How does hide/move silently actually work?

[rrwoods]

I'm this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?473826-DM-with-half-decent-system-mastery-trying-to-help-a-player-out-with-a-new-character) DM, and my system mastery doesn't extend to knowing how stealth skills actually work in 3.5 (or any system, really). I've max-ranked these skills on a number of characters I've *played*, and made the rolls when the DM asked for them, but never actually thought about when they were supposed to be made.

First thing that sticks out to me in the Swift Ambusher handbook is "you're trying to sneak attack and Hiding helps you do that".

From what I understand 4e went to a lot of trouble to define the "hidden" status -- I briefly thought Curmudgeon's "rules of hidden club" applied to 3.5 before I realized I was reading a 4e post -- but I don't think (?) 3.5 goes to the same lengths 4e does when defining how these skills work.

Does a Hide check that beats a potential observer's Spot check mean they flat-out can't see you? Does that turn on sneak attack (or make them flat-footed against you, which would turn on sneak attack)? If you have Hide in Plain Sight (and the conditions for it apply), you can make a Hide check while someone is looking at you. Are there no penalties to that check? Can someone be looking straight at me, I hide from them, and then sneak attack them?

[Troacctid]

Does a Hide check that beats a potential observer's Spot check mean they flat-out can't see you?
Yes. If you are hidden from a creature, it means that creature cannot see you; you have total concealment from them. However, they may be able to guess your location--for example, if you run behind cover and hide, they might not be able to see you, but they could still assume you're still behind that thing and lob a grenade in your general direction.


Does that turn on sneak attack (or make them flat-footed against you, which would turn on sneak attack)?
Yes. When you have total concealment from a target, they are denied their Dexterity bonus to AC.


If you have Hide in Plain Sight (and the conditions for it apply), you can make a Hide check while someone is looking at you. Are there no penalties to that check?
There might be penalties for other reasons, but not for them looking straight at you.


Can someone be looking straight at me, I hide from them, and then sneak attack them?
Depends on the specifics of your hide in plain sight ability. Some versions still require cover or concealment.

[frost890]

Hiding can be as simple as walking behind them so they do not notice you or blend in to the crowd as you follow them. you may not have cover but you can "hide" and make it so that you look like you belong in the enemy camp as a servant going about your tasks. it is largely what your DM will allow the skill to be used for.

[Troacctid]

you may not have cover but you can "hide" and make it so that you look like you belong in the enemy camp as a servant going about your tasks.

That's Disguise. Totally different skill.

[MisterKaws]

You should also remember that hide is not absolute, and people can still hear you with listen vs move silently checks. Also note that from CR3 and onwards, 90% of the monsters will have some sort of stealth-nullifying sense, so if the player doesn't have Darkstalker, he shouldn't even try to sneak, he won't be able to.

[Grand Poobah]

From the SRD


Your Hide check is opposed by the Spot check of anyone who might see you. 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.

A creature larger or smaller than Medium takes a size bonus or penalty on Hide checks depending on its size category: Fine +16, Diminutive +12, Tiny +8, Small +4, Large -4, Huge -8, Gargantuan -12, Colossal -16.

You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. Total cover or total concealment usually (but not always; see Special, below) obviates the need for a Hide check, since nothing can see you anyway.

If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide. You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you’re out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went.

If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check; see below), though, you can attempt to hide. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Hide check if you can get to a hiding place of some kind. (As a general guideline, the hiding place has to be within 1 foot per rank you have in Hide.) This check, however, is made at a -10 penalty because you have to move fast.

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.

Creating a Diversion to Hide
You can use Bluff to help you hide. A successful Bluff check can give you the momentary diversion you need to attempt a Hide check while people are aware of you.

See also: epic usages of Hide.

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.

Special
If you are invisible, you gain a +40 bonus on Hide checks if you are immobile, or a +20 bonus on Hide checks if you’re moving.

If you have the Stealthy feat, you get a +2 bonus on Hide checks.

A 13th-level ranger can attempt a Hide check in any sort of natural terrain, even if it doesn’t grant cover or concealment. A 17th-level ranger can do this even while being observed.

