PDA

View Full Version : Sleight of Hand (in combat)



Yechezkiel
2007-06-11, 09:09 PM
Does Sleight of Hand work just like 'Grabbing Items' (PHB pg. 155), only incredibly easier to pull off?

I know Sleight of Hand isn't an amazing skill, but I can see a lot of good combat uses for it if the DC is only a flat 20.

Gavin Sage
2007-06-11, 09:28 PM
I'd generally stipulate you can't use Sleight of Hand to pickpocket in combat with a character who is aware of and hostile towards you. Since they are observing you and reacting defensively, You reach out a hand, thats an attack. Its why the grabbing rule would exist period.

If unaware then no reason to not be able to nab something. However it would be small as per SoH rules. And not shall we say in use since that's prying something from another's grip.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-11, 09:32 PM
I'd generally stipulate you can't use Sleight of Hand to pickpocket in combat with a character who is aware of and hostile towards you. Since they are observing you and reacting defensively, You reach out a hand, thats an attack. Its why the grabbing rule would exist period.

If unaware then no reason to not be able to nab something. However it would be small as per SoH rules. And not shall we say in use since that's prying something from another's grip.

Read Sleight of Hand to take an item off of someone again though, if you hit the DC 20 you succeed... the target merely gets a Spot check (DC your Sleight of Hand check) to notice. That's why I wondering about this.

SpiderBrigade
2007-06-11, 10:03 PM
I'd probably allow it if they were flanked, based on the idea that they'd be distracted by the other person's attacks and not notice you darting in to snatch their purse or whatever. I'd also allow it if you were invisible or otherwise hidden.

That said, there'd be a hefty, hefty situation modifier on the check, since you'd only have that tiny window of opportunity. Not less than -5, and probably more like -10 or 15. A really skilled pickpocket could do this, but it wouldn't be easy.

Finally, if the target succeeds on the check to notice you taking the item, they'd get an Attack of Opportunity. I can't decide if that would stop you from taking the item. Possibly a successful attack would cause the item to drop in their square.

Human Paragon 3
2007-06-11, 10:06 PM
I would totally allow it, just raise the DC to 30.

Q: But at that rate, why not just use the grabbing rules, it'd be easier.
A: Not so. A decent thief will pull it off every time with skill focus and the rogue ability that lets you take 10 during tense situations.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-11, 10:20 PM
I'd probably allow it if they were flanked, based on the idea that they'd be distracted by the other person's attacks and not notice you darting in to snatch their purse or whatever. I'd also allow it if you were invisible or otherwise hidden.

That said, there'd be a hefty, hefty situation modifier on the check, since you'd only have that tiny window of opportunity. Not less than -5, and probably more like -10 or 15. A really skilled pickpocket could do this, but it wouldn't be easy.

Finally, if the target succeeds on the check to notice you taking the item, they'd get an Attack of Opportunity. I can't decide if that would stop you from taking the item. Possibly a successful attack would cause the item to drop in their square.

It only works on small objects, and then again is subject to how secure the item is... it's a Standard Action or Free Action at -20, so I'm thinking the flat DC 20 is a fair use of a turn to lift some small items off an opponent.

barawn
2007-06-11, 11:07 PM
to snatch their purse or whatever.

Purse?!

God, no. There's a much better (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spellComponentPouch) small item to steal when in combat (or this, similarly (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#holySymbolSilverorWooden)).

There was an old article on Wizards.com which mentioned exactly that tactic for rogues, although they never mentioned mechanically how it would work. I usually bump up the DC to 30 in general for combat, and 40 if the target is aware of and engaging you alone (i.e. not distracted).

Gavin Sage
2007-06-12, 01:26 AM
Read Sleight of Hand to take an item off of someone again though, if you hit the DC 20 you succeed... the target merely gets a Spot check (DC your Sleight of Hand check) to notice. That's why I wondering about this.

I'm saying that you shouldn't be able to preform the skill in combat at all because it involves reaching out and touching some. There's no logical difference between that and an unarmed attack, actually its more involved then throwing a punch. Given that we already have grabbing rules for in combat, and they are the same basic action, normal circumstances would mean you use grabbing rules.

In other words not try to break the game simply because something wasn't explicitly barred in the skill description. If SoH explicitly allowed its use in combat we'd have another issue. Or if you can arrange for your enemy to not be defending themself against you.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-12, 03:34 AM
I'm saying that you shouldn't be able to preform the skill in combat at all because it involves reaching out and touching some. There's no logical difference between that and an unarmed attack, actually its more involved then throwing a punch. Given that we already have grabbing rules for in combat, and they are the same basic action, normal circumstances would mean you use grabbing rules.

