|
Greetings all...
There is much disagreement in our group over the interpretation over how being alone in a room allows one to remain hidden when someone else walks in the room.
This is involving how some people are interpreting the errata from the 5th -6th printing which clarifies Stealth and movement by saying:
"When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment."
Now, the problem arose when the Rogue in our party was alone in a room and decided they wanted to hide in a shadow (concealment) with Stealth. When the rest of us finally made it into the room, the rogue decided to move across the room to another shadow. The GM informed everyone that they could not see the Rogue while doing this. The one PC with Darkvision protested and, siting the rule from the core book that states that creatures cannot use shadows for concealment against creatures with Darkvision: ""An area of dim lighting or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision." (pg 197)."
The group became split on this interpretation. Some people felt that (1) since he was alone in the room, he actually had COVER against the rest of the party via the walls of the room separating he and the party, and (2) since he started his round "using Stealth", then he automatically keeps it, even though his cover is gone, and therefore everyone has to make a Perception check.
The other members in our group felt that when you remove the condition of cover or concealment that is being used to base your Stealth roll, you lose the condition of being hidden and thus, need to find a new way to Stealth.
Now, the real problem here exists because of the way that the Pathfinder rules have chosen to word the description for Stealth vs. the way they were worded in 3.x. Basically, the replacement of "You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. (PHB 3.5)" with "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.(PF)". Some people are interpreting this as meaning that in Pathfinder, observation is the only prerequisite to using Stealth and that cover and concealment only need to be considered "in most cases".
Aside from these two references, can anyone provide us with OTHER references from the rules that state clearly whether cover or concealment are necessary in order to make a stealth check and KEEP it once that element (cover/concealment) is removed.
Thanks.
I think this is sort of a GM's call. If a character is "hiding" by being in the dark, but otherwise simply standing there, anyone with sufficient range of darkvision should see them without any check required.
But if a character is laying prone, for example, and covered by a cloak of roughly the same color as the ground (think LotR movie), I'd allow a stealth check. The individual with darkvision would see the lump on the ground, but if a lump is not out of the ordinary (natural cavern ground f/x), then he wouldn't suspect anything unless he makes his Perception check.
Basically, you don't have darkness-based concealment from characters that can see in the dark. But hiding in a way that seeing that person doesn't automatically foil being hidden should require a check.
Stealth is countered by perception.
Stealth is moving without detection by sight or noise.
Perception is detecting things/people by noise or sight.
Case A: As long as the party and the rogue are in different rooms there is no line of sight. Detection by sight is impossible. The rogue can use stealth to move around without noise and the party can use perception to hear the rogue.
Case B: As soon as the party enters the room with the rogue they have a line of sight and can use perception to detect the rogue by sight. The perception check is an automatic success if the rogue is not hidden or invisible. Then you roll a stealth check vs. perception. 'Hidden' is a not documented condition that effects a player if he uses stealth and if all prerequisites for stealth are given (cover or concealment).
In a room without furniture, smoke, etc. are shadows the only possibility to get concealment. Darkvision, lights etc. counter shadows so the rogue is visible in most cases.
I hope that helps a little ..
I don't believe the situation is adequately covered by RAW, and would require a GM ruling.
Personally, I most likely would have still required a Perception check on the part of the character with darkvision to notice the Rogue, but I would have given him a large situational bonus that would make it unlikely that he would fail.
My rationale? A psychological phenomenon called "selective attention". Google "the door study" or "invisible gorilla" if you're interested.
It's unlikely that the character with darkvision would overlook the Rogue (assuming he was only using shadows to hide) but not totally impossible.
Assuming the rogue was only using shadows inside the room to hide I would have the dwarf automatically see him as the shadows do not inhibit the dwarf's sight. To the dwarf the rogue is essentially just standing in the corner of the room.
If you have no issues with 3PP's you should pick up Rogue Glory (Drop Dead Studios), it clarifies a lot of what you are inquiring about. The product also brings the Rogue more in line with the other Core classes (power wise) and has been given a 5 star rating if I remember correctly. We use it with our games and have not had any problems to date.
Anybody else wondering why the rogue is hiding from the party? :p
That being said, I personally like Torms scenario. Its also likely that the rogue in that situation would be doing something to hide from the character with darkvision other than just standing in the corner in "plain" sight. i.e. the rogue knows the character has dark vision, and thus, knows that in order to hide from her, the rogue will need more than just the shadow. Kneeling in the corner and covering up with the cloak that is similar in color to the walls? That might do it.
(1) since he was alone in the room, he actually had COVER against the rest of the party via the walls of the room separating he and the party,
The rogue actually did have cover from the party while he was in the room by himself. However, the momment the party walked into the room with him that went away and he will need some other circumstance to provide cover/concealment for Stealth.
At that point he was using "shadows" to hide. That is all well and good, until someone with DV walks into the room. When the guy with DV walks in he will see the rogue, unless there is some other source of cover/concealment that is able to obstruct his vision. It is important to distinguish between those with DV and those without it. The rogue can still hide in the shadows, and he can still successfully avoid detection from the majority of the party, only the guy with DV will be able to see him immediately. Again, that is unless the rogue had some other source of cover/concealment to obstruct the DV and remain under Stealth.
and (2) since he started his round "using Stealth", then he automatically keeps it, even though his cover is gone, and therefore everyone has to make a Perception check.
Everyone except the guy with DV has to make a Perception check. This is not from the cover, that went away when the party walked in; this is due to the fact that he is maintaining Stealth within an area of shadow or dim ligh that grants him on going concealment. However, the guy with DV is not impaired by the concealment granted by shadow and therefore can see the rogue standing there as easily as you could when you walk into a brightly lit room.
When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment.
This rules selection doesn't really apply to your situation. This applies to situations where a rogue calculates risk and chooses the best possible momment to sneak between hiding places. In your situation the party simply walked in on the rogue removing all choice and calculation he had in the process.
He did start his turn using stealth and hiding in shadow so he keeps his stealth roll against anyone who is affected by the concealment granted from shadows. However, the guy with DV isn't affected, he can see just fine, so if a perception check is indeed needed the DC will be against a person standing in the open, which is a DC 0. That of course will be +1 for every 10 feet between them.
Perception DC:
Notice a visible creature - DC 0Modifiers:
Distance to the source, object, or creature - DC +1/10 feet
...
::EDIT:: Does this rogue happen to have Hide in Plain Sight? Does he have some magical ability or item that provides concealment or invisibility? If so, that would change circumstances. Also, he may have it and the party may not know, which could be why the GM made that call even though a guy with DV walked into the room.