Rogue with Blur - How often can I stealth?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

After several searches, I can never find decent consensus on this topic.

Let's say I'm a rogue. I want to sneak attack!

Blur is cast on me. I now have concealment.

How often can I stealth for sneak attacks? Can I take a five foot, make a stealth check, then sneak attack every round?


Stealth has nothing to do with whether you can sneak attack or not. The only two conditions in which you get sneak attack is if your target is denied its dex bonus to AC or you flank them. This doesn't even extend to say 'denied dex bonus to AC against MY attacks,' but, rather, the target simply must be denied its dex bonus, period, or you flank them.

Quote:
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.


Nevertheless, if you succeed to hide from an opponent using concealment, you deny them their Dex bonus.

The question is, is a persistent source of concealment such as blur valid, and if so, when can it be used?


The only way to attack someone and immediately hide is the snipe rules.
So it cannot be done with melee attacks at all. Secondly I don't think either displacement or blur allow you to hide while being watched. Yes they grant concealment but there is no question of what square your in your oponemt knows exactly where you are. If you suddenly cannot see a blurred person the blur no longer has any effect.


You do not. You simply gain a miss chance if they try to target you and may attempt to stealth. Nothing about concealment denies an enemy their dex bonus.

Quote:

Concealment

To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment.

When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has concealment if his space is entirely within an effect that grants concealment. When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you, use the rules for determining concealment from ranged attacks.

In addition, some magical effects provide concealment against all attacks, regardless of whether any intervening concealment exists.

Concealment Miss Chance: Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. Make the attack normally—if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance d% roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack.

Concealment and Stealth Checks: You can use concealment to make a Stealth check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Stealth check.

Total Concealment: If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can't attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.

Ignoring Concealment: Concealment isn't always effective. An area of dim lighting or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision. Characters with low-light vision can see clearly for a greater distance than other characters with the same light source. Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Perception checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Stealth checks when not moving (even though opponents can't see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual or auditory clues).

Varying Degrees of Concealment: Certain situations may provide more or less than typical concealment, and modify the miss chance accordingly.

Please point it out for me if I missed it.


Blur would allow you to hide (as you have concealment) and move into a flanking position to get consecutive sneak attacks.
Normally stealth is part of a move action and you only get 1 sneak attack from attacking from stealth (your first attack from stealth if it hits would get SA damage, the following attacks wouldn't as stealth drops and you can be "seen") UNLESS one of the other conditions for SA are in play or you have greater invisibility.


Mojorat wrote:

The only way to attack someone and immediately hide is the snipe rules.

So it cannot be done with melee attacks at all.

Why not? Granted, the target would have to be near-blind not to spot you standing within striking distance. But you can try to hide. That's what the Blur does. And if the victim fails its Perception check, you get to Sneak Attack again. And again. And again.

Serves 'em right for not taking ranks in Perception.


Just because you successfully use stealth to make someone fail to notice you doesn't grant you sneak attack because it does nothing to their dex bonus and that's the trigger for sneak attack and not stealth. Pathfinder has no concept of facing sides and stealth explicitly states its impossible to use stealth while attacking.


Buri wrote:
Please point it out for me if I missed it.

I'm looking, but... you're right! There doesn't seem to be any rule that lets you Sneak Attack just because you're hidden. Which makes me wonder why Rogues exist at all - exactly when can they Sneak Attack securely?

Sczarni

Only one of conditions to actually be able to Stealth is covered by Blur spell, but opponents still have eye sight on you. In pathfinder rules opponents have all around sight vision so you cannot Stealth infront of them without cover. Some high level talents grant you the second condition however and then Stealthing on battlefield just might be possible.

Rogues have plenty of ways to land Sneak attacks if you search enough topics, resources and ways to do it.


VRMH wrote:
I'm looking, but... you're right! There doesn't seem to be any rule that lets you Sneak Attack just because you're hidden. Which makes me wonder why Rogues exist at all - exactly when can they Sneak Attack securely?

Flanking provides guaranteed sneak attack. Other than that there are several conditions and spells that deny opponents their dex bonus whether or not they actually have said bonus.

So, as a rogue, the trick is to either flank or confer these conditions somehow. There are a couple ways the rogue can 'one man flank' as well though that's at higher level play.