In other words not try to break the game simply because something wasn't explicitly barred in the skill description. If SoH explicitly allowed its use in combat we'd have another issue. Or if you can arrange for your enemy to not be defending themself against you.

I was viewing it more as the rules allowing a Dexterous Rogue to use a skill he can put ranks in and get better at rather then the Grabbing Items rules that put them in a bad position. You are viewing it as an attempt to break the rules.

Curmudgeon
2007-06-12, 04:40 AM
Using Sleight of Hand (or any other standard action skill) in combat is most certainly permitted by the rules. Apply the standard circumstance modifier:
Increase the DC by 2 to represent circumstances that make the task harderAlso remember that such use provokes an Attack of Opportunity, and taking damage on the AoO is likely to foil the skill use. (You can avoid the AoO in the first place, or succeed despite taking damage, with a sufficient Concentration check -- but that's a cross-class skill for Rogues.)

Note too that filching a sheathed weapon (of any size) from an opponent requires a DC 50 SoH check.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-12, 05:16 AM
Using Sleight of Hand (or any other standard action skill) in combat is most certainly permitted by the rules. Apply the standard circumstance modifier:Also remember that such use provokes an Attack of Opportunity, and taking damage on the AoO is likely to foil the skill use. (You can avoid the AoO in the first place, or succeed despite taking damage, with a sufficient Concentration check -- but that's a cross-class skill for Rogues.)

Note too that filching a sheathed weapon (of any size) from an opponent requires a DC 50 SoH check.

Where can I find the reason SoH provokes and AoO, and where is that DC 50 SoH check? I'm trying to get everything on Sleight of Hand in print together now.

barawn
2007-06-12, 10:19 AM
There's no logical difference between that and an unarmed attack, actually its more involved then throwing a punch.

Sleight of Hand is more about distraction than it is actually attacking. Is it more involved? Yes. Which is why it requires a skill.

An unarmed strike wouldn't be right - you're not trying to beat someone's armor, since what you're trying to take is outside the armor. A touch attack coupled with a Sleight of Hand check makes more sense, if you want to restrict that.

Sleight of Hand really is a DM's choice for DCs, but saying you can't use it in combat is just silly. The DC 50 skill check for stealing a sheathed weapon comes from Epic usages of SoH, and it's fairly involved: you steal a sheathed weapon and hide it on your own person. Clearly, the DC for just stealing the sheathed weapon should be lower, and clearly, the DC for stealing a smaller object should be even lower than that.

And if the other person's distracted, it should be lower. If the other person's not even aware you're there (hidden or invisible), I don't really see why it would be much higher than the DC 20 listed.

barawn
2007-06-12, 10:25 AM
Where can I find the reason SoH provokes and AoO, and where is that DC 50 SoH check? I'm trying to get everything on Sleight of Hand in print together now.

The DC 50 SoH check is in Epic usages of Sleight of Hand. The AoO is in Actions in Combat: skills that take one action (sleight of hand) usually provoke an AoO. Yes, that's vague, but there's really very little in the SRD about trying to steal things during combat, which is unfortunate, in my mind. The idea that a rogue who's dextrous enough to steal something without noticing would just stand by and not try to quick grab the holy symbol that the cleric's holding out, trying to cast his Mega Powerful Spell is just crazy.

Skjaldbakka
2007-06-12, 10:30 AM
There is a lot more involved in sleight of hand than just *yoink*. Your typical pickpocket is going to bump into you, shake hands, or something along those lines, to distract you while he takes something small off your person. Granted, D&D isn't about realism, but that's how it tends to work. I'd say it is practically impossible to pull this off against someone who is wary of you(such as in combat), because you would have to go for just the *yoink*, and skip the set-up.

Which would make it DC 40, which a high level dextrous rogue could do.

You would probably need a skill boost item to pull this off at mid-levels. I would opt for the hidden or invisible rogue to do this, without the penalty. And yes, a spell component pouch would be the thing to grab, provided you can tell it apart from the coin purse.

Tengu
2007-06-12, 10:38 AM
Stealing from enemies in combat... been playing much Final Fantasy lately?

barawn
2007-06-12, 10:52 AM
because you would have to go for just the *yoink*, and skip the set-up.

