by a creature, that creature is flat-footed to you.Source
A creature you're undetected by can guess which square you're in to try targeting you. It must pick a square and attempt an attack. This works like targeting a hidden creature (requiring a DC 11 flat check), but the flat check and attack roll are rolled in secret by the GM, who doesn't reveal whether the attack missed due to failing the flat check, failing the attack roll, or choosing the wrong square.
A creature can use the Seek action to try to find you.
In my opinion, the retroactive effect of Sneak exists to avoid the sneaking character to change their mind if they realize they failed their check (which would be a kind of metagaming).
For example, let's say there are a lot of Fighters between me and my destination. If I rolled the Stealth check at the beginning of the movement, I'd stop it as soon as the first Fighter makes an AoO as I know I've rolled low. With current system, if I fail the roll, I still have to make the whole movement and take all the AoOs.
Oh yeah, the question of whether an AoO happens seems like it was fairly well settled already (summary for those who've missed the last half dozen posts, if they Sneaked successfully and became Undetected throughout movement, no AoO. If they failed and remained Hidden, yes AoO at usual miss chance). Part of reaching that conclusion started a small but relevant tangent about "When do you inform the player that they lost track of the Hidden enemy?"
So there are two arguments against Fighter getting his AoO vs. Rogue:
1) AoO doesn't trigger because non-moving move actions only trigger after their execution
2) Rogue is not a legal target for AoO because Fighter is not 'aware'
Perhaps it helps to look at the Stealth rules again:
Hide:
You huddle behind cover or greater cover or deeper into concealment to become hidden, rather than observed. The GM rolls your Stealth check in secret and compares the result to the Perception DC of each creature you’re observed by but that you have cover or greater cover against or are concealed from. You gain the circumstance bonus from cover or greater cover to your check.
Also, remember that OPs scenario is a non-invisible Rogue moving away.
So:
1) Move actions trigger AoOs. That is not contested. Moving out of a threatened square triggers an AoO before the move action resolves. That also is uncontested. (Step being the exception not withstanding.)
Explain then, if you can, how a Rogue adjacent to a Fighter is supposed to hide from the Fighter without moving behind cover or somehow getting concealment. Otherwise, no dice, Rogue can't even attempt stealth to begin with.
Only if the Rogue starts invisible, and thus Hidden, can he even attempt to hide without moving away. In this scenario, the Rogue could indeed hide before the AoO triggers and, on a successful stealth check, evade the AoO. If the (secret) stealth check fails however, Rogue either tries to move with another stealth check, eating an AoO, or he stays put, eating a full round of retaliation from the Fighter.
2) There is no such thing as 'awareness' in PF2. Stop inventing things that don't exist in RAW!
If a creature is either Observed or Hidden, every combatant is automatically 'aware' of both their presence and position. A seek check can reduce Hidden to Observed, but even a Hidden creature is a perfectly viable target for strikes, whether from an AoO or otherwise.
Even an 'undetected' creature is one the presence of which every combatant is automatically 'aware' of. Just not their exact location:
"If a creature is undetected, you don’t know what space it occupies, you’re flat-footed to it, and you can’t easily target it. Using the Seek basic action can help you find an undetected creature, usually making it hidden from you instead of undetected. If a creature is undetected, that doesn’t necessarily mean you’re unaware of its presence—you might suspect an undetected creature is in the room with you, even though you’re unable to find its space. The unnoticed condition covers creatures you’re entirely unaware of."
So, to summarise:
In the OP's scenario, the Rogue became Observed after attacking, thus if they try to vacate their square with anything but the Step action, they draw an AoO.
They can step and the sneak, or they can try to hide without moving if they can somehow provide cover and/or concealment from the Fighter.
If they happen to be invisible, and thus Hidden, they are still eating an AoO if they vacate their starting square with anything but a Step action. Stepping and sneaking are fine, as above.
Additionally, an invisible/Hidden Rogue can try to hide without moving, and does not draw an AoO until after they complete their action.
But if that check fails, they are still Hidden adjacent to an angry Fighter and liable to being stabbed/cut/pummelled.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lycar, I'm afraid you may be conflating the Hide and Sneak actions. I haven't yet read your whole post yet but you cannot move when you Hide, so the crux of the issue does not involve that action except as a set-up. I must review OP to be sure because I only entered thus discussion after discussion had been ongoing a while, but I feel that may explain a thing or two.
