Hide in Plain Sight and Cover - Concealment


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Here is an example scenario.

A Rogue with Hide in Plain Sight for Urban environment. He is in a room, 20x20. This room is completely empty. Walls are blank, room normally lit, (not to bright).

With him in this room there is one other person. He is facing an enemy. They are directly facing each other in the centre of the room. They are eye to eye.

Now, in this situation, can a Rogue use his Hide in Plain Sight ability, with a successful Stealth check vanish completely from view? No Bluff checks or anything. Just use HiPS to hide.

The rule states that he can Stealth, even while being observed. However, does a Rogue still require Cover and Concealment to complete this action as part of a Stealth check?

I've seen a read a few conflicting arguments in these forums about this which are related it to a Shadowdancer. I'm only interested in the Rogues ability.

NOTE: This is like the Ranger's ability. However the Ranger also has Camouflage. With Camouflage, he doesn't need Cover or Concealment.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

You will get a lot of variation on this.

Some people want the Stealth skill to be a video game kind-of "Poof!" you're invisible sort of thing. Some people don't. Many are torn in the middle somewhere. And the rules are a bit unclear.

Here's my take:

First, the rogue HiPS is not a free Invisibility skill all the time. The rogue must pick a terrain from the ranger's Favored Terrain list. In your example, you picked Urban terrain. Fine.

The real question is, WHY does the rogue need a special terrain? If all he is doing is standing there like your scenario and magically becoming invisible, then what difference does the terrain make? If it really is the video game "Poof!" ability, then shouldn't a rogue standing eye to eye with this enemy in the 20x20 room be just as good at going "Poof!" if he were in a 20x20 clearing in the woods, or a 20x20 cave, or just out in a field or in the desert or on a boat at sea?

Really, if it's just "Poof! - now you can't see me!" then it works anywhere.

So why the terrain?

Here's why:

Pathfinder SRD, Skills, Stealth wrote:
Breaking Stealth 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.

That last bolded part is critical. The rogue MUST end his turn in cover or concealment or he will be immediately visible to anyone capable of observing him.

So what good is HiPS?

Note the part of the same quote that I italicized. In order to use Stealth this turn, you must START your turn with Stealth. If you don't start your turn with stealth, you can't even use it this turn. Sure, you could run off to hide behind something, find cover or concealment, and make a Stealth check - but of course, your enemy watches you do that and knows exactly where you went. You could create a diversion and try it and maybe he won't know exactly where you went. Either way, that pretty much ends your turn.

So HiPS lets you start your turn "in Plain Sight", as the name says. You can make a Stealth check (which would not be possible without HiPS) and then move to where you can end your turn with cover or concealment. In an "Urban" terrain, that means doorways, alleys, behind corners of buildings, up on the roof, hiding behind crates or barrels or wagons or vendor stalls or anything else you find cluttering urban streets.

Your rogue in the empty room has ABSOLUTELY ZERO urban terrain to give him cover or concealment, so there is no way he can end his turn with cover or concealment, so he will end his turn being totally visible and observed. Period.

Up to this point, this has been RAW and some fairly simple deductions for RAI.

Now to the variance: the rest of this is up to each GM and you'll get many different answers. Here's mine: Can you use your HiPS long enough to Sneak Attack, even though you know you'll be visible and observed at the end of your turn?

For me, the answer is no. If you cannot find some way to end your turn with cover or concealment, that means there is not enough of your terrain features (in this case, Urban) for you to even attempt the skill. In a clear, open room like you described, with no "Urban" features of any kind, there is nothing the rogue can use to even attempt a HiPS check. Now, if the room had tables, chairs, other furnishings, anything that he might be able to use to his count as "Urban terrain", then I would allow it. He uses his terrain, vanishes, Sneak Attacks, and ends his turn visible and observed. Or he uses his terrain, vanishes, and ends his turn with cover or concealment and remains hidden.


I agree with DM-Blake. On all counts. Even the part he admits will have variance because it isn't covered by the rules.


I'd like to ask a slight variation on this:

What if the favored terrain is:
Water (above and below the surface)

The rogue and his foe are flying above a large lake.

How do we justify and enable the use of Hide in Plain Sight in this case?


I think a lot of the headaches involving stealth revolve around the apparently self-contradictory text of the Stealth Skill itself.
It says the following in consecutive sentences:

Stealth wrote:

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

2) Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.

3) 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.

Okay, so if I'm observing someone with my sense of hearing, can they use stealth? i.e. what qualifies as most creatures for 2)?

If finding cover or concealment is sufficient for Stealth, then why would I bother to create a diversion and move quickly?

If this is implying that a diversion is needed in addition to cover or concealment (ie, running behind a wall for a round or two isn't enough), then MOST of the tables I've been at which have involved stealth in combat have been run significantly incorrectly.

In connection to the above, does an Improved Invisible person also require a diversion every round they wish to reenter stealth (after making a non-sniping attack)?


Thank you DM_Blake!

This is exactly what I thought the rule was. I'm GMing a game and I had this very argument. The point of view from this person was, 'Hide in Plain Sight' means that you are hiding in plain sight. The name says it all.

Basically the situation was a head to head fight. No cover or concealment. At the start of the round, the character would Stealth right in front of his enemy and HiPS. Then the character can apply a heap of Sneak Attack dice. This would occur every round for every combat in the urban environment.