DC 40 is what I'd set as the base, too. If the character's lost their Dex bonus to AC, however, I'd lower it to DC 30, and if the character's unaware of the rogue, DC 20.

It makes sense, for instance - you could feint, trying to draw them off balance (to expose the side with the item you want to take), and then filch the item. That's equivalent to not skipping the set up. It takes two rounds, though.

Or if you imagine the big fighter's tackled someone, and wrestling with them, the rogue comes over... and *yoink* 'thanks, I'll take that."

Or, for even more fun - imagine surrounding someone with 4 rogues, and everyone Aid Anothering the rogue on the skill check - 3 rogues simultaneously stabbing at his front to force the character to back into the rogue who actually attempts the steal.

Arbitrarity
2007-06-12, 10:55 AM
There's already something for this, called disarm. I might allow a Sleight of hand check opposed by a spot check to steal something, followed by an attack roll (with the opponent having a penalty) for disarm, without provoking AOO.

Or maybe a sleight of hand opposed by an spot check to which the opponent adds BAB (As feint) for the same purpose, but only loosely held items.

barawn
2007-06-12, 11:17 AM
There's already something for this, called disarm. I might allow a Sleight of hand check opposed by a spot check to steal something, followed by an attack roll (with the opponent having a penalty) for disarm, without provoking AOO.

What's amazing is that I've replied about three or four times without even noticing that in my notes, the SoH section says "combine with a disarm action if aware of opponent."

Although now that I notice it, there's no bonus on the disarm attempt if the opponent's distracted, which doesn't make much sense (since it's an opposed attack roll). Obviously flanking gives you this automatically, but feinting should as well, as well as being flat-footed.

Person_Man
2007-06-12, 11:49 AM
I'd definitely allow it, and at the normal DC. If an enemy isn't physically holding something or wearing it in such a way that it cannot be simply pulled away (like armor) then it should absolutely be susceptible to being taken from him in combat.

But I'd also grant the enemy an attack of opportunity. There are ways around this (Flat Footed, Invisible, etc) but it seems to clearly fall into the realm of things that would provoke one.

I also believe (and often demonstrate) that Skill Monkeys tend to be towards the bottom of the power spectrum in D&D. Full progression spellcasters can accomplish almost anything a Skill Monkey can do, but better. Melee builds with decent Int and a good Skill list (and/or Able Learner) can be just as good at Skills as a Monkey, albeit from a more limited number of tasks. So if you're playing a Skill Monkey and find a creative way to use Sleight of Hand or Craft (traps) or Use Rope or whatever, my default position is to support it.

KIDS
2007-06-12, 11:56 AM
I believe it would still fall into either disarm or sunder category. In rare cases where I'd make it available, it would fall into "practically impossible" grade.

But yet, stealing (sundering, disarming, etc.) spell component pouches or holy symbols is a good but sadly underused tactic :(

PerasThorngage
2007-06-12, 06:39 PM
Actually I have this in combat in my game and it falls into the category that someone here already mentioned.

Touch Attack+DC 50 SOH check+ Attack of Opportunity vs an aware non flat footed enemy

Touch Attack + DC 30 SOH check vs an aware, but flat footed opponent (I.E. a non combat relfexes fighter who lost initiative to the rogue)

DC 30 SOH check vs an unaware/flat footed opponent (I.E. while the fighter is dealing with someone else the ninja is invisible and attempts to steal something)

My reasonings for this is that you see all the times in movies where the crook (rogue) steals the cops (fighter) gun and shoots at the cop.

Reasonings it should not be a disarm check is because it is not being held which would make it much more easy to accomplish.

Friendly neighborhood DM

Matthew
2007-06-13, 02:00 PM
Looking at the sleight of Hand Skill entry...


Sleight Of Hand (Dex; Trained Only; Armor Check Penalty)

Check
A DC 10 Sleight of Hand check lets you palm a coin-sized, unattended object. Performing a minor feat of legerdemain, such as making a coin disappear, also has a DC of 10 unless an observer is determined to note where the item went.

When you use this skill under close observation, your skill check is opposed by the observer’s Spot check. The observer’s success doesn’t prevent you from performing the action, just from doing it unnoticed.

