Do you make two flat checks? One at DC13? Just the DC11? DC15?
Is it spelled out somewhere? (Or is it impossible, in principle?)
If you are hidden, you can't be seen.
If you're concealed, you are seen but can't be observed precisely.
I don't see how you could be concealed and hidden at the same time to the same creature. Hidden should always overwrite concealed.
If you’re concealed, you can take a hide action to become hidden.
It’s not clear to me that you then lose the concealed status (that seemed to me to be a zonal effect that affected everyone in the area).
Sounds like you go for the single DC11 but I wondered if it was explicit or if everyone else thinks it’s obvious.
I guess another way to portray the alternative is that (it seems to me) if you hide in dim light you’d be harder to hit than if you’d successfully hidden in bright light.
You don't lose the concealed condition if you hide in fog.
The concealed condition doesn’t change which of the main categories of detection apply to the creature. A creature in a light fog bank is still observed even though it’s concealed.
But the miss chance from concealed is based on the fact that you can be seen and targeted, just not seen well enough to avoid some failure chance.
If you're hidden and concealed, you can't be seen, negating the effect of concealed (or rather: overwriting it with a stronger effect). I don't think it's written somewhere in the book, but it just makes sense. Just like you don't roll 2 flat checks to attack someone who's invisible in fog.
It doesn’t make sense to me (that’s the reason for the query). The situation was fighting in a corn field - the foliage granted standard cover (+2) so you could hide in it and become hidden. It makes sense to me that you’d be even harder to shoot at in moonlight than during the day.
I’m not saying you’re wrong (I suspect you’re right), but this is what led me to wonder if it was spelled out anywhere.
Cover is not concealment.
Nothing says you can't be hidden or concealed and still have cover. You get the flat check and the AC bonus when someone attacks you while you are concealed and have cover.
If you're hidden and concealed, you can't be seen, negating the effect of concealed (or rather: overwriting it with a stronger effect). I don't think it's written somewhere in the book, but it just makes sense. Just like you don't roll 2 flat checks to attack someone who's invisible in fog.
Fog and invisibility are both different ways of becoming hidden.
The way the book is set out, it seemed to me that observed/hidden/undetected/unnoticed and concealed/invisible were orthogonal, not all one section.
It seems like you’re treating that as all one section and the latter two are kind of “special cases” of the first category.
Cover is not concealment.
Nothing says you can't be hidden or concealed and still have cover. You get the flat check and the AC bonus when someone attacks you while you are concealed and have cover.
Cover is definitely not concealment. The second paragraph is also true, but not relevant to my point.
Hiding behind cover is one way you can become hidden.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know hidden and concealed don't belong to the same category of conditions. I even quoted the book to show that you can be hidden and concealed at the same time.
Yes, you can become hidden if you're concealed OR have cover. But concealed is a matter of visibility, while cover is a matter of having an obstacle between you and an attacker. Asking about concealment in a situation that clearly had cover and NOT concealment will probably not get you the answer you're looking for.
If you're still wondering about concealment and being hidden, despite it having nothing to do with the situation in question: As far as I know, nothing in the book specifies that you don't roll two flat checks when attacking someone who's hidden and concealed. Rolling just once just makes sense. I can't tell if you just desperately want the RAW to spell it out or what exectly you're expecting to learn here.
Maybe add your question to the rules question topic and it might be answered later.
I honestly don't know what else to tell you, so I'll leave it at that.
I’m asking people’s opinion (and I have yours).
You didn’t understand my query so I offered more information. I’m not trying to persuade you of anything.
I don’t think it’s obvious (note that you initially said “I don’t see how you could be concealed and hidden at the same time to the same creature” and ended quoting the book to show that you can be both at the same time).
I suspect you just roll the highest DC, but the situation in question (archers hiding in a corn field at night) didn’t gel with my intuition, so I wondered if it was more complicated than I thought.
Concealed and hidden are mutually exclusive.
You observe a concealed creature, you do not observe a hidden one. A concealed creature is difficult to observe, and therefore receives a DC 5 flat check against being targeted. A hidden creature is not observed but its space is known, and the targeting check has a flat DC 11.
Concealed and hidden are mutually exclusive.
To be clear on where I’m seeing the question come up. The concealed section includes this:
“The concealed condition doesn’t change which of the main categories of detection apply to the creature.”
Those being observed/hidden/undetected/unnoticed and you seem to be reading in that hidden can’t also apply to a creature that is concealed. I think they both can, based on that quoted sentence, but am not sure if the intent is to then apply both flat checks (I suspect not).
Those being observed/hidden/undetected/unnoticed and you seem to be reading in that hidden can’t also apply to a creature that is concealed.
That's not accurate. Page 465 reads:
There are three conditions that measure the degree to which you can sense a creature: observed, hidden, and undetected. However, the concealed and invisible conditions can partially mask a creature, and the unnoticed condition indicates you have no idea a creature is around.
The real question in your situation is whether the target is observed or not observed. The same creature cannot both observe and not observe another creature or object.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The rules say this about making multiple flat checks:
If more than one flat check would ever cause or prevent
the same thing, just roll once and use the highest DC.
Page 450
The rules say this about making multiple flat checks:
If more than one flat check would ever cause or prevent
the same thing, just roll once and use the highest DC.Page 450
Ah, brilliant. Thanks.
Those being observed/hidden/undetected/unnoticed and you seem to be reading in that hidden can’t also apply to a creature that is concealed.That's not accurate. Page 465 reads:
The real question in your situation is whether the target is observed or not observed. The same creature cannot both observe and not observe another creature or object.
There are three conditions that measure the degree to which you can sense a creature: observed, hidden, and undetected. However, the concealed and invisible conditions can partially mask a creature, and the unnoticed condition indicates you have no idea a creature is around.
The question is whether one can be both hidden and concealed. “Not observed” isn’t a thing.
What do you think this sentence was included for?
“The concealed condition doesn’t change which of the main categories of detection apply to the creature.”