I've read a lot of threads on stealth, but some things still elude me.
1) What action is it to create a diversion to hide?
Some say it's a separate Standard Action, akin to a feint.
Some assume it's part of the stealth attempt.
I have yet to see proof of any statement regarding this. Is Paizo still silent? How does PFS handle this?
2) If you do not have HIPS but you can hide without the need for concealment or cover (i.e. Slayer's Camouflage, Ranger's LV12 Camouflage), and you succesfully stealth when not observed, can you thereafter stay hidden in the middle of nothing, and walk around casually, in front of people, unnoticed as long as no enemy makes a high enough perception check? Or do you need concealment/cover by the end of your turn anyway?
(In case it's the latter, does this ability even do anything?)
3) Let's say I have Nightmare Boots. This gives me concealment on my turn as a swift action 3/day.
Is this functionally identical to HIPS, -except that it does not work in bright light- as long as I end my turn with cover or concealment?
4) If we put together 3) and 2) can I use boot-activated concealment on my turn to break observation, hide, and then stay hidden in the middle of nothing?
5) How does attacking from stealth in melee even work?
Is the enemy flat-footed against the first attack? Can you even get close normally without automatically breaking stealth?
What if you have an ability like the ones in the 2) question?
6) What special senses trump completely hide, assuming you need and you ahve cover? I know things like Scent allow to pinpoint your location, but it's not the same as being found out. Once a creature knows your location but you're hidden (i.e. you have HIPS or camouflage-like ability and you're hiding in the middle of nothing) what happens? Does the creature get a bonus to notice you?
What about blindsight/blindsense?
7) Same questions as 6) but you are hiding without cover, as in 2), so even if the creature can pinpoint your location and see the square you're in, you're still hidden. What happens now?
1) There is no official rule so it's GM fiat, but expect to use a standard action for this. Many GM might even give you different Actions depending on what you do for the diversion.
2) This is a poorly worded rule but it lets you hide so you can hide. Your opponent still gets their perception check against you and you are treated as having total concealment.
As the rules are written (under 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 an attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below)."
So RAW you aren't leaving your "cover" since you weren't using any which means you don't break stealth. This is almost certainly NOT RAI though.
3) Hiding in smoke is different than hiding in plain sight. You can do it but since the smoke is only in your square it's still obvious where you are. Expect AOE's to ruin your day.
4) Again, the smoke is obvious so don't expect it to give you anything more that you're already getting from slayer's camouflage.
5) The enemy is flatfooted against your first attack. You normally can't get close unless you're literally invisible without breaking stealth. Slayer's camouflage RAW lets you hide without cover in your favored terrain and since you don't break cover RAW you would be able to approach someone while hiding.
I would not let you do this in my game unless you were prone but it works RAW.
6) Tremorsense, blindsense, blindsight, keen scent, lifesense, thoughtsense, and Web will all be able to locate you while you're hiding.
7) You get 20% miss chance against them as if you had cover.
|
1: "Creating a distraction is a standard action." - Ultimate Intrigue page 184
2: Thouse camouflage abilities work the same as HiPS... you can use stealth vs observers perception to hide regardless of there being anything to provide concealment. Can't 'walk around casually' though... need to be sneaking.
3: This falls in to the category of 'concealment which still lets people know where you are'... like Blur. You get the concealment benefit against attacks, but cannot use it for stealth because you can't leave it behind... it travels with you.
4: No, can't use the boot smoke for stealth at all.
5: One attack only unless you have the stealth unlock from Pathfinder Unchained which denies the target Dex bonus to AC against multiple attacks from stealth.
6 & 7: Read the Ultimate Intrigue text on precise vs imprecise senses. You can locate an opponent with an imprecise sense (e.g. scent), but can only 'observe' them with a precise sense (e.g. sight).
2: I believe this ability cannot work the same as HIPS because if we look at the Ranger's progression we have:
LV12: camouflage: 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.