You can hide a small object (including a light weapon or an easily concealed ranged weapon, such as a dart, sling, or hand crossbow) on your body. Your Sleight of Hand check is opposed by the Spot check of anyone observing you or the Search check of anyone frisking you. In the latter case, the searcher gains a +4 bonus on the Search check, since it’s generally easier to find such an object than to hide it. A dagger is easier to hide than most light weapons, and grants you a +2 bonus on your Sleight of Hand check to conceal it. An extraordinarily small object, such as a coin, shuriken, or ring, grants you a +4 bonus on your Sleight of Hand check to conceal it, and heavy or baggy clothing (such as a cloak) grants you a +2 bonus on the check.

Drawing a hidden weapon is a standard action and doesn’t provoke an attack of opportunity.

If you try to take something from another creature, you must make a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check to obtain it. The opponent makes a Spot check to detect the attempt, opposed by the same Sleight of Hand check result you achieved when you tried to grab the item. An opponent who succeeds on this check notices the attempt, regardless of whether you got the item.

You can also use Sleight of Hand to entertain an audience as though you were using the Perform skill. In such a case, your “act” encompasses elements of legerdemain, juggling, and the like.

See also: epic usages of Sleight Of Hand.

Sleight of Hand DCs Sleight of Hand DC Task
10 Palm a coin-sized object, make a coin disappear
20 Lift a small object from a person
Action
Any Sleight of Hand check normally is a standard action. However, you may perform a Sleight of Hand check as a free action by taking a -20 penalty on the check.

Try Again
Yes, but after an initial failure, a second Sleight of Hand attempt against the same target (or while you are being watched by the same observer who noticed your previous attempt) increases the DC for the task by 10.

Special
If you have the Deft Hands feat, you get a +2 bonus on Sleight of Hand checks.

Synergy
If you have 5 or more ranks in Bluff, you get a +2 bonus on Sleight of Hand checks.

Untrained
An untrained Sleight of Hand check is simply a Dexterity check. Without actual training, you can’t succeed on any Sleight of Hand check with a DC higher than 10, except for hiding an object on your body.

...I don't think this use was intended at all. Up to you if you allow it, but it seems to me this falls under the Combat Rules for Grabbing an item... saying that, I imagine the Complete Scoundrel elaborates on what is and is not possible with Sleight of Hand. I probably wouldn't allow it.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-13, 02:11 PM
Looking at the sleight of Hand Skill entry...

...I don't think this use was intended at all. Up to you if you allow it, but it seems to me this falls under the Combat Rules for Grabbing an item... saying that, I imagine the Complete Scoundrel elaborates on what is and is not possible with Sleight of Hand. I probably wouldn't allow it.

Just a question to you and others who oppose it in combat: Why? Is the DC 20 too low compared to the involved process that is 'Grabbing Items'?

Matthew
2007-06-13, 02:30 PM
It's just my opinion (and I don't have access to the Complete Scoundrel), but the Skill description doesn't strike me as being intended for combat circumstances. Sleight of Hand appears to be focused on removing things from people unnoticed, not the actual removal of said items.

[Edit] Although, as I see it, you could use it in combat, but not to actually remove the item, just to prevent the opponent realising that you had removed it.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-13, 02:50 PM
It's just my opinion (and I don't have access to the Complete Scoundrel), but the Skill description doesn't strike me as being intended for combat circumstances. Sleight of Hand appears to be focused on removing things from people unnoticed, not the actual removal of said items.

[Edit] Although, as I see it, you could use it in combat, but not to actually remove the item, just to prevent the opponent realising that you had removed it.

Yeah, but this probably overcomplicates things... would SoH let you pull off the 'Grabbing' without the AoO, without the opposed roll, etc. etc.. Thanks though, I was looking for more interpretations as it really doesn't appear clarified in text.

Matthew
2007-06-13, 02:59 PM
Well, the way I would rule it is that the AoO still applies, as it is only the removal of said item that has been disguised not the 'coming too close' part, but yeah, it's a blurry area and I wouldn't be opposed to people ruling otherwise.

Bagera
2007-06-14, 12:05 AM
Any Sleight of Hand check normally is a standard action. However, you may perform a Sleight of Hand check as a free action by taking a -20 penalty on the check.

Doesn't that pretty much imply that you'd be using it in combat or combat like situations?

Yechezkiel
2007-06-14, 12:51 AM
Any Sleight of Hand check normally is a standard action. However, you may perform a Sleight of Hand check as a free action by taking a -20 penalty on the check.

Doesn't that pretty much imply that you'd be using it in combat or combat like situations?

I'd like to call in a RAW lawyer at this point.

