Stealth Conundrum


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

There's something I am confused by. Let me present two scenarios and see if I can figure it out by the answers I get.

Scenario A:

NPC gulps a potion of Invisibility and steps around the corner to see a 30' hallway with a closed door at the end. The NPC decides to sneak down to the door. The NPC's Stealth modifier is 0 and the NPC takes 10.

On the other side of the closed door there is a PC standing guard. The door's sound modifier is +5. What is the target DC for the PC to perceive the NPC?

Before you read the next example, please write down your answer.

Scenario B:

Same as Scenerio A with the following exception:

After the NPC steps round the corner, the PC opens the door and stands guard. What is the target DC for the PC to perceive the NPC?

For both scenarios, ignore the distance modifiers.


I'm going from the perception page on PFSRD.
A is 35. 10 because of their stealth, +5 for door, +20 for invisible.
B is 30 because of stealth and invisible.

If you were thinking of the DC to hear a walking person, that's for if the person walking isn't using stealth.


Invisibility Spell Description wrote:


Of course, the subject is not magically silenced, and certain other conditions can render the recipient detectable (such as swimming in water or stepping in a puddle). If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving.

The way I see it, there are two ways to go about this:

Either the NPC gets the +20 bonus to "sight based" Stealth checks only. Thus the DC to hear them through the door is 15, the DC to hear "something" in the hall is 10, and the DC to actually find the NPC is in is 30.

Or, the "KISS" method: Invisibility says you get +20 to Stealth checks while moving, so you get +20 to Stealth checks while moving = DC 35 through the door and 30 when the door is open.

I think either of these rulings is reasonable, and I can even see being inconsistent on which you'll use depending on the situation. Sometimes you want to set the scene and put the players on edge, so their PCs hear sounds from things that may or may not be there and waiting to poke them in the kidneys. Other times you just want to get on with the ambush. In both cases, when the NPC inevitably pokes them in the kidneys, it would require a DC 30 perception check to avoid being flatfooted and take the other penalties associated with invisibility: Even if I know there's someone in the hall, even if I know what square they're in, I still suffer all the ill effects of fighting an opponent that I can't see.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Do you want the RAW or the RAI answer?

As Written, it is a 35 DC. Invisibility gives you a +20 and that's just that.

As Intended, it is a 15 DC. There's no reason invisibility would make you quieter.

Sczarni

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MurphysParadox wrote:

Do you want the RAW or the RAI answer?

As Written, it is a 35 DC. Invisibility gives you a +20 and that's just that.

As Intended, it is a 15 DC. There's no reason invisibility would make you quieter.

Invisibility makes it more difficult for the Guard to perceive you. Arguing intent in this instance is a slippery slope.

Your reasoning for a DC 15 check is, reasonable.

It would also be reasonable for me to say that creatures that primarily rely on sight; such as the Humanoid races, put so much emphasis on what they see, they don't utilize their other senses enough. You've heard the phrase "seeing is believing"?

In the case of invisible creatures it's not unreasonable to say that because they cannot be seen, they are much harder for Humanoids to detect.

Hence the reduced modifier for an invisible creature who is also moving...


MurphysParadox wrote:

Do you want the RAW or the RAI answer?

As Written, it is a 35 DC. Invisibility gives you a +20 and that's just that.

As Intended, it is a 15 DC. There's no reason invisibility would make you quieter.

is 15 your answer for just A or both A and B?

PRD wrote:

Invisibility

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

RAW seems to agree with you that invisibility does not make you quieter.

Sczarni

That's why arguing intent on this is difficult... It could be that all of those factors have been considered already; hence the 50% reduction in stealth bonus an Invisible creature receives if they move.

I say A = DC 35
and B = DC 30


Quote:

Invisibility

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

I think for this quote it's saying that if you cast a spell it still makes sound. Thing is the invisibility spell says +20 to stealth checks while moving, not just sight based stealth checks. So the boosted stealth against a perception check.

Who knows why it's to all types of stealth, maybe being under invisibility spell means you can focus more on the other stealth parts since you know you can't be seen. Since it has a stealth bonus for standing still and for moving you could say that the +20 is taking into account more than sight, since standing still is just sight. But whatever reason it's +20 to all while moving. And that means that it's his stealth against a perception check.
So RAW is +20 to all moving stealth checks, and to locate stealth it is an opposed perception check.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
Quote:

Invisibility

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

I think for this quote it's saying that if you cast a spell it still makes sound. Thing is the invisibility spell says +20 to stealth checks while moving, not just sight based stealth checks. So the boosted stealth against a perception check.