LV 17: HIPS: While in any of his favored terrains, a ranger of 17th level or higher can use the Stealth skill even while being observed.
The LV 12 ability does not allow to use Stealth while observed, it only removes the need for concealment and/or cover
Now, if I'm getting this right,
Normally Cover or Concealment is used
1) to break observation, or
2) to prevent breaking stealth when ending a turn outside cover and/or concealment
The LV 12 Camouflage only helps you with the latter;
It prevents being noticed once you already used Stealth and you leave cover and/or concealment.
If you are already hidden you are not being observed? Cool. You can stay hidden without cover and/or concealment now.
This means a LV12 Ranger can only hide when not observed but once he's hidden he does not break stealth when getting out of cover or concealment, as long as he's not been observed yet (that would happen when perception beats stealth).
This includes hiding in the middle of a room, or even walking through an open door, even if the door is being actively watched, as long as the stealth check is higher than the perception check of the enemies.
If it was any different, the LV12 ability would do absolutely nothing:
It cannot be the same as the LV17 ability. It's no HIPS and it does not trump observation. As a LV12 Ranger, you can NOT ide while being observed.
What it does, factually, is to remove the need of cover or concealment, meaning you can hide wherever you want in a favored terrain, as long as you weren't being observed when you began doing so.
This is, imho, both RAW and RAI.
Please explain to me, if I'm wrong, what the LV 12 Ranger camouflage DOES, and how it's different from the LV 17 one.
I'm sorry for bringing this UP again, but I think opening a new thread so soon wouldn't be correct
I believe I'm still confused on this very thing:
8) How does not needing cover or concealment work without HIPS
Or, in other words, what makes the LV12 Ranger ability inferior to the LV17 one, and what are the limits of each other, if any.
When can I hide?
Can I ever break stealth for leaving, or lacking, cover/concealment if I was unobserved and already hidden before leaving, or losing, cover/concealment, provided my stealth check is never beaten?
9) How does HIPS work when you only have HIPS but you still need cover or concealment? (see Rogue HIPS advanced talent)
When can I hide?
...
9 is actually the most obscure point, I cannot even begin to understand what's the point of being able to hide even when observed if you still need cover or concealment.
In my opinion it does absolutely nothing.
Even if you're in an area that gives you cover or concealment you can't use stealth against someone who's already observing you
AFAIK, as soon as you have cover or concealment, including dim light unless the creature has special vision, you are already protected from observation
Source:
Being Observed 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
In other words, as soon as you have cover or concealment, you break observation. You don't need to create a distraction.
(So what's the point of rogue HIPS as written?)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, cover and concealment break observation. Ultimate Intrigue cleared that up.
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.
The Rogue can officially hide in her favored terrains no matter what (barring bright light and special senses). That's the point. You don't need to break observation anymore, so you don't need cover or concealment.
Yes, cover and concealment break observation. Ultimate Intrigue cleared that up.
I really need to get that book!
For reference, at what page is this explained?|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cover and Concealment for Stealth: The reason a character usually needs cover or concealment to use Stealth is tied to the fact that characters can't use Stealth while being observed. A sneaking character needs to avoid all of an opponent's precise senses in order to use Stealth, and for most creatures, that means vision. Effects such as blur and displacement, which leave a clear visual of the character within the perceiving character's vision, aren't sufficient to use Stealth, but a shadowy area or a curtain work nicely, for example. The hide in plain sight class ability allows a creature to use Stealth while being observed and thus avoids this whole situation. A sneaking character can come out of cover or concealment during her turn, as long as she doesn't end her turn where other characters are directly observing her.
You don't need to break observation AND find cover/concealment. The cover/concealment is your way of breaking the observation.
Edit: I don't have the physical copy in front of me, or I'd give you the page number sorry!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, cover and concealment break observation. Ultimate Intrigue cleared that up.
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.The Rogue can officially hide in her favored terrains no matter what (barring bright light and special senses). That's the point. You don't need to break observation anymore, so you don't need cover or concealment.Wait. What?
