| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I've looked over the stealth rules and either I don't understand stealth or they are just way messed up. Let's run out this out. The party is ambushed by 3 hobgoblins in the woods. One is rogue the other 2 rangers (that's more a filler and has little to do with my question). One of the players run past few tree's then says I want to stealth behind the tree. Now the hob's saw him run there and not past it. I allowed this although I don't think I should have done that. I mean he was observed running to the location even if they couldn't fully see, even though cover allows a stealth. It allowed him to step out toss a javelin and do sneak damage. He then ran to another tree and repeated this all battle. I had my doubts but let it happen to keep the game moving. I later looked at stealth and read down to sniping and it takes a -20 to stay stealthed and you aren't moving into view at all. So what's the rule on this?
The hobgoblins were observing the player character.
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.
That's why there is this option:
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.
To use stealth against someone you need cover (or concealment) and also to be unobserved (or create a diversion).
Basically, no your player couldn't do what you allowed him to.
In short, without special abilities stealth doesn't work well in combat.
Stealth rules are broken. People are always observing you using smell and hearing. So by the logic that Claxon quoted, stealth cannot work as written.
My group plays that if you can get concealment or cover, and you are staying there (not just running through), you can attempt to stealth.
In my opinion, if you don't use the diversion option that Claxon mentioned, they saw you run into the bushes and disappear but they know where you disappeared. If you do use the diversion, they don't have any idea where you went, you just vanished.
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of posts debating how stealth should work vs. how it is written. You're going to have a very difficult time finding the perfect answer.
"Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth." I think that is the most important line.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
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.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.
Cover and Stealth Checks: You can use cover to make a Stealth check. Without cover, you usually need concealment (see below) to make a Stealth check.
Concealment and Stealth Checks: You can use concealment to make a Stealth check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Stealth check.
So the CRB appears to come out really strongly and say that cover or concealment is sufficient for stealth, but then starts talking about being "observed", without defining what that is. Is someone with cover or concealment "observed"? Then why doesn't the Combat chapter remind us of that?
That is where Ultimate Intrigue comes in:
Since Perception is the skill that determines what a character sees, hears, and senses in the game world, it is no wonder that it’s often considered the most important skill in the game. Stealth and Perception often oppose one another, and the two of them together can be difficult to adjudicate.
Active and Automatic Perception: There are two ways Perception checks happen in the game. The first way is automatic and reactive. Certain stimuli automatically call for a Perception check, such as a creature using Stealth (which calls for an opposed Perception check), or the sounds of combat or talking in the distance. The flip side is when a player actively calls for a Perception check because her PC is intentionally searching for something. This always takes at least a move action, but often takes significantly longer. The Core Rulebook doesn’t specify what area a PC can actively search, but for a given Perception check it should be no larger than a 10-foot-by-10-foot area, and often a smaller space if that area is cluttered. For instance, in an intrigue-based game, it is fairly common to look through a filing cabinet full of files. Though the cabinet itself might fill only a 5-foot-by-5-foot area, the number of files present could cause a search to take a particularly long time.
Precise and Imprecise Senses: Since Perception covers all senses, it is important to distinguish which of those senses count as observing a creature that is using Stealth. Some senses are more precise than others. Imprecise senses allow a creature to pinpoint the location of another creature, but they don’t allow for the use of targeted effects, and attacks against those creatures are subject to miss chances from concealment. A few examples of imprecise senses are hearing, scent, blindsense, and tremorsense. 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. Precise senses allow the creature to pinpoint an enemy’s location. 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. Senses other than the listed ones count as precise or imprecise at the GM’s discretion. A creature might have a limited form of a sense that makes it too weak to count as precise, such as a beast with primitive eyes that has difficulty seeing a creature that isn’t moving.
Okay, so to "observe" someone you need to use a precise sense, light sight; hearing doesn't suffice.
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. As the Core Rulebook mentions, 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.
So here we have it: cover or concealment make sight an imprecise sense and that makes them sufficient for Stealth.
States of Awareness: In general, there are four states of awareness that a creature can have with regard to another creature using Stealth.