Nerd-o-rama
2007-06-14, 01:42 AM
RAW paralegal here, with the relevant rules citation:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/sleightOfHand.htm

Action

Any Sleight of Hand check normally is a standard action. However, you may perform a Sleight of Hand check as a free action by taking a -20 penalty on the check.

As a note, RAW aside, I had an NPC to pick a player's pocket in a recent combat with an unarmed touch attack and a successful SoH check. Seeing as the character was based loosely on Locke from Final Fantasy VI, it seemed appropriate.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 05:10 AM
Any Sleight of Hand check normally is a standard action. However, you may perform a Sleight of Hand check as a free action by taking a -20 penalty on the check.

Doesn't that pretty much imply that you'd be using it in combat or combat like situations?
I shouldn't think so. Opening a Lock is a Full Round Action, it doesn't follow that it is therefore a Combat Action. D&D gives all such small measurements of time in terms of Actions.

Overlard
2007-06-14, 05:55 AM
Other than stealing component pouches and holy symbols, a good tactic is to use SoH t plant objects on someone. Like say... a silenced spell component into someone else's spell component pouch. That screws up most wizards - if they don't see you putting something in their pouch then it works fantastically. If they do, then they've still got to try and find the component that isn't theirs in the their pouch (you try finding the odd-one-out piece of bat guano) :smallbiggrin:

Fixer
2007-06-14, 06:22 AM
According to the RAW on Disarm:

Disarm
As a melee attack, you may attempt to disarm your opponent. If you do so with a weapon, you knock the opponent’s weapon out of his hands and to the ground. If you attempt the disarm while unarmed, you end up with the weapon in your hand.

If you’re attempting to disarm a melee weapon, follow the steps outlined here. If the item you are attempting to disarm isn’t a melee weapon the defender may still oppose you with an attack roll, but takes a penalty and can’t attempt to disarm you in return if your attempt fails.
...

Grabbing Items
You can use a disarm action to snatch an item worn by the target. If you want to have the item in your hand, the disarm must be made as an unarmed attack.

If the item is poorly secured or otherwise easy to snatch or cut away the attacker gets a +4 bonus. Unlike on a normal disarm attempt, failing the attempt doesn’t allow the defender to attempt to disarm you. This otherwise functions identically to a disarm attempt, as noted above.
emphasis mine

Thus, you make your Disarm attempt and they may resist using their attack roll and that is how you get things off people who are in combat with you.

As a House Rule:
I would say that if an opponent is unaware of your exact location (i.e. you are hidden or invisible) or simply do not identify you as a threat (i.e. under Santuary or something similar) you may use Sleight of Hand normally, resisted by their Spot check as normal. The major distinction between Sleight of Hand and Disarming (an object) is that Sleight of Hand requires that the target not see you or think of you as a threat. Disarming can be done to anyone, whether they think of you as a threat or not.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 06:29 AM
Yes, we have already identified that as being the case. The action under discussion would almost by necessity be a House Rule (though it is possible to interpret things otherwise). All Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal. The Disarm Action is used to remove objects held, the Grab Action is used to remove objects worn.

[Edit] Not sure what Overlard is on about or how that Action would be resolved.

Overlard
2007-06-14, 06:58 AM
Yes, we have already identified that as being the case. The action under discussion would almost by necessity be a House Rule (though it is possible to interpret things otherwise). All Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal. The Disarm Action is used to remove objects held, the Grab Action is used to remove objects worn.

[Edit] Not sure what Overlard is on about or how that Action would be resolved.
Essentially my character (a beguiler) took an item from his spell component pouch and cast silence on it. He then went up to the enemy wizard & distracted him (resolved as feinting in combat). He then dropped the silenced item in the wizard's spell component pouch. The wizard failed his spot check and had no idea where the silence was coming from anymore. He didn't have any silenced spells prepared (I don't know if he even had the feat) and so spent a few rounds trying to get away from the effect before realising that it was on him somewhere, and then spent more time trying to find what was silenced. He was killed before he found it.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 07:08 AM
Sounds fairly unlikely to me, but if it worked in your game, good for you. Watch out for the DM playing that trick right back on you, though.

Overlard
2007-06-14, 07:11 AM
Sounds fairly unlikely to me, but if it worked in your game, good for you. Watch out for the DM playing that trick right back on you, though.
Don't see why it wouldn't work. If you can take the spell component pounch off someone, why not plant something small in it? If you're going to play characters with high intelligence, you might as well play them intelligently. The wizard simply had no idea what was going on until it was too late.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 07:26 AM
It's not that it couldn't ever work, it's that the kinds of Actions involved wouldn't be Feint + Sleight of Hand (at least in my games, they wouldn't) and there'd be plenty of Circumstance Modifiers.
A lot depends on circumstances, but the trick is not really any different from a Character casting Silence on himself, walking up to an opponent and grappling him (which is essentially what you did).