I explained that HiPS means you need to find cover or concealment, eg a curtain, while being observed. Make the Stealth check and your done. If you didn't have HiPS, then you couldn't hide behind the curtain as you are being observed.

They need to make some of these rules more clear, as people interpret them differently. For cases like this, I thought common sense would kick in as you apply it to a real situation.


The biggest issue I have is that seemingly no matter how you rule it, it would still be very unrealistic unless it was considered to be a supernatural ability.

Nothing prevents a person from being observed without concealment or distraction. That said, I'd agree that that one would still have to end in concealment/cover for stealth to work. Explanation-wise, I'd probably call it a supernatural ability rather than an extraordinary one.


I'm not convinced this is how Stealth works.

Many, many times I hear something like this from a GM:

"The enemy attacks you (<is visible and observed>) and then spends a move action to walk into the nearby fog (<concealment>). He makes his Stealth Check... Roll Perception if you want to be aware of him. If you fail to perceive him, he's in Stealth and will be able to Sneak Attack you next round."

In the above posts, it's being claimed that despite walking into the fog, he cannot use Stealth because he did not first create a diversion. (or otherwise enable the use of stealth, such as with your reading of HiPS)

I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but your version conflicts with almost all of the in-game experiences that I can recall. I'd love to see some definitive rules posts/clarifications supporting your reading.


umm ... but isn't the whole point of hide in plain sight hiding without cover....


I'm interested in this topis as well as I have a player with a Shadowdancer who abuses the hell out of HiPS.

Rogue's Hide in Plain Sight wrote:

Hide in Plain Sight (Ex)

Prerequisite: Advanced talents

Benefit: A rogue with this talent can select a single terrain from the ranger’s favored terrain list. She is a master at hiding in that terrain, and while within that terrain, she can use the Stealth skill to hide, even while being observed.

Special: A rogue may take this advanced talent more than once, each time selecting a different terrain from the favored terrain list.

There are other versions of Hide in Plain Sight, one for Ranger, for Rogue, for Assassin, and for Shadowdancer. They are not all the same, but imply the same ability to hide even while observed.

Stealth wrote:

Stealth

(Dex; Armor Check Penalty)

You are skilled at avoiding detection, allowing you to slip past foes or strike from an unseen position. This skill covers hiding and moving silently.

Check: Your Stealth check is opposed by the Perception check of anyone who might notice you. Creatures that fail to beat your Stealth check are not aware of you and treat you as if you had total concealment. 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.

Creatures gain a bonus or penalty on Stealth checks based on their size: Fine +16, Diminutive +12, Tiny +8, Small +4, Medium +0, Large -4, Huge -8, Gargantuan -12, Colossal -16.

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.

HiPS allows you to ignore the "If people are observing you..." rules.

Quote:

Breaking Stealth: 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. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make and attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).

Sniping: If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location.

Creating a Diversion to Hide: You can use Bluff to allow you to use Stealth. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Stealth check while people are aware of you.

Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action.

Special: If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Stealth checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if you're moving.

If you have the Stealthy feat, you get a bonus on Stealth checks (see Feats).

The problem seems to be the interaction between HiPS (don't need cover or concealment to use Stealth) and the normal "breaking cover or concealment" rules (must end your turn in cover or concealment).

Since HiPS allows you to Stealth even while observed, you meet the requirements for using Stealth and don't need to find cover or concealment by the end of your turn. So, in effect, HiPS is an unlimited form of Invisibility: you're not detected and have total concealment.

The other issue, as DM_Blake has pointed out on another thread, is that Stealth does not make your opponent lose their DEX to AC, it only gives you (the stealthing person) total concealment.


Another variation on the HiPS power is the Sorcerer Shadow bloodline power Shadow Well: "At 9th level, you can use the Stealth skill even while being observed and without cover or concealment, as long as you are within 10 feet of a shadow other than your own."

The rogue talent doesn't explicitly waive the need for cover or concealment, it just waives the requirement that people aren't observing you. Some of the other powers do waive the cover or concealment requirement as well, or establish different criteria for that.

It's clear that these powers all play out differently, which makes the topic of stealty sneak attacks even more unclear than they already were.


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

You can't use stealth if people are observing you with any of their senses. There are many senses in pathfinder: sight, blindsense, blindsight, tremorsense, scent. You cant hide if people are observing you with any of those.

Stealth wrote:
Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth

But against most creatures ( those creatures that are using sight), you can use stealth if you have cover or concealment.

It means that you can use stealth against creatures that are using sight to observe you if you have cover or concealment. Cover or concealment won't help you versus creatures using other senses.

1)Every version of HiPS allows you to stealth while being observed. It means that you can stealth from creatures even if they are observing you using any of their senses(blindsight, blindsense, etc.). You do not need cover or concealment to do that.

HiPS just do that: "If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can use Stealth" it change can't into can.

2)Ranger Camuflage allows you to use Stealth without cover or concealment. Cover or concealment is working only versus creatures using sight to detect you. So camuflage in contrast to HiPS allows you to use stealth only versus creatures using sight to observe you.

It's not 2 requirements you need to fulfill( beeing unobserved and having cover or concealment), you just cant be observed, thats all. Cover and concealment is just a way to be unobserved from sight.


+1 for DM blake.

HiPS needs cover/concealment this is intimated by the proviso's in Shadowdancer and Assassin - if you didn't still need cover or concealment why would you need dim light or shadow to use it?


