You can't hit what you can't see

[Naez]

I'm making a sniper build fighter/deepwood sniper/cragtop archer.

Once I've got everything in place I can shoot things over a mile and a half away. The issue is I can't see my targets (that'd be a -412 to the spot check) so I was wondering if there's any way to get around that.

[StreamOfTheSky]

The first MOST IMPORTANT thing to do when planning any sort of long range build is to make sure your DM understands that the spot penalties only apply against enemies who are actually hiding, and have the favorable conditions (cover, not being observed, etc... these can be negated with the right feats or class features, but still) to hide in the first place. A creature doesn't require a DC 20 spot check to see just because they're standing in an open field 200 feet from you.

If your DM fails to understand this, or argues against it.... save your build for another game where you won't be insanely (not to mention unrealistically....I'm a commoner level 1 and I can see people many hundreds of feet away with ease) crippled, it's just not worth the frustration.

Now, you're going to be shooting literally miles away, so sight will still be your biggest problem. Spells are pretty much the only solution, unfortunately. Having an innocuous pet familiar/companion (like a rat) that enemies may pay no attention to that you can scry on is the type of route you'll need to go. Clairvoyance is great if you have the time to cast and know the exact area your victims are in.
Getting Seeking on your bow to overcome not having direct line of sight to the foe yourself is also crucial, and Goggles of Foefinding from MIC will remove all but total cover (Imp. Precise Shot does the same, but is level 11+).

[Curmudgeon]

Unfortunately, the rules do require you to Spot creatures who aren't hiding. The DC to Spot a Large creature in plain sight is 0 (as you can see on the table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm#tableDifficultyClassExamples)), and the linear range penalties increase the DC unreasonably with distance. I don't think this is a case where squinting at the rules, as StreamOfTheSky suggests, will cut it. I've addressed the issue head-on with the following house rule.

Range penalties for Spot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spot.htm) and Listen (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/listen.htm) are reduced:
From 101'-300', range penalties add -1 per additional 20'.
From 301'-600', range penalties add -1 per additional 30'.
From 601'-1000', range penalties add -1 per additional 40'.
Beyond 1000', range penalties add -1 per additional 50'.

DistancePenaltyDistancePenaltyDistancePenaltyDista ncePenalty
10'-1160'-13450'-25880'-37
20'-2180'-14480'-26920'-38
30'-3200'-15510'-27960'-49
40'-4220'-16540'-281000'-40
50'-5240'-17570'-291050'-41
60'-6260'-18600'-301100'-42
70'-7280'-19640'-311150'-43
80'-8300'-20680'-321200'-44
90'-9330'-21720'-331250'-45
100'-10360'-22760'-341300'-46
120'-11390'-23800'-351350'-47
140'-12420'-24840'-361400'-48

[hamishspence]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/spot.htm

The Spot skill is used primarily to detect characters or creatures who are hiding. Typically, your Spot check is opposed by the Hide check of the creature trying not to be seen. Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it.


So if it's not hiding, and not "difficult to see" no check is made.


The DC to Spot a Large creature in plain sight is 0 (as you can see on the table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/usingSkills.htm#tableDifficultyClassExamples)),



The table says "something large in plain sight" not "A Large Creature in plain sight"

[Alistaroc]

Custom Item of Continuous Arcane Eye, 64,000 gp, or less if you craft it yourself, or have a party member craft it for you. Just direct the eye wherever you want, and if your DM rules that concentrating requires an action, concentrate one round, then fire at the square that the enemy is in(or one that is where they would end up) on the next round.

[Curmudgeon]

The table says "something large in plain sight" not "A Large Creature in plain sight"
A Large creature is something of Large size. The size is specified, and a creature is certainly not nothing.

[hamishspence]

It's lowercase L, not uppercase.

I would guess that the DC exists for those rare circumstances in which a character's vision might be massively hindered, and thus a Spot check might actually be called for.


A creature doesn't require a DC 20 spot check to see just because they're standing in an open field 200 feet from you.

Or hovering in the air in one's eyeline, for that matter. A giant Eagle, 200 ft away, exactly in the direction you're looking - with nothing whatsoever obscuring it - that seems like a "no check called for" situation.

[StreamOfTheSky]

A Large creature is something of Large size. The size is specified, and a creature is certainly not nothing.

The rules for Spot say it's for seeing creatures who are hiding (or hard to see, I forgot that snippet). You don't need a Spot check to see ANYTHING AT ALL. Not only is that not what the spot skill says, its a completely ridiculous interpretation and makes the maximum possible spotting distance for a 1st level character laughably short. You don't "win" a skill check by a natural 20, so your interpretation means someone with 0 ranks and Wis 10-11 can never see anything past 200 ft, and it'd take quite a while to even see that far.

[Curmudgeon]

The rules for Spot say it's for seeing creatures who are hiding (or hard to see, I forgot that snippet).
"Hard to see" is manifest if you fail to Spot them despite them being in plain sight.

[hamishspence]

No - as written above:

Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it.