[Edit] Casting Silence on a Dagger and then stabbing a Caster with it is a tactic about as old as the game itself.

Overlard
2007-06-14, 07:35 AM
It's not that it couldn't ever work, it's that the kinds of Actions involved wouldn't be Feint + Sleight of Hand (at least in my games, it wouldn't) and there'd be plenty of Circumstance Modifiers. A lot depends on circumstances, but the trick is not really any different from casting Silence on yourself and walking up to the Wizard (which is essentially what you did).
There were a lot of circumstance modifiers, but my beguiler has bluff and sleight of hand coming out his... places where skills shouldn't be coming out of, while the wizard's sense motive & spots were weak. The feint was to get him to follow the dagger in my left hand while I dropped the component in with my right. I can't seen any other logical way to do it. I would have done it while invisible, but it was obvious he was able to see through invisibility.

I've done the "cast silence on yourself and stand next to the wizard" trick before, but the wizard can always walk away from it and cast on the same turn, while he can't get away from something in his own spell component pouch. This way I neutralised a higher level spellcaster with one second level spell in the second round of combat, and left myself free to deal with his minions & allies (who had much lower will saves than he would have done).

How would you handle that action in your game then?

Matthew
2007-06-14, 07:48 AM
The thing for me is that it almost certainly oughtn't to be easier to plant a silenced piece of Bat Guano in a caster's Spell Pouch than slip a Dagger between his ribs, but that sort of thing aside, I'd have probably handled it as follows:

Begulier uses Standard Action to make a Disarm Attempt (i.e. insert object) and a Free Action (-20 Modifier) to use Sleight of Hand to conceal the purpose of the Disarm Attempt, with modifiers appropriate to the circumstances.

It's a very unusual Action, so it's hard to say exactly how it ought to be handled, but my general guideline would be to place it in the context of other Combat Actions.

barawn
2007-06-14, 09:00 AM
Yes, we have already identified that as being the case. The action under discussion would almost by necessity be a House Rule (though it is possible to interpret things otherwise). All Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal. The Disarm Action is used to remove objects held, the Grab Action is used to remove objects worn.

No - by RAW, Sleight of Hand allows you to grab the item if you succeed. It says it right there.


If you try to take something from another creature, you must make a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check to obtain it. The opponent makes a Spot check to detect the attempt, opposed by the same Sleight of Hand check result you achieved when you tried to grab the item. An opponent who succeeds on this check notices the attempt, regardless of whether you got the item.

Honestly, the fact that there's another way to grab an item during combat is irrelevant. Sleight of Hand allows you to grab an item in such a way that the other person doesn't know you're doing it. That's a different action than simply taking the item - even though the net effect is the same. There are plenty of things in the SRD that can be done multiple ways to obtain the same effect.

Think about it this way: if you succeed on a Sleight of Hand check, and the other person fails his Spot check, he doesn't even know you did something. How could he oppose your action with a weapon if he didn't know you did anything?

Restricting it so you need a Disarm action is a reasonable house rule, but it is a house rule - and now that I think about it, my own house rule doesn't make sense (I have to say - discussions like this really help me clarify things in my own rules) - it should be to take something during combat, you need a Sleight of Hand check, opposed by the opponent's Spot check. If the opponent succeeds, in combat, you don't get the item unless you succeed on a disarm action. The Sleight of Hand check would have a very high DC, and the opponent would get a healthy Spot bonus, too.

Sleight of Hand is a horrendously written skill in general - it needs a healthy amount of DM interpretation, period. By RAW, there's nothing to prevent you from using it in combat.

Overlard
2007-06-14, 09:39 AM
The thing for me is that it almost certainly oughtn't to be easier to plant a silenced piece of Bat Guano in a caster's Spell Pouch than slip a Dagger between his ribs, but that sort of thing aside, I'd have probably handled it as follows:

Begulier uses Standard Action to make a Disarm Attempt (i.e. insert object) and a Free Action (-20 Modifier) to use Sleight of Hand to conceal the purpose of the Disarm Attempt, with modifiers appropriate to the circumstances.

