Is sniping now useless?

[Ravingdork]

Insofar as I can tell, there are no more ranged penalties to Perception checks. While that removes a lot of alleged absurdities (like not being able to see the sun), it also means that the chief thing allowing a sniper to hide no longer exists.

Say you're a high level pro sniper with +20 Stealth check modifier. You snipe someone 10,000 feet away. The victim's friends have to beat your +0 Stealth check modifier.

Even though you're 10,000 feet away, they can spot you about as easily as they can spot one another.

Surely this was not intended?

[The Mad Comrade]

The book hints that the penalties are still in place, q.v. "Stealth and hiding in forest terrain".

However, thanks to the p. 218 blurb, bottom-left corner, 80x magnification scopes less than 3 inches long such as this are 5 credits, L bulk.

[Wrath]

Maybe it's more about the idea that distances of 10 000 feet don't need a rule set to make the DM say, nah uh.

But I realise that number was used as a ridiculous number for intent.

This is now being left up to DM discretion rather than hard and fast numbers it seems. The search part of perception (which is needed to find hidden opponents now) discusses that DMs can change the difficulties depended get on other conditions then gives examples of DCS.

It also,says you can only make a search check to find things near you. That term is dependent on the DM. For example, I'd be limiting Search for things within 30 feet for most situations. Further ona barren flat plane, less in a dense jungle. So now you've got an automatic success at sniping.
If players bring scopes and other visual enhancers then that distance will change.

I like the move away from hard and fast numbers determining something rather than DMs having solid input into the situation. Helps prevent people gaming the system into oblivion.

[HWalsh]

Ravingdork wrote:

Insofar as I can tell, there are no more ranged penalties to Perception checks. While that removes a lot of alleged absurdities (like not being able to see the sun), it also means that the chief thing allowing a sniper to hide no longer exists.

Say you're a high level pro sniper with +20 Stealth check modifier. You snipe someone 10,000 feet away. The victim's friends have to beat your +0 Stealth check modifier.

Even though you're 10,000 feet away, they can spot you about as easily as they can spot one another.

Surely this was not intended?

Actually, I think this was intended.

A few things though:

1. The -20 only applies to one specific kind of check.

You only are spotted from trying to re-hide after the shot. Meaning you fire once, don't move, and nobody knows where the shot came from. Typically this is not how real world snipers operate. Usually they know what direction it came from, this is why real-world snipers reposition themselves after a successful shot. If you shoot, then move, and are 10,000 feet away, you can hide as normal without the -20 penalty to the check.

So all you have to do is shoot then hide. Sure they saw you, but they don't see you now, and what they can't see they can't shoot.

2. No, they never intended you to be invisibly attacking characters from 10,000 feet away with complete impunity. Not only would that suck for everyone who isn't a Sniper in the group, players would (rightfully) feel they were being cheated.

3. No, they never intended everyone to max out Perception or instantly die to people from long range.

4. No Master Sniper is going to "just" have a +20. You can get a +20 without as early as level 8 with virtually any class - Much earlier with magic, feats, etc.

-----

The problem with sniping in RPGs is this:

"It is only fun for the sniper."

Edit to add:
This is true of overly stealthy characters/groups as well. I was recently in a 5e game that had one of the "annoying" stealth rogues. Namely every word out of his mouth was, "I'm sneaking!"

Every combat inevitably went the same. He'd come out of stealth, get a full turn where nobody else could act, and would get sneak attack, and get 2 attacks off. Every time. Like clockwork. On top of that he usually went first so, yup, almost every combat we would have to sit through 4+ attacks by one character back to back. I, as a player, was sick of it.

As a GM I have also had that issue running Pathfinder. My players would have such high optimized scores in whatever their "thing" was that there was virtually no chance for failure. I stopped having fun at certain levels. I found that I couldn't run APs without significant modifications to every major encounter because there was no challenge to the players and thus, for me, no fun as a GM.

I would, outright, detest running a game where one of my players played an invisible super long range sniper who shot all of the major NPCs from 10,000 feet away and would eventually lose interest in running the game. This would cause either:

A. Conveniently none of the major campaign enemies ever being outside. Conveniently making this tactic 100% impossible.

B. Conveniently every major NPC would have a counter for this tactic to avoid getting cheese ganked.

Alternatively I could get so frustrated with my players that I would set up a situation where THEY were under attack from the invisible sniper. They would be annoyed at it. Then I would have to say, "Gee. Now you know how I feel."