Who knows why it's to all types of stealth, maybe being under invisibility spell means you can focus more on the other stealth parts since you know you can't be seen. Since it has a stealth bonus for standing still and for moving you could say that the +20 is taking into account more than sight, since standing still is just sight. But whatever reason it's +20 to all while moving. And that means that it's his stealth against a perception check.
So RAW is +20 to all moving stealth checks, and to locate stealth it is an opposed perception check.

This, absolutely. Invisibility gives a bonus to stealth checks. Stealth covers both hiding and moving silently. Therefore, invisibility gives a bonus to moving silently and to hiding.

Why is this difficult?


A. The DC for A would be 15. 10 for Stealth (no bonus from invisibility since it's hearing based), +5 for the door. If the creature were deaf it would have no chance.
If the guard somehow had scent, then the DC would be the same, but the guard would have a +8 (so basically DC 7), up to a distance of 30 ft. assuming no prevailing wind (and with distance modifiers.)

B. The DC would be 10, 5 less than above because there's no intervening door. In this case, the guard would have a chance to notice a visible disturbance that indicates the presence of an intruder. According to Invisibility in the Glossary, the guard would have a DC 20 Perception check to notice a disturbance or get a hunch that there's an active invisible somewhere within 30 ft. It seems to just be a flat DC 20 no matter the target's stealth, though some other modifiers may still apply (distance, etc.).
To pinpoint the target, the DC is 10 (stealth check) + 20 (invisibility).

Typically just to have the guard detect someone, you're going to use the lowest DC, which is based on hearing (DC 15), though if they beat a DC 20 you could also describe them seeing a disturbance as well as hearing a sound, and if they manage to beat 30, they know the square the target is in (until it moves, of course).

Looking over some of the Perception DCs I'm wondering what they were thinking. In 3.5 the DC to hear a conversation was 0, with details being +10. Here it seems to be a DC 0 for the details... Seriously, someone 100 feet away can hear the details of your conversation by paing no special attention at all (DC 10)? Are we chalking this up to yet another 'magical comet' passing overhead and altering the world?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's difficult because it doesn't make sense to them, so they are trying to find something that makes sense. They feel that it shouldn't apply since it's not sight based, so they are trying to find rules that support something they have an easier time believing. I don't know how a halfling could grapple a huge dragon, but if his CMB succeeds he can. You just need to accept that rules say one thing, regardless of how much sense it makes in our world.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Quote:

Invisibility

The ability to move about unseen is not foolproof. While they can't be seen, invisible creatures can be heard, smelled, or felt.

I think for this quote it's saying that if you cast a spell it still makes sound. Thing is the invisibility spell says +20 to stealth checks while moving, not just sight based stealth checks. So the boosted stealth against a perception check.

Who knows why it's to all types of stealth, maybe being under invisibility spell means you can focus more on the other stealth parts since you know you can't be seen. Since it has a stealth bonus for standing still and for moving you could say that the +20 is taking into account more than sight, since standing still is just sight. But whatever reason it's +20 to all while moving. And that means that it's his stealth against a perception check.
So RAW is +20 to all moving stealth checks, and to locate stealth it is an opposed perception check.

The link you provided on perception links to this:

OGC wrote:
Invisibility makes a creature undetectable by vision, including darkvision.

Nowhere does it say Invisibility has any effect on the sound being created nor is there any suggestion this applies strictly to spell casting.

Dark Archive

Don't forget the +3 for being 30' away. The DC is 15-18 depending on how close to the door the target is when the PC notices.


Genuine wrote:

... Invisibility gives a bonus to stealth checks. Stealth covers both hiding and moving silently. Therefore, invisibility gives a bonus to moving silently and to hiding.

Why is this difficult?

It's not difficult, it's just wrong. Invisibility even specifically states that it doesn't make you harder to hear or smell.

There's also precedence for sight and hearing based Perception checks. For instance, if you're Deafened, you automatically fail Listen-based Perception checks, if Blinded, sight-based ones. Being Blinded or Deafened also applies an addition -4 to opposed Perception checks in addition to automatically failing their respectively-based checks.