SRD again


Cover
To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).

When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from your square to the target’s square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.

Low Obstacles and Cover
A low obstacle (such as a wall no higher than half your height) provides cover, but only to creatures within 30 feet (6 squares) of it. The attacker can ignore the cover if he’s closer to the obstacle than his target.

Cover and Attacks of Opportunity
You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with cover relative to you.

Cover and Reflex Saves
Cover grants you a +2 bonus on Reflex saves against attacks that originate or burst out from a point on the other side of the cover from you. Note that spread effects can extend around corners and thus negate this cover bonus.

Cover and Hide Checks
You can use cover to make a Hide check. Without cover, you usually need concealment to make a Hide check.

Soft Cover
Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Hide check.

Big Creatures and Cover
Any creature with a space larger than 5 feet (1 square) determines cover against melee attacks slightly differently than smaller creatures do. Such a creature can choose any square that it occupies to determine if an opponent has cover against its melee attacks. Similarly, when making a melee attack against such a creature, you can pick any of the squares it occupies to determine if it has cover against you.

Total Cover
If you don’t have line of effect to your target he is considered to have total cover from you. You can’t make an attack against a target that has total cover.

Varying Degrees of Cover
In some cases, cover may provide a greater bonus to AC and Reflex saves. In such situations the normal cover bonuses to AC and Reflex saves can be doubled (to +8 and +4, respectively). A creature with this improved cover effectively gains improved evasion against any attack to which the Reflex save bonus applies. Furthermore, improved cover provides a +10 bonus on Hide checks.

Concealment
To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment.

When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has concealment if his space is entirely within an effect that grants concealment. When making a melee attack against a target that isn’t adjacent to you use the rules for determining concealment from ranged attacks.

In addition, some magical effects provide concealment against all attacks, regardless of whether any intervening concealment exists.

Concealment Miss Chance
Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. If the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance percentile roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack.

Concealment and Hide Checks
You can use concealment to make a Hide check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Hide check.

Total Concealment
If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can’t attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).

You can’t execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.

Ignoring Concealment
Concealment isn’t always effective. A shadowy area or darkness doesn’t provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision. Characters with low-light vision can see clearly for a greater distance with the same light source than other characters. 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).

Varying Degrees of Concealment
Certain situations may provide more or less than typical concealment, and modify the miss chance accordingly.

In a nutshell to qualify for a hide check you need either cover (eg a pillar, creature, wall etc) or concealment (eg a bush, smoke, shadowy illumination).

So, if you were wanting to enter town through the guarded gates without being noticed you could hide within a group of pilgrims moving through the gates (taking a penalty for double movement) as the pilgrims provide cover.

However, if the guard spotted you you'd need to run and break line of sight as there would be little point hiding behind a pilgrim as the guard knows where you are.

If you tried entering at night and the (common) lantern carrying guard is stood to one side of the 20' gate, you can use the shadowy illumination the lantern leaves between 15-30' as concealment. However, if the guard happened to be a half-Orc or dwarf, they'd spot you moving through the gate regardless of how good the hide check was because they have darkvision and can see 60' in darkness regardless of prevailing lighting.

[ericgrau]

^ This is pretty good.

I'll also add that you may almost always take a 10 since you aren't participating in a fight. If the observer is standing on watch (rather than actively adventuring, searching, etc.) then he automatically takes a 10. Arguments to the contrary usually mean that you can never take a 10 at any useful time in your entire life, which I don't believe is the intent at all.

This is very important because otherwise unless you have an extra +20 bonus there is no point to even trying to hide if there are multiple rolls involved, because one will almost certainly fail.

[rrwoods]

So if Alice hides from Bob, is Alice effectively invisible (the status) relative to Bob, or is it something more specific than that?

I'm mostly looking for the combat ramifications of the Hide/Move Silently skills. Out-of-combat I think I have down, probably.

[ericgrau]

Sort of... except if Alice leaves cover/concealment she isn't hidden anymore. And attacking usually does that. If she has movement left she can try to hide immediately at a -20.