- Unaware: On one end of the spectrum, a sneaking creature can succeed at Stealth well enough that the other creature isn’t even aware that the creature is present. This state allows the sneaking creature to use abilities such as the vigilante’s startling appearance. The Stealth skill description in the Core Rulebook says that perceiving creatures that fail to beat a sneaking character’s Stealth check result are not aware of the sneaking character, but that is different from being totally unaware. This is also true of a creature that has previously been made aware of the creature’s presence or location (see below) but is currently unable to observe the sneaking creature. In those cases, the sneaking creature can’t use abilities such as startling presence.
- Aware of Presence: The next state is when the perceiving creature is aware of the sneaking creature’s presence, though not of anything beyond that. This is the state that happens when an invisible creature attacks someone and then successfully uses Stealth so the perceiving creature doesn’t know where the attacker moved, or when a sniper succeeds at her Stealth check to snipe. A perceiving creature that becomes aware of a hidden creature’s presence will still be aware of its presence at least until the danger of the situation continues, if not longer (though memory-altering magic can change this).
- Aware of Location: The next state is awareness of location. This happens when a perceiving character uses an imprecise sense, such as hearing or tremorsense, to discover what square a hidden or invisible creature inhabits.
- 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.
So here's a lot more info. Apparently, you can still hide even if people know where you're hiding. All that's truly required is that they can't see you clearly.
---
So what was all that "making a distraction to hide" stuff about then?
That's an unfortunate piece of writing, but I think the best interpretation is this:
- If you're in cover or concealment, you can hide. Nothing else is needed.
- If you're in the open, you can't hide because people can observe you.
- A Bluff check can momentarily distract people, breaking observation. This allows you to Stealth and move elsewhere unseen.
- If you're not in cover/concealment by the end of your turn people automatically see you again.
Bluff isn't the only way to break observation. Running around the corner also does it. But people saw you run around the corner, so they can follow you and ruin your cover/concealment.
What Bluff does is allow you to Stealth right from your starting point, so that people don't know which bush you went to hide behind.
Under this reading, sniping from concealment is only really important for full attacks, as otherwise you'd just "hide" again by . . . sitting there.
I dunno. It seems silly that you can "hide" by standing behind a lone pillar.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sniping is a whole other thing.
If you're hidden in the bushes you can shoot, and then Stealth; or you can shoot and then Snipe-stealth. Both are allowed due to Concealment.
Sniping-stealth is much harder, but if you succeed, people don't know where the arrow came from. If you don't use Sniping but regular Stealth, people know the arrow came from that shrub and they can go and flush you out of it.
Having seen it in action in a scenario, it's really quite terrifying if Bane arrows are coming your way and you don't know where the archer is. You don't even know in which direction to run to gain cover.
If there are terrain features that allow for the rogue to hind behind and take cover there is often the same terrain features for the hobgoblins to take cover behind. Staying out in the open when you just seen someone hide behind a tree is asking for trouble. This is why fighting elves is so terrifying. They are so many places to hide and line of sight is often only 20 feet or so before shrubs and bushes and trees obscure things.
Dont punish clever use of terrain, learn from it
Ok great but my question is/was do you get sneak damage every round you make a stealth check the round before. In the above example the hob's were firing bows so they weren't going to advance to bring 1 of 6 characters back into sight.
If you are in a room with large chest and that's it nothing else (who knows why there is a chest sitting alone in a room ). A rouge falls runs behind the chest and drops down out of view makes a stealth check. The next round pops up and fires his bow (from 20' away cause I don't to hear about the no sneak from more than 30' thing) he would get his bow damage plus his sneak damage cause he was observed at the start of his turn?
That depends on how your interpreting it.
I say no, you need to create a diversion before you take to your hiding place or else everyone knows where you are, they just don't have line of sight to you. My reading of the rules is that unobserved is more than just lacking line of sight, you must divert the enemy's attention so they don't know where you went.
Other's in this thread seem to interpret it as getting cover/concealment to be sufficient to make a stealth check despite someone watching you walk behind the chest in the middle of the room.
Sniping is a whole other thing.
If you're hidden in the bushes you can shoot, and then Stealth; or you can shoot and then Snipe-stealth. Both are allowed due to Concealment.