@Pizza Lord, where in the invisibility spell does it say that you don't get a bonus to hearing based? Or only a bonus to sight based? Or that you can ignore the creatures stealth check for detecting them via perception.
I know it doesn't really make sense to us, but the Pathfinder world isn't our world and not all of our real life rules translates to that world.


@N N 959, I was using spell casting as an example, something with verbal components. Or a gun going off, or removing your armor check penalty. But it says a +20 while moving, not qualifiers. And so if they are using stealth under the invisibility spell, they get that +20 while moving.
That same page that you got your reference has a table right there that says, using stealth is stealth+20 and a door is +5 to that.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Behold the Pandora's Box that was opened when hide and move silently were made into 1 skill.


Okay, so it was brought up the DC 20 for a hunch, I'd say 25 through the door. But that is a hunch, but it could be just like when you're paranoid, or waiting so long you start to imagine things. It doesn't mean you know there is something there, just a feeling that something might be there. So it depends on how you role play off of a hunch. I wouldn't qualify that as fully perceiving the NPC, you have no proof behind it. Thus I didn't include it in my answers and view.


The Human Diversion wrote:
Behold the Pandora's Box that was opened when hide and move silently were made into 1 skill.

Hide and Move Silently aren't the problem. It's Listen and Spot that are the problem, and merging the skills isn't the issue even there, it's not distinguishing between the kinds of checks so they can have different modifiers applied. No one gets confused by the Monk's High Jump ability not effecting tumbling even though Jump and Tumble were merged because the different applications of Acrobatics are kept distinct.


Chess Pwn wrote:
@N N 959, I was using spell casting as an example, something with verbal components.

Okay, then I misunderstood, I thought you meant spell casting as an exhaustive list. My bad.


No problem N N 959, I realized it wasn't clear to you, so I don't mind explaining my point. Also don't mind if I end up wrong on this, I'm just sharing my opinion and providing the support for that opinion.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's a valid concern that invisibility shouldn't make you harder to detect by sound. The problem however, was created by the fact that hide and move silently were rolled into stealth, and that spot and listen (and search though not relevant here) were rolled into one.

RAW, invisibility makes you harder to hear because the mechanics of the spell say a flat bonus to stealth.

As a GM, it would be entirely reasonable for you to say that it doesn't make you harder to hear and thus the perception check to hear them remains unaffected altogether. Of course, this also sets a precedent for adjusting other things which have similar sorts or problems...which leads to a long road of lots of changes or just saying to hell with and using it as is because it simplifies the system.


Funny thing about perception is that it's not 3.5 anymore. There is no "seeing" or "hearing" skills. It's just perception.

Silver Crusade

MurphysParadox wrote:

Do you want the RAW or the RAI answer?

As Written, it is a 35 DC. Invisibility gives you a +20 and that's just that.

As Intended, it is a 15 DC. There's no reason invisibility would make you quieter.

Since you're invisible, you can focus all of your stealthiness on being quieter, hence the +20 from invisibility on any stealth check.


There is still hearing, there is still seeing. Yes, it is a poor mechanics choice to have them balled into one (IMO, since there are many creatures who have keen hearing and not sight, or keen sight and not hearing, or get bonuses or penalties for either in low-light, darkness, or daylight conditions). Even so, by looking at conditions, such as Blinded or Deafened, we see that game rules do in fact differentiate between sight-based perception checks and listen-based perception checks.

If you can't see someone, you can't read their lips or see the symbol on their armor, no matter how keen your hearing is or whether you have scent or not, regardless of your Perception score.

Similarly, just because Jump, Tumble, and Balance were rolled into Acrobatics doesn't mean that every bonus or penalty to one instance applies to another.

An invisible, inaudible, immobile plate of spoiled food concealed under a napkin on your plate can be detected with a Perception check while blindfolded in a dark room with harpies singing (though possibly with a distraction penalty) with the same difficulty as if you were just sitting staring at the napkin and wondering what might be under it.


Yes, but what is happening in the OP's scenario? A guard is trying to perceive the NPC. I'm saying that he's using all his senses. I'm also saying the NPC is using all his abilities to perform the stealth he rolled. Rules are a stealth is countered by a perception check, and invisibility spell says you get a +20 on moving stealth checks.