Again, in most situations cover/concealment is sufficient to use Stealth.
(at least, how I typically see it run)

If you still need cover/concealment to use HiPS, the ability will usually do absolutely nothing.
I doubt this is the intended effect for this high level power, so it must do something more than affect a few corner cases...


CountofUndolpho wrote:

+1 for DM blake.

HiPS needs cover/concealment this is intimated by the proviso's in Shadowdancer and Assassin - if you didn't still need cover or concealment why would you need dim light or shadow to use it?

A limiter on the Assassin's HiPS does not at all indicate that all other HiPS require cover/concealment.


Komoda wrote:
CountofUndolpho wrote:

+1 for DM blake.

HiPS needs cover/concealment this is intimated by the proviso's in Shadowdancer and Assassin - if you didn't still need cover or concealment why would you need dim light or shadow to use it?

A limiter on the Assassin's HiPS does not at all indicate that all other HiPS require cover/concealment.

No, you're right. But the Rogue HiPS also has a limiter - you need Favored Terrain. All them need some help. None of them just vanish as a pure act of will. HiPS is never just Frodo putting on the One-Ring (although, technically, even Frodo's version of HiPS required an external limitation, namely, putting on the ring).


Though Hellcat Stealth's limit - bright or normal light - doesn't even imply cover or concealment.

And for the Shadowdancer, you only need to be within 10' of dim light, not actually in it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

there are two conditions to stealth:

1)do not be observed
2)cover/concealment

examples:
1) no hips, no cover
you are in the woods with your party, stealthing like a boss. You spot some random thugs laying in ambush ahead. You start moving from tree to tree (while aaking your stealth checks vs their perception checks) and you reach them. Out of nowhere (for them) you appear from behind the closer tree, stabbing one (surprise round for you). Combat starts. As long as they observe you, you can't stealth. You need to feint, winning a bluff check , AND a stealth check at -10. And this only makes you stealthed from ONE guy, the rest all know where you are.

In the above example you meet both criteria vs the thugs in the beginning, but not after combat starts. When you started stealthing you weren't being observed by them. You moved from cover to cover. After combat started, you are now being observed, so tough luck, even though there is cover nearby.

In the above exaple you NEVER had stealth vs your party. You started stealthing while you were being observed by them so they could "follow" you with their eyes.

2)hips, cover
As before. Combat starts.
You are now alone with the rest of the thugs, your group is behind you a good few rounds because they suck. Your initiative comes, you go "aww hell no, i ain't dying here" You move to the tree line, getting cover and rolling your stealth. Since you have HiPS, you don't give a crap about them actually watching you go to the treeline, they lost you.

3)hips, no cover
As before. Combat starts.
You are now alone with the rest of the thugs, your group is behind you a good few rounds because they suck. Your initiative comes, you go "aww hell no, i ain't dying here" You move to the tree line, getting cover and rolling your stealth. Since you have HiPS, you don't give a crap about them actually watching you go to the treeline, you think you they lost you.
Because you are a nub you didn't kill the wizard thug. He dismisses the hallucinatory terrain you were in the whole time. Suddenly you are in the plains, hiding behind what you thought was a tree that is actually just air. The rest of the thugs wave at you as they charge.

4)OP invisible rogue.
As before.
etcetcetc
Your turn comes again, you are wounded with 3 thugs around you and a wizard readying to fry you. Before you get your pretty elven ears clipped, you use your major magic talent to cast "Blend". No you don't need cover/concealment. Also because you have HiPS you don't care that they are watching you. You just vanish from their sight moving slowly towards your group. Stupid wizard casts see invisibility to find you because you vanished in thin air, only to find nothing, beause you aren't invisible, you are just stealthing right in front of his eyes.

5)no hips, blend.
You can walk into an empty room stealthed. But if a guard is in there and you break stealth. In order for you to distract him you need to feint first.

Lesson learned: HiPS best friend:
[link]http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/blend[/link]

notice the distinction:
HiPS:

Quote:
she can use the Stealth skill to hide, even while being observed.

Blend:

Quote:
This grants you a +4 circumstance bonus on Stealth checks and allows you to make Stealth checks without cover or concealment

edit:

for those who say HiPS gives nothing if it requires cover/concealment:
wut?
it basically nullifies a bluff check vs anyone observing. Gives you a +10 to your steath, allows you to stealth when MULTIPLE people are watching, and most importantly you don't have to lose your standard action to feint and move to stealth. You can easily stab someone and move to stealth. Or better yet, spring attack from cover to cover every single round.


So your argument is that Hide in Plain Sight (in any of its variants) doesn't do what the name says, it just lets you ignore the initial "can't be observed" rule. You still have to move into cover. You can't actually hide in plain sight. Somewhat counter intuitive.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

thejeff wrote:
So your argument is that Hide in Plain Sight (in any of its variants) doesn't do what the name says, it just lets you ignore the initial "can't be observed" rule. You still have to move into cover. You can't actually hide in plain sight. Somewhat counter intuitive.

That is where two people read the same rule and get entirely different interpretations.

I read HIPS and I get a strictly intuitive interpretation that you must move into cover or concealment (or some other thing such as a shadowdancer's dim light requirement).


James Risner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
So your argument is that Hide in Plain Sight (in any of its variants) doesn't do what the name says, it just lets you ignore the initial "can't be observed" rule. You still have to move into cover. You can't actually hide in plain sight. Somewhat counter intuitive.

That is where two people read the same rule and get entirely different interpretations.

I read HIPS and I get a strictly intuitive interpretation that you must move into cover or concealment (or some other thing such as a shadowdancer's dim light requirement).