Practically speaking give the rogue one sneak attack and then say he's not hidden anymore. Anything else involves getting "creative" with the rules rather than what makes sense. I mean maybe if you are neck deep in foilage that is touching you on all sides... no, not even then, because the person automatically knows where the dagger came from and can look right at you unless you moved. Still makes no sense at all. At best you can try to bend the rules which shouldn't be done in a real life game.

If he wants to hide again he'll need total cover/concealment first so he's no longer seen, then he can move to (partial) cover/concealment and hide.

[Zancloufer]

Succeed at Hide essentially means you are invisible. If you attack it does break that and you can be seen and need to take cover to try and hide again.

However if you attack while hidden and are still in cover (fired from bushes, in a cloud of smoke/darkness the target can't see through) you can try to hide again, but with a -20 to your hide. If you break cover to attack you CANNOT try to Hide again, unless you have something like Hide in Plain sight. Also note that your "invisibility" can be countered if they HEAR you, so move Silently vs their Listen is just as important.

Also note that invisibility does stack with Hide, granting a +20 (or +40 if not moving) to a hide check. Which makes Silence + Invisibility a pretty good way to sneak up on anythign that doesn't have Scent, Touch-sight or something similar.

[Andezzar]

Hiding can be as simple as walking behind themThat does not work. D&D does not know facing, so there is no "behind them". Everyone has 360° vision.

[frost890]

That's Disguise. Totally different skill.

Disguise makes you look like someone/something else. Hiding can be just as much interacting with the crowd so that you do not stand out to an observer. It is not always about being behind something.


That does not work. D&D does not know facing, so there is no "behind them". Everyone has 360° vision.

That depends on the rules used and the GM. Technically you "Hide" behind them and use them as cover. If we are just going off the roll it tends to destroy the role-play aspect of the game

[Andezzar]

That depends on the rules used and the GM. Technically you "Hide" behind them and use them as cover. If we are just going off the roll it tends to destroy the role-play aspect of the gameWhich side is behind them? You cannot determine the facing of a creature so you are no more behind it than you are in front of it.

That is unless you use the variant facing rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/combatFacing.htm).

[Troacctid]

Disguise makes you look like someone/something else. Hiding can be just as much interacting with the crowd so that you do not stand out to an observer. It is not always about being behind something.
No, the Hide skill requires cover or concealment and hides you from sight. You can Hide in a crowd because they provide cover. It's still about being behind something (or in this case someone).


That depends on the rules used and the GM. Technically you "Hide" behind them and use them as cover. If we are just going off the roll it tends to destroy the role-play aspect of the game
You can't use a creature as cover against itself without an unusual special ability that allows it. A creature that is looking the other way would fulfill the "not being observed" requirement (this is usually the purpose of making a Bluff check to create a distraction), but you would still need cover or concealment.

[Jowgen]

There are 3 special uses of Hide detailed in the RC p. 92 that I don't think are in the SRD. I believe they were taken from some other plat books.

The first allows you to blend into a crowd to hide from someone scanning the area (no cover/concealment mentioned).

The second allows you to to move through open space from one source of cover/concealment to another, allowing 5 ft of movement per 5 ranks of hide you have while also incurring a -5 penalty per 5 ft moved.

The third allows you to sneak up on someone from hiding, with there being a -5 penalty per 5 ft moved through open space.
__________________________________________________ _____________________

Also, I actually have a question on the topic. If you are successfully hidden from someone in regular concealment (e.g. darkness), but they beat your Move Silently with a listen, what happens? Do they automatically spot you? Do they know your square and get another spot check? Do they only know your square but still just don't see you?

[Firest Kathon]

No, the Hide skill requires cover or concealment and hides you from sight. You can Hide in a crowd because they provide cover. It's still about being behind something (or in this case someone).
By RAW, you cannot hide in a crowd. Creatures provide "Soft Cover (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#cover)", but you cannot use it for Hide checks.


Soft Cover
Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover [...] nor does soft cover allow you to make a Hide check.

[Troacctid]

By RAW, you cannot hide in a crowd. Creatures provide "Soft Cover (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#cover)", but you cannot use it for Hide checks.