It's a very unusual Action, so it's hard to say exactly how it ought to be handled, but my general guideline would be to place it in the context of other Combat Actions.
I don't follow how it would be a disarm action, when they're extremely different actions. I'd say that an AoO is justified if the attempt is spotted, but sleight of hand is there for pickpocketing and similar actions which this obviously is. Feinting is getting the opponent to expect one action/attack and then performing another. That seems a lot more logical to me than your way. But everyone interprets rules and actions their own way I guess.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 10:10 AM
No - by RAW, Sleight of Hand allows you to grab the item if you succeed. It says it right there.
Barawn, I'm fully aware of what the RAW says. How I would rule and what the RAW says are not necessarily in agreement. Regardless, I don't agree that Sleight of Hand was intended for use in combat and I do think that if it was intended for use in this way it would be in the Combat Action section or explicitly stated in the Skill description that it can be used in combat (as with skills such as Intimidate). In Non Combat situations you do not have to make a Touch Attack to touch someone, for instance.
If you think it is fair, then that's fine, but I don't agree that a Character should be able to touch his opponent using Sleight of hand without making something resembling a Touch Attack, never mind inserting an item into an undefined Spell Component Pouch.

I don't follow how it would be a disarm action, when they're extremely different actions. I'd say that an AoO is justified if the attempt is spotted, but sleight of hand is there for pickpocketing and similar actions which this obviously is. Feinting is getting the opponent to expect one action/attack and then performing another. That seems a lot more logical to me than your way. But everyone interprets rules and actions their own way I guess.
As I said, it's a very unusual action and not one that I consider to be legislated for. Consequently, I would use the nearest thing I could think of as a guide to rule for this action.

Just out of interest, did your Character Feint and use Sleight of Hand at the same time [i.e. Standard Action to Feint + Free Action to Sleight of Hand with -20]?

barawn
2007-06-14, 10:12 AM
I don't follow how it would be a disarm action, when they're extremely different actions. I'd say that an AoO is justified if the attempt is spotted, but sleight of hand is there for pickpocketing and similar actions which this obviously is. Feinting is getting the opponent to expect one action/attack and then performing another. That seems a lot more logical to me than your way. But everyone interprets rules and actions their own way I guess.

The AoO listing for skill checks is "usually", if memory serves. An AoO should be an automatic. The opponent might not know what you're trying to do, but you are giving him an opportunity by trying to do something other than continue fighting.

If it was done as a free action (with the -20 penalty) then I would say there's no AoO, because you continue fighting.

barawn
2007-06-14, 10:27 AM
Barawn, I'm fully aware of what the RAW says. How I would rule and what the RAW says are not necessarily in agreement.

That's fine. But don't say this, then.


All Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal.

Because that's not what it appears to do by RAW. As intended, I don't know.

As for the "rules as intended," I have no idea. It's a ridiculously poorly written skill, and ridiculously overpowered. It doesn't even say in the skill description it has to be a small object, although it's implied in the table. Nowhere does it say that how well the item's secured does anything. DC 20 to take anything off of anyone? Jeez, a second-level halfling rogue can get +14 to Sleight of Hand with no effort, and steal off of anyone by taking 10 (outside of combat, obviously), and unless the character has at least +5 to spot, he won't even notice. Even if he does notice, he still can't prevent it from being taken.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 11:16 AM
Hahah. Okay, I can see the misunderstanding. Here's what I wrote in full:


Yes, we have already identified that as being the case. The action under discussion would almost by necessity be a House Rule (though it is possible to interpret things otherwise). All Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal. The Disarm Action is used to remove objects held, the Grab Action is used to remove objects worn.

to be clear, I ought to have wrote 'In combat, all Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal', because I don't think this Skill can be used normally in Combat (though, the Complete Scoundrel might have more to say). Skills that can be used in Combat invariably refer to what is possible in that situation. This seems anagolous to allowing an Open Locks roll against somebody's belt buckle.

Admittedly, though, reading strictly by the RAW (i.e. in my opinion ignoring the context) I cannot find anything explicitly prohibiting this (or the Belt Buckle), so I will concede the point. However, I would say that the Sleight of Hand Skill appears to assume that the target is not actively attempting to prevent the character from touching them (hence the fixed DC and lack of Opposed Rolls).

[Edit] Looking into it, it seems that much of the text pertaining to Sleight of Hand is a cut and paste job from the 3.0 Pick Pockets Skill, which had no explicit Action associated with it. This loophole looks to be a result of sloppy editing.