But the shadowdancer's dim light requirement is precisely why I don't think you have to. You have to be within 10' of dim light. The text doesn't say you have to then move into it.


Sure. You can take the name of the ability, "Hide in Plain Sight", and stop there. "Oh, yeah, it's like an on/off switch that lets me vanish from plain sight - invisibility on demand with no regard for any other consideration; I'm invisible or I'm not."

Or you can try to fit HiPS into the rest of the framework of the game. The first word of the name of the ability is "Hide". That means Stealth. Then you apply HiPS to the existing rules for Stealth and try to incorporate ALL of the rules into one big picture that is internally consistent with ALL of the rules, including the cover/concealment requirement and including the fact that there is a clear distinction between Stealth and Invisibility.

It's not easy, it's not clear, and it definitely could be written better, but the inescapable conclusion to the second approach is as I wrote it in my earlier post in this thread.


DM_Blake wrote:

Sure. You can take the name of the ability, "Hide in Plain Sight", and stop there. "Oh, yeah, it's like an on/off switch that lets me vanish from plain sight - invisibility on demand with no regard for any other consideration; I'm invisible or I'm not."

Or you can try to fit HiPS into the rest of the framework of the game. The first word of the name of the ability is "Hide". That means Stealth. Then you apply HiPS to the existing rules for Stealth and try to incorporate ALL of the rules into one big picture that is internally consistent with ALL of the rules, including the cover/concealment requirement and including the fact that there is a clear distinction between Stealth and Invisibility.

It's not easy, it's not clear, and it definitely could be written better, but the inescapable conclusion to the second approach is as I wrote it in my earlier post in this thread.

Except of course that it's not invisibility. It's just the ability to use Stealth, even without the normal requirements.

But of course, since it's not magic, it has to be worse than a first level spell.

And frankly, I'm not at all sure there's any big picture that's internally consistent with ALL of the stealth/perception rules.


thejeff wrote:
But of course, since it's not magic, it has to be worse than a first level spell.

No, that's not true. Nobody thinks that. Nobody. People on the forums just throw that around along with "Paizo hates fighters" and "martials can't have nice things" and other crap sayings so they can feel like they're persecuted or something. Never have understood that...

This has nothing to do with magic.

With magic, ANYTHING is possible. Because "Magic!".

But skills are NOT magic. If skills were magic, the chapter would just have a list of "Skill Spells" you could learn, and none of them would be limited, there wouldn't be modifiers, just "Metaskill" feats to make them stronger, or learn a higher level "Skill Spell" to do what you want.

Oh, wait - yeah, they already do that in Chapter 10...

Skills are not Magic.

Skills are something everyone can do. A farmer with no training can sneak off to the woodshed to meet his mistress without his wife knowing - if he makes his Stealth check. And maybe a Bluff check later. If he blows those, maybe he can fix the problem with a great Diplomacy check...

That farmer didn't study skills, didn't got to a Skill Academy, didn't invest XP into Class (or even NPC) levels to get better at his skills, and yet he can do them.

Because skills are not Magic.

Skills can only do what normal people can do.

I'll repeat that for emphasis: Skills can only do what normal people can do.

Normal people cannot simply stand in a room with someone looking at them and flip an mental on/off switch to vanish from sight.

However, normal people CAN create a diversion, dive behind cover, and sneak away. Or even sneak around behind the guy, using cover or concealment, and attack that guy unexpectedly while he's wondering where the normal guy went. Most people cannot do that, but very well trained sneaky guys can. Normal guys with lots of training. You know, like a rogue who invests lots of ranks into Stealth and maybe even gets the HiPS talent.

It's not about some imaginary "We hate martials" conspiracy, or even a "We hate skills" subset of that conspiracy. It's really not.

Verdant Wheel

Hide in Plain Sight contains a clause about cheating observation.

It does not contain a clause about cheating cover/concealment.

You can interpret that liberally or conservatively, a fault of the ability's authorship, further confounded by the self-contradicting and non-consolidated Stealth rules.

So, choose "Poof" or make your rogue work a little more for it. I personally prefer the latter.

(and for the record, both interpretations are "greater than Earth-realistic" if you ask me)


DM_Blake wrote:
thejeff wrote:
But of course, since it's not magic, it has to be worse than a first level spell.

No, that's not true. Nobody thinks that. Nobody. People on the forums just throw that around along with "Paizo hates fighters" and "martials can't have nice things" and other crap sayings so they can feel like they're persecuted or something. Never have understood that...

This has nothing to do with magic.

With magic, ANYTHING is possible. Because "Magic!".

But skills are NOT magic. If skills were magic, the chapter would just have a list of "Skill Spells" you could learn, and none of them would be limited, there wouldn't be modifiers, just "Metaskill" feats to make them stronger, or learn a higher level "Skill Spell" to do what you want.

Oh, wait - yeah, they already do that in Chapter 10...

Skills are not Magic.

Skills are something everyone can do. A farmer with no training can sneak off to the woodshed to meet his mistress without his wife knowing - if he makes his Stealth check. And maybe a Bluff check later. If he blows those, maybe he can fix the problem with a great Diplomacy check...

That farmer didn't study skills, didn't got to a Skill Academy, didn't invest XP into Class (or even NPC) levels to get better at his skills, and yet he can do them.

Because skills are not Magic.

Skills can only do what normal people can do.