Addendum: Awareness may not be a mechanical term, but it is entirely possible to be Observed by some creatures and Hidden to others. It is not true that an Observed creature has the same level of stealth against every creature in the fight. If you Hide and roll below on creature's Perception DC but above another, they would have different levels if awareness to you, in lay terminology.
Lycar, I'm afraid you may be conflating the Hide and Sneak actions. I haven't yet read your whole post yet but you cannot move when you Hide, so the crux of the issue does not involve that action except as a set-up. I must review OP to be sure because I only entered thus discussion after discussion had been ongoing a while, but I feel that may explain a thing or two.
So even better. If the Rogue is Observed, they can't hide and can only Step + Stride to get away, and then are out of actions to actually hide.
Bottom line: The only way for the Rogue to prevent an AoO for trying to get away is to take a Step. If that is enough to get cover or concealment, they can indeed try to hide without provoking.
Unless the Fighter has a reach weapon of course..
Addendum: Awareness may not be a mechanical term, but it is entirely possible to be Observed by some creatures and Hidden to others. It is not true that an Observed creature has the same level of stealth against every creature in the fight. If you Hide and roll below on creature's Perception DC but above another, they would have different levels if awareness to you, in lay terminology.
Irrelevant. We are only concerned with the Rogue's status towards the Fighter, since that is the only thing that matters for the Fighter getting or not getting an AoO, with or without a flat check miss chance.
Besides, upon breaking stealth the Rogue become Observed, which means they are indeed being observed by all combatants. Being invisible only changes that to being Hidden from all combatants, but still having their grid square revealed to everyone.
Only once a Stealth check gets involved could different states of observation result form different Perception scores of other combatants vs. the stealth check. But since we only care about the stealth status of the Rogue vs the Fighter, that distinction is irrelevant.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Rogue never "broke" stealth in the original example. The Rogue is Hidden from the Fighter.
The Rogue then becomes Undetected (on a success) to the Fighter and moves away Undetected.
The Rogue was never Observed at any point in the example. Observed and Hidden are mutually exclusive Conditions.
On the table it would look like this:
Rogue is Hidden from the Fighter.
The player declares the Rogue is going to Sneak away.
The player charts the path the Rogue will take after he begins his Sneak.
The GM rolls the secret Stealth check.
The Rogue, believing himself to be Undetected, moves away.
The GM reveals whether the Stealth check was successful or not.
If successful, the Rogue became Undetected from the Fighter as part of moving away and could not be targeted.
If unsuccessful, the Rogue is only Hidden (due to whatever gave him the Hidden status to begin with) as he moves away and the Fighter may make an AOO with the DC 11 Flat Check.
The Rogue never attacked anyone in the original example. Furthermore, attacking someone while Hidden does not make you Observed unless whatever gave you the Hidden status is removed in the process of making the attack. If you're in a lightless room and don't have darkvision but you succeeded your Perception check to locate the square than an enemy is occupying, them attacking you in the dark does not make them Observed. If a supernatural fog is applied across an area that gives everyone within the Hidden condition from everyone outside their own square, someone attacking from within the fog does not make them Observed.
Addendum: Awareness may not be a mechanical term, but it is entirely possible to be Observed by some creatures and Hidden to others. It is not true that an Observed creature has the same level of stealth against every creature in the fight. If you Hide and roll below on creature's Perception DC but above another, they would have different levels if awareness to you, in lay terminology.Irrelevant. We are only concerned with the Rogue's status towards the Fighter, since that is the only thing that matters for the Fighter getting or not getting an AoO, with or without a flat check miss chance.
Besides, upon breaking stealth the Rogue become Observed, which means they are indeed being observed by all combatants. Being invisible only changes that to being Hidden from all combatants, but still having their grid square revealed to everyone.
Only once a Stealth check gets involved could different states of observation result form different Perception scores of other combatants vs. the stealth check. But since we only care about the stealth status of the Rogue vs the Fighter, that distinction is irrelevant.