Sniping-stealth is much harder, but if you succeed, people don't know where the arrow came from. If you don't use Sniping but regular Stealth, people know the arrow came from that shrub and they can go and flush you out of it.
Having seen it in action in a scenario, it's really quite terrifying if Bane arrows are coming your way and you don't know where the archer is. You don't even know in which direction to run to gain cover.
If you're hidden in the bushes and shoot, you automatically break stealth. Unless these bushes provide full cover or full concealment, you're target can likely now see you and you can't use stealth.
As for seeing which direction an arrow is coming from, this has nothing to do with stealth. Noticing an arrow, like noticing anything else, is governed by perception. There's no set DC for noticing an arrow, so it would be up to the GM to set the DC and determine how much information a successful check grants.
Ok great but my question is/was do you get sneak damage every round you make a stealth check the round before. In the above example the hob's were firing bows so they weren't going to advance to bring 1 of 6 characters back into sight.
If you are in a room with large chest and that's it nothing else (who knows why there is a chest sitting alone in a room ). A rouge falls runs behind the chest and drops down out of view makes a stealth check. The next round pops up and fires his bow (from 20' away cause I don't to hear about the no sneak from more than 30' thing) he would get his bow damage plus his sneak damage cause he was observed at the start of his turn?
The rogue can't hide if she's being observed.
If she uses a bluff to create a distraction ("Look, elephant!"), you weren't looking at the rogue when she hid and didn't see her hide behind the chest. (One could make an assumption, but in a world of magic there's a lot of ways one could simply disappear from sight.)If the Rogue is hidden and makes an attack, you're denied your Dex, and she gets sneak attack.
That depends on how your interpreting it.
I say no, you need to create a diversion before you take to your hiding place or else everyone knows where you are, they just don't have line of sight to you. My reading of the rules is that unobserved is more than just lacking line of sight, you must divert the enemy's attention so they don't know where you went.
Other's in this thread seem to interpret it as getting cover/concealment to be sufficient to make a stealth check despite someone watching you walk behind the chest in the middle of the room.
But there's a lot of grey area in between the two that doesn't really seem covered by the rules. Sure if I duck behind the only person sized piece of cover in the room and try to surprise you by shooting at you or sneak away elsewhere next turn, it makes sense that it shouldn't work.
What if it's a larger piece of cover - a low wall where I could pop up anywhere and take my shot or undergrowth I could shoot out of?
There are no rules handling that distinction. By RAW, we have to pick either "you need a distraction or you can't stealth, even if you move into any kind of cover or concealment" or "You can always use stealth if you reach any kind of cover or concealment"
You're correct, and I choose the "you need to create a distraction or have some other ability that allows you to make a stealth check while being observed."
Such as Hide in Plain Sight.
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.
And to contrast that:
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.
If you only needed cover or concealment to make a stealth check, and a 12th level ranger can use stealth in any favored terrain even if it doesn't offer cover or concealment, then by the "only cover/concealment" interpretation you don't ever need Hide In Plain Sight on a Ranger. But since it's a higher level ability, we should probably assume it does something and isn't redundant. And this is the main reasoning I don't accept the interpretation you can hide while being observed without making a distraction (or something else).
By RAW, we have to pick either "you need a distraction or you can't stealth, even if you move into any kind of cover or concealment" or "You can always use stealth if you reach any kind of cover or concealment"
You need to create a distraction or you can't stealth unless you're in full cover or concealment.
In normal cover or partial concealment, you're still being observed and can't stealth.The rules aren't robust enough to cover every corner case. Hiding behind a large tree (that provides full cover) works exactly the same if that tree is in a forest or an empty field.
You're correct, and I choose the "you need to create a distraction or have some other ability that allows you to make a stealth check while being observed."Such as Hide in Plain Sight.
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.And to contrast that:
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.If you only needed cover or concealment to make a stealth check, and a 12th level ranger can use stealth in any favored terrain even if it doesn't offer cover or concealment,...
It seems like these might be the counters to this argument.
Normal, I need a distraction or cover/concealment to start stealth and I need to end my turn in cover/concealment.