Any cover or concealment automatically breaks observation?
Got a quote from Ultimate intrigue for that?
So, no bluff to distract, just take a step in dim light and roll stealth?
As long as your opponent only has normal vision that should work, yeah. Darkvision prevents that for sure and it depends on distance for low-light.
You still need to move into cover or concealment and if you do that you would already break observation, if it worked that way.
The difference is that if you use Distraction, you have the following advantage:
Enemies don't see you moving towards cover or concealment so they don't know in what direction you wnet (i.e. behind what column you hid, or in which shadowy area you walked)
Since UI clarifies that "cover or concealment" is something that breaks observation, I believe this point is now clarified.
It also means, back to the original question that the 17th level Ranger HIPS is useless, since the Ranger already has from 12th level cover or concealment in favored terrain and thus can always use stealth with no concern over observation.In fact, observation is now completely irrelevant. Either you have cover/concealment or you don't. Whether anyone sees you beforehand doesn't matter at all.
I believe you are misunderstanding.
Yes you need both: Breaking observation AND having cover or concealment
BUT
Cover or concealment also breaks observation.
You still need Cover or Concealment though, even if you weren't being observed, in order to not break your stealth when people start looking at your square
It follows, logically, that
"not needing cover or concealment" is not something that breaks existing observation, it's not the same as having actual cover or concealment.
It only prevents observation from happening when you lack cover or concealment and you are already hidden.
Basically, the LV 12 Ranger can hide when unobserved, even if there's no cover or concealment around.
Once he's hidden, even if he's standing in the middle of nothing, you have to beat his stealth check to notice him. You aren't, thus, observing him.
Therefore, he can keep stealthing around.
Another thing that a LV12 ranger can do, if I'm getting this right, is to use a bluff diversion and then do a 5ft step.
He wasn't being observed when moving and he didn't need cover or concealment, so he's now succesfully hidden, in the very middle of nothing.
At least, this is how I read it. Maybe ShieldLawrence knows the subject better
|
|
Ultimate Intrigue, Chapter 4, Perception and Stealth, selected passages
"A sense is precise if it allows the creature to use targeted effects on creatures and objects it senses, and to attack enemies without suffering a miss chance from concealment. This includes vision, touch, blindsight, and lifesense."
"When a creature uses a precise sense to observe an enemy, that enemy is unable to use Stealth against the observer unless it creates a distraction first, or has a special ability allowing it to do so."
"The hide in plain sight class ability allows a creature to use Stealth while being observed and thus avoids this whole situation."
Oooh. A Stealth thread! I've spent many angry moments in threads like this one...
Good memories.
*****
5) How does attacking from stealth in melee even work?
Is the enemy flat-footed against the first attack? Can you even get close normally without automatically breaking stealth?
What if you have an ability like the ones in the 2) question?
5) The enemy is flatfooted against your first attack. You normally can't get close unless you're literally invisible without breaking stealth. Slayer's camouflage RAW lets you hide without cover in your favored terrain and since you don't break cover RAW you would be able to approach someone while hiding.
I would not let you do this in my game unless you were prone but it works RAW.
5: One attack only unless you have the stealth unlock from Pathfinder Unchained which denies the target Dex bonus to AC against multiple attacks from stealth.
Wait, are they flat-footed or just denied their Dex bonus?
I understand all of this CBDunkerson, but I'm really sure there has to be some difference between the LV12 and LV17 camouflage.
My opinion is that the difference is as follow:
LV12 you don't need cover or concealment, but you still need some way to break observation (including possibly creating a diversion) in order to enter stealth.
Once you entered stealth, your stealth check is what prevents observation. You are never at risk of breaking stealth for lacking cover or concealment at the end of your turn.
LV17 you don't need cover or concealment AND you don't even need any way to break observation. You can hide anywhere, at any time, as long as you're in your favored terrain and there is no bright light around.
Am I correct?