Fixer
2007-06-14, 11:22 AM
Essentially my character (a beguiler) took an item from his spell component pouch and cast silence on it. He then went up to the enemy wizard & distracted him (resolved as feinting in combat).

Ok, as a GM I would have OK'd this action as well.

Feinting in combat causes an individual to become vulnerable in some fashion. If a rogue can direct a sneak attack after a feint, then I would rule that a feint can be used to perform a reasonable Sleight-of-Hand as well to an object the person isn't handling (no Sleight-of-Handing a wielded sword or armor or shield or whatnot).

Now, it could be argued that a spellcaster would be paying attention to their spell pouch, and they'd be right, but since the pouch itself was not the target of the sleight-of-hand (it was the silenced item that was the target), the wizard in question THOUGHT the beguiler was trying to take the pouch (because he failed his spot roll) and managed to avoid the attempt.

If the beguiler in question was trying to steal the spell component pouch, I'd rule it would require the Grabbing action, no matter if there was a feint or not.

Yechezkiel
2007-06-14, 02:17 PM
Hahah. Okay, I can see the misunderstanding. Here's what I wrote in full:

to be clear, I ought to have wrote 'In combat, all Sleight of Hand appears to do by the RAW is conceal the Action of removal', because I don't think this Skill can be used normally in Combat (though, the Complete Scoundrel might have more to say). Skills that can be used in Combat invariably refer to what is possible in that situation. This seems anagolous to allowing an Open Locks roll against somebody's belt buckle.

Admittedly, though, reading strictly by the RAW (i.e. in my opinion ignoring the context) I cannot find anything explicitly prohibiting this (or the Belt Buckle), so I will concede the point. However, I would say that the Sleight of Hand Skill appears to assume that the target is not actively attempting to prevent the character from touching them (hence the fixed DC and lack of Opposed Rolls).

[Edit] Looking into it, it seems that much of the text pertaining to Sleight of Hand is a cut and paste job from the 3.0 Pick Pockets Skill, which had no explicit Action associated with it. This loophole looks to be a result of sloppy editing.

I'm going to have to contradict your statement, especially in light of Jack Mann's post "RAW and you"...

Sleight of Hand, by RAW is this:
"If you try to take something from another creature, you must make a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check to obtain it. The opponent makes a Spot check to detect the attempt, opposed by the same Sleight of Hand check result you achieved when you tried to grab the item. An opponent who succeeds on this check notices the attempt, regardless of whether you got the item."

I'm sorry, but you cannot say it appears to do what you think it does, and claim it is written that way.

Matthew
2007-06-14, 09:30 PM
Uh, Yechezkiel, look, I conceded that in the third paragraph of the text you quoted. The sentence that follows "Admittedly, though, reading strictly by the RAW (i.e. in my opinion ignoring the context) I cannot find anything explicitly prohibiting this (or the Belt Buckle), so I will concede the point" is my interpretation of the intent of the RAW.

Overlard
2007-06-15, 04:52 AM
Just out of interest, did your Character Feint and use Sleight of Hand at the same time [i.e. Standard Action to Feint + Free Action to Sleight of Hand with -20]?
Improved Feint to make the feint a move action, and then a standard action to use SoH.

Matthew
2007-06-17, 12:53 PM
Thought so. Thanks for clearing that up.

Pestlepup
2007-06-17, 01:38 PM
Well, not sure how relevant it is in this case, but according to the combat rules, using a skill that takes 1 action usually provokes an attack of opportunity. Intuitively thinking it's as it should be. As for allowing pick-pocketing in combat, that's up to the DM. I'd allow it was conceivable to remove the desired item from the target's person with a minimun of effort. It is Sleight of Hand after all, not Pound And Grab. A holy symbol might be stretching it, but a purse, wayward dagger or somesuch might be possible. With a high DC or hefty penalties, however. A battle isn't a stationary event regardless of what The Grid tries to tell us. The combatants will move, lunge, dodge and generally make themselves as mobile as possible. Trying to rush in to grab and cut a coin purse (And yes, you need fingerblades or something to sever the leather strap with. Purses don't just jump into one's lap.) or snatch a frantically swinging dagger makes for a risky pursuit, and any successful attack will foil the attempt. It's not a matter of concentration, as you're not trying to remain on the defensive while casting a spell for instance. A direct lunge at an item will require the thief-to-be to sacrifice a great deal of defense for a chance to pilfer the intended item.