You're missing the more specific rules about crowds.


It takes 2 squares of movement to enter a square with crowds. The crowds provide cover for anyone who does so, enabling a Hide check and providing a bonus to Armor Class and on Reflex saves.

[Andezzar]

This only does not work because of the primary source rule. CAdv clearly says that you can:
Blend into a Crowd: You can use the Hide skill to blend into a crowd, but doing so conceals you only from
someone scanning the area to find you. You remain visible to everyone around you, and if they happen to be hostile they’re likely to point you out.

[Eladrinblade]

so if the player doesn't have Darkstalker, he shouldn't even try to sneak, he won't be able to.

Scent only pinpoints you if within 5ft, and even then you have total concealment unless they spot you. Blindsense still leaves you with total concealment, they just know where you are. Most creatures with scent/blindsense can have these senses negated via spells or other similar things (like a thunderstone). Darkness/Invisibility/silence/nondetection/polymorph/the "image" line, and probably others, give ways to deal with these extra senses. Granted, a rogue or whoever doesn't have these abilities, but casters typically aren't good at sneaking, so a team effort is required. Or the sneaker just needs UMD or the proper magic item.

This gives me a good idea for an alchemical item: the stinkbomb. And maybe a related spell. I'm aware of the scentbreaker item from forgotten realms.


By RAW, you cannot hide in a crowd. Creatures provide "Soft Cover (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#cover)", but you cannot use it for Hide checks.

In the description for the hide skill: "or to tail someone through a busy street without being noticed." This implies to me that a "crowd" grants cover or concealment. "Crowds" aren't common on the battlefield, so the book didn't give any hard mechanical rules for them, but there you go. Ninja-corrected.


That does not work. D&D does not know facing, so there is no "behind them". Everyone has 360° vision.

"All-around Vision" is a specific ability that some monsters (like beholders) have. The robe of eyes grants it as well. It's easy as pie to rule that if someone is "focused" on something, like watching an open gate, then they are "flanked" so to speak, and anyone outside of their cone of vision effectively has cover/concealment until something brings the spotter's attention to them (like if they hear footsteps in another direction).

Also, the move silently and listen skill descriptions both imply that you can "sneak up behind someone".

But...


The second allows you to to move through open space from one source of cover/concealment to another, allowing 5 ft of movement per 5 ranks of hide you have while also incurring a -5 penalty per 5 ft moved.

The third allows you to sneak up on someone from hiding, with there being a -5 penalty per 5 ft moved through open space.
__________________________________________________ _____________________

Also, I actually have a question on the topic. If you are successfully hidden from someone in regular concealment (e.g. darkness), but they beat your Move Silently with a listen, what happens? Do they automatically spot you? Do they know your square and get another spot check? Do they only know your square but still just don't see you?

I could have sworn the first thing there was within the PHB somewhere, but I can never find it when I look. Where was it originally, I wonder? Complete adventurer.

As for your question: they now know that something is there, and can move to find it. If the hide-er was using cover (like a low wall), they might be about to lose it if the listener peeks over. Likewise, the listener might bring a light source closer to the darkness. Regardless, surprise is lost and initiative is rolled. If the hide-er wins or is not discovered by their turn, they can shoot the listener or whatever and get a sneak attack, but then the listener gets their turn.

[Andezzar]

"All-around Vision" is a specific ability that some monsters (like beholders) have. The robe of eyes grants it as well.Sure, but that does not mean that creatures without those abilty don't de facto can see in every direction at once. Unless you use the facing rules, you cannot say in which direction a creature is looking at any point in time. So it either looks in none of them or all of them.

It's easy as pie to rule that if someone is "focused" on something, like watching an open gate, then they are "flanked" so to speak, and anyone outside of their cone of vision effectively has cover/concealment until something brings the spotter's attention to them (like if they hear footsteps in another direction). Sure it is easy to make up houserules. But your houserules or mine have little impact on the OPs table.


Also, the move silently and listen skill descriptions both imply that you can "sneak up behind someone". What are you referring to? I find no mention of directionality in the SRD articles about Hide and Move Silently.

