Question on Spot vs Hiding + HIPS

[shaikujin]

Hiding after a melee attack incurs a -20 penalty to the hide check.

But what happens if the creature (assuming its' hide bonus is 30) that's trying to hide has one of the versions of HIPS that grants Total Concealment?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/hide.htm states that total concealment usually obviates the need for a Hide check unless noted under the "Special" entry.

However, there's nothing in the special description that mentions this.


Does the creature still need to make a hide check? What would the spot DC be to spot this creature, 10? Or 30?

[Urpriest]

Could you point me to a version of HiPS that grants total concealment? I'm not aware of any.

[sleepyphoenixx]

As far as i'm aware all HIPS versions only allow you to hide while observed (with certain restrictions). You still need to get concealment somewhere else.

Otherwise, total concealment usually means you don't need a hide check since you can't be seen anyway.

[shaikujin]

Sorry, I said HIPS as I thought more folks would be familiar with it.

The ability I was thinking of is actually Dark Moon Disciple's "Shadow Blend".



What's the spot DC required to see the creature?

[Urpriest]

Sorry, I said HIPS as I thought more folks would be familiar with it.

The ability I was thinking of is actually Dark Moon Disciple's "Shadow Blend".



What's the spot DC required to see the creature?

In this case, the monk simply gains total concealment. While they may also hide, regardless no opponent can make a Spot check to notice them without something like Darkstalker in play. They simply cannot be seen as there is no line of sight to them.

[ksbsnowowl]

In this case, the monk simply gains total concealment. While they may also hide, regardless no opponent can make a Spot check to notice them without something like Darkstalker in play. They simply cannot be seen as there is no line of sight to them.

Agreed. Same thing applies to Shadow Creatures, Shadow Mastiffs, and Shadow Dragons.

[Curmudgeon]

Hiding after a melee attack incurs a -20 penalty to the hide check.
Nope. Hiding while attacking incurs a -20 penalty, but you're generally only allowed to Hide after attacking by moving. A Hide check isn't (except the very odd, ranged-only, special case of Sniping) ever a separate action; it's piggy-backed onto some other action (but there's only a limited set of those).

The difference is potentially huge. If you were already hidden, and succeed on a new check to Hide while attacking, you never become visually apparent. That means enemies don't even know what squares you occupied at the time of the attack; they haven't a clue whether you were right next to them or 40' away.

[shaikujin]

Thanks guys!

[Splendor]

*If we look at 'Shadow Blend' as 'Invisibility in shadows', we also need to look at a couple of RAW statement/rules:

"Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Spot checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Hide checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Hide checks when not moving (even though opponents can’t see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual clues)." - PHB 153

"Sniping: If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a –20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot." - PHB 76

According to these rules it must be a ranged attack (not melee) to hide after attacking (not during). And since you can't hide and attack at the same time, I guess you become visible for a moment (maybe?) during your attack and then auto-hid after it. So an opponent could ready an action to attack you as you appeared.

*If we look at 'Shadow Blend' as 'Greater Invisibility in shadows' then we also should include the statement/rule:

"Those struck by an invisible attacker know the location of that attacker, unless the attack came from farther away than 5 feet." - Rules Compendium pg 76

I think ruling Shadow Blend as Greater Invisibility is way too powerful (especially as a class feature or +1 LA) and would go with it as invisibility.

Couple of things to note:
Invisible/hiding creatures leave tracks, displace water, displace fog, smell, make noise (-20 to pinpoint) and may in fact still cast shadows.

While only the stuff that is on you when you turn Shadow blend (or you hide under your clothing later) is invisible, you disappear after each attack rendering mundane items used against you (flour pouch, Liquid Light) useless, since they were on you when you shadow blended. Although I guess if you shadow blended and made hid then they would still impair you're hide checks.

But concealment doesn't grant bonus to hide checks!
Yes it does. Most of the rules covering concealment bonuses to hide checks deal with invisibility, but page 152 of the PHB states "near-total darkness could provide a 40% miss chance (and a +10 circumstance bonus on Hide checks)". So there is some leeway. This is hardly ever mentioned because 3.5 did away with varying concealment. Its either partial or full; partial allows you to hide and full allows you not to be seen (usually).

