Ok as a pretext Im currently trying to play a halfling sniper but Im having major issues with the stealth rules that are making it incredibly unfun. I would love to try to get a understanding of how they work.
So heres my present understandings to stealth and as to how they affect me.
To "stealth" one has to be in cover or concealment or pass a bluff check to begin stealthing and end their action inside of cover or concealment.
One cannot stealth in a place with out cover or concealment of some sort other wise.
One of my fellow players also informed me that a player cannot use other players as cover for stealth even though they count as cover for attacks, no clue where this rule is.
Here are some questions assuming the previously mentioned is not erroneous.
If i stealth from cover out of cover am I immeadiatly perceived by everyone with LOS on me? This seems odd as people have 360 degree vision all the time normally.
Each round I have to roll a stealth check to see how well i continue to stealth?
To be detected each opponent can make a perception roll vs me as an immeadiate action each round? And if one of them sees me they can just yell out where i am buffing everyones chances to see me as free actions.
If I stealth someone where in cover and I move from cover to another place with cover with a stretch of no cover in between am I then unstealthed?
If you break cover or concealment you are seen as if they have 360 degree vision. The game does not have facing rules.
Not each round. Each time you move.
Perception checks can be made as an auto response or as a move action. The rules don't really say which one covers what to my knowledge. The way I do it is that if Person A enters an area where Person B is already hiding then they have to call for the perception check.
If Person A tries to sneak into an area then the check would be automatic.
If someone sees you and calls your position then they can make a 2nd check, but I would not allow it as a free action or immediate action.
Ok so if a halfing was hiding behind lets say a box, that halfing then attacks from behind the box, only the first attack made will have the possibility of landing sneak attack damage on anyone within thirty feet. The rest of the attacks will then be normal attacks. Unless that character is sniping in which case it gets to make 1 attack which if it hits gets sneak attack damage and then they can roll a d20 to go back into stealth.
So when this happens wouldnt everyone "know" where the halfling is allowing 2 checks vs the stealth made at a healthy penalty. And if not, it would only takes one person to pass a perception vs penalized stealth check to allow everyone else a reroll on that perception vs stealth? All for one attack with sneak damage? Also someone could merely walk to the side of the box the halfling is hiding behind to auto see the halfling?
wraithstrike wrote: If you break cover or concealment you are seen as if they have 360 degree vision.
Exactly in what part of stealth is that?
"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."
The observer can be distracted looking to another side or example. Stealth rules are broken only if people choose to break it.
Nicos I was not assuming the distraction was in play. I was just answering the general question. You get to use bluff to distraction so that the pseudo 360 vision is not in play. That allows you to find a spot to hide.
Generally speaking, assuming bluff is not being used to distract someone my previous statement holds.
Nicos wrote: wraithstrike wrote: If you break cover or concealment you are seen as if they have 360 degree vision.
Exactly in what part of stealth is that?
"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."
The observer can be distracted looking to another side or example. Stealth rules are broken only if people choose to break it.
You need a Bluff check to do that. There is no "side" that other people are looking to.
Zomburs wrote: Ok so if a halfing was hiding behind lets say a box, that halfing then attacks from behind the box, only the first attack made will have the possibility of landing sneak attack damage on anyone within thirty feet. The rest of the attacks will then be normal attacks. Unless that character is sniping in which case it gets to make 1 attack which if it hits gets sneak attack damage and then they can roll a d20 to go back into stealth.
So when this happens wouldnt everyone "know" where the halfling is allowing 2 checks vs the stealth made at a healthy penalty. And if not, it would only takes one person to pass a perception vs penalized stealth check to allow everyone else a reroll on that perception vs stealth? All for one attack with sneak damage? Also someone could merely walk to the side of the box the halfling is hiding behind to auto see the halfling?
They can make a 2nd perception check anyway, but not as a free or immediate action. They know their buddy was attack, but if they did not see the sniper they get to use a move action on their turn to locate him/her.