[Eladrinblade]

What are you referring to? I find no mention of directionality in the SRD articles about Hide and Move Silently.

It's not on the SRD (probably), it's in the book.

Under listen: ", to detect someone sneaking up on you from behind," (pg 78)

Under move silently: "You can use this skill to sneak up behind an enemy..." (pg 79)

[Andezzar]

So what is behind the enemy? Which direction is the enemy facing? Does the enemy not move (his head) at all during the round? If you fiat such things, why does the rogue need a flanking buddy unless his target is denied its DEX to AC to sneak attack? He is attacking from behind after all. By all means use the variant facing rules, but without them it makes little sense to half-heartedly introduce them.

[yellowrocket]

Attention to something is meant as a die cast modifier to be determined by the dm. The spotter is engaged in something to the north. So we'll modify the roll with a negative penalty (same as ambient noise modifying a listen check) on how in to the the thing he is, but he still gets a check. So when you're sneaking on him from the south you only get the de facto bonus of his penalty on the opposed roll. Same modifier concept. Modifiers to opposed rolls are well within the rules as written as the dms pervue. It's up to the individual dm to determine how much they apply.

Other conditions and fess may apply. May not be available in all states. Side effects include headache, nasusa, books being thrown, and loss of friends.

[ericgrau]

So what is behind the enemy? Which direction is the enemy facing? Does the enemy not move (his head) at all during the round? If you fiat such things, why does the rogue need a flanking buddy unless his target is denied its DEX to AC to sneak attack? He is attacking from behind after all. By all means use the variant facing rules, but without them it makes little sense to half-heartedly introduce them.

It's more like facing isn't tracked rather than it doesn't exist. People still face certain directions and don't have eyes on the back of their heads, we just normally don't pay attention to it. Especially not in combat where you're constantly looking around. So a lot of it ends up as DM's call.

[Andezzar]

If you give benefit or disadvantages based on facing this is a houserule. One DM's houserules have next to no impact on another DM's houserules. The standard behavior is as you said, facing is not tracked and that people are constantly turning, and thus at any given moment are facing the right direction. That is functionally identical to having 360° vision.

[yellowrocket]

One of the modules I was reading through recently had in it a case where a spot check had a numerical penalty to the archer for talking to the other guard. I'll have to try to find it.

[Andezzar]

That is a penalty for the distraction, or does the penalty change depending on where someone sneaks in relation to the guard?

[yellowrocket]

The guard was raised above ground level, ypu were either crossing the area he was supposed to be watch or approaching. Again ill have to find the actual text. As to whether the distraction was the penalty, or the penalty was because of the distraction is irrelevant. It establishes that functionally and raw you can apply modifiers to a spot roll with out having to use the variant rule set for facing.

[SangoProduction]

That's Disguise. Totally different skill.

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Urban_Adventures

Ctrl-F "Crowd". You can hide from someone using crowds as cover. So maybe a Disguise check if they have any reason to suspect you normally, but otherwise, you can just straight up use your hide...in fact, by this limited rule, you could actually hide from the crowd by hiding in the crowd. ...Kinda makes sense, as an abstraction of your moving through people and using their movement to mask yours, but not if the whole crowd is looking for you. But that's RAW for you. All you need is a Tower Shield.

[Abithrios]

Sure, but that does not mean that creatures without those abilty don't de facto can see in every direction at once. Unless you use the facing rules, you cannot say in which direction a creature is looking at any point in time. So it either looks in none of them or all of them.


There are certainly times when you cannot say where someone is facing, but that doesn't mean you NEVER know which way a character is facing. The situation I am thinking of is one of someone who has no reason to suspect that someone is sneaking up on them and isn't standing watch.

For example, if you are sneaking up on someone who is reading a book at a desk, the direction away from the desk is behind them. It depends heavily on how much description the DM provides, but if the DM s includes details, such as what someone is doing or where they are facing, then that can have mechanical effects.

[HolyDraconus]

Tower shields grant concealment...... so.....