Indeed, we are only concerned with the Fighter's level of awareness toward the Rogue in this example, however the statement to which I was responding was much more strongly worded:
2) There is no such thing as 'awareness' in PF2. Stop inventing things that don't exist in RAW!If a creature is either Observed or Hidden, every combatant is automatically 'aware' of both their presence and position. A seek check can reduce Hidden to Observed, but even a Hidden creature is a perfectly viable target for strikes, whether from an AoO or otherwise.
I felt it useful to clarify that this understanding is was in error, since we were no longer speaking of Fighters and Rogues but of all hypothetical combatants. The Degrees of Detection are highly context-sensitive so any such blanket statement is necessarily inaccurate, even if in normal circumstances a creature which is not taking efforts to become Hidden is indeed Observed to all creatures who could see them in a combat scenario.
---
The above Tiger has already illustrated the various oversights of your understanding of OP's example scenario in which a Rogue who is Hidden by undisclosed means attempts a Sneak action to break away from a Fighter, so I'll not pile on with my 95 Theses and encourage you to review your argument in light of these errata.
On the table it would look like this:
Rogue is Hidden from the Fighter.
The player declares the Rogue is going to Sneak away.
AoO from the Fighter triggers:
"Trigger: A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action, makes a ranged attack, or leaves a square during a move action it’s using.
Oh and I just realised I overlooked something:
"Hide: Success: If the creature could see you, you’re now hidden from it instead of observed. If you were hidden from or undetected by the creature, you retain that condition."
So the Rogue actually can't even upgrade from Hidden to Unobserved. Oops.
So yeah. If the Rogue is Hidden at the start of their turn and leave their starting square within reach of the Fighter with anything but a Step action, they get whacked. Can't hide, can't sneak.
Furthermore, attacking someone while Hidden does not make you Observed unless whatever gave you the Hidden status is removed in the process of making the attack. If you're in a lightless room and don't have darkvision but you succeeded your Perception check to locate the square than an enemy is occupying, them attacking you in the dark does not make them Observed. If a supernatural fog is applied across an area that gives everyone within the Hidden condition from everyone outside their own square, someone attacking from within the fog does not make them Observed.
RAW is such:
"Hide: 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."
Also, even the Obscuring Mist spell merely provides Concealment:
"You call forth a cloud of mist. All creatures within the mist become concealed, and all creatures outside the mist become concealed to creatures within it. You can Dismiss the cloud."
Concealed does not equal hidden:
"This condition protects a creature if it’s in mist, within dim light, or amid something else that obscures sight but does not provide a physical barrier to effects. An effect or type of terrain that describes an area of concealment makes all creatures within it concealed.
...
The concealed condition doesn’t change which of the main categories of detection apply to the creature. A creature in a light fog bank is still observed even though it’s concealed."
Only Invisibility makes a mention of remaining undetected:
"A creature with the invisible condition (by way of an invisibility spell or invisibility potion, for example) is automatically undetected to any creatures relying on sight as their only precise sense. Precise senses other than sight ignore the invisible condition."
Okay, so... we have a conundrum here. A Hidden/Unobserved creature that attempts a strike becomes Observed. But it's invisible! So it can't be observed!
Well, there is that:
"If you’re already observing a creature when it becomes invisible, it starts out hidden, since you know where it was when it became invisible, though it can then Sneak to become undetected."
So in other words, the striking creature reveals its presence and position by striking, downgrading its status from Undetected to Hidden. Even if it is invisible!
And yes, that means if the creature merely was Hidden to begin with, it becoming Observed within a bank of fog makes it indeed Observed, albeit still Concealed. Either way, its position is now know and it can be targeted with strikes.
Think of it that way: If an adjacent creature strikes, the target will know where/what square that attack came from. Even if the attacker is invisible, they can retaliate by attacking the square the attack came from. With the usual DC 11 flat check of course.
A ranged attack usually involves a missile of some kind, arrow, spear, sling stone etc., that can presumably be tracked back to its point of origin. No seek check required. " If you attempt to Strike a creature,... you then become observed."
I'm not aware of any spell or effect actually giving the Hidden condition rather then Concealed, but even if Hidden, any move but a Step provokes an AoO.