Yes, if someone were to gain line of sight with no cover or concealment they would auto-see the halfling.
Stealth is not all that good in PF, and for ranged rogues it is really bad if they plan to use sneak attack as a source of damage.
That is why many people suggest you play a bard or ranger if you want to play a rogue. They get most of the benefits without the handicaps.
BigNorseWolf wrote: Nicos wrote: wraithstrike wrote: If you break cover or concealment you are seen as if they have 360 degree vision.
Exactly in what part of stealth is that?
"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."
The observer can be distracted looking to another side or example. Stealth rules are broken only if people choose to break it.
You need a Bluff check to do that. There is no "side" that other people are looking to.
Only if the rules are taken to a insane extreme.
wraithstrike wrote: Nicos I was not assuming the distraction was in play. I was just answering the general question. You get to use bluff to distraction so that the pseudo 360 vision is not in play. That allows you to find a spot to hide.
Generally speaking, assuming bluff is not being used to distract someone my previous statement holds.
Bluff is listed as one posibilty, the distractions are not restricted by it though.
Zomburs wrote:
To "stealth" one has to be in cover or concealment or pass a bluff check to begin stealthing and end their action inside of cover or concealment.
Its even worse than you think.
1) you need cover or concealment AND
2) You need to not be observed. If you are crouching down behind a box as people come into the room you can hide. If people come into the room and then you crouch down behind the box they are not toddlers: they still see you. Its like a where's waldo picture: once you see him you have no trouble finding him again.
Concealment is very.. very. VERY hard to gain against things with darkvision. It really doesn't help that most of the ways you can gain concealment against them also stop you from sneak attacking.
Quote: One of my fellow players also informed me that a player cannot use other players as cover for stealth even though they count as cover for attacks, no clue where this rule is. 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.
Quote: If i stealth from cover out of cover am I immeadiatly perceived by everyone with LOS on me? This seems odd as people have 360 degree vision all the time normally. Yup.
Facing is too hard to pull off in a turn by turn game. The opposite would happen if there were facing: people would simply run behind a figure that's holding still and say "now you can't see me"
It sort of makes sense because perception is both hearing and sight.
Quote:
Each round I have to roll a stealth check to see how well i continue to stealth?
Raw is silent on that issue. Its up to the DM whether you can keep your static mod or have to reroll.
Quote: To be detected each opponent can make a perception roll vs me as an immeadiate action each round? And if one of them sees me they can just yell out where i am buffing everyones chances to see me as free actions. Everyone gets 1 free roll to spot you whenever you make a stealth check.
They can spend a move action to get another roll, so theorectically thats 3 rolls per round if all they're doing is looking for you.
Quote: If I stealth someone where in cover and I move from cover to another place with cover with a stretch of no cover in between am I then unstealthed? Yup. its one of the things the new stealth rules were trying to fix.
Wow, this makes me want to reroll. It seems as if alot of rogue abilities are keyed towards being stealthed or flanking. Stealthed seems to be way harder than what its worth. Thats pretty disheartening.
Do you have a link to the new stealth rules?
apparently I needed to refresh or something, but Ill restate just incase its getting overlooked:
where can I look at these new stealth rules in the works?
Part 1
Part 2
None of this is official rules yet, though.
Without a lot of help from mechanics and a bit from the GM, it is virtually impossible to be a sniper rogue. First off, with the -20 modifier to stealth for "snipe" to remain hidden, you just aren't going to succeed from 30ft away without Greater Invisibility. If you want to be a sniper, you have to put almost everything into that tactic, from finding ways to reduce the penalty to stealth from snipe, increasing the range you can snipe, and finding effective ways to hide in order to catch foes off guard, which is difficult unless your GM actively sets things up to give you the opportunities.