Malag wrote:

Only one of conditions to actually be able to Stealth is covered by Blur spell, but opponents still have eye sight on you. In pathfinder rules opponents have all around sight vision so you cannot Stealth infront of them without cover. Some high level talents grant you the second condition however and then Stealthing on battlefield just might be possible.

Rogues have plenty of ways to land Sneak attacks if you search enough topics, resources and ways to do it.

You can stealth with blur after attacking, but you must use a bluff check. Since you have concealment you are stealthing. However, like said above although you are steathing there is nothing in stealth that allows you to sneak attack.

Unless you use the blog alternate rules, stealthing in combat is pretty useless for a rogue, unless you are trying to run away or if you are just trying to save your arse because you are low on hps.

That said nearly every GM (that I know) and including me would house rule and allow sneak attack if you are stealthing at least for 1 attack.


VRMH wrote:
Buri wrote:
Please point it out for me if I missed it.
I'm looking, but... you're right! There doesn't seem to be any rule that lets you Sneak Attack just because you're hidden. Which makes me wonder why Rogues exist at all - exactly when can they Sneak Attack securely?

When they surprise their opponent, they get a free round to attack.

Sczarni

@Gignere
"You can stealth with blur after attacking, but you must use a bluff check." - Bluff check would by normal be at least standard action (Feint is example) so you can't Bluff check after attack and even if you could you cannot Stealth without cover still, that is you wouldn't remain stealthed long enough.

I do however understand your comments but rogue can deal with landing sneak attacks very well.


There's also a talent to treat surprise round initiative rolls to be a 20 though you can only make a ranged attack with that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I have discovered where the confusion stems from.

3.5 has the following text:

Quote:
If you're successfully hidden with respect to another creature, that creature is flat-footed with respect to you. That creature treats you as if you were invisible.

Pathfinder does not.


James Jacobs on the topic.


Umbral Reaver wrote:

After several searches, I can never find decent consensus on this topic.

Let's say I'm a rogue. I want to sneak attack!

Blur is cast on me. I now have concealment.

How often can I stealth for sneak attacks? Can I take a five foot, make a stealth check, then sneak attack every round?

The stealth skill is about remaining unobserved, not disappearing.

So if NPCA observes you, but NPCB has not then you could use stealth (as you have concealment via the blur spell) to remain unobserved by NPCB, but NPCA would be able to directly see you as long as NPCA retained line of sight to you.

If you blocked line of sight to NPCA, then you could attempt to use stealth to remain unobserved by NPCA when they regained line of sight to you.

-James

The Exchange

To the OP by the RAW any amount of concealment is required to stealth, I know the temptation is to say that a minimum of total concealment is required to stealth such as invisibility, however I have a hard time not believing that a rogue sneaking in dim or no light with a 20% miss chance doesn't have a chance to move around a stealth on someone. However the one sneak attack via stealth rule still applies a-la sniping. But however your example is a Blur spell and as such isn't an environmental type of concealment, it would be like using Hide in Plain sight to hide in ones own shadow so no go sorry.

Grand Lodge

It works with Nightmare Fist.


Mojorat wrote:
The only way to attack someone and immediately hide is the snipe rules.

You could also take a standard action to shoot and then move, taking a new stealth check with no penalty.


Buri wrote:

You do not. You simply gain a miss chance if they try to target you and may attempt to stealth. Nothing about concealment denies an enemy their dex bonus.

Please point it out for me if I missed it.

Quote:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.

You missed it. Also, if they're not aware of you, they're denied their dex bonus.

Grand Lodge

Nab Hellcat Stealth, and Blur is basically invisibility for you.


Aratrok wrote:
Mojorat wrote:
The only way to attack someone and immediately hide is the snipe rules.
You could also take a standard action to shoot and then move, taking a new stealth check with no penalty.

The OP seemed to specifically talk about melee attacking somone making a 5' step and Hiding. Which if your trying to use blur for your hide justification i dont belive is possible.

One problem with using Blur as your reason to justify hiding is that If the target cannot see you then Your blur has no effect. This means If you Hide they cant see you then the reason for the hide justification of blur cannot keep you hidden.

Its different from say obscuring mist because it doesnt cease to work the moment you hide.


I see no reason by RAW that prevents Blur from providing the concealment required.