I'll repeat that for emphasis: Skills can only do what normal people can do.

Normal people cannot simply stand in a room with someone looking at them and flip an mental on/off switch to vanish from sight.

However, normal people CAN create a diversion, dive behind cover, and sneak away. Or even sneak around behind the guy, using cover or concealment, and attack that guy unexpectedly while he's wondering where the normal guy went. Most people cannot do that, but very well trained sneaky guys can. Normal guys with lots of training. You know, like a rogue who invests lots of ranks into Stealth and maybe even gets the HiPS talent....

Sounds like a big double standard to me. Because this isn't even about skills.

It's about Extraordinary abilities.

What's so extraordinary about an ability that just lets you do what normal people do?

That is literally the opposite of the meaning of the word.

" very unusual : very different from what is normal or ordinary

: extremely good or impressive"

There is nothing impressive or unusual about an ability that lets you do something a normal, ORDINARY person can do.

THAT is where all the griping comes from. Ex abilities have been mandated to be misnamed. The majority of them aren't extraordinary for the very reason you state: They're not magic, so they can't do anything interesting or powerful. Except when they do (like Evasion letting you avoid a fireball that fills up the entire room while chained up and paralyzed), but that doesn't stop people from still using "Hurr, Extraordinary isn't magic so it obviously can't do anything normal people can't" as a faulty argument for why an ability can't work the way it should.

Of course the Shadowdancer's Hide in Plain Sight is a Supernatural ability, so your whole point is moot there in the first place.


It this debate about whether or not Hide in Plain Sight allows you to ignore the need for cover or concealment?

Because it's pretty clear that it doesn't.*

Just take a look at a ranger.

Quote:
Camouflage (Ex): A ranger of 12th level or higher can use the Stealth skill to hide in any of his favored terrains, even if the terrain doesn't grant cover or concealment.
Quote:
Hide in Plain Sight (Ex): While in any of his favored terrains, a ranger of 17th level or higher can use the Stealth skill even while being observed.

Hide In Plain Sight (for a ranger as there is more than 1 version) merely lets them ignore the not being observed requirement to use stealth while in a favored terrain. It's very clear what it does.

Camouflage is an ability that lets the ranger disappear while standing in the middle of a field (assuming he has favored terrain plains) despite not having anything remotely big enough to hide behind.

Now, a Shadowdancer does a have different form of Hide in Plain Sight that has two different parts. Part 1 allows the shadow dancer to use stealth even when observed. This functions like the ranger's. Part two says that if the shadow dancer is within 10ft of a shadow she doesn't need to have something to hide behind. That is to my knowledge the only special version of Hide in Plain sight that gets rid of the normal need for cover concealment.*


Claxon wrote:
Now, a Shadowdancer does a have different form of Hide in Plain Sight that has two different parts. Part 1 allows the shadow dancer to use stealth even when observed. This functions like the ranger's. Part two says that if the shadow dancer is within 10ft of a shadow she doesn't need to have something to hide behind. That is to my knowledge the only special version of Hide in Plain sight that gets rid of the normal need for cover concealment.*

I could be wrong, but I think the argument here is that even that version of HiPS doesn't do Part 2. You need to be within 10' of dim light to use it to use stealth while observed, but you still have to get into cover or concealment - which could be the dim light, but could be something else as well.


Thing is... isn't the only reason you need concealment so that you're not observed.


thejeff wrote:

So your argument is that Hide in Plain Sight (in any of its variants) doesn't do what the name says, it just lets you ignore the initial "can't be observed" rule. You still have to move into cover. You can't actually hide in plain sight. Somewhat counter intuitive.

my argument is that it does EXACTLY like it's text says:

you ignore being observed. It says nothing about cover/concealment.

There is a reason some abilities say:
igonore observe
and some others say:
ignore cover/conceal

they are obviously different and provide different things.

and yes, in my own interpetation, HiPS does exactly what it's name says:
You are in plain sight, and you go hide. As in hide behind something. Not as in hide "poof i'm invisible"

Milo v3 wrote:
Thing is... isn't the only reason you need concealment so that you're not observed.

no. You can make people stop observing you with feinting. You still need to move to cover to actually hide.

Imagine this:
You and your pall are in a forest. He goes behind a tree. Turn ends. You know he is behind the tree, because you saw him go there. You can't see him now though (he has full concealment), but if he leaves that tree and go behind the next tree, you can still follow his movement, and know that now he is behind the second tree and etc.

That happens when you go behind concealment while being observed.

HiPS allows you to bypass that. It allows you to leave from a place, while being observed and go behind something to hide, without the others noticing you leaving their presense. Now they can't follow you going from tree to tree, because they lost you in the initial movement.

Rynjin wrote:
There is nothing impressive or unusual about an ability that lets you do something a normal, ORDINARY person can do.

no ordinary person can do what HiPS does.

In effect, it makes someone so un-noticable that they lose him as he moves away to hide.

You are standing with a crowd, and you leave them, go behind a telephone pole, and they go "huh? where did he go?"

That is heaps different from pointing to someone at the sky and going "look it's superman" and rushing to the telephone pole to hide. And yes, while (with severe penalties and etc) it might have the same effect on one person, the rest of the crowd will just laugh at the fooled one and say "you've been tricked fool, he's behind there"


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Can we just all agree that the stealth system in Pathfinder is ridiculous? The biggest problem, in my opinion, is the assumption that everyone has 360' vision all the time. If you just run the game logically, instead of using the stealth system as is, everything works out fine. Just make sure you tell your PCs ahead of time, so they're not disappointed when the corner cases in the core rules they're trying to manipulate don't work anymore.