[ksbsnowowl]

[snip]

I think this is somewhat relevant and demonstrative:


D&D® Frequently Asked Questions
Version 3.5: Date Updated 6/30/08

Can a character with Spring Attack who begins her turn hidden move up to a foe, attack him, then return to a position of hiding? Is she considered to be hiding (that is, invisible to the foe) when she makes the attack? What if the character has the camouflage or hide in plain sight class features?


Normally, a character can’t make a Hide check right after attacking a foe, since that foe’s attention is now focused on her (even if the attacker started her turn hidden or invisible). The sniping option (on page 76 in the PH) allows a character to make a move action to hide immediately after making a ranged attack against a foe at least 10 feet away, but this doesn’t apply to melee attacks (even those made with reach). Even if the character has Spring Attack, she simply can’t make a Hide check while she is being observed.
As far as your second question goes, unless the character’s approach remains entirely in an area where she can hide (that is, an area with sufficient cover or concealment to attempt a Hide check), the character is not considered to be hidden still when she makes the attack. Conceivably, your character might begin her turn hidden in overgrowth, move up through the undergrowth to attack a target, then move back to a hiding place within the plants, having never left the area of concealment. In this case, she’d be considered hidden when she made the attack, although she’d have a –20 penalty on her Hide check.
The third part of your question changes the situation entirely. Separately, both the camouflage and hide in plain sight class features make this tactic more useful, but together, they’re incredibly effective. A character with the hide in plain sight class feature (described on page 48 in the PH) can make a Hide check even if she’s being observed. This doesn’t require any extra action to accomplish (unlike the sniping maneuver). The character could attack a foe, then move to a place with sufficient cover or concealment to allow a Hide check, making the Hide check as part of movement. The character doesn’t need Spring Attack to pull this off, although that feat would allow her to move (potentially from a place of hiding, although that’s not necessary), make an attack, and then move again to a place of hiding. Still, unless the character has cover or concealment for her approach, she’s not considered to be hidden when she delivers the attack. The camouflage class feature (also on page 48 in the PH) allows the character to make a Hide check in any sort of natural terrain, even if it doesn’t provide cover or concealment. This means that the character could begin hidden, move up to a target across open terrain, and make an attack while still being considered hidden (although she’d still suffer the –20 penalty on her Hide check). Even if the character has Spring Attack and moves away after the attack, she can’t make a Hide check to hide after the attack.
Put all three of these elements together—such as in the hands of a high-level sneaky ranger—and here’s what you get:
1. The character begins his turn hidden (as long as he’s in natural terrain, he doesn’t even need cover or concealment).
2. He moves up to a foe across natural terrain and makes an attack (making a Hide check with a –20 penalty to be considered hiding when he attacks).
3. He then moves back from the foe and makes a new Hide check to disappear from view (again, he doesn’t need cover or concealment while in natural terrain).
4. The foe then, if still standing, says, “Hey, what hit me?!”

You can indeed hide while attacking.

The thing is, you don't need to hide, because they can't see you anyways. That's what total concealment means. Yes, it is a totally broken side effect of WotC getting rid of grades of concealment in the switch to 3.5, but that is what the rules mean. It's even right there in Core with the shadow mastiff.

I can perhaps see a hide check to allow them to see evidence of your passing, assuming you are moving on the ground. If you are completely airborne, less likely (and depends if you are flapping wings or not).

Edit:
I do agree that the struck foe knows the square from which he was attacked (assuming no reach). However, a smart attacker will attack then move, leaving the target clueless as to where the assailant is.

[Curmudgeon]

"Sniping: If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a –20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot." - PHB 76

According to these rules it must be a ranged attack (not melee) to hide after attacking (not during). And since you can't hide and attack at the same time, I guess you become visible for a moment (maybe?) during your attack and then auto-hid after it.
The highlighted statement is in conflict with the rules. You must Hide and make your melee attack at the same time; the rules don't allow for those to be separate actions.
It’s practically impossible (-20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging.
...
Action: Usually none. Normally, you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action. However, hiding immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action. Only ranged attacks, if you choose to use the Sniping option, can work with a separate move action to Hide; melee attacks must incorporate the Hide check in the same action as the attack (or be done later, such as the normal option of moving and making your Hide check as part of that action).