With that said, I can see the flipside in that 'hey, that is where they generally are so they cannot hide'. Unfortunately for that, any form of 20% concealment can have that same answer.

The rules only require 20%. If we start looking at 'can they actually see me there' the answer is always 'yes' when it comes to 20%. Blur, fog, darkness is all 20%. Again, I see no reason by the rules to deny a person using blur the ability to stealth.

- Gauss

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

This is a stupid argument. If you can use Stealth successfully, then you can Sneak Attack. If you have concealment, you can use Stealth. Blur provides concealment. Therefore, if you are currently blurred and you use Stealth successfully, you can sneak attack. Buri, you're being ridiculous.


I actually have no issue with somone with 20% concealment hiding. the problem as i see it and perhaps articulated poorly is that. In order for blur to work because it is a visual based illusion the target has to see you. If you hide it doesnt work because they cannot see you. For the same reason Mirror image doesnt work if your invisible.

Grand Lodge

Stealth does not guarantee sneak attack, and sneak attack does not require stealth.

Now, stealth can create the conditions for sneak attack to apply, but that is where the relationship ends.

This is important to remember.


You also can not be observed when you try to stealth. You can make a bluff check to distract them however.

As for stealth and sneak attack it should be noted that sneak attack is not a function of stealth, but of a failed perception check. The idea that stealth leads to sneak attack is a flawed connection. The distinction is important because it is a failed perception check that causes you to be unaware of an opponent. As for pulling stealth off in the middle of combat a GM can still rule that the enemy is aware of you, and while RAW might not agree I think the GM still has a good point if you are standing directly in front of someone.


what about HIPS and spring attack? can´t you move from shadows, sneak, move back to shadow and hide?

Sczarni

Gauss wrote:


The rules only require 20%. If we start looking at 'can they actually see me there' the answer is always 'yes' when it comes to 20%. Blur, fog, darkness is all 20%. Again, I see no reason by the rules to deny a person using blur the ability to stealth.

- Gauss

Gauss, 20% is only on border of a fog. 50% is inside it or 10 feet away so it's not 20% everywhere. On borders of fog, visibility is somewhat clearer.

@Ismodai
The moment you get out of your Cover Stealth has failed I believe. There are also conditions of bright and normal light which prevent you from doing it in middle of battlefield.


Ismodai wrote:
what about HIPS and spring attack? can´t you move from shadows, sneak, move back to shadow and hide?

No, as soon as a potential observer has an unobstructed and un-obscured line of sight to you then you are seen by them.

Stealth is about maintaining being unseen/observed. You need to continue to have cover/concealment to have a chance at that.

As to having some concealment, note that an invisible creature immersed in water has merely concealment. Their form is plainly visible if they are not attempting to use stealth.

Blur is no different than trying to hide while invisible in water..

-James

Grand Lodge

Hellcat Stealth is better. You can use stealth in bright light whilst being observed.

Silver Crusade RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16

james maissen wrote:
Ismodai wrote:
what about HIPS and spring attack? can´t you move from shadows, sneak, move back to shadow and hide?

No, as soon as a potential observer has an unobstructed and un-obscured line of sight to you then you are seen by them.

Stealth is about maintaining being unseen/observed. You need to continue to have cover/concealment to have a chance at that.

As to having some concealment, note that an invisible creature immersed in water has merely concealment. Their form is plainly visible if they are not attempting to use stealth.

Blur is no different than trying to hide while invisible in water..

-James

The point isn't that you have to be completely hidden from sight, it's that the attacker doesn't know where the attack is coming from. That's why blur should work with Sneak Attack. I know the Stealth rules are screwed up, but saying that blur doesn't allow for Sneak Attack is just insane to me.


cartmanbeck wrote:


The point isn't that you have to be completely hidden from sight, it's that the attacker doesn't know where the attack is coming from. That's why blur should work with Sneak Attack. I know the Stealth rules are screwed up, but saying that blur doesn't allow for Sneak Attack is just insane to me.

Umm.. my point is that blur DOES allow you to sneak.

I don't think the Stealth rules are screwed up, just not understood and perhaps badly edited or worded in places. The overall concept is neither hard nor problematic... rather it's what people want to read in that's the problem there.

-James

Sczarni

The problem is indeed what people want to read.

Here is a hint how lots of things become clearer:

Read entire ruling, not parts of it.