Camouflage, I need a distraction or cover/concealment to start stealth but I don't need to end my turn in cover/concealment. Thus using stealth without cover/concealment
Hide in Plain Sight, I don't need a distraction or cover/concealment to start stealth or need to end my turn in cover/concealment.
|
|
Ok great but my question is/was do you get sneak damage every round you make a stealth check the round before. In the above example the hob's were firing bows so they weren't going to advance to bring 1 of 6 characters back into sight.
If you are in a room with large chest and that's it nothing else (who knows why there is a chest sitting alone in a room ). A rouge falls runs behind the chest and drops down out of view makes a stealth check. The next round pops up and fires his bow (from 20' away cause I don't to hear about the no sneak from more than 30' thing) he would get his bow damage plus his sneak damage cause he was observed at the start of his turn?
Yes, more or less.
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).
You have to have successfully used Stealth last turn.
The idea behind it is that although people know you're hiding behind that chest, they can't see you so they don't know when you're going to come up and shoot them. That makes it harder for them to dodge.
|
|
Sniping is a whole other thing.
If you're hidden in the bushes you can shoot, and then Stealth; or you can shoot and then Snipe-stealth. Both are allowed due to Concealment.
Sniping-stealth is much harder, but if you succeed, people don't know where the arrow came from. If you don't use Sniping but regular Stealth, people know the arrow came from that shrub and they can go and flush you out of it.
Having seen it in action in a scenario, it's really quite terrifying if Bane arrows are coming your way and you don't know where the archer is. You don't even know in which direction to run to gain cover.
If you're hidden in the bushes and shoot, you automatically break stealth. Unless these bushes provide full cover or full concealment, you're target can likely now see you and you can't use stealth.
As for seeing which direction an arrow is coming from, this has nothing to do with stealth. Noticing an arrow, like noticing anything else, is governed by perception. There's no set DC for noticing an arrow, so it would be up to the GM to set the DC and determine how much information a successful check grants.
If you're hidden in the bushes and shoot and don't use sniping you break stealth. If you used Sniping successfully you don't:
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.
Fair enough, you could probably see a general direction from which the arrow came. But it can't be too precise, because then sniping wouldn't "maintain your obscured location", which it explicitly does. So enemies just sort of get a compass direction to search in.
Unless these bushes provide full cover or full concealment, you're target can likely now see you and you can't use stealth.
You don't need full cover or concealment. The Core Rulebook states both in the Stealth skill and in the Cover/Concealment rules that "if you have cover/concealment you can use stealth".
Ultimate Intrigue goes on to explain what that means: because you have concealment, sight is no longer a precise sense against you (there's miss chance; apparently cover also counts according to both the CRB and UI), and you aren't observed well enough to make Stealth impossible.
Sniping is a whole other thing.
If you're hidden in the bushes you can shoot, and then Stealth; or you can shoot and then Snipe-stealth. Both are allowed due to Concealment.
Sniping-stealth is much harder, but if you succeed, people don't know where the arrow came from. If you don't use Sniping but regular Stealth, people know the arrow came from that shrub and they can go and flush you out of it.
Having seen it in action in a scenario, it's really quite terrifying if Bane arrows are coming your way and you don't know where the archer is. You don't even know in which direction to run to gain cover.
If you're hidden in the bushes and shoot, you automatically break stealth. Unless these bushes provide full cover or full concealment, you're target can likely now see you and you can't use stealth.
As for seeing which direction an arrow is coming from, this has nothing to do with stealth. Noticing an arrow, like noticing anything else, is governed by perception. There's no set DC for noticing an arrow, so it would be up to the GM to set the DC and determine how much information a successful check grants.
If you're hidden in the bushes and shoot and don't use sniping you break stealth. If you used Sniping successfully you don't:
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.Fair enough, you could probably see a general direction from which the arrow came. But it can't be too precise, because then sniping wouldn't "maintain your obscured location", which it explicitly does. So enemies just sort of get a compass direction to search in.
Unless these bushes...
I don't allow my players any information. If you do than multiple successful sniping actions become pointless and leave room for argument. If you say that the attack comes from the north, the player is going to try and watch the north. Then when there is another attack they are going to argue that they know where it is coming from. Then each round they are going to want to know more and more precisely where it is.
Or they are just going to drop an AoE on the area and expect it to damage the foe.
They should not know where the attack comes from, period.