Except for the special case of ranged attacks when you choose to use the Sniping rules — and note two things:

Sniping is a choice, not a requirement.
Despite having the same numeric value, Sniping and attacking/running/charging are different penalties.
— you may not make a Hide check as its own separate action. Usually Hide is not an action, but piggy-backed onto some other action. If you can satisfy all the requirements to use the Hide skill while attacking, it's just a matter of getting a good enough check (despite the penalty) to beat your opponent's Spot score.

[shaikujin]

Additional questions:

1) Besides casting Daylight, how can I defeat Shadow Blend?

2) Say the shadow blend creature (with +30 bonus to hide) is already hidden and none of the party detects it. It then attacks me in melee (with only 5 ft reach), does it need to roll a hide check again to remain hidden (with the -20 penalty)?

3) If so, and it is able to get off a full attack of 3 attacks, does it need to roll a hide check for each attack?

4) Am I allowed a spot check to determine which square the hidden creature is in?

5) If so, what's the DC (specifically, does the creature's -20 penalty apply)?

6) Are my party members that were not attacked allowed a spot check?

7) Does this take a move action since we were unable to detect it initially?

Thanks!

[ksbsnowowl]

Additional questions:

1) Besides casting Daylight, how can I defeat Shadow Blend?Attack it during the day, underneath the nourishing light of earth's yellow sun.


2) Say the shadow blend creature (with +30 bonus to hide) is already hidden and none of the party detects it. It then attacks me in melee (with only 5 ft reach), does it need to roll a hide check again to remain hidden (with the -20 penalty)?No need for a hide check. It has total concealment, which means you can't see it anyway.

If that seems way too powerful, I could see implementing a rule to have it make hide checks while attacking, but at no penalty to the Hide check. If someone spots it then, he could target and attack it, but still taking the 50% miss chance.


4) Am I allowed a spot check to determine which square the hidden creature is in?You could always try to notice spoor of its passing.

If it attacked you, you know which square you were attacked from automatically (assuming 5ft reach).


5) If so, what's the DC (specifically, does the creature's -20 penalty apply)?probably would apply in this instance, but see the caveats in my previous post.


6) Are my party members that were not attacked allowed a spot check?they won't automatically know which square you were attacked from, but you could tell them. Otherwise, yes.


7) Does this take a move action since we were unable to detect it initially?

Thanks!Making a non-reactive spot check is a move action, yes.

[Curmudgeon]

2) Say the shadow blend creature (with +30 bonus to hide) is already hidden and none of the party detects it. It then attacks me in melee (with only 5 ft reach), does it need to roll a hide check again to remain hidden (with the -20 penalty)?
Shadow Blend is a Supernatural ability.
Using a supernatural ability is a standard action unless noted otherwise. Shadow Blend has no specified duration, nor is it specific about whether it affects the Monk or the shadowy area the Monk's disappearing into. A DM could say that taking any action ends the total concealment of Shadow Blend — until the next time the Monk uses a standard action to activate it again.

In any case, no Hide check is ever required with Shadow Blend: that ability either offers total concealment, or it isn't operating.

[ericgrau]

Additional questions:

1) Besides casting Daylight, how can I defeat Shadow Blend?

2) Say the shadow blend creature (with +30 bonus to hide) is already hidden and none of the party detects it. It then attacks me in melee (with only 5 ft reach), does it need to roll a hide check again to remain hidden (with the -20 penalty)?

3) If so, and it is able to get off a full attack of 3 attacks, does it need to roll a hide check for each attack?

4) Am I allowed a spot check to determine which square the hidden creature is in?

5) If so, what's the DC (specifically, does the creature's -20 penalty apply)?

6) Are my party members that were not attacked allowed a spot check?

7) Does this take a move action since we were unable to detect it initially?

Thanks!

