| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
It's a no-action? A free action? Or a move action?
According to the Stealth skill description "Usually none". What it means?
There is a faq from the 3.5 Hide Skill. Is it reliable, even, for Pathfinder?
"According to the Hide skill description, hiding isn't an action at all, except when you use the sniping option (see page 76 in the Player's Handbook), in which case hiding is a move action. For all practical purposes, however, you hide as a move action or as part of a move action. That is, if you're moving, you hide as part of your movement (something like drawing a weapon, see Part 2). If you don't move, it still takes you a move action to hide."
Pathfinder has the same verbage for stealth so the rule is the same
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.
If the words didnt change then the rule didn't change.
Pathfinder has the same verbage for stealth so the rule is the same
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.If the words didnt change then the rule didn't change.
For the 3.5 rules it's a move action and use the same words.
Pathfinder players should not be expected to know the rules from a prior edition unless they are converting material from said edition. I would advise against inferring anything about RAI from 3.5 (edit: unless a Paizo developer states otherwise). Using such a rule in the absence of more up-to-date rules, of course, is fine and dandy if it works for your table.
I would rule that simply hiding is not an action any more than "standing still" is an action, but it would still require a Stealth check.
I would rule that simply hiding is not an action any more than "standing still" is an action, but it would still require a Stealth check.
This can work if you use a total cover as a large wall. If you take only a partial cover as a low fence is not just required "standing still" but at least crouch down to avoid being seen.
I do not see why it should be different from 3.5 since the written rules are identical and the mechanics as well.
Even d&d 5e work the same way, it's require 1 action or a bonus action.
I hope in the response of some Paizo developer...
It's a no-action? A free action? Or a move action?
According to the Stealth skill description "Usually none". What it means?There is a faq from the 3.5 Hide Skill. Is it reliable, even, for Pathfinder?
"According to the Hide skill description, hiding isn't an action at all, except when you use the sniping option (see page 76 in the Player's Handbook), in which case hiding is a move action. For all practical purposes, however, you hide as a move action or as part of a move action. That is, if you're moving, you hide as part of your movement (something like drawing a weapon, see Part 2). If you don't move, it still takes you a move action to hide."
I think that we should consider two point:
a) What hypothetically would do someone if was sniping with a bow or crossbow in a real situation or a movie.b) What means, in fact, "standing still" while "hiding".
When "a" happens, the shooter needs to have clear sight of the target and no obstacles in the trajectory of the bolt or arrow. This means that in order to shoot, you are, in fact, suddenly moving out of your cover (as in a movie when a guy shoots from behind a corner...even if a gun is less cumbersome than a bow or a crossbow, he still has to get out of cover to shoot...).
In order to hide (unless you are using HIPS or similar), you have to be unobserved, so what the sniper is, in fact, doing is:
Moving out of cover to attack (observable)
Attacking (break Stealth)
Moving back behind cover (unobserved) + Stealth.
The move action is required because you, in fact, are stationary, but you need to perform a movement to snipe.
In normal circumstances, you'd need a diversion (standard action) to be able to hide, but this is probably reduced to a move action because the joint effect of distance and limited movement (out of cover and suddenly under cover) makes it "easier" to pull.
When "b" happens, unless there are truly exceptional circumstances (such as Teleport and stand still), you will had to choose the place to hide and move under that "cover":
So in fact the Stealth roll still happen as "part of a movement", but it is not happening when you are standing still, but, instead, when you "move" into your hiding spot.
Skarm
It's entirely plausible to attempt to hide without movement being involved. Consider Alice crouched and rummaging through a filing cabinet when she hears someone open the door. Alice immediately freezes and tries to be very, very quiet. Her initial position is already in cover, so all she has to do is try not to be heard. That's Stealth without movement. The GM may have to adjudicate such a situation.
I think using hide as no-action could break the game's mechanics. In practice, you can repeat the skill as long as you like, as it does not consume a move action. Even if you get caught up in the first failed attempt you are not automatically observed, if you're behind a full cover.