Pardon, Lycar. I strongly recommend you review the OP and key responses in greater detail. The Hide action is not relevant. It appears as if you've misunderstood the bulk of the argument presented. The Rogue is already Hidden. Arguing that the Rogue cannot become Hidden has no merit as a counterpoint because we don't every know why our example Rogue is Hidden, only that they already are.
Oh yeah, the question of whether an AoO happens seems like it was fairly well settled already (summary for those who've missed the last half dozen posts, if they Sneaked successfully and became Undetected throughout movement, no AoO.Is it strange to anyone else to read a thread with a back and forth argument where nobody really agrees on anything only for someone to show up and unilaterally declare the issue has been settled, usually by asserting that they were Right All Along?
It happens a lot here.
Oh yes, that earlier post of mine was certainly in error, proven by Lycar's responses here. However, at the time of writing, the debate about whether a Fighter should get AoO against a Sneaking Rogue had fallen almost entirely silent in favour of the tangent I brooked upon. I should have clarified as I did in my first post that the debate was settled for me and I considered the (at the time) subsiding of the main debate to be evidence that at least a few others agreed. In my defense, I did say it seems.
In any case, I shall definitely admit I was wrong regarding the status of the debate and that it yet rages on. We will yet see (or at least Observe!) if there are any great revelations still to come concerning the original topic.
(or the sub-topic of when players learn that a creature has become Unobserved, which I make no claim to being settled, even if the last words from both parties have been in tentative agreement to be overturned at earliest convenience)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the table it would look like this:
Rogue is Hidden from the Fighter.
The player declares the Rogue is going to Sneak away.AoO from the Fighter triggers:
"Trigger: A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action, makes a ranged attack, or leaves a square during a move action it’s using.
This is true!
The trigger of Attack of Opportunity does include leaving a square during a move action, which sneak would be. The problem that the fighter faces isn't that a trigger hasn't occurred, rather it is that they are not aware of the trigger occurring. Or are you claiming that characters are always perfectly aware of everything happening around them at all times? If so, why are there any degrees of detection at all?
On a successful Sneak action, you are Undetected during the movement and after said movement. When you are undetected:
When you are undetected by a creature, that creature cannot see you at all, has no idea what space you occupy, and can't target you, though you still can be affected by abilities that target an area. When you're undetected by a creature, that creature is flat-footed to you.
So how is that Fighter making that Attack of Opportunity? What are they targeting?
Oh and I just realised I overlooked something:
"Hide: Success: If the creature could see you, you’re now hidden from it instead of observed. If you were hidden from or undetected by the creature, you retain that condition."
So the Rogue actually can't even upgrade from Hidden to Unobserved. Oops.
What? Nobody brought up Hide in reference to the Op's example. The rogue began the thought experiment Hidden, and there are plenty of ways for that to happen ranging from hiding in a bush to being under the effects of Invisibility. Create a Diversion is a practically 0 cost way of making this exact scenario happen.
I claim responsibility for this Hide tangent since my boulder example probably brought it up, but it should be noted that the Op's example just gave us a hidden rogue next to a fighter, something that can certainly happen.
And I'm not really seeing whatever point you were trying to make about hide. Hide's purpose isn't to make you undetected. It is to make you hidden from an opponent so you can then sneak to become undetected. Or to be undetected if you become so for some other reason, say the battlefield changes and now you and your opponent are separated by a Wall of Stone or some similar effect.
So uh. Congrats? Hide does exactly what you say.
Snip for brevity. Something about Obscuring Mist, then about making strikes while hidden. I guess.
I uh. I'm not sure what exactly you were really responding to. Did anyone bring up the rogue making an attack?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Snip for brevity. Something about Obscuring Mist, then about making strikes while hidden. I guess.I uh. I'm not sure what exactly you were really responding to. Did anyone bring up the rogue making an attack?
It appears the first mention of the Rogue attacking in this thread came from Lycar's first post in this thread on Wednesday.
Either way, another potentially illustrative scenario occurred to me in the shower which I wished to present before I am finished for the day:
In the case of the argument that a creature, even an Undetected one, moving within a Fighter's reach, provokes AoO, I present this question. If we assert that the Fighter gets an AoO because a creature left a square in their reach, regardless whether the Fighter could see the creature doing that action, what distinguishes this case from an already Undetected creature successfully sneaking by the Fighter. Would the Fighter get an attempt to strike a creature they did not know was moving past them merely because 'a creature leaves a square during a move action' overrides any question of the Fighter needing to know where that creature is?