Example 1:
If I cut out the "Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.", I can say that concealment is enough to use Stealth.

Example 2:
If I read fully it says "If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.", which is suprisingly completely different from the first example. Note that I am not quoting full Stealth ruling.

Blur does not give you Invisibility. If you do rule that you can Stealth with Blur only in home games you are nerfing other feats which give you this possibility and are making them highly useless.


Malag wrote:

The problem is indeed what people want to read.

Here is a hint how lots of things become clearer:

Read entire ruling, not parts of it.

Example 1:
If I cut out the "Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.", I can say that concealment is enough to use Stealth.

Example 2:
If I read fully it says "If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.", which is suprisingly completely different from the first example.

Blur does not give you Invisibility. If you do rule that you can Stealth with Blur only in home games you are nerfing other feats which give you this possibility.

Shrug not really, to get blur at a minimum you would need to spend gold and a standard action to buff. The only class that gets both blur and stealth is the bard (and one of the sorcerer bloodlines), and if you want to stealth with blur it costs one of your spells per day, and a standard actions and only for minutes at a time.

The feats that allow you to do something similar is still very valuable to those that can not cast blur, even for those that can it saves them a standard action, and a spell per day.


Malag wrote:


Blur does not give you Invisibility. If you do rule that you can Stealth with Blur only...

Of course not, however blur will satisfy the requirement to have cover/or concealment as it gives concealment.

The character using stealth still has to be unobserved to use stealth to maintain being unobserved... the blur spell just satisfies the maintaining concealment relative to a potential observer.

-James


Ismodai wrote:
what about HIPS and spring attack? can´t you move from shadows, sneak, move back to shadow and hide?

As soon as you leave your cover/concealment you are no longer hidden. That is why a lot of us were hoping for Paizo to make stealth rules that work in combat.


Martiln wrote:
Buri wrote:

You do not. You simply gain a miss chance if they try to target you and may attempt to stealth. Nothing about concealment denies an enemy their dex bonus.

Please point it out for me if I missed it.

Quote:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.
You missed it. Also, if they're not aware of you, they're denied their dex bonus.

Your last statement is blatantly false as it has zero support in the rules.

Also:

Quote:
Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty. It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.

So it is impossible to use sneak attack from stealth save the specific exception of sniping.


cartmanbeck wrote:
This is a stupid argument. If you can use Stealth successfully, then you can Sneak Attack. If you have concealment, you can use Stealth. Blur provides concealment. Therefore, if you are currently blurred and you use Stealth successfully, you can sneak attack. Buri, you're being ridiculous.

Blur does nothing to hide you from the square you're at or from someone seeing you taking up that square even if attacks against you miss 20% of the time. Even if you try to look at it logically, then logically, if no line of sight is broken then I can still see you and if I'm looking right at you you can not stealth unless you have some sort of Hide in Plain Sight ability.

Calling me ridiculous for simply stating what's in the rules is in itself ridiculous.


Umbral Reaver wrote:
James Jacobs on the topic.

See my quote about attacking. A rule that attacking and benefiting from stealth and a rule that stealth can not be used while attacking can not co-exist together.


Buri wrote:
Martiln wrote:
Buri wrote:

You do not. You simply gain a miss chance if they try to target you and may attempt to stealth. Nothing about concealment denies an enemy their dex bonus.

Please point it out for me if I missed it.

Quote:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.
You missed it. Also, if they're not aware of you, they're denied their dex bonus.

Your last statement is blatantly false as it has zero support in the rules.

Also:

Quote:
Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed, you take a –5 penalty. It's impossible to use Stealth while attacking, running, or charging.
So it is impossible to use sneak attack from stealth save the specific exception of sniping.

Sneak attacking while trying to use stealth and using it after you have used stealth are not the same thing.

I have seen this argument come up before, but "after" and "while" are at different places in the time continuum.

I can't talk and while remaining completely silent as an example, but I can talk after remaining silent. I just have to remember that talking breaks my silence.

In short it is not impossible to use sneak attack from stealth. This does make it impossible to use stealth while charging since charging is an attack, that also uses movement.

edit:The last sentence assumes you are trying to use stealth while moving.


Buri wrote:
Umbral Reaver wrote:
James Jacobs on the topic.
See my quote about attacking. A rule that attacking and benefiting from stealth and a rule that stealth can not be used while attacking can not co-exist together.