[Andezzar]

There are certainly times when you cannot say where someone is facing, but that doesn't mean you NEVER know which way a character is facing. The situation I am thinking of is one of someone who has no reason to suspect that someone is sneaking up on them and isn't standing watch.

For example, if you are sneaking up on someone who is reading a book at a desk, the direction away from the desk is behind them. It depends heavily on how much description the DM provides, but if the DM s includes details, such as what someone is doing or where they are facing, then that can have mechanical effects.Let's go over that with the rules. If you have concealment vs. the guy sitting at the desk, you can hide, but he can spot. that's how hiding works. If you have total concealment vs. him, you cannot/need not hide. Giving the observer a penalty to his spot check is not covered by the by the rules and a houserule, which has no bearing on another DM's houserules.

[frost890]

So what is behind the enemy? Which direction is the enemy facing? Does the enemy not move (his head) at all during the round? If you fiat such things, why does the rogue need a flanking buddy unless his target is denied its DEX to AC to sneak attack? He is attacking from behind after all. By all means use the variant facing rules, but without them it makes little sense to half-heartedly introduce them.

PHB Page 83 under spot gives a -5 penalty for being distracted because your attention is focused over "there"

PHB Page 137 talks about determining awareness.

And of course the easiest way to determine which way they are facing... ask the gm to describe what they are doing and which way they are facing.

[Andezzar]

PHB Page 83 under spot gives a -5 penalty for being distracted because your attention is focused over "there"Distraction has nothing to do with facing.


PHB Page 137 talks about determining awareness.I see nothing about direction in that part either.


And of course the easiest way to determine which way they are facing... ask the gm to describe what they are doing and which way they are facing.Sure, but there is no benefit or drawback the NPCs or the PCs get from that information.

[yellowrocket]

You've crossed the line to rules assinine. I'm done with debating you. They provided contextual information in which you refuse to accept context.

[HolyDraconus]

So i hide behind my shield....

[Vaz]

http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Urban_Adventures

Ctrl-F "Crowd". You can hide from someone using crowds as cover. So maybe a Disguise check if they have any reason to suspect you normally, but otherwise, you can just straight up use your hide...in fact, by this limited rule, you could actually hide from the crowd by hiding in the crowd. ...Kinda makes sense, as an abstraction of your moving through people and using their movement to mask yours, but not if the whole crowd is looking for you. But that's RAW for you. All you need is a Tower Shield.

Tower shield nonsense aside, there is a difference between hiding in a crowd, and trying to pass yourself off as a servant. Namely, you can do both, facing 2 spot checks, one against Hide check, and one against Disguise check.

[Melcar]

Let's go over that with the rules. If you have concealment vs. the guy sitting at the desk, you can hide, but he can spot. that's how hiding works. If you have total concealment vs. him, you cannot/need not hide. Giving the observer a penalty to his spot check is not covered by the by the rules and a houserule, which has no bearing on another DM's houserules.

The thing is, that in the case the person is reading a book, and thus constantly looking at it, he would not be taking a spot check unless he first with a listen check knew that someone was there. The fact that someone is doing a spot check means they are actively scanning the area. In situations where a person is so focused at one thing and thus not scanning the room, (e.g reading a book) no spot check should be rolled.

The no facing part is only happening in combat, where everybody dances around. In non-combat situations facing is verymuch happening. If the DM tells you the wizard is sittiing still reading, he is then not looking everywhere for potential intruders - he's reading and thus facing the table/ book - end of story!

[Andezzar]

The thing is, that in the case the person is reading a book, and thus constantly looking at it, he would not be taking a spot check unless he first with a listen check knew that someone was there. The fact that someone is doing a spot check means they are actively scanning the area. In situations where a person is so focused at one thing and thus not scanning the room, (e.g reading a book) no spot check should be rolled.The rules disagree with you:
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. To read lips, you must concentrate for a full minute before making a Spot check, and you can’t perform any other action (other than moving at up to half speed) during this minute.

Actively scanning an area is search, not spot.

[Melcar]

The rules disagree with you:

The thing is that if you are focused on reading, you have no chance to spot something. Therefore no spot should be taken. You do however have a chance to hear something and thus looks up from the book and takes a spot!