So for whatever reasons it may be described as, it's a perception against the boosted stealth check. If he was saying he was only looking for someone and was blind he'd have penalty. If he said he was listening and was deaf he'd have the penalty. But if he's trying to perceive with all senses then as long as his perception beats their stealth he knows they are there, else he fails and doesn't.

I'd also say the active guard would get to roll the perception to see if he has a hunch, but rules don't cover what to do with a hunch.


PF combined some skills but RAI is that sound and sight do matter. If you.like we can FAQ it but I am sure it will lead to them making a distinct difference in how you perceive someone.


I think the answer to B lies in 2 different actions.

1) Does the guard notice the door opening
2) Does he see the person stealthing about

While the first will be easier depending on the situation, stealth does not muffle the sound of the door. Note that if the door is locked or has a creaking sound due to lack of maintenance, it could be very easy to notice.

As for noticing the person itself, it will be harder. Because a door opens (depends on type of door and situation), it is possible it may open due to uneven surface or wind or other explanations so if the guard hears the door he should be on his guard and may be given a bonus on his check because he is expecting something.

It all depends on the actual situation, type of door, room/location, maintenance of door...


In scenario B, the PC opens the door, not the NPC. The examples are meant to determine if RAW gives me a better chance to perceive an invisible creature when sight is not involved.


The stealth check does not change because the PC opens the door. However, the guard may very well notice the door opening and may stumble unknowingly on the PC depending on positions when he goes to investigate (providing he notices the door opening which is not part of the stealth of the PC).

Opening the door does not give the guard an actual circumstance bonus but I remember clearly there being an up to +20 circumstance check when a guard was spotting around after specific things like finding a dead body or after an alarm was rang in older D&D books.

There are no mention of such things in RAW of either perception and stealth for PF but it would not be a far call to allow it.


Chillsabre wrote:
The stealth check does not change because the PC opens the door. However, the guard may very well notice the door opening and may stumble unknowingly on the PC depending on positions when he goes to investigate (providing he notices the door opening which is not part of the stealth of the PC).

The PC is the guard. Reread the scenarios.


Whether the PC or NPC roles are reversed, the result is the same. PCs and NPCs use the same rules for using skills it makes no difference.

Stealth check result is 10, +20 for moving around in stealth with invisbility. The only thing is if the door is opened, the +5 does not apply.


Chess Pwn wrote:

Yes, but what is happening in the OP's scenario? A guard is trying to perceive the NPC. I'm saying that he's using all his senses. I'm also saying the NPC is using all his abilities to perform the stealth he rolled. Rules are a stealth is countered by a perception check, and invisibility spell says you get a +20 on moving stealth checks.

So for whatever reasons it may be described as, it's a perception against the boosted stealth check. If he was saying he was only looking for someone and was blind he'd have penalty. If he said he was listening and was deaf he'd have the penalty. But if he's trying to perceive with all senses then as long as his perception beats their stealth he knows they are there, else he fails and doesn't.

I'd also say the active guard would get to roll the perception to see if he has a hunch, but rules don't cover what to do with a hunch.

Being deaf has certain rules and here, if the PC standing guard was deaf, he would get a penalty on the opposed role because he still has his other senses. Perception is the use of all senses and the deafened condition includes this.

Deafened: A deafened character cannot hear. He takes a –4 penalty on initiative checks, automatically fails Perception checks based on sound, takes a –4 penalty on opposed Perception checks, and has a 20% chance of spell failure when casting spells with verbal components.

Now in this situation, he would certainly not hear the person stealthing on the other side of the door since only sound is involved but if he opens the door he can use his other senses.


Chillsabre wrote:
Whether the PC or NPC roles are reversed, the result is the same. PCs and NPCs use the same rules for using skills it makes no difference.

It makes a difference who is opening the door.


Chess Pwn said wrote:
Okay, so it was brought up the DC 20 for a hunch, I'd say 25 through the door. But that is a hunch, but it could be just like when you're paranoid, or waiting so long you start to imagine things. It doesn't mean you know there is something there, just a feeling that something might be there. So it depends on how you role play off of a hunch. I wouldn't qualify that as fully perceiving the NPC, you have no proof behind it.