"difficult to see" is a subjective, DM-defined condition, that causes a Spot check to be considered "necessary to notice" in the first place.

[Curmudgeon]

"difficult to see" is a subjective, DM-defined condition, that causes a Spot check to be considered "necessary to notice" in the first place.
Where does it say that? As I read it, "difficult to see" is simply describing the result of your Spot check failing to detect the creature in plain sight. Different characters will have different perceptions (Spot check results), and some of them may find something difficult to see. There's nothing subjective with this way of reading the rules.

[kardar233]

I'd suggest dipping Binder for Malphas, which gives you a bird (raven, I think) whose eyes you can see through. Excellent scout.

[BowStreetRunner]

Performing routine tasks in normal situations is generally so easy that no check is required.
The use of a skill check to spot something should really only occur if spotting the object is not something that can be done routinely. There is a perennial discussion that shows up from time to time in the forums where someone posits that under the 3.5 rules it is actually impossible to see the sun or the moon. However, as these are actually routine tasks there would in fact be no roll required so the question is entirely moot. Likewise, standing in the nosebleed seats at a stadium and spotting an ogre standing alone in the middle of the football field on a sunny day really requires no roll. (Noticing that the Manchester United patch on his shoulder is upside down however would require a roll.)

It is really up to the DM in this situation to determine if a roll is required at all. Once the DM has decided that it is required however, I must admit that the ranges given in the rules are really intended more to support the use of miniatures on the standard tabletop and not to represent a realistic sight-range at all. (When I was in the army we routinely practiced 300 meter shots with our rifles without using any sort of scope - a range considered by authorities to be well within the range of a Mongolian composite bow. This is nearly 200 5-ft squares on a tabletop playing mat. Not many DMs really even want to deal with areas that large in their battles.)

[Lerondiel]

Where does it say that? As I read it, "difficult to see" is simply describing the result of your Spot check failing to detect the creature in plain sight. Different characters will have different perceptions (Spot check results), and some of them may find something difficult to see. There's nothing subjective with this way of reading the rules.

Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see, so a successful Spot check is necessary to notice it.

English is a mess of a language bud, but in this case it reads pretty clear - the spot check is necessary as a result of a creature being difficult to see, not the other way around.

Something subjective in the rules may be unhelpful for pregenerating successful builds/outcomes, but it does give the DM scope to take a wide variety of conditions into account....eg how heavy some intervening fog, foliage or terrain might be, the colour of the creature vs its background, the speed of the creature, lighting conditions, etc


EDIT: ManU ogre....snort...nice work BSR!

[Oberon Kenobi]

RAW silliness aside, common sense would dictate that yes, you need something special to be able to see a humanoid-sized target a mile and a half away. Common sense would also dictate that you shouldn't be able to shoot someone with a bow from that distance, but screw that noise.

OP: I suggest a Glass of Distance from Sandstorm. It's a spyglass that lets you clearly see things up to ten miles away; costs 52,200. It also lets you (and anyone touching you, and anyone touching them and so on) teleport to a spot you can see through it, or pluck a creature (or similarly-connected group of creatures) up to ten miles away to you, once a day. I'm sure the latter effect is where most of the cost comes from, so you could probably talk your GM down by a lot if you just wanted the far-seeing part of it.

[Curmudgeon]

The use of a skill check to spot something should really only occur if spotting the object is not something that can be done routinely.
Apparently the game authors decided that noticing something Large in plain sight was not a routine task, because they assigned both a skill (Spot) and a DC (0) to this task. So your quote is fine, but doesn't apply here.

[BowStreetRunner]

Apparently the game authors decided that noticing something Large in plain sight was not a routine task, because they assigned both a skill (Spot) and a DC (0) to this task. So your quote is fine, but doesn't apply here.
Or maybe they just included it as a benchmark from which to perform calculations for more difficult checks. Ex pede Herculem.

[Naez]

OP: I suggest a Glass of Distance from Sandstorm. It's a spyglass that lets you clearly see things up to ten miles away; costs 52,200. It also lets you (and anyone touching you, and anyone touching them and so on) teleport to a spot you can see through it, or pluck a creature (or similarly-connected group of creatures) up to ten miles away to you, once a day. I'm sure the latter effect is where most of the cost comes from, so you could probably talk your GM down by a lot if you just wanted the far-seeing part of it.

This will probably be the winner. This or take leadership to get a divining spotter. Now can I strap it to my bow and use it like a scope? Though that's a DM decision I would think unless there's a precedent for scopes on bows in dnd.

[Oberon Kenobi]

The illustration for the Gnome Steambow from the Arms and Equipment Guide depicts it as having a scope, but makes no reference to it in the rules text. The only actual sight that I know of is the gnome crossbow sight from the same book, which lets you treat targets as if they were two range increments closer–but of course, that goes on a crossbow, not a bow.

If I were the type to allow a PC to shoot targets up to a mile and a half away, I'd let them put a scope on their bow too, especially given the cost of the thing. But I don't think there's any precedent to point to if you're looking to convince your GM, unless you're using a crossbow.