Even with, say, Snipper Goggles (practically the only thing that can make an actual sniper viable), it's going to be rare for there to be encounters where you can even utilize that range (if you're far enough away, they simply aren't going to notive you, and that -1/10ft penalty to perception (if the GM remembers to factor that in, which most don't because they forget about it), making that -20 for snipe more managable). Honestly, it's not worth it unless the DM acknowldges your tactic and designs encounters to let your tactic shine now and then (as opposed to trying their hardest to negate your tactic entirely, which is more common. GMs, as a whole, seem to hate player tactics that allow them to attack from relative safety).
Otherwise, I'd make a character themed as a "cheap shot specialist", using the feat below:
Gang Up (Combat)
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise.
Benefit: You are considered to be flanking an opponent if at least two of your allies are threatening that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning.
Normal: You must be positioned opposite an ally to flank an opponent.
It's a ranged rogues best friend, and a whole lot simpler than trying to make a sniper any other way. The sniper archetype still supports this though, reducing range penalties and increasing sneak attack range. Or just skip the archetype and wait for/have a friend make Sniper Goggles for you. Then you don't even need to worry about stealth and can still Sneak Attack with reasonable consistancy.
" Or just skip the archetype and wait for/have a friend make Sniper Goggles for you. Then you don't even need to worry about stealth and can still Sneak Attack with reasonable consistancy."
How does sniper goggles avoid the need for stealth?
It doesn't it what it does is let you sneak attack at I believe any range which can give you huge penalties on your opponents spot checks to find you as you pick them off one by one.
Zomburs wrote: " Or just skip the archetype and wait for/have a friend make Sniper Goggles for you. Then you don't even need to worry about stealth and can still Sneak Attack with reasonable consistancy."
How does sniper goggles avoid the need for stealth?
I was refering to having the goggles in addition to the feat I mentioned, not on their own. Guess I should have been more specific at the end there. The sniper archetype increases the range you can make sneak attacks, but snipper goggles remove the range restriction entirely, so they're perfect for ranged rogues unless there is just something you absolutely must have something else in the eye slot. With the feat and the goggles, you can sneak attack anything vulnerable to precision damage at any range provided there are two allies adjascent to it, which generally isn't too hard to make happen.
Umm Roaming Shadow I may be missing something but I'm not sure Gang up actually allows you to get sneak attack at range. Its been debated before but it lacks anything allowing you to override the need for a melee weapon for flanking.
Specific overrides general, and the feat just says you are considered to be flanking, regardless of your own position (meaning you don't even need to be threatening), so long as there are two allies adjascent to the creature. While I believe that may not be RAI, that does seem to be what RAW says. Now, you don't get the +2 flanking bonus to attack because you're not making a melee attack, but by the wording of the feat, you are still considered to be flanking, regardless of your position, which is what you need for sneak attack.
Flanking
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
When in doubt about whether two characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two attackers' centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent's space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.
Exception: If a flanker takes up more than 1 square, it gets the flanking bonus if any square it occupies counts for flanking.
Only a creature or character that threatens the defender can help an attacker get a flanking bonus.
Creatures with a reach of 0 feet can't flank an opponent
Gang Up (Combat)
Prerequisites: Int 13, Combat Expertise.
Benefit: You are considered to be flanking an opponent if at least two of your allies are threatening that opponent, regardless of your actual positioning.
Normal: You must be positioned opposite an ally to flank an opponent.
Notice that Gang up doesn't change the melee attack requirement it only changes the positioning one.
Gang Up: Does this feat (page 161) allow you to flank a foe with ranged weapons?
The Gang Up feat allows you to count as flanking so long as two of your allies are threatening your opponent. The feat makes no mention of ranged attacks being included, and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks, ranged attacks do not benefit from this feat. (JMB, 8/13/10)
—Jason Bulmahn, 08/13/1
Also this from the ARG FAQ
Talonhawke wrote: Gang Up: Does this feat (page 161) allow you to flank a foe with ranged weapons?
