the extent of sleight of hand

[thrompton]

I'd like to know your opinion on something. On my 3.5 game, my character (lvl6 bard) would like to know what kind of item a civilian has in his pocket. A wand, a scroll, thieve's tools etc.

I was thinking about using a sleight of hand roll, but my DM said that SoH can only be used to steal something, not to go through an inventory.

Any idea that could help?

[Toofey]

Steal it, then put it back after you've taken a look.

edit: Oh how I miss Vylanna Tyreen (a thief I played who did this quite a lot)

[falloutimperial]

The old technique of subtly bumping into someone is often used as a sleight of hand for actual theft, but I think sleight of hand is the best skill for even just going through inventories as you said.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Your DM is right. The only way to figure out what's in someone's pocket is to either look into his pocket, which would probably draw unwanted attention, or take what's inside and see.

Maybe, just maybe, I'd let you get away with seeing what's in there with a succesful bluff for bumping into him, sleight of hand to open the pocket, and spot to see what's in it. If either of the first two fail, you don't even get to make the spot, and you'd still be limited to just the one pocket, not his whole "inventory."

Btw, this really belongs in the 3.5 subforum.

[Greyfeld85]

Your DM is right. The only way to figure out what's in someone's pocket is to either look into his pocket, which would probably draw unwanted attention, or take what's inside and see.

Maybe, just maybe, I'd let you get away with seeing what's in there with a succesful bluff for bumping into him, sleight of hand to open the pocket, and spot to see what's in it. If either of the first two fail, you don't even get to make the spot, and you'd still be limited to just the one pocket, not his whole "inventory."

Btw, this really belongs in the 3.5 subforum.

That's a ridiculously pedantic reading of the rules, and forces the player into an unacceptable chance of failure for something that he could just as easily do by stealing whatever is on the person.

If the person has taken the time to hide an object and you're trying to find it, yes it's spot vs. SoH (or search vs. SoH, if you're frisking them), but to just slip a hand in their pocket and figure out what they're carrying? Sleight of Hand check, all the way. It's simple and it makes sense, and doesn't force the player to roll 3 skill checks to do something so stupidly simple.

[Kelb_Panthera]

That's a ridiculously pedantic reading of the rules, and forces the player into an unacceptable chance of failure for something that he could just as easily do by stealing whatever is on the person.

If the person has taken the time to hide an object and you're trying to find it, yes it's spot vs. SoH (or search vs. SoH, if you're frisking them), but to just slip a hand in their pocket and figure out what they're carrying? Sleight of Hand check, all the way. It's simple and it makes sense, and doesn't force the player to roll 3 skill checks to do something so stupidly simple.

That's not stupidly simple. Don't believe me? Have a friend put a couple random objects in his pocket, then try and -see- what they are, without removing them After that, reach in there and see how certain you are of what they are without looking. Not so simple, huh?

It would indeed be much easier to just take it, look at it, and put it back. Two sleight of hand checks, one to take it and one to put it back, and it's done. If you don't want to take a chance, just don't put it back.

SoH v spot only applies at the time you make the concealment. It represents the spotter seeing you tuck something away. It's not to see things that are already concealed. That's search. Search involves frisking the guy. I think frisking the guy just to find out what's in his pocket is a bit silly.

Neither the bluff nor the sleight of hand I suggested should be at all difficult, in any case. Most people don't have any ranks in sense motive, and don't have a wisdom modifier to speak of. Same goes for spot ranks. The only difficult check in my setup is the spot check, since you're trying to see something that's partially concealed and fairly small.

[CET]

Ok . . . I know I have a looser interpretation of d20 rules than most folks, but why couldn't the OP just roll a spot (or search perhaps - the distinction there is pretty vague) to pick up the general outline and dimensions of what's in the pocket. From there they can probably make an educated guess (might be a scroll or a really thick wand, too rigid to be a tool kit and too bulky to be a dagger). This can be modified for the mark's clothing, so there can be a penalty for very baggy clothes where the item doesn't print well.

Or, if the OP really wants to use SoH, I'd say they can go for the old 'bump and feel.' They make 2 rolls (Bluff and SoH). If the Bluff succeeds, the mark doesn't pick up on what is happening. If the SoH succeeds, the OP gets a pretty good sense of what is in the pocket. Now - in contrast to actually picking the pocket - if the bluff fails, the mark might think something is up, but they can't very well have the OP's hand chopped off for bumping into them.

[Greyfeld85]

That's not stupidly simple. Don't believe me? Have a friend put a couple random objects in his pocket, then try and -see- what they are, without removing them After that, reach in there and see how certain you are of what they are without looking. Not so simple, huh?

We're not talking about Real Life, we're talking about a fantasy game, where mundane tasks are handwaived as "non-heroic" and combat is boiled down to an exchange of numbers and dice rolls.

Skills are already worthless enough in a roleplaying system where magic is commonplace and can do anything under the sun with little effort and zero drawback. There's absolutely no good reason whatsoever to force a player to almost certainly fail their maneuver by enforcing 3 separate skill checks, no matter how much RAW may or may not support it.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Ok . . . I know I have a looser interpretation of d20 rules than most folks, but why couldn't the OP just roll a spot (or search perhaps - the distinction there is pretty vague) to pick up the general outline and dimensions of what's in the pocket. From there they can probably make an educated guess (might be a scroll or a really thick wand, too rigid to be a tool kit and too bulky to be a dagger). This can be modified for the mark's clothing, so there can be a penalty for very baggy clothes where the item doesn't print well.