I think using hide as no-action could break the game's mechanics. In practice, you can repeat the skill as long as you like, as it does not consume a move action. Even if you get caught up in the first failed attempt you are not automatically observed, if you're behind a full cover.
It is a non-action, but it is part of the movement to go into hiding...not a separate non-action.
Skarm
The only thing that calls out a move action is sniping. There is no reason why you would need to take more time to hide while not moving than taking a 5-foot step, and there is no reason why not taking a f-foot step is game breaking when moving is actually better since the opponent might attack your previous square.
If anything required a move action it would be the ability to move and hide vs being forced to stand still.
The only thing that calls out a move action is sniping. There is no reason why you would need to take more time to hide while not moving than taking a 5-foot step, and there is no reason why not taking a f-foot step is game breaking when moving is actually better since the opponent might attack your previous square.
If anything required a move action it would be the ability to move and hide vs being forced to stand still.
Yes, I suppose you can use the "hide action" while taking a 5-foot step, but can you do a 5-foot step in the same square??
It is a non-action, but it is part of the movement to go into hiding...not a separate non-action.Skarm
We talking if we can hide while stand still and what kind of action it is.
We talking if we can hide while stand still and what kind of action it is.
You seem to miss the main point, Brondy:
Are you "born" in the place in which you "stand still hiding"?
Are you suddenly "come in existence out of nowhere" in the place you "stand still hiding"?
Probably your answer is "no" in both instances, so you had to "move" into the place in which you tried to hide and, in that case, the Stealth roll is part of that movement...not of the "I am standing still and hide" moment.
Even in the case of a teleport, you'd probably have to move under cover anyway because teleport isn't that accurate...
...in any other exceptional circumstance it would be a non-action, as per rules. And the point that "you can retry any time you want" doesn't seem valid, since the DM wouldn't probably tell you the result of the enemies Perception roll nor their Perception modifier, so you cannot know if your Stealth would succeed or fail to hide you.
Also another point against allowing a reroll in this instance and it is this:
You are declaring you are "standing still" and you are "in the very same spot in which you were before". Apart from your not being able to know if the opponent will notice (until he notices you), you'd not do *anything* that would change the circumstances for your Stealth roll and, as such, there would be no reason for allowing you another Stealth roll apart from the (metagaming) reason "My roll on d20 sucked badly"!
...instead, if you move, you could be hiding in a better spot or move more stealthily, etc... so there are plenty of reasons to allow another roll.
Skarm
I think we're arguing that very "in any other exceptional circumstance it would be a non-action", since that isn't actually specified in the rules.
Generally at some point, you're going to need to move into the cover/concealment, but what happens after that?Per my previous example, Let's say I bluff/distract and get successfully into partial cover, with no one beating my Stealth roll. That uses my actions for that round certainly - stealth as part of a movement action.
Next round, I want to get a potion from my Haversack (move action) and drink it (standard) all while staying hidden (?).Can I do that in one round, or do I need to use move actions for Stealth? Do I roll Stealth again this round? If I keep the old check, does it keep the old modifiers (including the -10 for bluff)?
I think, that with a strict interpretation, change of circumstances would require a distinct Stealth roll: For example...you move into the place (Stealth roll)...but then you get the potion from your haversack (Stealth roll)...
...but I think would be too cumbersome to manage, so, in the end, you keep your Stealth roll until the Stealth is "broken"...
Skarm
I think we're arguing that very "in any other exceptional circumstance it would be a non-action", since that isn't actually specified in the rules.
Generally at some point, you're going to need to move into the cover/concealment, but what happens after that?Per my previous example, Let's say I bluff/distract and get successfully into partial cover, with no one beating my Stealth roll. That uses my actions for that round certainly - stealth as part of a movement action.
Next round, I want to get a potion from my Haversack (move action) and drink it (standard) all while staying hidden (?).Can I do that in one round, or do I need to use move actions for Stealth? Do I roll Stealth again this round? If I keep the old check, does it keep the old modifiers (including the -10 for bluff)?