The Gang Up feat allows you to count as flanking so long as two of your allies are threatening your opponent. The feat makes no mention of ranged attacks being included, and since flanking specifically refers to melee attacks, ranged attacks do not benefit from this feat. (JMB, 8/13/10)
—Jason Bulmahn, 08/13/1
Also this from the ARG FAQ
I stand corrected then. Thank you for the FAQ link. With the wording of the feat, I thought one would count as flanking without actually flanking in the same manner that firearms can resolve against Touch AC without actually being touch attacks, or like how some rogue archetypes allow you to treat a foe as flat footed without them actually being flat footed.
In that case, being a ranged rogue really is just a pain in the rear without snipper goggles, and still a pain even then, just slightly less.
If you really want to do it talk to your GM about a 3.5 feat whose name I can't remember but was in the PH2 it allowed you to ready a shot for when an ally attack an enemy if you did so the enemy was flat-footed against you.
Nicos wrote: wraithstrike wrote: Nicos I was not assuming the distraction was in play. I was just answering the general question. You get to use bluff to distraction so that the pseudo 360 vision is not in play. That allows you to find a spot to hide.
Generally speaking, assuming bluff is not being used to distract someone my previous statement holds.
Bluff is listed as one posibilty, the distractions are not restricted by it though. Le sigh. I was assuming no bluff was being involved. He did not ask me about the use of bluff so I did not include it.
Thank you all for all the information, even though I am dissapointed with how this skill works.
Hopefully it will be changed/fixed or at least made fun.
Essemtially, with the current stealth rules, once the battle has been joined, stealth and combat don't really mix except for Invisibility effects and special circumstances. Mundane stealth is mostly an out of combat utility, good for all sorts of non-combat purposes and getting the jump on enemies to start combat. The playtest rules revision for stealth linked in an above post, however, go a long way towards making stealth a viable combat tactic.
Zomburs wrote: Wow, this makes me want to reroll. It seems as if alot of rogue abilities are keyed towards being stealthed or flanking. Stealthed seems to be way harder than what its worth. Thats pretty disheartening. Actually using stealth is not hard at all, and there are many advanced class features/feats to increase it.
The stealth skill is about *remaining* unobserved when you would normally become observed by another (typically by their movement placing you in their line of sight).
It is not greater invisibility, however it can be far more reliable than it with proper investment.
The 3e wording in the SRD is not the best and the nice folks at Paizo would be well served at attempting to tackle it.
-James
The stealth skill itself isn't the problem. It's using it in the midst of combat is very difficult without a fair degree of specialization or special class features. Someone just trying to get by with having a high stealth skill is going to have a very hard time using stealth as part of their combat tactics more often than not. Though ducking around a corner (or other good sized solid object), using steath, and then "sniping" from the cover of the corner is perhaps a usable tactic. If your stealth is good enough, that one shot will catch them off guard for sneak attack (if within proper range), though one might have trouble still with that -20 penalty to stealth, though there are ways to get it down to -10, and someone with really good stealth might be able to work with that.
And while some may say "of course he knows your behind that cover" and so not be surprised, if you think about how the rules abstract, the stealth roll means that sure, he saw you duck behind it, but then he lost track of you. He doesn't know if your're still there or if you kept going, and there's likley more pressing concerns for his attention (like the party fighter, for instance). He can't see you, doesn't notice when you poke your head around, and then THWACK, there's a bolt in his kidney. Whether or not he realizes precisely where that bolt came is where "snipe" comes into play.
The problem with using cover is that unless its a low wall, cover for you means cover for your opponent, since line AB is the same as line BA if AB passes through a hard corner or cover then so does line BA.
Actually, for determining cover to and from ranged attacks, you choose one corner of the origin square to all four corners or the target square (except for larger creatures). You only compare all of your corners when making a melee attack. One can shoot around a corner without incident while still having cover from an opponent, because if the line of effect starts on the corner of the cover, it's not passing through a barrier or square that provides cover; the line starts at, not passes through.
Honestly, shooting around a wall/tree/whatever is a tried and true tactic of ranged combat, and it's well within the rules.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
