Hide in Plain Sight - Shadow Dancer

[Barbarian Horde]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shadowdancer
It's a rogue 5/Shadow Dancer 2
Ok so google fu skills reveal to me that I can make a hide check while being observed. Now get a -20 if I attack and then hide. We reverse this, I hide then attack as a rogue I can add my sneak attack damage every round. Grant doing this I'll be visible on enemies turn. Now I want to make sure I have the correct understanding so that I can apply it to my NPC.

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=79574

[Crake]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Shadowdancer
It's a rogue 5/Shadow Dancer 2
Ok so google fu skills reveal to me that I can make a hide check while being observed. Now get a -20 if I attack and then hide. We reverse this, I hide then attack as a rogue I can add my sneak attack damage every round. Grant doing this I'll be visible on enemies turn. Now I want to make sure I have the correct understanding so that I can apply it to my NPC.

http://www.myth-weavers.com/sheet.html#id=79574

I believe you are correct. The -20 would be to prevent your opponents from ever seeing you to begin with, however, since your hips lets you hide while a) being observed and b) without cover, you can still attempt a hide check after they have already seen you without penalty.

[Duke of Urrel]

I believe you can do as you say. However, if I were your dungeon master, I wouldn't allow you to make a Hide check while taking a five-foot step. (I consider the need to hide to be a "hampering" condition that precludes taking a five-foot step.) Therefore, I would either (1) require you to limit your attacks to one per round, so that you can take move actions in between and make Hide checks while moving, or (2) require every one of your Hide checks to add the -20 penalty for hiding during a full attack action.

[Barbarian Horde]

I guess that could be cheesy in a core game. Because as far as I can see in raw its just a movement action to put yourself in a hiding position. And the Hide in Plain Sight can be used as long as Im in range of any shadow 10ft range so I don't think you would even need to move lol

[Chronos]

Quoth Duke of Urrel:

I believe you can do as you say. However, if I were your dungeon master, I wouldn't allow you to make a Hide check while taking a five-foot step.
Houserule however you like, but this is exactly contrary to the standard rules, which not only don't disallow movement while hiding, they require it.

[Curmudgeon]

Hide (except in the odd case of Sniping) takes no action. Instead, there are a limited number of actions onto which you're allowed to piggy-back a Hide check. You can't just stand and Hide, because there's no action there which the Hide skill specifies you can add to.
You can move up to one-half your normal speed and hide at no penalty. When moving at a speed greater than one-half but less than your normal speed, you take a -5 penalty. It’s practically impossible (-20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging. Those highlighted terms are the full list of what you can do and also Hide. Taking a 5' step is moving.

Now as to the technique, there's a big downside. You take a 5' step and Hide, so you're able to attack while hidden and get all the advantages. However, as soon as you attack you're visibly apparent.
If your Hide check succeeds, your target doesn’t notice you until you attack or make some other attention-grabbing action. So you get one attack, then no further benefits. On the other hand, if you successfully Hide while attacking with the -20 penalty on that swing, you don't become visibly apparent — not even for a moment — so your enemy never knows what square you attacked from. You can then take a full attack and don't need to make any more checks.
Action: Varies. Every time you have a chance to spot something in a reactive manner you can make a Spot check without using an action. Trying to spot something you failed to see previously is a move action. If your opponent fails to Spot you on that first swing, they can't Spot you attacking in the same space with the same weapon again, no matter how many times you swing. They can try to Spot you there only when it's their turn and they can take a move action for a retry. You, on the other hand, can just stand there and hope they won't think to run away or use a move action Spot retry; then you can make another full attack from the same space and not need any more Hide checks from there (because the Spot "something" is unchanged: the same character in the same space doing the same thing can only be Spotted as a move action check after an initial failure).

[Duke of Urrel]

If your opponent fails to Spot you on that first swing, they can't Spot you attacking in the same space with the same weapon again, no matter how many times you swing. They can try to Spot you there only when it's their turn and they can take a move action for a retry. You, on the other hand, can just stand there and hope they won't think to run away or use a move action Spot retry; then you can make another full attack from the same space and not need any more Hide checks from there (because the Spot "something" is unchanged: the same character in the same space doing the same thing can only be Spotted as a move action check after an initial failure).

It's entirely up to the dungeon master whether your "superior technique" works, because it's entirely up to the dungeon master when the following condition is met:


Every time you have a chance to spot something in a reactive manner you can make a Spot check without using an action.

It is the dungeon master who decides when you – or your enemy – has a chance to spot something in a reactive manner. The dungeon master may well decide that when you try to make a full attack while trying to hide in plain sight, your opponent gets another chance to spot you every time you make an attack roll.