In my game, yes, the guy could Stealth. That's the point of HiPS. You can already make a stealth check if you get behind something and block line of sight, so the ability would do nothing otherwise. Is it awesome? Eh, kind of? It's no greater invisibility. At best, it gives one of the weakest classes in the game access to their weak damage bonus one time per round at high levels assuming their Stealth rolls are high enough. Sorry, I am not impressed. Give him what he worked for--I promise, he's still probably doing less damage than the NPC Warrior with high strength, power attack, and a Greatsword.


mplindustries wrote:
The biggest problem, in my opinion, is the assumption that everyone has 360' vision all the time.

Thank God I'm not the only one who finds this annoying!


reading some of the answers here, it seems that there is some confusion between full concealment and stealth.

the way I (and i can't stress that "I" enough) see it:

full concealment=/= stealth. (similar to how "denied his dex bonus" is so much less than "flat-footed")

if you are behind a tree, and no one can see you, you have full concealment. If you move to the next tree, again you have full concealment, and etc.

That is NOT stealth. Stealth is way, way more than that. Stealth is having full concealment AND no one knows where that place you are is.

So yes, in both cases, no one can see you. But in stealth's case, no one even knows where you are.

There are a lot of people p.e. saying that just moving behind some concealment and rolling stealth stealths you. Well... if they are observing you they literally saw you going behind THAT place of concealment. It makes no differance if you rolled a 10 on your stealth or a 100. They know you moved THERE. They just can't see you (full concealment).

That is what HiPS (imo always) gives you. The ability to get concealment somewhere, and the enemy not knowing where that somewhere is. Imagine a rogue, in a dungeon, orc in front of him, stabbing a creature, and next second, when the orc opens his eyes recoiling from the pain, not having a friggin clue where that thing that just stabbed him went.

Could a normal rogue stab him and then move behind the crates that are 10ft on his right? sure he can. He can even roll stealth. the orc sees him though going behind that particular pile of crates though, even if he doesn't see him "now" (where "now" is his turn).


shroudb wrote:

reading some of the answers here, it seems that there is some confusion between full concealment and stealth.

the way I (and i can't stress that "I" enough) see it:

full concealment=/= stealth. (similar to how "denied his dex bonus" is so much less than "flat-footed")

if you are behind a tree, and no one can see you, you have full concealment. If you move to the next tree, again you have full concealment, and etc.

That is NOT stealth. Stealth is way, way more than that. Stealth is having full concealment AND no one knows where that place you are is.

So yes, in both cases, no one can see you. But in stealth's case, no one even knows where you are.

There are a lot of people p.e. saying that just moving behind some concealment and rolling stealth stealths you. Well... if they are observing you they literally saw you going behind THAT place of concealment. It makes no differance if you rolled a 10 on your stealth or a 100. They know you moved THERE. They just can't see you (full concealment).

That is what HiPS (imo always) gives you. The ability to get concealment somewhere, and the enemy not knowing where that somewhere is. Imagine a rogue, in a dungeon, orc in front of him, stabbing a creature, and next second, when the orc opens his eyes recoiling from the pain, not having a friggin clue where that thing that just stabbed him went.

Could a normal rogue stab him and then move behind the crates that are 10ft on his right? sure he can. He can even roll stealth. the orc sees him though going behind that particular pile of crates though, even if he doesn't see him "now" (where "now" is his turn).

You're reading a lot into the rules here.

Are you still "observed" when you get into "full concealment"? If so, you should be able to use stealth. If not, what does "observed" mean and is it ever possible to break it without a bluff or magic or something? Strictly mundane.
If I go behind a wall, he may know I went behind the wall, but he can't see me, so how does he know where and when I'm going to try to sneak out? If I go out of sight into darkness, does that count?
I can see it kind of makes sense if it's a single tree or other small location, but if it's a larger area, it really doesn't. But that difference isn't supported at all by any of the rules arguments people throw around on this subject.

The only rules distinction I see is between partial and full cover or concealment.


I will say that during my tactical training, as soon as we lost sight of an enemy, we had to start from square one to reacquire the target. Even if he just turned the corner down a different hall, we were screwed. At any time he could jump out and "surprise" us.

Initiative wins fights. Anytime you can't see your target, he can quickly gain initiative.

I think stealth works when LOS is broken, as by concealment or cover. I think HiPS gives you even more chances to use stealth.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Milo v3 wrote:
Thing is... isn't the only reason you need concealment so that you're not observed.

I'm going to jump in in the middle of this, these are my impressions of how I think the rules work. I'm not trying to say anyone is right or wrong, this is just my take: Milo v3 - I don't think so. I think even if you have partial concealment you can't stealth if you are observed. You need both not be observed and concealment. I believe that is RAW (again not trying to start an argument, just stating what I think the rules are without much conviction). So I think HiPS only removes one of those conditions. I also believe that RAI is that it's supposed to remove both, with the understanding that the Shadowdancer can manipulate shadows to obscure his movement (again, my take, not trying to convince anyone).