In the glossary under invisibility it states what the DC 20 Perception check does:

"A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check." The hunch part comes next with "something's there."

By this, RAW, I'd say you are aware something is there, not just "something might be there." Though I'd be a fan of RPing random stealth checks if a PC is actually on guard duty to make the player feel paranoid, or houseruling that a significant failure on a perception check gives false positives away from the stealthed/invisible creature.


Arguably RAW the Perception DC for an invisible creature using stealth is DC 20 + Stealth + any other mods. You also get a +20 on your stealth check for being invisible on top of the base DC of 20. This would make your invisible take 10 stealth check 50 before any other mods were factored in.

http://paizo.com/prd/glossary.html


Ninja are you referring to the DC 20 check to notice something's there or to Pinpoint? (or both?)


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

Has anyone else noticed that "You can move up to half your normal speed and use Stealth at no penalty," while only Stealthed, but if you are also invisible, you get a -5 for moving at half your speed?


stealth wrote:
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth.

so basically, the person is invisible, but if he makes a loud enough noise, the PC is aware of it. Stealth in general only applies to sight anyway, in general you don't roll stealth to stop people from smelling you for instance. if someone can see you, your noticed instantly, no stealth roll, if someone can hear you, the same thing happens. The noise isn't aided by stealth rolls, so standard hearing DCs.

P.S. stealth is left VERY open to GM interpretation.


Krith wrote:
Ninja are you referring to the DC 20 check to notice something's there or to Pinpoint? (or both?)

The DC 20 check to notice something is there, which is the base for using perception against an invisible creature.


Bandw2 wrote:
The noise isn't aided by stealth rolls, so standard hearing DCs.
Stealth wrote:
This skill covers hiding and moving silently.

I learned my Stealth rules from the great Shadowlord himself, may his path go ever shrouded and that he may grace his followers to go unseen.


I read that differently:

"A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack."

This to me is one roll at DC 20 to notice the invisible creature, not a base for the modifiers. If you add in modifiers, that statement becomes completely false, since you always would either be not moving or doing something, you would very rarely use a DC 20 as your check.

I read it as the check to notice and then a second check to pinpoint as a "hunch" and pinpointing a creature are two completely different things.

"It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity."

Not sure if this is what you meant, but I don't read this, RAW, as adding any modifiers on the initial DC 20 "hunch" check, only as modifiers to the pinpoint check (which would be a normal perception check for whatever the invisible creature is doing with +20 to the DC and then all the rest of the modifiers).


one doesn't need to accurately aim with alchemist's fire.
...
aka, light them on fire problem solved.


Krith wrote:

I read that differently:

"A creature can generally notice the presence of an active invisible creature within 30 feet with a DC 20 Perception check. The observer gains a hunch that “something's there” but can't see it or target it accurately with an attack."

This to me is one roll at DC 20 to notice the invisible creature, not a base for the modifiers. If you add in modifiers, that statement becomes completely false, since you always would either be not moving or doing something, you would very rarely use a DC 20 as your check.

I read it as the check to notice and then a second check to pinpoint as a "hunch" and pinpointing a creature are two completely different things.

"It's practically impossible (+20 DC) to pinpoint an invisible creature's location with a Perception check. Even once a character has pinpointed the square that contains an invisible creature, the creature still benefits from total concealment (50% miss chance). There are a number of modifiers that can be applied to this DC if the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity."

Not sure if this is what you meant, but I don't read this, RAW, as adding any modifiers on the initial DC 20 "hunch" check, only as modifiers to the pinpoint check (which would be a normal perception check for whatever the invisible creature is doing with +20 to the DC and then all the rest of the modifiers).

There is no second check to pinpoint, it's all one check.

DC 20 to even know something is there, beat it by another 20 to know what square it's in.

DC 40 is around their standard for "practically impossible" in other areas of the rules as well.


Krith wrote:
This to me is one roll at DC 20 to notice the invisible creature, not a base for the modifiers. If you add in modifiers, that statement becomes completely false, since you always would either be not moving or doing something, you would very rarely use a DC 20 as your check.

The thing is the check is a DC 20, and then is modified by the modifiers listed under "Perception DC Modifier". So it's a DC 20 to notice them, -20 to that if the invisible person is in combat or speaking, so DC 0, which makes sense because if they're talking it's obvious that someone is there. If the invisible person if going half speed, it'd DC 15 to notice that something is there. If the invisible person is using stealth then it replaces the DC with their stealth check +20.