4-5) In the specific case of shadow blend no. It is total concealment with no need for a hide check. He simply cannot be seen. It's not hide in plain sight. But you could make a listen check. See http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#invisibility . I know those rules are for invisibility but there are similar darkness rules and for loss of vision in general it should be almost the same. Some other special abilities could also detect him like tremorsense, blindsense, or other -sense. All of these retain the 50% miss chance. But blindsight would overcome it with no miss chance.

Move silently (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/moveSilently.htm) doesn't usually have a -20 in combat, only when running or charging.

6) They also get a listen check. You'll notice in the link above that unlike your allies you automatically know the square he was in when he attacked you (even w/o a check). Though he might move afterwards.

7) No, listen checks are reactive but if the first check fails you may make another one as a move action.

[cerin616]

I don't think anyone mentioned, this is technically not HiPS.

you aren't in plain sight.

You can also beat this if you have dark vision as I would still be observing you as you think "Im hidden in these shadows" and make a hide check that will automatically fail.

[ksbsnowowl]

I don't think anyone mentioned, this is technically not HiPS.

you aren't in plain sight.

You can also beat this if you have dark vision as I would still be observing you as you think "Im hidden in these shadows" and make a hide check that will automatically fail.

The Supernatural ability still has you in total concealment, meaning Darkvision doesn't help. The concealment isn't due to the darkness, it is due to the Supernatural ability. Lack of light is just a condition on it working.

[Curmudgeon]

You can also beat this if you have dark vision as I would still be observing you as you think "Im hidden in these shadows" and make a hide check that will automatically fail.
There's no Hide check. There is total concealment, which is Supernatural (i.e., magical); it works against all vision types.

[cerin616]

There's no Hide check. There is total concealment, which is Supernatural (i.e., magical); it works against all vision types.

Wasn't aware that Su means it is magical concealment, I just assumed magic came into play to blend you in with shadows, which froma darkvision point of view, there aren't any.

(Apparently wizards doesn't know how this works either, surprised right?)

[ksbsnowowl]

(Apparently wizards doesn't know how this works either, surprised right?)

That's probably because it was likely an unintended consequence of the 3.5 rules changes. Once they discovered it, they just ran with it, evil though it is.

[Splendor]

I think Curmudgeon finished this question by pointing out that Shadow Blend is a supernatural effect and takes a standard action to use.

I can't imagine someone allowing shadow blend to be equal to greater invisibility, so attacking should end the effect. Which means they are no longer concealed and you could just attack them. It would require another standard action to shadow blend.

[ksbsnowowl]

I think Curmudgeon finished this question by pointing out that Shadow Blend is a supernatural effect and takes a standard action to use.

I can't imagine someone allowing shadow blend to be equal to greater invisibility, so attacking should end the effect. Which means they are no longer concealed and you could just attack them. It would require another standard action to shadow blend.
Where does it say that attacking ends the effect? Activating it is a standard action, but it takes no action to maintain it. The only listed things that end it are sunlight and Daylight.

If you argue that supernatural abilities that don't say otherwise must be maintained with a standard action, then an ogre mage's Change Shape ability would be nearly worthless, as would the protective aura of leonals and ghaeles be worthless in a fight. The ghaele's light ray attack would also be useless, because it would be unusable; she would have to use her standard action to maintain the alternate form, and thus would have no standard action to use to make the light ray attack (which can only be used in her globe alternate form.)

[Splendor]

Where does it say that attacking ends the effect?

If you read earlier I mentioned about Shadow Blend being equal to either 'Invisibility in shadows' or 'Greater Invisibility in shadows'. Since its a class feature (or part of a +1 LA) 'Invisibility in Shadows' seemed more appropriate then 'Greater Invisibility in Shadows'.
If you play it as 'Invisibility in shadows' the effect would end when you attack. If you played it as 'Greater Invisibility in shadows' then it is way overpowered.

[Curmudgeon]

Where does it say that attacking ends the effect?
It doesn't say that. But then again, the Shadow Blend description doesn't say what ends it. I already commented that the DM will have to make some decisions here:
Shadow Blend has no specified duration, nor is it specific about whether it affects the Monk or the shadowy area the Monk's disappearing into. A DM could say that taking any action ends the total concealment of Shadow Blend — until the next time the Monk uses a standard action to activate it again.

[shaikujin]

Thanks for all the clarification guys!