EDIT: If I GM a non-PFS game, I say let the thieves abuse HiPS to their hearts content. Being able to get 1 sneak attack per round makes them just slightly above completely useless.

mplindustries - I'm with ya. I think a lot of the problem stems from players who don't understand what Pathfinder's combat system is supposed to simulate. People assume because the mechanics are one way, that's what's really happening. So since everyone goes in initiative order, that means everyone is just standing in line waiting for their turn to come up, they have their action and go to the end of line again. They don't understand that the character's feet aren't planted in one spot. I mean mark out a 5'x5' square, that's a lot of room for one person to stand in. A round is also 6 seconds, count out 6 seconds and you'll see it's a lot longer than you might believe. Your character doesn't stand there for 5 seconds, take 1 swing and stand there for another 5 seconds. That character is moving the entire 6 seconds, he's bobbing and weaving, feinting and striking throughout the whole round.

What I'm getting at, is that in combat I'm okay with doing away from facing. The problem is that people think just because there's no facing, that characters get 360 degree vision.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

thejeff wrote:
It's just the ability to use Stealth, even without the normal requirements.

But a 10,000 on Stealth doesn't allow you to hie when there is no cover.

Silver Crusade

This is the version of Hide in Plain sight that I think should be used it is from Legendary Rogue. IT is simple and to the point and does away with terrain restrictions that I feel do not fit the rogue class. Rogues are not rangers and should not have to waste valuable feats or talents
for a skill that is the backbone of the rogue class Stealth.

Hide in Plain Sight (Ex): A rogue with this talent is a master of
disappearance. She can use the Stealth skill to hide even while
being observed. The rogue must have a feat or skill specialty that
grants a bonus on Stealth checks and be at least 12th level before
selecting this talent.


thejeff wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Now, a Shadowdancer does a have different form of Hide in Plain Sight that has two different parts. Part 1 allows the shadow dancer to use stealth even when observed. This functions like the ranger's. Part two says that if the shadow dancer is within 10ft of a shadow she doesn't need to have something to hide behind. That is to my knowledge the only special version of Hide in Plain sight that gets rid of the normal need for cover concealment.*
I could be wrong, but I think the argument here is that even that version of HiPS doesn't do Part 2. You need to be within 10' of dim light to use it to use stealth while observed, but you still have to get into cover or concealment - which could be the dim light, but could be something else as well.

How doesn't it?

Quote:

Hide in Plain Sight (Su)

A shadowdancer can use the Stealth skill even while being observed. As long as she is within 10 feet of an area of dim light, a shadowdancer can hide herself from view in the open without anything to actually hide behind. She cannot, however, hide in her own shadow.

Despite not specifically mentioning cover or concealment, it seems fairly straightforward that "without anything to hide behind" means cover or concealment.


How we've run it is that HiPS and it's variants do not allow you to *Poof*; rather it's utility is in the consequence of having your cover/concealment removed.

You move into a closet and close the door. Assuming stealth is successful, an enemy opens the door:

Shadowdancer
As long as it's still dark in the closet, it appears empty

Ranger
If it's a favored terrain, it appears empty

Hellcat
If it is well lit in the closet, it appears empty.

HiPS then simulates having one guy hot on the heels of another, a corner is turned, and the first guy seems gone. The only time we let it be a *Poof*, is after a Distraction.

HiPS should not allow one to enter a stealth state, rather, it should allow a stealth state to be preserved when it otherwise wouldn't.

I have been in love with stealth since BECMI.
I want stealth to be powerful and awesome for everyone.
I hold the current rules of Stealth/Perception and Concentration/Distraction to be incomplete, and broken if you look at all the rules.


James Risner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
It's just the ability to use Stealth, even without the normal requirements.
But a 10,000 on Stealth doesn't allow you to hie when there is no cover.

a) I kind of wish it would. If you're that good, you should be able to do ridiculous things.

b) But it doesn't. By itself. That's why you need Hide in Plain Sight. Which let's you hide in plain sight - that is without cover.


shroudb wrote:

there are two conditions to stealth:

1)do not be observed
2)cover/concealment

examples:

EXACTLY. I don't know why that post doesn't have a bunch of favorites. I consider it to almost be the end of the discussion right there (although I think it was just giving examples for what DM_Blake said).

I guess one question that still somewhat remains is whether any total concealment or full cover can break being observed (without HIPS/HS), or more-so what types/context of full cover or total concealment,or how long one might have to have sight line broken before they could actually stealth.

For full cover, it would depend on the cover, and this is where it gets iffy. If it's behind some barrels in the corner of a room, it makes no sense for them to be considered no longer observed. However if it's in an area full of pillars, shelves, junk, and some corridors, it'd be very reasonable to have lost sight of them and then not know where they went from there.

For total concealment, it can depend on the source I'd say. A large smoke or fog effect would work I suppose, but not one that only fills a 5-10 feet.

Verdant Wheel

For those in "Poof" camp, does the guy have to at least Create a Diversion to Hide (a standard action) in order to roll Stealth check?

Or just "Poof!"?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Again, those who claim that merely breaking line of sight using cover or total concealment isn't sufficient to fulfill the "not observed" requirement:

You're essentially claiming that an observed rogue can walk into a 20' radius Fog Cloud and be unable to use Stealth, no matter where he wanders within that cloud, as long as the "observers" maintain focus on him. (despite being unable to use sight to locate him after the first 5')

How does that make any sense?

If you concede that cover/concealment IS sufficient to become unobserved, even without a specific distraction, that doesn't leave your version of HiPS with much value.