[Wrath]

@HWalsh- the stealth thing in 5e is something a few folks have noticed.

Blind sight, readied actions, detect magic, detect thoughts all mess that plan up.

Things with perception as maxed as the rogue also mess it up.

But it certainly gets annoying if left to run rampant for too long.

As for 10,000 feet of sniping hell....it's just not going to pop up that often in a game honestly. It would make for a good scenario to run against the players once or twice, but that's about it. And unless your game is specifically open world warfare scenario, then most combats are going to be well and truly inside the range of between 30 to 120 feet or so. Closer for close quarters ship combat.

[The Mad Comrade]

There are a few problems with leaving it entirely up to GM fiat. Ones that run up against (a) reasonable suspensions of disbelief, and (b) cribbing something suitable from a different game system. As things stand, Ravingdork's questions are fair ones: are we to believe that there is no penalty to Perception based on (a) how big something is - it's far, far easier to see the office building that those working within at 10,000'; and (b) how far away they are, without visual assistance.

10,000' is the maximum possible distance at which the highest item level sniper rifle can be fired at a target. How does one go about seeing a target, environment permitting, at that distance when the game has presented such equipment as being readily available to those in the know with enough credits? It is perfectly reasonable that an advanced-technology sniper rifle can be accurately fired at a target at that range.

It is possible to identify a Medium-sized creature as a humanoid at a fair distance. For most creatures we cannot identify anything smaller than a building or a vehicle at that range without visual assistance. Identifying said humanoid's details are not usually possible at the furthest ranges of many encounter distances.

I agree that this needs to be simplified - but right now it is too vague.

re: Stealth rogues becoming old hat. That's what they do, it's their shtick and they should be able to have it work quite often. It may get tiresome, but (a) they get one shot at it; (b) they're now prime target #1 unless they outright kill all of the bad guys on the opening salvo; and (c) there are a gaggle of defenses baked into the game that counters it to varying degrees of success.

[Scarvexx]

SF P.396
Creatures can usually see 5d8×100 feet if the sky is completely clear. Also on a good sized planet 16,000 ft is beyond the horison.

I'd give total concealment unless they have a counter sniper.

[The Mad Comrade]

Scarvexx wrote:

SF P.396

Creatures can usually see 5d8×100 feet if the sky is completely clear. Also on a good sized planet 16,000 ft is beyond the horison.

I'd give total concealment unless they have a counter sniper.

See what, exactly? I can't see Farmer Bob, presuming visual clarity, as anything other than maybe some humanoid wearing 'farmer clothes' at 800'. I can see the farmhouse, the barn and other obvious large structural details at that range. You won't be able to identify that 'farmer' at that range - are you about to shoot a wanted scumbag or Farmer Bob?

16,000' is beyond the top-end rifle's maximum range. Distance to horizon depends on elevation above sea level or the local equivalent. Eye level at 5' 7" horizon distance at sea level is 2.9 miles (a bit over 15,000'). From a 100' observation tower that becomes 12.2 miles/19.6 km.

[Randalfin]

Just an observation on rules as a forum lurker, I'd like to point out you can absolutely see the sun via Pathfinder perception rules.

The distance modifier for perception is +1 per 10 feet. Which means that the distance to the sun, assuming it's still 93 million miles from Golarion, gives it about a +49 billion on its perception DC.

However, with the exponentially increasing penalty from size modifiers over colossal, that gives it a negative somewhere in the 95 billions.

If my math is off, it should still only be by 10 billion or so. Hence, even if the sun managed to roll a stealth check, it's penalty is way too high.

Just a note from a random lurker. Don't mind me.

[The Mad Comrade]

Randalfin wrote:

Just an observation on rules as a forum lurker, I'd like to point out you can absolutely see the sun via Pathfinder perception rules.

The distance modifier for perception is +1 per 10 feet. Which means that the distance to the sun, assuming it's still 93 million miles from Golarion, gives it about a +49 billion on its perception DC.

However, with the exponentially increasing penalty from size modifiers over colossal, that gives it a negative somewhere in the 95 billions.

If my math is off, it should still only be by 10 billion or so. Hence, even if the sun managed to roll a stealth check, it's penalty is way too high.