Hold on, so some of you are saying that (back the chest idea). Rogue shoots drops behind the chest and makes a stealth check. Pops up the next round and fire inflicting sneak damage. Falls prone as a free action and uses stealth again. Pops up the following round (from behind that chest everyone saw him drop behind.) but thanks to high stealth roll stands up fires an arrow and does sneak damage then fall prone, rinse and repeat? That can't possibly be RAI.
I hate to harp on this cause I know it's a circular argument but, a rogue is hiding pops up fires a bow, has the feat shot on the run and ends his turn behind another, lets say 3' diameter tree which is enough to proved some kind of cover, not full but some, rolls a stealth and goes undetected because he's ended his turn in cover?
also I saw the whole half wall thing but I mean you don't have to pop up cause guess what you have partial cover and that means you can stand there and use stealth cause you have "cover".
You attack someone or something without darkvision or low light at night. Smash him with your melee weapon 5' away but guess what that's 20% concealment so I'm gonna go ahead and use my stealth and sneak again next round not to mention, what if he misses his perception he can't attack cause he can't find you?
I could make move outlandish argument but I mean RAW, right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, using sniping means that you stay hidden in one location. It doesn't let you use 'shot on the run' to stay stealthed while you attack and find cover elsewhere.
Without sniping, attacking breaks stealth, and you need both cover/concealment AND to not be observed to re-enter stealth, so all of your other examples just don't apply.
the cover/concealment is enough to make you not observed so you can stealth. they may know where you are, but you're not observed via clarification from intrigue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like Stealth was easier to figure out before UI. I'm going to stick with that.
By RAW, we have to pick either "you need a distraction or you can't stealth, even if you move into any kind of cover or concealment" or "You can always use stealth if you reach any kind of cover or concealment"You need to create a distraction or you can't stealth unless you're in full cover or concealment.
In normal cover or partial concealment, you're still being observed and can't stealth.The rules aren't robust enough to cover every corner case. Hiding behind a large tree (that provides full cover) works exactly the same if that tree is in a forest or an empty field.
Where do you get the "full cover or concealment"? Makes sense to me, but the stealth rules don't distinguish, near as I can tell.
And the one tree that provides full cover lets you do the duck behind it, then pop out to sneak attack thing we were just complaining about.
In order to use stealth you need two things:
1. Cover or concealment. Any type of cover or concealment will do.
2. You need to be unobserved. Being in cover isn't enough as most sight-based creatures will still be able to see you. Total cover or concealment, however, will prevent most creatures from seeing you, fulfilling this requirement.
So, just being in cover or concealment just satisfies #1, but you'll still have to satisfy #2 somehow. Being in total cover or concealment will usually satisfy both #'s 1 and 2.
Hold on, so some of you are saying that (back the chest idea). Rogue shoots drops behind the chest and makes a stealth check. Pops up the next round and fire inflicting sneak damage. Falls prone as a free action and uses stealth again. Pops up the following round (from behind that chest everyone saw him drop behind.) but thanks to high stealth roll stands up fires an arrow and does sneak damage then fall prone, rinse and repeat? That can't possibly be RAI.
First the Rogue has to hide behind the chest. Unless this is a very large chest which provides full cover chances are she can still be seen. She'll have to make a bluff check or something to satisfy the 2nd requirement of stealth.
Once she's in stealth she can sneak attack once, then create a distraction and hide again as a move action. She can't get off a full-attack without some way to stealth faster than as part of movement.
She can keep doing this round after round until someone walks behind the chest. At this point she would no longer have cover from the person behind the chest and could not use stealth against him (but she could still use stealh against every one else.)
I hate to harp on this cause I know it's a circular argument but, a rogue is hiding pops up fires a bow, has the feat shot on the run and ends his turn behind another, lets say 3' diameter tree which is enough to proved some kind of cover, not full but some, rolls a stealth and goes undetected because he's ended his turn in cover?
Ending her turn in cover will allow her to maintain stealth. Furthermore, only characters that make their perception checks will notice her move cover.
You attack someone or something without darkvision or low light at night. Smash him with your melee weapon 5' away but guess what that's 20% concealment so I'm gonna go ahead and use my stealth and sneak again next round not to mention, what if he misses his perception he can't attack cause he can't find you?