Let me give another example of why full concealment/cover should also remove your "observed" state automatically. If we assume it doesn't:

You're in a 50' x 50' room with a basic rogue.
Your perception is terrible; his stealth is superb.
You are observing him.
He 5' steps, pulls a potion of Invis, and drinks it.
However, since concealment supposedly doesn't remove the observed state, you still know exactly where he is and he is not permitted to use the stealth skill.
On his following turns, the rogue would like to move around and use stealth... however, because you are still "observing" him, he still is not permitted to do so.

Again, this doesn't make much sense.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

If you consider the above examples, you may come to the same conclusion as me. Although HiPS doesn't specifically say so, what it actually does is:
allow you to use the stealth skill when you are in a square where you could normally only use stealth if they weren't already observing you.

Generally, this is when you have PARTIAL cover or concealment.


thejeff wrote:
shroudb wrote:

reading some of the answers here, it seems that there is some confusion between full concealment and stealth.

the way I (and i can't stress that "I" enough) see it:

full concealment=/= stealth. (similar to how "denied his dex bonus" is so much less than "flat-footed")

if you are behind a tree, and no one can see you, you have full concealment. If you move to the next tree, again you have full concealment, and etc.

That is NOT stealth. Stealth is way, way more than that. Stealth is having full concealment AND no one knows where that place you are is.

So yes, in both cases, no one can see you. But in stealth's case, no one even knows where you are.

There are a lot of people p.e. saying that just moving behind some concealment and rolling stealth stealths you. Well... if they are observing you they literally saw you going behind THAT place of concealment. It makes no differance if you rolled a 10 on your stealth or a 100. They know you moved THERE. They just can't see you (full concealment).

That is what HiPS (imo always) gives you. The ability to get concealment somewhere, and the enemy not knowing where that somewhere is. Imagine a rogue, in a dungeon, orc in front of him, stabbing a creature, and next second, when the orc opens his eyes recoiling from the pain, not having a friggin clue where that thing that just stabbed him went.

Could a normal rogue stab him and then move behind the crates that are 10ft on his right? sure he can. He can even roll stealth. the orc sees him though going behind that particular pile of crates though, even if he doesn't see him "now" (where "now" is his turn).

You're reading a lot into the rules here.

Are you still "observed" when you get into "full concealment"? If so, you should be able to use stealth. If not, what does "observed" mean and is it ever possible to break it without a bluff or magic or something? Strictly mundane.
If I go behind a wall, he may know I went behind the wall, but he can't see me, so how does he...

that's really simple really:

imagine T to be trees big enough for full concealment, O to be an orc, and R to be Rogue, W is wall

TTT.T
TTT...T
TTT....WWW
....OR

the rogue and the orc are fighting there. The rogue disengages and goes behind the wall:

TTT.T
TTT...T..R
TTT....WWW
....O
The orc "knows" that the rogue went there, even though he doesn't see him on his turn. If the Orc moves there he can see him and continue his attack. like that:

TTT.T
TTT...T..RO
TTT....WWW
...........
But if the orc spends his round drinking up a potion, then when rogue's turn comes he may indeed stealth to another tree

TRT.T
TTT...T
TTT....WWW
....O
Next orc's turn he goes where he thinks the rogue is seeing nothing and swearing for losing him from his sight

TRT.T
TTT...T
TTT....WWWO
.........

Now, the rogue, accurding to orc's perception may be anyplace.

BUT
the very first round that the orc lost sight of him, he saw where he was going, and he could easily followed him and stick to him, not letting him stealth for the entirety of combat.

I changed it a bit to include a wall to point that:
When the rogue goes behind the wall. He may sit in any place behind that and the orc (probably) won't know behind which exact square the rogue is (because the rogue was moving behind full concealment, so no vision).
BUT he can't actually in the same action, move behind the wall, and stealth to a nearby tree.

Silver Crusade

You do not have to have cover or concealment to use hide in plain sight. You just have to spend a standard action to use hide in plain sight just like using any other Ex ability. It is a level 12 power after all. It is an exception to normal perception rules on using stealth while under observation.

If hide in plain sight is hard for some to undstand what do the other posters think of the rouge advanced talents that let a rouge go unnoticed by blind sense, blind sight tremor sense or sent. That talent is also an ex ability.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

thejeff wrote:
b) But it doesn't. By itself. That's why you need Hide in Plain Sight. Which let's you hide in plain sight - that is without cover.

Again, it doesn't unless your particular HiPS is one that doesn't require cover/concealment like Shadowdancer's. All of them require cover/concealment or a terrain of a particular type to be present.


James Risner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
b) But it doesn't. By itself. That's why you need Hide in Plain Sight. Which let's you hide in plain sight - that is without cover.
Again, it doesn't unless your particular HiPS is one that doesn't require cover/concealment like Shadowdancer's. All of them require cover/concealment or a terrain of a particular type to be present.

They all require something to be present, that's clear. (dim light, particular terrain, bright/normal light) The question is if you have to specifically move to cover/concealment to stealth even when the proper conditions are present.

I hope we all agree that with the Shadowdancer's version, you don't. As long as you're within 10' of dim light, you can use stealth even while being observed and without actually entering the dim light or finding other cover/concealment.

The question is whether the other variations work the same way.
A ranger can do so while in a favored terrain, since he has both Hide in Plain Sight and Camouflage.


I do not understand form where people get that you need to fulfill two requirements to use stealth, when it clearly says that you only need to not be observed to use stealth and cover or concealment usually helps with that.

1 to 50 of 71 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Hide in Plain Sight and Cover - Concealment All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.