If not, why is it the case that an Undetected Rogue (succeeding at a Sneak action while already Hidden) does provoke? The Fighter may be aware that the Rogue was once adjacent to them, but the Sneak action states that the Rogue is Undetected for the duration of their movement on a success, rendering it functionally indifferent unless we assert that the Rogue does not gain the benefit of their action until after they have left their first square while Sneaking.
While I'm kind of ambivalent now either way, the big difference for me here is that in the given example, the action that provokes the AoO is also the one that renders the target incapable of being subjected to the AoO, which seems inconsistent with how those actions are generally treated and just kind of, imo, feels wrong. Which admittedly is not a rules argument but the rules are a little janky and fuzzy here anyways.
Even that aside, there's a distinct mechanical difference between "you lose awareness of a creature" and "you were never aware of the creature to begin with" which makes the scenarios not entirely comparable to begin with, imo.
While I'm kind of ambivalent now either way, the big difference for me here is that in the given example, the action that provokes the AoO is also the one that renders the target incapable of being subjected to the AoO, which seems inconsistent with how those actions are generally treated and just kind of, imo, feels wrong. Which admittedly is not a rules argument but the rules are a little janky and fuzzy here anyways.
Even that aside, there's a distinct mechanical difference between "you lose awareness of a creature" and "you were never aware of the creature to begin with" which makes the scenarios not entirely comparable to begin with, imo.
Welp, my plans for this evening have been postponed, so I get a chance to clarify my meaning.
To me, the thing which make these two scenarios comparable is that in both cases, a creature which is Undetected leaves a square which is threatened by a Fighter. Indeed, in one case, the creature was known to the Fighter, but at the time of the triggering movement (recalling that the move action does not actually trigger until a square has been left or the action is concluded, whichever comes first), their states are identical--an creature whose location the Fighter does not know has moved out of a square without their ability to detect that movement.
The Sneak action doesn't break down a very strict order of operations, but the Success entry feels to me like it is clear that, regardless whether the Rogue was Hidden or Undetected, it becomes and remains Undetected throughout its entire movement, up to and including the movement that would trigger an AoO if the Fighter were aware of it.
My example is mainly to illustrate that I don't believe a creature moving past the Fighter while Undetected is mechanically different from a creature which happened to be Hidden on the action previous to the movement.
I, too, was skeptical about the argument that you simply don't inform the Fighter that the trigger was met, but subsequent arguments have convinced me that an Undetected creature is simply not a valid target for an AoO, even if they were detected before they started Sneaking.
On a successful Sneak action, you are Undetected during the movement and after said movement. When you are undetected:
When you are undetected by a creature, that creature cannot see you at all, has no idea what space you occupy, and can't target you, though you still can be affected by abilities that target an area. When you're undetected by a creature, that creature is flat-footed to you.
But that's the point: Unless the Rogue starts out Undetected, they are a valid target for an AoO, and an AoO triggered by leaving a threatened square gets resolved before the move action occurs.
The Rogue may well be Undetected during and after they sneak, but not before. And before is when the AoO resolves.
I, too, was skeptical about the argument that you simply don't inform the Fighter that the trigger was met, but subsequent arguments have convinced me that an Undetected creature is simply not a valid target for an AoO, even if they were detected before they started Sneaking.
Uhm... if they were detected before starting to sneak, that would mean they were no longer Undetected, now wouldn't it? And Hidden creatures are valid targets. Or do you mean the creature started out as Unnoticed and then became Undetected before sneaking away?
Lycar, what happens if the fighter and rogue don't start adjacent or in range of each other? Would the fighter get an aoo against a rogue sneaking past them?
Lycar concludes that by virtue of possessing the Move trait, the mental act of deciding that Sneak is going to be used triggers the AOO and resolves before the Undetected condition applies. Basically that "during" does not include the initiation/start, that before the movement begins there is some non-movement move action happening that creates an opportunity for the Fighter to strike or that the Undetected does not apply until after the first 5 ft.
Those of us who conclude the Fighter does not get an AOO on the Rogue's successful Sneak find that the Undetected condition applies for the entirety of the action. the word "during" to include the initiation/start, includes the first 5 ft.