I could make move outlandish argument but I mean RAW, right?
Again, she would have to create a distraction to hide, but yes, that's how stealth works. It's dark, characters without low-light vision can't see well in the dark and it's easy to lose track of a skilled opponent.
Edit: I should clarify some things about the shot on the run scenario.
If the Rogue shoots from stealth, then uses bluff to create a distraction and hide again, she can still move to different cover without breaking cover a second time.
If the Rogue uses shot on the run, she will break cover when she attacks, but then she can still use bluff to create a distraction and hide behind the new cover.
|
|
In order to use stealth you need two things:1. Cover or concealment. Any type of cover or concealment will do.
2. You need to be unobserved. Being in cover isn't enough as most sight-based creatures will still be able to see you. Total cover or concealment, however, will prevent most creatures from seeing you, fulfilling this requirement.
So, just being in cover or concealment just satisfies #1, but you'll still have to satisfy #2 somehow. Being in total cover or concealment will usually satisfy both #'s 1 and 2.
No, you just need to be unobserved; cover or concealment are ways to become unobserved.
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.
|
|
Hold on, so some of you are saying that (back the chest idea). Rogue shoots drops behind the chest and makes a stealth check. Pops up the next round and fire inflicting sneak damage. Falls prone as a free action and uses stealth again. Pops up the following round (from behind that chest everyone saw him drop behind.) but thanks to high stealth roll stands up fires an arrow and does sneak damage then fall prone, rinse and repeat? That can't possibly be RAI.
I hate to harp on this cause I know it's a circular argument but, a rogue is hiding pops up fires a bow, has the feat shot on the run and ends his turn behind another, lets say 3' diameter tree which is enough to proved some kind of cover, not full but some, rolls a stealth and goes undetected because he's ended his turn in cover?
The thing that's tripping you up is what it means to succeed at Stealth. It doesn't mean people forget you were ever there, or where they last saw you. It means they can't see you clearly right now.
Because they can't see you clearly, they can't see when you're going to shoot. That makes it harder to dodge your shots and so you can make sneak attacks.
It's similar in a way to flanking: someone has difficulty seeing all threats coming and so can be sneak-attacked.
also I saw the whole half wall thing but I mean you don't have to pop up cause guess what you have partial cover and that means you can stand there and use stealth cause you have "cover".
Yes, it's like someone is already difficult to see if he's just standing there half behind the wall. But if he really works for it, back against the wall, he'd be almost impossible to see (contested Perception/Stealth roll). And because of that you don't know when he's going to shoot, so you don't know when to dodge.
You attack someone or something without darkvision or low light at night. Smash him with your melee weapon 5' away but guess what that's 20% concealment so I'm gonna go ahead and use my stealth and sneak again next round not to mention, what if he misses his perception he can't attack cause he can't find you?
I could make move outlandish argument but I mean RAW, right?
It's not outlandish. Fighting people in the dark who can see in the dark better than you do is quite dangerous.
Note that they probably can't stand entirely still and become stealthy again:
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.
So attacking someone in the dark, then taking a 5ft step while he's trying to make out exactly where you are in the dark - that's a valid tactic.
Look unless you have full cover/concealment you are being observed during a battle. I was being a smart-arse. No you can't stand behind a half wall and use stealth standing there because you have some cover, why because you were being observed. I never said anything about crouching (is crouch even an choice? I see prone condition. I see crawling. Guess someone that crouched has all the advantages of someone standing, but that's neither here nor there.) down behind the wall.
You can't stealth at night 5' away from someone you just attacked and then stealth, why because you are being observed. I never said that you also had better vision in that scenario.
You can't drop down behind a chest (unless it was a huge 5' by 5' chest I guess.) why because you are being observed. The whole standing behind a pillar thing, although I guess it can proved total cover, I could maybe give you (more than likely not though, cause that just seems silly to me, personal preference.).
You can't wear a cloak of displacement and stealth every round, You can't cast blur and stealth every round while out there fighting. Why will cause you are being observed.