Or, if the OP really wants to use SoH, I'd say they can go for the old 'bump and feel.' They make 2 rolls (Bluff and SoH). If the Bluff succeeds, the mark doesn't pick up on what is happening. If the SoH succeeds, the OP gets a pretty good sense of what is in the pocket. Now - in contrast to actually picking the pocket - if the bluff fails, the mark might think something is up, but they can't very well have the OP's hand chopped off for bumping into them.
I'm perfectly okay with both of these as long as the player is okay with only getting a rough description, rather than being told exactly what's in the pocket.

We're not talking about Real Life, we're talking about a fantasy game, where mundane tasks are handwaived as "non-heroic" and combat is boiled down to an exchange of numbers and dice rolls.

Skills are already worthless enough in a roleplaying system where magic is commonplace and can do anything under the sun with little effort and zero drawback. There's absolutely no good reason whatsoever to force a player to almost certainly fail their maneuver by enforcing 3 separate skill checks, no matter how much RAW may or may not support it.

Basic non-heroic actions are most certainly represented by rules in the d20 system. Just because your group glosses over them doesn't mean they aren't there. There are rules for heat-exhaustion for crying out loud. How much less heroic can you get than being taken down by heat-stroke?

As for there being almost no chance of success, that's simply not true either. Assuming a first level commoner has no ranks in sense motive or spot, which I don't think is unreasonable, a first level rogue with 4 ranks in each skill and a +2 dex mod, a +1 cha mod, and a ±0 wis mod, will have around an 75% chance to succeed on the bluff, an 80% chance to succeed on the SoH, and a 30% chance to make the spot against a tiny object in the pocket. That's an overall 60% chance to go undetected and 18% chance to actually see what's in the pocket. By fifth level the chances of failure are negligably slim. If he really wants to know what's in there, he'd be much better off just taking the 80% chance of just taking the damn thing, undetected, without being concerned about whether the mark is suspicious, then throwing it to the street if he doesn't want it.

If a player want's to do something that's more difficult than his alternative options, I don't see it as being rediculous to actually make the task more difficult than its alternatives.

[Deepbluediver]

On the one hand, this seems like a perfectly appropriate use of SoH. On the other, sneaking something out of some one's pockets is probably easier than reaching and feeling around, trying to figure out what it is. For example, if I pickpocket a small, crinkly piece of paper, it might be a $50 dollar bill, or it might be an old McDonald's receipt. Trying to figure out just what I'm grabbing without removing it would probably take longer and require a more thorough examination (via the sense of touch).

What I would probably say is that for a slightly higher DC (say +5, maybe), you can get a good sense of the kind of objects are held in the pocket.
Examples:
a tightly rolled paper of some kind, probably a map or scroll
some hard, round, metal objects, most likely coins
or- a coin pouch, feels about half-full
hard stone-like objects, possibly gems
metal keys (these have a very distinctive shape, which is why they are identified specifically)
a large metal medalion of some kind
a small stoppered flask; might be poison, might be potion, might be booze


A low roll might make some one upset or suspicious of why you bumped into them and committed sexual assault via groping, but they might not be able to outright accuse you of theft.

[LibraryOgre]

I would personally allow someone to use SoH instead of Spot for something like this... not so much "dig in his pockets and see", but "given my experience, what is in those pockets?"

[Darrin]

but "given my experience, what is in those pockets?"

String or nothing!

Sorry... couldn't resist.

[Gamer Girl]

Well, you can't just 'look' at a person and see/guess what is in their pockets.

You can sure use Sleight of Hand to steal whatever they have in a pocket, see what it is and then give it back(you could drop it and then say 'hey is that yours?' or even just set it under a chair or such to make it look like it fell out on it's own). You can even use Sleight of Hand to put an item back into a persons pocket.

And you can always follow the guy, wait for him to take his clothing off say for a bath, and then go through his pockets. Or even dump skunk weed on him so he has to go change his clothing.

[Slipperychicken]

Frisking uses Search (with a +4 bonus), not Spot, to oppose Sleight of hand. Since you're doing a more limited frisk, a Search check without that bonus seems more reasonable, although you would need to make Sleight of Hand checks so the target doesn't notice the intrusion.

[prufock]

On the one hand, this seems like a perfectly appropriate use of SoH. On the other, sneaking something out of some one's pockets is probably easier than reaching and feeling around, trying to figure out what it is. For example, if I pickpocket a small, crinkly piece of paper, it might be a $50 dollar bill, or it might be an old McDonald's receipt. Trying to figure out just what I'm grabbing without removing it would probably take longer and require a more thorough examination (via the sense of touch).

What I would probably say is that for a slightly higher DC (say +5, maybe), you can get a good sense of the kind of objects are held in the pocket.
Examples:
a tightly rolled paper of some kind, probably a map or scroll
some hard, round, metal objects, most likely coins
or- a coin pouch, feels about half-full
hard stone-like objects, possibly gems
metal keys (these have a very distinctive shape, which is why they are identified specifically)
a large metal medalion of some kind
a small stoppered flask; might be poison, might be potion, might be booze


A low roll might make some one upset or suspicious of why you bumped into them and committed sexual assault via groping, but they might not be able to outright accuse you of theft.

This is pretty much how I would rule it, too. A spot check might let you see a vague shape in a pocket or pouch, but a SoH check would let you feel what it is - as much as your tactile sense can tell you, anyway. No need to actually take the object, since you're effectively just touching it (quickly) and dropping it again. You COULD take it to examine if you really need to know what it is.

[Varil]

Seems like either an epic level spot, or a relatively mundane use of sleight of hand to get some general information.

I'd allow either 1 : A single low-DC sleight of hand to 'feel' their pocket, and get an idea of the general shape of what's inside, or 2 : two normal-DC sleight of hand checks, one to take the item out(and see it), and a second one to put it back unnoticed(or just skip the second check and keep the item).