***
Just being in cover or concealment isn't sufficient to break observation
This is not what's written in the quoted text imho. How did you extrapolate this meaning from that text?
The point is, cover/concealment is an explicitly valid way to prevent enemies from using their precise senses against you in the first place.|
|
Oooh. A Stealth thread! I've spent many angry moments in threads like this one...
Good memories.*****
5) How does attacking from stealth in melee even work?
Is the enemy flat-footed against the first attack? Can you even get close normally without automatically breaking stealth?
What if you have an ability like the ones in the 2) question?5) The enemy is flatfooted against your first attack. You normally can't get close unless you're literally invisible without breaking stealth. Slayer's camouflage RAW lets you hide without cover in your favored terrain and since you don't break cover RAW you would be able to approach someone while hiding.
I would not let you do this in my game unless you were prone but it works RAW.5: One attack only unless you have the stealth unlock from Pathfinder Unchained which denies the target Dex bonus to AC against multiple attacks from stealth.Wait, are they flat-footed or just denied their Dex bonus?
Dex-denied only. Flat-footed is a separate condition that tends to only happen before you act in combat.
|
|
Just being in cover or concealment isn't sufficient to break observationThis is not what's written in the quoted text imho. How did you extrapolate this meaning from that text?
The point is, cover/concealment is an explicitly valid way to prevent enemies from using their precise senses against you in the first place."When a creature uses a precise sense to observe an enemy, that enemy is unable to use Stealth against the observer unless it creates a distraction first, or has a special ability allowing it to do so."
If you attack him, he's observing you using a precise sense. He beats your Stealth with his Perception, he's observing you using a precise sense. He walks into the room before you try to hide, he's observing you using a precise sense. You're in the open before you duck into cover, concealment (or your favored terrain in the 12th level Ranger's case), he's observing you using a precise sense.
Since he is, you're unable to use Stealth against him without creating a distraction (or having some HIPS ability that lets you use stealth while being observed).
And when you step to a "shadowy area or curtain" you've broken observation and you can begin stealthing again (or at least trying to stealth, you never know how the rolls will go).
If you attack him, he's observing you using a precise sense
If you attack him you break stealth anyway
He beats your Stealth with his Perception, he's observing you using a precise sense
Only if I'm not in Cover or Concealment. That prevents precise observation.
He might see me and know where I am, but I can retry using stealth next turn as long as I still have cover or concealment.He walks into the room before you try to hide, he's observing you using a precise sense.
Unless I have cover or concealment
You're in the open before you duck into cover, concealment (or your favored terrain in the 12th level Ranger's case), he's observing you using a precise sense.
Yes, he is. Unless I also have HIPS, even if I'm a LV12 Ranger in their favored terrain, I'm being observed.
As soon as I break observation, however (either via finding cover/concealment, or with a bluff check diversion) I can hide.Since he is, you're unable to use Stealth against him without creating a distraction (or having some HIPS ability that lets you use stealth while being observed).
I agree. But if I'm a LV12 ranger already hidden in my favorite terrain when the enemy appears, and he doesn't beat my stealth check, I can just stand there unnoticed. I could even dance macarena in his face if I feel confident enough.
Since I'm already hidden, he can't observe me with precise senses until either-he beats my stealth check
-birght light happens
-I break stealth for some reason (i.e. attacking)
Too many rules point at concealment and observation being two different requirements that you have to meet.
Too many rules point at concealment and observation being two different requirements that you have to meet.
They are different and you need to meet both, It also happens that when you have cover or concealment, you are also breaking previously existing observation, provided the kind of concealment or cover you're employing work vs the precise senses of the creature.
For example, dim light breaks observation if the cerature is trying to observe you with normal sight. It does not break observation vs creatures with darkvision.
This is explictly stated in Ultimate Intrigue.
Every other rule and consideration must follow from this.
I'm confident this is explicit enough if you read carefully:
The reason a character usually needs cover or concealment to use Stealth is tied to the fact that characters can't use Stealth while being observed.