That's a fundamental difference in how we're reading "during" and not one that can be overcome by rules analysis.
But he must also conclude that Kip Up doesn't provide any benefit either because, in his words, "AOOs resolve before the movement" occurs and only the movement is protected from AOOs.
Lycar concludes that by virtue of possessing the Move trait, the mental act of deciding that Sneak is going to be used triggers the AOO and resolves before the Undetected condition applies. Basically that "during" does not include the initiation/start, that before the movement begins there is some non-movement move action happening that creates an opportunity for the Fighter to strike or that the Undetected does not apply until after the first 5 ft.
Those of us who conclude the Fighter does not get an AOO on the Rogue's successful Sneak find that the Undetected condition applies for the entirety of the action. the word "during" to include the initiation/start, includes the first 5 ft.
It seems more like Lycar is leaning towards the bit of AoO's trigger where it lists, "A creature within your reach uses a manipulate action or a move action," rather than the last part where it lists leaving a square.
So from what I can gather, according to Lycar it could go like this:
Rogue: I am hidden from the fighter right?
GM: Yes.
Rogue: Ok, I am going to sneak away from him. My bonus is +X
GM: Sneak is a move action, so the Fighter uses AoO. (Rolls AoO)
Rogue: But you haven't rolled my Sneak yet?
GM: Don't need to, you are sneaking which is a move action. The fighter hits you for X damage.
Rogue:... I'm down.
GM: Upside, you get to move 5 feet away from the fighter. Let me see if your sneak was successful. (Rolls Stealth). Success! You are undetected. He doesn't know where your body is.
Rogue: Great. Thanks. I wanted to play a Swashbuckler anyway I guess.
Some say that Rogue's body is still laying there, waiting for help. But the party couldn't find him either. He was truly too stealthy for his own good.
Once again Blake's Tiger has adequately summarized the primary thrust of my understanding:
Those of us who conclude the Fighter does not get an AOO on the Rogue's successful Sneak find that the Undetected condition applies for the entirety of the action. the word "during" to include the initiation/start, includes the first 5 ft.
I feel like the arcane and circuitous way the Sneak skill is written and designed is at least somewhat responsible for the ongoing contention over whether Sneak can or cannot trigger AoO. Once again, for those who missed it on the previous page, the post which convinced me was the one which cited that a move action only triggers AoO either upon leaving a square or at the end of the action, whichever of those two things comes first.
I took this to be clear (to me) indicator that, because the Rogue was,
a) Undetected while moving, (Sneak Success entry, CRB 252)
b) Could not trigger AoO until moving out of their square or ending their action, (Move Actions that Trigger Reactions, CRB 474) and
c) Could not be targeted by AoO while Undetected (Undetected, CRB 623)
That the Rogue was effectively entirely Undetected to the Fighter before possibly triggering any AoO, and therefore not a valid target for said AoO.
I understand that there seems to be considerable disagreement about whether a creature becomes Undetected when they start their movement (in their original square) or not until they have left their square (effectively staying detected/Hidden) until after they have already started moving. To me there can be no ambiguity as the Sneak Success entry states that the creature is Undetected during their movement with no caveats about their movement not actually starting until after they've moved from their square.
Alternatively, perish the thought, the confusion may come because the Sneak action is written so that the Rogue Strides from their square before the dice roll resolves what Degree of Detection they will be for the rest of the movement, which is retroactively applied. In this case, it may seem entirely reasonable that the Fighter can get an AoO against a creature who has moved but not yet rolled Stealth, however, this model breaks the Sneak action beyond recognition, and I cannot seriously entertain the suggestion.
Uhm... if they were detected before starting to sneak, that would mean they were no longer Undetected, now wouldn't it? And Hidden creatures are valid targets. Or do you mean the creature started out as Unnoticed and then became Undetected before sneaking away?
If the above paragraphs do not sufficiently explain my meaning, we may be working from irreconcilable mental models of Stealth and Detection, but to respond to this specifically:
If they were detected (i.e. Hidden) before they started to Sneak, it would mean they were not Undetected. Moreover, they never were Undetected in the first place, so the words 'no longer' carry no meaning. The Rogue begins the scenario Hidden and takes the Sneak action.