This is what it means, why else would there be a perception DC modifier table for Invisible creatures if it wasn't modifying a DC? and what DC is listed in this entry? A DC 20 to notice, 40 to pinpoint.

This also makes it work just like we'd expect invisible but not stealthing? A DC 20 modified by what you're doing. If you are stealthing, it's your stealth check, modified by the invisibility spell, which is the same values as in the table. Stealth check +20. It even has there door part for a +5.


Krith wrote:
Not sure if this is what you meant, but I don't read this, RAW, as adding any modifiers on the initial DC 20 "hunch" check, only as modifiers to the pinpoint check (which would be a normal perception check for whatever the invisible creature is doing with +20 to the DC and then all the rest of the modifiers).

The thing about this statement is that the pinpointing is an addition to the DC. It's only ever talking about 1 DC, so the modifiers are to that DC. It's DC 20 and modifiers for the hunch. DC 20 + 20 and modifiers for a pinpoint.


Atarlost wrote:
The Human Diversion wrote:
Behold the Pandora's Box that was opened when hide and move silently were made into 1 skill.
Hide and Move Silently aren't the problem. It's Listen and Spot that are the problem, and merging the skills isn't the issue even there, it's not distinguishing between the kinds of checks so they can have different modifiers applied. No one gets confused by the Monk's High Jump ability not effecting tumbling even though Jump and Tumble were merged because the different applications of Acrobatics are kept distinct.

Of all the posts on this topic, I find this to be the most helpful and illustrative of the problem.

It's nonsensical that Invisibility has an effect on Stealth if the perceiver isn't using sight to perceive the target. Nor does Inviso provide any ability to conceal sound or smell. Yet, I think everyone agrees that with the door open in Scenario B, the NPC gets the +20 Stealth benefit.

As several posters have noted, the game does contemplate Perception checks based on specific senses, but I think Atarlost nails it when he suggests the inherent problem is that the rules don't give us a bright line examples of when to apply which type of Perception check.

Added to the quandary is the word choice and agreement on terms. I asked what it takes to "perceive" the NPC. I chose that word on purpose. But it calls into question what it means to perceive something. The Inviso rules try to address that with a concept of a "hunch", but if I have scent, I can detect you as easily as I might see you if you were not Inviso. So why can't I roll to see if I can smell you without scent?

But that leads to the idea it's easier to detect the person with the door closed than with it open. In real life, this might actually be true. For most people, if we can use our eyes, we tend to focus on that information source to the determine of others. But realism isn't really a basis for understanding RAW.

IMO, with the door closed, the DC is going to be 15+NPC's to simply hear someone in the hallway. Inviso provides no benefit. With the door open and using your eyes, Inviso gets us to 30. If the players were to close their eyes and indicate focus on sound, it's only a DC Stealth vs Perception to hear something. But that just tells you something is in the hall...you won't know where, and I'd say the PC is blind for the round.

Thanks to those who posted.


I still think that the DC 15 to hear someone is if they are not using stealth. Otherwise one should always just listen for people since a 15 is super easy to beat as a guard. A lv 1 with a wis mod of 1 with class skill perception can take ten to hit that 15. Now that would defeat stealth. How could anyone stealth anywhere with this rule? No one could sneak in anywhere without the guards knowing. I'd blindfold all my guards if they just needed that 10 or 15 to know someone was there that shouldn't be.

Perception skill says that the DC to notice, I feel this is the same as perceive, someone using stealth is their stealth check. And Invisibility gives a +20 to moving stealth. As this is the rules forum this is the rules. If you want to run it differently that's fine, but this is the rule.


Chess Pwn wrote:
I still think that the DC 15 to hear someone is if they are not using stealth.

In my examples, the NPC has a Stealth Modifier of 0 and was Taking 10 on stealth. So the DC to hear the NPCS was Stealth + Door = 15.


Okay, I didn't realize that part, that was my misinterpreting what you meant. But still, rules would say that invisibility spell gives you a +20 to stealth checks while moving. Regardless of if it makes sense or not that's to all checks by the wording.

1 to 50 of 205 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Stealth Conundrum All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.