It looks like you're talking about first-edition rules, so I've flagged this to be moved to the correct forum.
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.
Taking a -20 on your Stealth check is a fairly stiff penalty, and succeeding at a Stealth check doesn't mean they don't know you're there; it just means they don't know exactly where the person who's shooting at them is exactly. Nothing's stopping them from coming to look for you.
You can only make a Stealth check if you have cover or concealment, so if the person you're shooting at comes looking for you and comes around the corner of the rock you're hiding behind so it's not between you and them anymore, there's no more stealth. With sniping, you could conceivably move from rock to rock, staying away from them and shooting, but it depends on you keeping something between you and them .. and keeping on beating their Perception checks with your -20 Stealth checks.
If you can keep passIng stealth checks at -20 you’re fighting something so far below your level that your wizard could probably just walk up to it and punch it. with their hands.
That's not true. In PF1 you could get unreasonably large bonuses to stealth for your level if you were trying. The -20 is certainly felt, but can be largely mitigated by enough bonuses and decent rolls.
But yeah, if your opponents continually fail to beat your stealth roll with their perception check you can remain hidden from them perpetually.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you can keep passIng stealth checks at -20 you’re fighting something so far below your level that your wizard could probably just walk up to it and punch it. with their hands.That's not true. In PF1 you could get unreasonably large bonuses to stealth for your level if you were trying. The -20 is certainly felt, but can be largely mitigated by enough bonuses and decent rolls.Can I see an example of this?
Taking a random CR 1 orc warrior, it has a perception DC of 16. At -20 you need to be rolling 36. Assuming you roll a natural 15, you’d need 21 points of bonuses.
That's in 2E and I would have to look up sniping rules for it should they exist. This thread seems to be focused on the 1E rules and will likely move later.
But in 1E that same orc has a -1 assuming he is taking 10 on his watch he has a 9. A first level character would need to have a 30 to beat that and that is high at first level. But some races can make that a -10 in stead of -20 so now we just need a 20 those same races are small so +4 size, usually at least a +3 dex mod, +1 rank and +3 class skill bonus so a total of +11 only needing a 9 to beat the check.
As Talonhawke said, this is the difference between PF1 and PF2.
While getting a 30+ on a roll at first level is impossible in PF2, in PF1 there are classes (archetypes) and races that reduce the penalty for sniping and magical bonuses abound. In PF1 it will get substantially easier as you level up to overcome that -20 penalty for sniping.
The original poster was referring to PF1 not PF2, and mistakenly posted in the wrong forum.
I agree that if you had a -20 penalty in PF2, it would be impossible to overcome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And why wouldn't you be? It's in the 2nd Edition forum!