Effects such as blur and displacement, which leave a clear visual of the character within the perceiving character's vision, aren't sufficient to use Stealth, but a shadowy area or a curtain work nicely, for example
This means a shadowy area is sufficient to use stealth.
So, yes. You can attack, and stealth right after that. If you're in a shadowy area, for example.
However,
The middle part clarifies, that not all concealments are the same: in order to break observation and thus allow stealth, it must be some sort of cover or concealment that works vs the creature's precise senses.
Blur does not work vs nomal sight for breaking observation. Dim light does.
If the creature has Darkvision, dim light does not work.
You can still hide if you find cover.
Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth
"find" is the keyword. It means you didn't previously have cover and were being observed. But now you have cover (or a valid concealment) and they cannot observe you with precise senses.
This "allows you to hide"Finally,
Observing: The final state is when the perceiving character is able to directly observe the sneaking character with a precise sense, such as vision. This is generally the result when the perceiving character rolls higher on its opposed Perception check than the sneaking character's Stealth result while also having line of sight to the sneaking character and the ability to see through any sort of invisibility or other tricks the sneaking character might be using
This includes being concealed. That's a trick I might be using.
If your precise sense does not pierce through concealment, you're not observing me.Note that often cover breaks line of sight, it is extremely explicit that LOS is required to observe, therefore finding cover that breaks LOS (i.e. a pilla) always allows enetring stealth
Again: In what circumstances, other than your 12-16th level Ranger in favored terrain, would someone be "unable to use Stealth against the observer unless it creates a distraction first"? That's a general rule. It applies to the general case. Not to one specific class ability.
The complete rule says that "When a creature uses a precise sense to observe an enemy, that enemy is unable to use Stealth against the observer unless it creates a distraction first, or has a special ability allowing it to do so.""
Finding cover or concealment however breaks observation.
You don't need a ditraction anymore.
I.e. I walk behind a pillar, you have no LOS, you aren't observing me. I roll stealth.
You can now walk around the pillar and see me as soon as the pillar does not provide cover against you anymore. because I don't have cover anymore, this breaks my stealth (there is an exception to this rule, that allows me to move from cover to cover, but is irrelevant in this context)
If I wanted to use stealth right away without letting you know which pillar I chose to get cover, I'd have to create a diversion first.
See, this applies to all characters.
----
"You can't observe me in dim light anyway." (Without darkvision or some such.)
This is true.
Of course, this does not mean you cannot locate me or attack me (with a 20% miss chance) unless I am actually hiding.
But, by virtue of being concealed, I can now hide. Sufficient is not an ambiguous term.
----
I'll be asking FAQ questions now. Please feel free to mark them as FAQ if you are interested!
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Q: If enemies can see me, but I have concealment against them, such as when being in dim light, do I count as being Unobserved and can thus use Stealth right away, or do I still need to create a diversion first in order to "break observation"?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Q: If I have a special ability saying that I can use Stealth to hide without Cover or Concealment, such as the Level 12 Ranger's Camouflage class feature, do I still automatically break my stealth if, after moving, I end my turn where I don't have Cover or Concealment and enemies have Line Of Sight to me?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Q: If a Shadowdancer that is within 10ft. from a shadow makes a full attack in melee, can the shadowdancer use the Hide in Plain Sight class feature as part of a 5ft step immediately after that?
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Q: If I have concealment against a creature with Line of Sight to me, and it's a form of concealment that works against that creature's precise senses, such as Dim Light versus Humans, and I'm not currently hidden, am I considered "observed" by that creature for the purpose of attempting a stealth check to hide?
Dear Pathfinder Design Team,
In my opinion, you did a great job with Ultimate Intrigue to make stealth rules more accurate and easy to read, and after reading the new rules carefully I believe the answer is almost certainly "no".
Unfortunately, not everyone thinks the new rules are clear and univocal, and the community is still divided on this point.