If the result of the Stealth check is a Success, the Rogue is Undetected for the duration of their movement. To me this means that an Undetected Rogue leaves the square. The Fighter not only does not witness the movement, but if we argue that they can assume a trigger that they didn't see, the target of their Strike must be 'the triggering creature', who is currently untargettable thanks to the Undetected condition. Since the Rogue's space did not trigger AoO, while the Fighter may strike the Rogue's space, the space they are in is not itself a valid AoO target. Again, even assuming that the Fighter can take a reaction which they have not actually seen a trigger for.
If the result of the Stealth check is a Failure or Worse, the Rogue is Hidden or Observed when they leave their square. The Fighter detects the trigger of their AoO by direct sensory input and may Strike at the relevant miss chance. A variety of other factors may yield the same result, such as if the Rogue's end point is not behind sufficient cover or concealment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, a lot of posts since I last checked here!
(Not to single out anyone, but yeah I hope my upcoming video on the Stealth and Awareness rules can clear a lot of prevailing confusion about what the terms and actions mean, since in my opinion they are not presented well in the Core Rulebook.)
Yes, for me seeing what Sneak does on a success "you are undetected during your movement..." settled the question in my OP for me.
What seems to be tripping up people accepting both that the Fighter make an AoO if the Rogue were to Stride away hidden, AND be able to Sneak away undetected without provoking an AoO (which I think is the correct reading of the rules), is the seeming thematic disconnect.
For it to "make sense," I think it's important to take step back (pun intended!) and remember what exactly being Hidden means, and what it doesn't mean.
Remember that in the Core Rulebook that being Hidden means we know the location of a creature. This is true even as they move: the Failure result of the Sneak action is that you remain Hidden throughout your movement. This means that something -- the GM and the player can fill in the fluff as to what that "thing" is - reveals your location to the other creature.
The Core Rulebook describes hearing as an imprecise sense for humans, which at best can only perceive the location of a creature, but is not precise enough to make a creature Observed to you. So one way to imagine how a Sneaking creature fails to become Undetected actually gives away their position is that they are making noise as they move.
So in my OP, the rogue is hidden. (We can assume that she did Create a Diversion as her first action on her turn, to become Hidden to the fighter.) If she were to Stride away, she would alert the Fighter that she's doing this somehow, and there is a good chance that the sense that the fighter is using to detect this is hearing, as we know from the CRB using this as the example of an Imprecise Sense. The fighter hears or senses somehow that she is trying to move away, and can take advantage of the opening. Meanwhile, she must succeed at Sneaking away to foil his sense of hearing (and/or other senses).
Does it sound outlandish that the fighter can react so quickly to the opening made by leaving the square while hidden? First off, if she is hidden because she just Created a Diversion, it's perfectly believable that the fighter somehow perceives that it was a ruse to escape and tries to land a hit on her anyway (with a 50/50 miss chance). Now, what if the rogue is hidden by virtue of being actually invisible? (Let's say, she was invisible and failed a Sneak check to walk up to the Fighter... remember that she's not Undetected!) In that case, it is more outlandish for the Fighter to suddenly sense the Rogue leaving. But in a fantasy game outlandish things will happen! If we can accept invisibility in our fantasy, it isn't much more fantastical that someone can sense an invisible creature leaving. (Leaving aside a lot of supernatural monk abilities...) Fighters have an amount of training that is preternatural to the point of seeming almost magical, the way champions in competitive fighting react so quickly to openings in a fight.
(Another reason it's hard to imagine why Attack of Opportunity would happen in this situation is the artificial turn-based structure of combat in TTRPGs. If we accept that it is a necessary abstraction of actual, simultaneous combat, it is easier to suspend disbelief and accept that a skilled fighter will, in the chaos of combat, find a chance to get in an extra blow when an opponent lets their guard down, even for just a moment.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, just in case the vehemence and sheer volume of my arguments have overstated a point I don't hold, I'm 100% on-board with Fighter's reflexes and their ability to react to any opening they can detect, even when they can barely see the creature which is performing the action. I hope I have been very clear about the one circumstance where one couldn't make an AoO but that shouldn't be extended to other actions which imho clearly do provoke, precisely as Rot Grub has said.