He actually disagrees with you.

James Jacobs wrote:


As far as I know that was not taken out deliberately. Rogues can still sneak attack creatures that haven't noticed the rogue, be it due to their blindness, the rogue being invisible, the rogue making a successful Stealth check, and so on.


I know he does. I read the quote. However, it makes zero sense to me.

Being blinded means you lose dex to AC so it makes sense for a rogue to get sneak attack there.


I think the idea which you expressed, but I disagree with is that you are stealthing the entire time you are stealthed. I see it as once you stealth the action is complete, but the modifier stays in place until you move or restealth.

As an example if I camouflage myself, and hide I am no longer making adjustments to stay hidden so whatever my stealth score is should stay the same, and if someone walks by and fails their perception check I should get a sneak attack. Once I do attack I am no longer hidden of course, thus stealth is broken, just like silence in my previous thread.

Now if I am trying to hide I can't expect to be able to make a stealth check while I am attacking someone. My actions would be obvious, and thus ruin the check.


The reason I don't think stealth auto-grants a sneak attack apart from the rules text about what qualifies an attack as a sneak attack and that stealth doesn't qualify either of those conditions is that to attack you need to make a quick, violent motion which is the very antithesis of what stealth is.

Even if you slowly get in place undetected the motions you need to make at the start of an attack motion such as a stab or swing are likely to make fabric rub, the gear you're carrying make some sort of noise, any armor to make noise, etc.

If you allow for sneak attack from stealth then you're hand waving several lead up conditions that can make such a thing highly improbable. For example, nothing in the rules text states that drawing a weapon makes noise but unsheathing a blade surely should make some noise in addition to those others I mentioned. Otherwise, you have to be sure to be far enough away that the target can't likely here you and this can force you to potentially perform a fairly well planned set up. Performing a sneak attack in the spur of the moment, as is the case 99% of the time, is highly improbable in this case especially if you've just finished an action that likely takes up both hands like picking a lock or disabling a trap where it'd make sense that your weapon would require some sort of stowing.

If I were revising the rules, I'd be okay with granting a reflex save to a creature that has failed to notice you thus far with the DC being your attack roll + 5, or some such, and saying that if they fail then they become the victim of a sneak attack. But, in the current iteration of the rules, you can't do it.


The rules do not disallow it at all, and as I said it is not stealth, but a failed perception check that sets you up for sneak attack. As an example I don't need to be stealth. You just have to fail to notice me. You being blind, as an example means you might not notice me, or if there are heavy perception penalties you won't notice.

If I am small creature, and you have been cursed that would work. The perception for noticing someone is 0. Most GM's don't make anyone roll for perception if stealth is not used, but the book does account for being able to automatically notice things.

A tiny creature causes a -12 to perception checks IIRC. If you are cursed with a penalty of -8 and you fail to make a 20 on your roll then you fail to reach 0. At that point you are unaware of me, and ripe for a sneak attack.

Why stealth, uh I mean lack of perception can lead to sneak attacks.

Are you going to argue that a character that is not trying to hide can sneak attack you, but one that is just not seen because of poor perception can sneak attack?


Quote:

Concealment and Stealth Checks

You can use concealment to make a Stealth check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Stealth check.
Quote:
If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth.

Ok...so it seems like you can use concealment from Blur to get stealthy and open someone up to a backstab...right? Wait...let's read on in the Stealth Skill description.

Quote:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. 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. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast.

I would rule that blur gives you a chance, as part of your move action, to use a stealth assuming you can get out of LOS. That's going to make it hard, if not impossible for you to get more than one sneak attack per round (or every other round).


Buri wrote:


Blur does nothing to hide you from the square you're at or from someone seeing you taking up that square even if attacks against you miss 20% of the time. Even if you try to look at it logically, then logically, if no line of sight is broken then I can still see you and if I'm looking right at you you can not stealth unless you have some sort of Hide in Plain Sight ability.

If the blurred character is observed, then you are right they cannot disappear using stealth (baring creating a distraction or a form of HiPS, etc).

However if they were unobserved, then they could use the concealment granted by blur to use stealth to remain unobserved by others.

-James

1 to 50 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Rogue with Blur - How often can I stealth? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.