Actively scanning an area is search, not spot

No... if a guard scans the court yard he is using spot!

[Andezzar]

The thing is that if you are focused on reading, you have no chance to spot something. Therefore no spot should be taken.Of course you can fiat that any NPC is oblivious, but again there is no rule saying you should decide that based on direction. peripheral vision and movement (within one's square) should give the reader a chance.

Oh and would you spring that on the PC's? Just deciding that they are so preoccupied with whatever they are doing that they can neither reactively spot, nor take a move action to spot what they (per fiat) missed?


Actively scanning an area is search, not spot You are probably right. I confused the borders of those skills with the way how they are handled in another game.

[Melcar]

Of course you can fiat that any NPC is oblivious, but again there is no rule saying you should decide that based on direction. peripheral vision and movement (within one's square) should give the reader a chance.

Oh and would you spring that on the PC's? Just deciding that they are so preoccupied with whatever they are doing that they can neither reactively spot, nor take a move action to spot what they (per fiat) missed?

If you want the hide ability to actually give the possibility to "sneak up behind someone" then yes, I would determine that some focused actions made is so, that they would not be eligible to make a spot check. One such thing could be reading a book/ studying. There could indeed be other situations out of combat where a reactive spot would make no sense and thus would not be taken. The thing is, that the rules seem to imply that every body is constantly vigilant and on high alert. That might be true in combat and after a initiative check has been made, but for the most part out of combat it is not true.

As I have pointed out, the listen skill shoul be used in conjunction with spot, so the reader might look up because he hears something and then make the spot check. Or the royal guard who have been facing north now turns and looks to the south because he heard something.

[Andezzar]

If the reading charcter can't actually spot, there cannot/need not be a hide check, because you cannot determine whether the hiding character has concealment vs no observer.

Also everyone is not always on high alert. That is what the distraction penalty is for.

[yellowrocket]

So you give the distracted or otherwise fully engrossed individual a minus 20 penalty to the check. This is then the (rather common sense ) solution to the situation you are both arguing. Agreed?

Yes you've suckered me back in.

[Andezzar]

So you give the distracted or otherwise fully engrossed individual a minus 20 penalty to the check. This is then the (rather common sense ) solution to the situation you are both arguing. Agreed?

Yes you've suckered me back in.The rules say -5 for being distracted, but if you want to increase that penalty, feel free. Your houserules however probably have no bearing on the OP's table.

[Vaz]

Circumstance bonus/penalties are explicitly not houserules.

[Melcar]

If the reading charcter can't actually spot, there cannot/need not be a hide check, because you cannot determine whether the hiding character has concealment vs no observer.

Also everyone is not always on high alert. That is what the distraction penalty is for.

There is a difference between being distracted or not looking at all. In the case of guard he might be distracted if you get someone to cause a scene, but a reader is not looking (spotting) at all. And yes, I see how that eliminates the use of hide. But then again if it makes sense in the situation. Everybody can hide anyways...

Move silent and listen are needed though!

[Troacctid]

If they're not paying attention to you, that would fulfill the "Not being observed" requirement of hiding. It's basically the whole point of using Bluff to create a distraction, innit?

[PersonMan]

Tower shields grant concealment...... so.....

Not quite, but they do grant cover.

So yes, AFAIK it's RAW that you can hide behind your tower shield, thus making yourself and all your equipment (including the tower shield) invisible unless someone can Spot you.

---

As for 'sneaking up behind someone / blending in', I'd say that those both use hiding but not necessarily Hiding. If you're tailing someone and ducking away when they look behind them, that's a situation that's likely going to need DM-ruling anyways because of DnD's whole 'everyone fights by spinning (https://youtu.be/Q7oyW6LjxrA?t=1m44s)' rule for facing/vision as well as the matter of cover, concealment, etc. in an environment where you need to move between cover and/or are briefly exposed when your cover walks away.

At least, that's how any game I've been in would likely handle it. After all, who wants to halt a game for an hour while everyone looks up every usage of 'Spot', 'cover', 'hide' and 'concealment' in any sourcebook that could have relevant rules?