Now, could you be stealth with partial cover or 20% miss concealment before a battle starts? Sure you can. I am talking about in the heat of battle though cause they can observe you which means see/hear/smell you, then you can't stealth. I sure hope they can't taste and feel you but hey to each there own! If you are visible at all they CAN observe you.
|
The thing to remember is the beginning and end of turn.
With the 6th printing of the CRB, the character needs to make stealth checks at these moments in his turn, or right after creating a distraction.
So, if the character begins his turn in cover, he may make a stealth check to hide. He goes and sneaks a close foe, who did not see him with his perception. This breaks stealth. Then the character 5 foot steps into cover from the rest of the enemies, and uses stealth at the end of turn.
Now, typically, a character does not have the action economy to get to cover after attacking a foe from stealth at the beginning of the turn, and this can be dependent on terrain, being indoors with lots of little nooks and hallways, or out in the open field with one haystack to hide behind.
And yes, the character needs to reroll the stealth check at the beginning of the turn, even if he is already in stealth.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, you just need to be unobserved; cover or concealment are ways to become unobserved.
Absolutely not. You need Cover/concealment AND you need to be unobserved. There is no rules interpretation paradigm where you can just vanish becomes a credible interpretation.
Raw: It's sheer torture of the english language to say that someone with half of their body poking around a corner, standing behind a waist high wall, or in a candle lit room 5 feet away from you is not observed.
There is simply no need to say or even bring up observed if unobserved means "have cover or concealment". The stealth rules could be 3 sentences long
Game mechanics treat them as two seperate clauses. The rangers camouflage ability and hide in plain sight make no sense if the two clauses are one and the same.
There is no point in ever using the bluff check to hide if you can simply hide at will as soon as you have cover or concealment
It leads to absurdities. You can just vanish while fighting someone around a hard corner. Two untrained farmers standing out in the middle of a moonlit pumpkin patch have a 50 50 of being able to batman each other while playing penuckle. While yes, the game does have some absurdities, if one reading of a mundane ability gets you a sane interpretation and one gives you an episode of loony toons, the former is far more likely than the latter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, you just need to be unobserved; cover or concealment are ways to become unobserved.
Absolutely not. You need Cover/concealment AND you need to be unobserved. There is no rules interpretation paradigm where you can just vanish becomes a credible interpretation.
Raw: It's sheer torture of the english language to say that someone with half of their body poking around a corner, standing behind a waist high wall, or in a candle lit room 5 feet away from you is not observed.
There is simply no need to say or even bring up observed if unobserved means "have cover or concealment". The stealth rules could be 3 sentences long
Game mechanics treat them as two seperate clauses. The rangers camouflage ability and hide in plain sight make no sense if the two clauses are one and the same.
There is no point in ever using the bluff check to hide if you can simply hide at will as soon as you have cover or concealment
It leads to absurdities. You can just vanish while fighting someone around a hard corner. Two untrained farmers standing out in the middle of a moonlit pumpkin patch have a 50 50 of being able to batman each other while playing penuckle. While yes, the game does have some absurdities, if one reading of a mundane ability gets you a sane interpretation and one gives you an episode of loony toons, the former is far more likely than the latter.
How, for the love of god, can you ever be unobserved in Pathfinder by a strict reading of the stealth rules? It clearly states that it is not limited to sight. Therefore we should acknowledge that hearing and smell also come into account. As well as shifts in the wind and even taste if one has a strong enough odor.
Beyond that, your statement does not jive with Ultimate Intrigue:
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.
Yet you seem to ignore that. Is it your opinion that this clarification is not a part of the rules? I think it clearly debunks your position.
I agree that the ranger's skills are messed up. But the original stealth rules (written at the same time as those ranger skills) didn't do anything per RAW. As such, the stealth rules have changed but not everything that those stealth rules have touched.
And as pointed out before, a successful stealth check does not automatically mean that you are forgotten about or that someone doesn't know where you are. It means that the stealthed person has gained a tactical advantage over you due to your inability to see them. And yes, this includes hiding behind a tree or ducking behind a wall. They can pop up again on either side of the tree or a few feet from where you thought they were and deny you your dexterity to your AC. But you can also just walk around the tree or wall and instantly find them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
States of Awareness: In general, there are four states of
awareness that a creature can have with regard to another
creature using Stealth.