Just a note from a random lurker. Don't mind me.

laughs, laughs, and laughs some more

I like the way you think. :)

[BigNorseWolf]

It is, but not for the reason you think.

Starfinder doesn't have the observed clause in stealth. Without that, instead of taking the absurd penalties you are far better off shooting, and with your move action stealthing and then moving somewhere.

[Ravingdork]

There's no such thing as a size (much less size modifiers) above colossal in Pathfinder. I suppose the GM could impose a significant circumstance penalty due to brightness though.

In any case, that's a bit off topic.

[The Mad Comrade]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

It is, but not for the reason you think.

Starfinder doesn't have the observed clause in stealth. Without that, instead of taking the absurd penalties you are far better off shooting, and with your move action stealthing and then moving somewhere.

Which is about how it works IRL, isn't it?

[pauljathome]

Randalfin wrote:

If my math is off,.

Your math is WAY, WAY off.

The DC to perception for distance is linear. So, a -49 billion on the roll.

Let us assume that the size modifier chart continues (it doesn't say it does, but lets allow it).

The Sun is about 7 million times the size of a person. That is 23 doublings. Each doubling (size increase) yields you a -4.

So, -49 billion + 92

[The Mad Comrade]

pauljathome wrote:

Randalfin wrote:

If my math is off,.

Your math is WAY, WAY off.

The DC to perception for distance is linear. So, a -49 billion on the roll.

Let us assume that the size modifier chart continues (it doesn't say it does, but lets allow it).

The Sun is about 7 million times the size of a person. That is 23 doublings. Each doubling (size increase) yields you a -4.

So, -49 billion + 92

+93 billion circumstance bonus due to brightness, per Ravingdork's excellent suggestion. Distance penalty is -93 billion, reducing the DC to 0. The size of the sun in our sky at that distance remains at +16 (Colossal), although it frequently gains concealment via Earth's cloud cover and of course how much cover it gets depending upon where one is on the planet. Night time = total cover. ;)

[Tiny Coffee Golem]

Are you two done measuring your slide rules yet? Skill is also important. not just size.

[Ravingdork]

*bump*

[Lane_S]

Sniping when done properly is not useless.

In many environments the range increments of sniper rifles far out distance the effective spot distances ( terrain effects section). This is countered by the need for line of sight and knowing where the target will be.

Case 1: The enemy has set up camp on a hill in the jungle. The area for 500 yards around the camp has been cleared. The commanders quarters and command post are both obscured however you have found a spot with LoS to the latrine. You set up 1000 yards out and wait. You have one shot because a standard move will take the target out of LoS. After the shot they can not spot you because of distance however they do send out patrols in the direction you likely fired from

Case 2: You are providing cover fire for your team in an urban environment. You set up on a roof top with a view of the entire street and 200 yards away from the shop front the team is at. You are able to fire for several rounds as the opponents chase your team before they take a side street and out of LoS. Normal limits for perception in urban terrain is 2D6x10 feet however you are elevated making it closer to hill terrain. The opponents are able to spot you at this range however it will take them several rounds to reach the building and many more to reach the roof. If you planned well you have multiple exit routes. Even if they do spot you a move action will take you out of LoS and give total cover and concealment.

Both cases give a huge advantage to the sniper but only if the target is in a limited area. As a GM I would require the players to scout the area and find ideal places to set up, using skill checks. These could include perception, survival and stealth. You may want to modify the stealth check by using Int instead of Dex to identify where to hide. It would also be appropriate to limit the snipers field of fire based on terrain. In case 2 he has a fairly large area to fire on but likely to have signs, awnings, civilians etc in the area. He is also looking thru a scope with narrow field of view. In that situation I would restrict them to selecting targets in a single 2D6x10 radius area but allow them to select a new area each round.

[rook1138]

We just used sniping the other day...
monster only had 15ft move, but a 100ft aura. so we stayed well out of the aura and sniped it with sniper rifles. One would aim and fire while the other moved back and reloaded (the rest of the party stayed between or behind the snipers for support purposes, just in case). repeat till the monster died.

[Jack Rift]

The second AP has a Snipping setup. The bad guy has superior cover and hight advantage. Besides has help from another critter. Players have aid of multiple partial or full cover to keep it somewhat balanced. While this isn't the crazy ranges that the rifles can use, I consider this a sniper's ideal setup. Finding the sniper was actually really hard.