[Melcar]

I have to agree, that albeit this is a RAW forum, when the rules are so, that the main ability of hide are rendered devoid, by the "no facing", one should apply common sense. I also believe that the “no facing” rule only applies to combat. What game would have a situation where the player asks his/her DM: “which way is the guard facing?” And the DM answers: “All… He is spinning around, like a crazy person – making his royal drill sergeant angry as hell for not standing still and impersonating a horrible ballet dancer – and looking 360 degrees, despite not wearing a robe of eyes! So go screw yourself rogue. There is no way I’m going to let you use your primary skill here! I follow the rules!”

I understand again that there has been an expansion of the rules to include that you can hide a certain number of feet away from cover, but at a certain point, when the rogue gets away from his cover, he will get auto-spotted according to the rules. This however is not, by multiple examples true. The rogue might get heard, but won’t get spotted unless the target choses to look behind him. This can only be correctly determined by the DM and no arbitrary “no-facing” rule, can correctly or logically determine that.

[PersonMan]

As far as I know, the point of the no-facing rule is to avoid making combat far more complex than it currently is. Imagine tracking the facing of 9 mooks, 2 beefy monsters and the BBEG while also keeping the 4 party members' facing, their two summons' facing, the Paladin's mount's facing and the Wizard's familiar's facing in mind. It only gets worse when you're outside a medium in which you can just adjust the minifigures to show facing.

[Apricot]

If a character's actively looking the other way and has no magical way of "seeing" things behind them, I don't believe you could take a Hide check, because there's no reason you'd ever have to. A full-sized dragon wouldn't have to make the Hide check, even, and provided it made an impossible Move Silently check, it could even sneak right up to the other-way-facer.

I think that's the best way of interpreting the situation. There's no weirdness about using a creature as cover from itself: their ocular units are just not pointed in the right direction, making the entire question moot. If the creature turns, then you can make a Hide check to go against its Spot.

The non-facing rule only applies to combat, as far as I can tell.

[Troacctid]

I understand again that there has been an expansion of the rules to include that you can hide a certain number of feet away from cover, but at a certain point, when the rogue gets away from his cover, he will get auto-spotted according to the rules. This however is not, by multiple examples true. The rogue might get heard, but won’t get spotted unless the target choses to look behind him. This can only be correctly determined by the DM and no arbitrary “no-facing” rule, can correctly or logically determine that.

You're talking like the rules don't care at all if the guy you're hiding from is looking the other way, but that's not true. The rules are quite clear that you can't even attempt a Hide check if the individual from whom you're hiding is looking at you (AKA observing you). By RAW, you need them to be looking the other way in order to hide from them.

Basically, it is not a sufficient condition (because peripheral vision is a thing), but it is a necessary condition, unless you can hide in plain sight.

[Melcar]

You're talking like the rules don't care at all if the guy you're hiding from is looking the other way, but that's not true. The rules are quite clear that you can't even attempt a Hide check if the individual from whom you're hiding is looking at you (AKA observing you). By RAW, you need them to be looking the other way in order to hide from them.

Basically, it is not a sufficient condition (because peripheral vision is a thing), but it is a necessary condition, unless you can hide in plain sight.

I was trying to prove a point about the fact that facing does indeed exist, and that the “no facing” only applies to combat. And as you correctly point out, even there you specifically cannot hide from the target if the target is looking directly at you. The rules seem to collide a bit here. My point is, that I think we agree, I was merely not precise enough me thinks.

I’ve had quite some trouble understanding hide, precisely because of the rule collision. One the one hand you can sneak up by using hide, on the other you can only leave cover for a certain amount of feet, and on the last if there is “no facing” the target is always looking at you while at the same time looking everywhere else. Thus making sneaking op behind people impossible.

So, as I have pointed out earlier, I believe that unless the target has a reason to keep looking over his shoulder, he won’t do spot checks and thus no hide check is needed. That however does not seem clear in the rules, which seem to indicate that hide and spot always should be used. Which in turn seem to render sneaking up impossible.