[Curmudgeon]

It is the dungeon master who decides when you – or your enemy – has a chance to spot something in a reactive manner. The dungeon master may well decide that when you try to make a full attack while trying to hide in plain sight, your opponent gets another chance to spot you every time you make an attack roll.
That would be a house rule for that particular DM, because the RAW of it is:
Every time you have a chance to spot something in a reactive manner you can make a Spot check without using an action. Trying to spot something you failed to see previously is a move action. The DM decides what "something" refers to. However, that definition would apply identically to the use of the word in the two sentences. If you fail to Spot something in a reactive manner, you must use a move action for a retry against the same something — which you can't do until it's your turn.

[Duke of Urrel]

Houserule however you like, but this is exactly contrary to the standard rules, which not only don't disallow movement while hiding, they require it.

I do not claim that hiding precludes moving. My claim is that a dungeon master may well rule that hiding precludes taking a five-foot step, which is a special move that you can take only under special conditions. "Not having to try to hide while you move" may well be one of those conditions.


That would be a house rule for that particular DM, because the RAW of it is: The DM decides what "something" refers to. However, that definition would apply identically to the use of the word in the two sentences. If you fail to Spot something in a reactive manner, you must use a move action for a retry against the same something — which you can't do until it's your turn.

The question is whether the dungeon master believes it should be harder to stay hidden while attacking several times than it is to stay hidden while attacking once. Every separate attack in a full attack may count as something – indeed, it will if I'm the dungeon master and I'm the one doing the counting. I don't believe two or more attacks count as one and the same something.

[Darrin]

Ok so google fu skills reveal to me that I can make a hide check while being observed. Now get a -20 if I attack and then hide. We reverse this, I hide then attack as a rogue I can add my sneak attack damage every round. Grant doing this I'll be visible on enemies turn.

I don't think there's anything in the rules that prevent you from hiding after your attack as well. Hiding itself is not an action, it's a "piggy-back" check done while doing something else (usually movement-related). So you could hide with a -20 penalty, make a sneak attack, and then hide again with a -20 penalty after the attack.

At least, I think that's how it works. Curmudgeon is the best person to ask about anything Hide-related.

[Zirconia]

That would be a house rule for that particular DM, because the RAW of it is: The DM decides what "something" refers to. However, that definition would apply identically to the use of the word in the two sentences. If you fail to Spot something in a reactive manner, you must use a move action for a retry against the same something — which you can't do until it's your turn.

Hmm, as Duke of Errel pointed out, separate attacks might not count as the same "something". The retry rule might apply if, for example, the sneaker attacked once, the attackee failed their reactive spot check, and wanted to try another spot check to see where that darned attack came from. On attackee's turn, they use a move action to try once again to figure out where that "something" attack came from.

I think a reasonable DM could take the view that additional attacks from sneaker would each count as a separate "something", especially on following rounds. If I can persuade my DM to use your interpretation though, Curmudgeon, it might actually convince me to start working on some in-combat Hide options. :)

[Curmudgeon]

So you could hide with a -20 penalty, make a sneak attack, and then hide again with a -20 penalty after the attack.

At least, I think that's how it works. Curmudgeon is the best person to ask about anything Hide-related.
The highlighted word is wrong. Because Hide is not an action, you can only Hide while attacking, not afterward. That's what you want, anyway: to never be seen because you remain hidden at all times.

[Darrin]

The highlighted word is wrong. Because Hide is not an action, you can only Hide while attacking, not afterward. That's what you want, anyway: to never be seen because you remain hidden at all times.

Ok, sorry, wrong word there. But just to clarify, assuming the PC starts the round unhidden, can he make two Hide checks in a round? Let's say, 5-foot step at the start of his turn (which is some kind of "non-action" action) to qualify for sneak attack, then a second check along with the sneak attack? Or is the first check redundant?

[Curmudgeon]

Yes, both movement and attacking allow Hide checks. By making a Hide check while moving, the Shadowdancer will disappear from the enemy's sight somewhere along the movement path. That's only 5', but it still means the enemy loses sight of the Shadowdancer before they finish moving. That means the enemy doesn't know which specific square the Shadowdancer ended up in — though they can usually guess that it's one of those reachable with a 5' step if they end up being on the receiving end of a full attack from a hidden attacker immediately after they lost sight of the Shadowdancer. Still, making the enemy guess among maybe 3 squares is much better than them knowing which square the Shadowdancer was in when they started their full attack and making a full attack with a 50% miss chance each swing.

No, that first check isn't redundant at all.