I am also aware that core rules state clearly that "you can hide if you have concealment", but a large number of people assume cover and concealment don't influence the status of being observed, which is in and on itself a necessary condition for attempting a stealth check to hide.
A clear answer here would finally shed light over an issue that has been splitting the userbase since the game's first release!
Thank you very much for your hard work and dedication.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.
Did you find cover/concealment against the opponent's precise senses? If so, you are allowed to use stealth. The rules allow you to, that's what they say.
Of course there are situations that prevent stealth and abilities that enhance stealth, but the general rule is finding cover/concealment allows the stealth check.
There's no additional observation check.
Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth.
If people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth
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.
Now either there is an outright contradiction within two sentences of each other (and one sentence is completely meaningless) or something else is going on.
There is something else going on. Your quote comes from a paragraph and the paragraph makes the meaning of the sentence perfectly clear.
You cannot stealth while observed
You need to reach cover or concealment
Here is how you reach cover or concealment unobserved: you make a bluff check to tell them "hey look a monkey". Those that fail are distracted. You can then make a stealth check at a -10 penalty to haul rear to the shadows, batman style.
It makes every sentence work without any contradictions
It resolves every "contradiction" you get otherwise
It makes every sentence meaningful (the line "if your onlookers are momentarily distracted is pretty meaningless otherwise)
It means that camouflage is not a prone shooter option.
It means that the lines in shadowdancer stealth "A shadowdancer can use the Stealth skill even while being observed" is meaningful
It makes sniping an actual option instead of "why would you ever do that"
It makes the bluff and hide tactic an actual option instead of "why ever would you do that" : It takes two skills and a whopping -10 penalty. Why would you EVER take that option if all you needed was concealment?
It keeps stealth from being the god skill improved invisibility in combat
It does a pretty good job of mirroring reality
Most importantly it explains why they're all in the same paragraph together, in context. Sentences 3 4 and 5 obviously rely on each other what do you think sentences 1 and 2 are doing there?
Neither concealed nor observed: Polonius doing the macarana in the middle of the room.
Concealed and not observed: Polonius behind the curtain with his shoes sticking out as soon as you walk into the room
Concealed but observed: Polonius stabs hamlet and walks behind the curtain with his shoes sticking out: adventurers are not toddlers, they understand the concept of object permanance and can follow part of an object.
As soon as you evaluate the options on anything but 100% certainty that you know exactly what the words mean every conceivable interpretation method points to observation and concealment being 2 different things.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've always been of the opinion that concealment breaks observation. I've had this conversation a number of times. Nothing new has been said or is likely to be. Neither side will be convinced short of a FAQ. *shrug*
RE: Bluff/Hide & why you would ever do it - I can run behind one of six pillars, but if I don't distract you first, you know precisely where I am. So any advantage I have won't last long.
I've always been of the opinion that concealment breaks observation. I've had this conversation a number of times. Nothing new has been said or is likely to be. Neither side will be convinced short of a FAQ. *shrug*
Can you give me a scenario where you would ever use the "look a monkey" option under those circumstances?
I've always been of the opinion that concealment breaks observation. I've had this conversation a number of times. Nothing new has been said or is likely to be. Neither side will be convinced short of a FAQ. *shrug*Can you give me a scenario where you would ever use the "look a monkey" option under those circumstances?
Edited above while you were posting.
RE: Bluff/Hide & why you would ever do it - I can run behind one of six pillars, but if I don't distract you first, you know precisely where I am. So any advantage I have won't last long.
option 1) Look a monkey (standard action) move behind a pillar. (move action, I will assume that the -10 accounts for moving fast.)
Option 2) Withdraw , go behind the pillar, stealth, move again to another pillar. no penalty, 1 skill 1 stat and double the range of movement possible, i can be within any pillar within 25 feet of the first pillar at a mere -5 you have to be within 30 feet of your starting point at a -10 and two different skillchecks with 2 different stats.