Unaware:
Aware of Presence:
Aware of Location:
Observing:The final state is when the perceiving
character is able to directly observe the sneaking
character with a precise sense, such as vision.
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... 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.
So this shows that knowing where they are isn't the same as observing, and since it goes and clearly states that a shadowy area (dim light 20% concealment) or a curtain (some concealment) works for stealth. Thus someone that is seen can go behind a curtain and then stealth.
The intrigue rules have cleared this up and stealth is the winner.
|
...
No, you just need to be unobserved; cover or concealment are ways to become unobserved.
Absolutely not. You need Cover/concealment AND you need to be unobserved. There is no rules interpretation paradigm where you can just vanish becomes a credible interpretation.
How, for the love of god, can you ever be unobserved in Pathfinder by a strict reading of the stealth rules? It clearly states that it is not limited to sight. Therefore we should acknowledge that hearing and smell also come into account. As well as shifts in the wind and even taste if one has a strong enough odor.
I believe the "usually by sight" but can use others refers to only creatures that have other senses listed, such as scent, blindsight, and tremorsense.
So you probably cannot use bluff to stealth against a dog or wolf unless upwind or in a sewer where strong smells overwhelm them. But a human or PC without the scent ability? there are no game mechanics to support humans using their nose to notice someone is there (even though in real life we know this happens, the archtypical sniper eating local food is an example). I think that line means other senses that are not strong enough to warrant their own entry in "vision/senses" are covered by the opposed perception stealth rolls. If he rolls higher, he is also quiet enough avoid detection.
I think Ultimate Intrigue's "clarification" actually just made things more difficult to understand, because Ultimate Intrigue's statement conflict with literally everything else in the game and how it's written.
I think Ultimate Intrigue's "clarification" actually just made things more difficult to understand, because Ultimate Intrigue's statement conflict with literally everything else in the game and how it's written.
Ultimate intrigue went sentence for sentence in copying the old stealth rules and putting them a different way, which oddly enough carried the ambiguity over.
How, for the love of god, can you ever be unobserved in Pathfinder by a strict reading of the stealth rules?
Start the encounter stealthed. Thats what its for. Or Make the bluff check. Thats the reason that it's there.
Polonius is standing behind the tapestry as you walk into the room with his feet sticking out: Concealed and not observed. Make a stealth check vs perception.
Polonius stabs hamlet, walks behind the tapestry: Concealed but observed. He's not fooling anyone, you saw where he went. He still has concealment (because you can mistake a bulge in the tapestry for his kidney), but you know exactly which square to swing at.
Polonius in the middle of the room: Neither concealed nor observed
It clearly states that it is not limited to sight. Therefore we should acknowledge that hearing and smell also come into account. As well as shifts in the wind and even taste if one has a strong enough odor.
Those aren't targeting senses for the hominid bipeds that wrote the rules.
The options are not people vanishing in front of you or you can never stealth because of rules lawyering shennanigans. If you're going to respond please respond to the position that I'm taking.
Beyond that, your statement does not jive with Ultimate Intrigue:
It does actually, if you read the entire thing.
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
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.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Look they aren't taking about in the heat of battle. Yes you can stealth with any cover/concealment. IE hiding in a dark ally waiting to ambush the poor sap leaving the bar.
No you can't attack from that darkened ally, round after round using a stealth check after you shoot him. You shot him now you can snipe or be out of stealth, he see's you, you are observed even with the 20% concealment you can't stealth because you are being observed.
You could however round a corner out of sight and restealth in combat because you can't be observed around a corner. If you want to restealth in combat, id like to keep on point with that fact of the thread. You'd have to either bluff (distract) them or use the snipe skill so as that they never saw you in the first place. I mean Aware of location, they saw you shot or stab them, they are aware of your location.
Forgot to add sniping to the list of things you would never do if you could just re stealth
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Lets see if we can get a FAQ out of this;
Can you stealth while in combat, without total cover or concealment?
please hit the FAQ button guys!
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Lets see if we can get a FAQ out of this;
Can you stealth while in combat, without total cover or concealment?
please hit the FAQ button guys!
This seems to be the crux of the issue
For stealth are (cover/concealment) and non observed status two separate conditions or does concealment/cover automatically provide non observed status?