You understand what I am asking. These are few questions I would like to have an answer.
But I really care about the case when I'm behind a total cover without having used the stealth movement yet.
At the beginning of my turn, I can use stealth action without moving? I mean staying in the same square. Should I use move action?
I think using hide as no-action could break the game's mechanics. In practice, you can repeat the skill as long as you like, as it does not consume a move action. Even if you get caught up in the first failed attempt you are not automatically observed, if you're behind a full cover.
Action aside, it doesn't break much. Even if you use Stealth again, the enemy may not know where you are, but they certainly know where you were, and they'll quickly discover that the two are the same simply by using that information. Besides, ideally the player won't know they failed until the enemy makes it apparent.
Still, not a bad idea (and mostly harmless) to use a move action in such situations when the player isn't already using a move action to do something that Stealth can piggyback on. That way you don't have to worry about players trying to infini-Stealth into sneak attack when the jig is clearly up.
Action aside, it doesn't break much. Even if you use Stealth again, the enemy may not know where you are, but they certainly know where you were, and they'll quickly discover that the two are the same simply by using that information. Besides, ideally the player won't know they failed until the enemy makes it apparent.
Maybe breaks the mechanics just a little but I not like the idea of "infinite rolls". The rules should not allow it.
I prefer a FAQ to clarify, how in d&d 3.5, what kind of action is "hide" from stand still.
The only thing that calls out a move action is sniping. There is no reason why you would need to take more time to hide while not moving than taking a 5-foot step, and there is no reason why not taking a f-foot step is game breaking when moving is actually better since the opponent might attack your previous square.
If anything required a move action it would be the ability to move and hide vs being forced to stand still.
Yes, I suppose you can use the "hide action" while taking a 5-foot step, but can you do a 5-foot step in the same square??
It is a non-action, but it is part of the movement to go into hiding...not a separate non-action.SkarmWe talking if we can hide while stand still and what kind of action it is.
The point I was making was that it makes less sense to say you take more time to hide by moving than when you stand still so if you can take a 5-foot step and hide without an action, then you should be able to stand still and hide without an action.
Action aside, it doesn't break much. Even if you use Stealth again, the enemy may not know where you are, but they certainly know where you were, and they'll quickly discover that the two are the same simply by using that information. Besides, ideally the player won't know they failed until the enemy makes it apparent.Maybe breaks the mechanics just a little but I not like the idea of "infinite rolls". The rules should not allow it.
I prefer a FAQ to clarify, how in d&d 3.5, what kind of action is "hide" from stand still.
It was a nonaction in 3.5, but most GM's wouldn't allow you to make multiple checks. You got one stealth check and it applied for the entire round.
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)
Here is a quote from Jason explaining how stealth works after the errata since people still had a lot of questions.
This new wording doesn't allow players to start from stealth and walk out into an open field and stab someone in the back. It just allows you to move around without breaking stealth as long as you start and end with cover/concealment. You no longer need the distraction mechanism to stealth between areas.
Not really correct here. The wording was intentionally put together to specify "at the end of your turn". That is the moment when you check your status to see if you can maintain Stealth. This does allow you to move from cover, use Stealth to approach a target, and make a single attack, at which point, Stealth is broken, regardless of the outcome. Now, if you slay that target with one hit, and still could maintain Stealth from all other foes in the area (if say, it is dark and they cannot see you), a GM might reasonably interpret that you could maintain Stealth from other foes, but that requires GM interpretation and is not really the point of this particular situation.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
As you can see he intended for only one stealth check.
It was a nonaction in 3.5, but most GM's wouldn't allow you to make multiple checks. You got one stealth check and it applied for the entire round.
No, it wasn't. It was just a non-action if used as part of movement but from "still stand" was a move action.
I have already quoted in my first post..."If you don't move, it still takes you a move action to hide."http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040622a
I think that in Pathfinder should be the same, click on the flag FAQ to ask for a definitive clarification from developers.