Nothing new has been said or is likely to be. Neither side will be convinced short of a FAQ. *shrug*
Actually something new has been said.
In Ultimate Intrigue, designers stated that "the reason why you need cover or concealment" in the first place, is to avoid observation. They also state that, for that purpose "dim light or a curtain work just fine"
But I agree that we need a FAQ, because despite the new rules being mostly clear, some people are still confused.
I made FAQ posts above, trying to follow the FAQ guidelines (single question per post, question is easy to find, etc) please consider marking them for FAQ
Right. You're somewhere in a 30' radius of where I last saw you (at -10). Or somewhere within a 25' radius of where I last saw you behind that pillar (at -5).
Assuming we want to treat Withdraw as two move actions, anyway. You use a full-round action to move twice your speed, not two separate move actions. So if you're comfortable with cover/concealment changing the game mid-action, then sure. Otherwise, Stealth can't be used on the second half of the Withdraw action because you didn't have C/C when you started moving. That's one potential issue.
More importantly, you'd also have to decide if Stealth is at all possible when your movement is meeting or exceeding your normal rate of movement (30' for the first part of that Withdraw, per your setup). Reading the Stealth and Withdraw sections in concert, one could make a pretty good argument that you can only combine the two if you Withdraw no more than 25' (for a 30' base character) since Withdrawing is one action that let's you move up to double your speed as a part of a single action but Stealth limits you to less than your normal rate of speed if you want to use Stealth in conjunction with your movement.
So really, I suppose it depends on how you choose to read Withdraw. I tend to think that you can't Withdraw and use Stealth if your Withdraw distance meets or exceeds your normal movement. But if you aren't so inclined, then yes, the Withdraw option is better than distraction. Regardless, it again doesn't change how I read Stealth.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, I found the answer,
this is neither vague nor ambiguous.
Read carefully
A sense is precise if it allows the creature to use targeted effects on creatures and objects it senses, and to attack enemies without suffering a miss chance from concealment
Normal Sight is explicitly a Precise Sense, but it ceases to be a precise sense vs a concealed opponent, because of this very rule I just quoted.
Now,
Observation has the strict requirement of being able to use precise senses:
Observing: The final state is when the perceiving character is able to directly observe the sneaking character with a precise sense, such as vision.
You are, technically, not observed if the creature cannot use a precise sense VS you
Because in dim light Sight suffers a 20% miss chance, Sight in Dim Light cannot possibly be a precise sense.
It follows that dim Light breaks observation vs normal sighted creatures.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing new has been said or is likely to be. Neither side will be convinced short of a FAQ. *shrug*Actually something new has been said.
In Ultimate Intrigue, designers stated that "the reason why you need cover or concealment" in the first place, is to avoid observation. They also state that, for that purpose "dim light or a curtain work just fine".
That part isn't new, just a more explicit statement of how I've always read the rule. Also, UI came out prior to the last conversation I had about this, so the precise sense stuff came up then. Most people walked away feeling the same as they did before (though your last post's content was not discussed, I don't think - that's a nice find).
Assuming we want to treat Withdraw as two move actions, anyway.
There is NO ambiguity there, at all. You stealth as part of movement, not move actions. Even then it's 1 full round action, during which you hit cover at some point and according to you can begin stealthing.
[]quote]You use a full-round action to move twice your speed, not two separate move actions. So if you're comfortable with cover/concealment changing the game mid-action, then sure.
*headscratch* isn't that the entire point of the cover concealment thing? I'm genuinely confused as to your position here. Are you saying you need cover/concealment at the START of your action? If so Why?
More importantly, you'd also have to decide if Stealth is at all possible when your movement is meeting or exceeding your normal rate of movement
There's no ambiguity here.
. When moving at a speed greater than half but less than your normal speed
So it's your movement rate that matters. Not your movement.
But if you aren't so inclined, then yes, the Withdraw option is better than distraction. Regardless, it again doesn't change how I read Stealth.
It's on a long list of why that reading is the worse one.