PDA

View Full Version : Spot DC for things that aren't hiding



Ulzgoroth
2007-07-26, 03:20 PM
It seems intuitively obvious that it ought to be possible to fail to see things that aren't actually hidden or obstructed. Creatures or objects that are small, distant, or both can be hard to see even if they are theoretically in plain sight. It also seems that this ought to be judged by a spot check.

Spot DCs are usually determined by an opposed skill check (hide in this case). But there's no one making a hide check to determine that. What would be a reasonable base 'hide check' for something not hidden? Or should some other mechanic be used?

ndragonsbane
2007-07-26, 03:28 PM
I do this for spot/listen all the time:

DC= 0+Size Mod+Distance Mod+Cover/Concealment Mod

The last is a +/-2 circumstance modifier for visibility.

If it has total cover or concealment it cannot be spotted (a duh, but still).

Granted this makes some things pretty easy to spot, but smallish things become pretty hard at a distance (I use +1 per 10' to hide/m sil. instead of -1 per 10' to spot/ listen).

[Edit: when I use this for listen I replace size modifier with environment/misc.]

Skjaldbakka
2007-07-26, 03:32 PM
According to SRD, the spot DC for a large object in plain sight is 0. Modify for distance from there.

Ulzgoroth
2007-07-26, 03:34 PM
I was actually thinking that baseline should be something more like -20 or -30...putting it at 0 means that an alert lookout with no particular aptitude can't see a human approaching openly from beyond 200 feet. Which struck me as unreasonable.

SpikeFightwicky
2007-07-26, 03:41 PM
I find the rules are kind of contradictory for spot... The skill entry says that the skill is for finding characters/creatures who are hiding, or something that's difficult to see.

Then in the skill examples, they give a DC 0 for spot check of a large object in plain sight...

So for every 10 feet you are from the large object, you get a chance to not see it, which doesn't make much sense.

In my group, we don't use it to spot things that aren't hiding <= houserule.

RAW-wise, the spot DC for things that aren't hiding is 0 + distance (+1 per 10 ft.). So a tank 50 ft. away in an open plain has a spot DC of 5...

its_all_ogre
2007-07-26, 04:12 PM
the -1 pr 10 foot is doubled in plains i believe though dmg pages on....plains!
so it would be spot 5 at 100 feet! modified for dex of 0 means spot 0 again (though i am not sure if that is raw, but hide is dex based)
i normally just use spot checks to see who spots who first in those instances where this matters.

WhyBother
2007-07-26, 04:20 PM
So a tank 50 ft. away in an open plain has a spot DC of 5...

So a 25% chance to miss a large object in a game that intentionally plays it fast and loose with facing to allow for just this sort of thing... I think I'm going to say "you were looking the other way." Even with fantastic peripheral vision, The ninety-degree-arc directly behind your head should be pretty much invisible. Alternatively, I'd probably rule anyone who failed this check was looking at his feet, lost in thought, or otherwise just not paying attention to the world more than 10 feet around him. It happens.

Dervag
2007-07-26, 04:21 PM
I made up a rule that makes the distance modifier to spot checks dependent on the size of the object. The DC at 'point blank' range is assumed to be 0 for unconcealed objects.

Fine: +2/5 feet (spotting an ant more than 25 feet away would be difficult, even if the ant is in the open on a contrasting background)

Diminutive: +1/5 feet (a mouse may be virtually invisible even at close range with concealment, and will not be visible except under the most glaring of circumstances at more than 50 feet)

Tiny: +1/10 feet (you can see a cat standing a hundred feet away with no trouble; farther than that and you might well overlook them).

Small: +1/20 feet

Medium: +1/40 feet (a man is easily visible as an individual for about 100 to 150 yards, but beyond that they tend to be difficult to spot unless moving as part of a group)

Large: +1/80 feet

Huge: +1/160 feet (you can easily see an elephant a third of a mile away)

Gargantuan: +1/320 feet

Colossal: +1/640 feet (you almost have to try to overlook something the size of an office building at any distance of less than a mile).

The base DC of 0 assumes an ordinary background in good light. The background should contain enough features that a person could concievably overlook the thing they're looking at. In an unusually featureless environment (such as an insect crawling across white wallpaper, or a man walking across a desert), the base DC should be negative, because the object being Spotted is outstanding compared to its surroundings. Likewise, an animal with an electric blue coat in an environment with the usual brown and green colors would stand out even more than usual and have a negative spot DC, except against an electric blue background.

Objects even larger than a normal Colossal object (such as a mountain), or collections of smaller objects with size greater than a single normal Colossal object (such as forest made up of thousands of Huge, Gargantuan, and Colossal trees) should have even longer range increments. Thus, it is possible to see a forest, a city skyline, or a mountaintop by taking 10 on one's Spot check from many miles away. Indeed, such features may be easily visible out to the limits of line of sight imposed by atmosphere or the curvature of the Earth!

Rockphed
2007-07-26, 04:27 PM
Alternatively, I'd probably rule anyone who failed this check was looking at his feet, lost in thought, or otherwise just not paying attention to the world more than 10 feet around him. It happens.

It happens to me all the time!

NullAshton
2007-07-26, 04:43 PM
By RAW, the spot DC for an object that isn't hiding is non-existent. There is no rules to spot an object, except a few lines that say a spot check may be required to spot something hard to see. In that case, it's an ad-hoc DC, since again no DC is stated for that.

There is no mathematical formula in the rules for this.

Diggorian
2007-07-26, 05:06 PM
For pretty much most ability checks and skills I assume everyone in the game is taking 10 most of the time, including Spot. I think the skill doesnt represent just visual capability but also the perceptiveness to notice what matters.

The size mod given by hide could be applicable to objects as well as creatures.

Curmudgeon
2007-07-26, 08:46 PM
By RAW, the spot DC for an object that isn't hiding is non-existent. There is no rules to spot an object Please turn to page 64 of your Player's Handbook and look at the first entry of Table 4-3: Difficulty Class Examples. This DC does, indeed, exist.

Dervag
2007-07-26, 11:43 PM
The question of when someone sees an object which is not specifically hidden may be very important sometimes.

For instance, imagine that I am a scout trying to find a hostile army and make it back to camp. If I get too close to the army and they see me, then their cavalry will chase me down and kill me. So it is of the utmost importance that I spot their army from as far away as possible.

How do we resolve this question? Presumably, the keen-eyed high level ranger will do better on this challenge than some myopic city-bred clerk.

The obvious thing to do is to use Spot checks; nothing else makes more sense as a way to answer the question of how far away I spot an advancing army, and many things make less sense.

Matthew
2007-07-27, 12:29 AM
No, that's not DC 0 for an object at distance X, that's a flat DC 0 for seeing something in plain sight. Also, it is not a Spot specific DC, it's an example of relative difficulties.

Ulzgoroth
2007-07-27, 05:00 AM
It is clearly the case that it is possible to not see an object despite it being neither completely impossible to see nor deliberately hidden. The question is how to handle that. The PHB's position on this is only relevant insofar as it cooperates with basic logic.

That said, I'd rather not take an approach that requires completely rewriting the spot skill, and incidentally greatly weakening the hide skill (much of the viability of hiding comes from the -1/10ft to spot checks).

The DC 0 example is noteworthy, but clearly makes no sense as a universal rule. A large object in 'plain sight' may be light-years away and impossible for any remotely normal person to see. There is no indication in the example of how far away this large object is, nor is it clear that 'large' is meant in the technical sense.

Dervag
2007-07-27, 07:01 AM
No, that's not DC 0 for an object at distance X, that's a flat DC 0 for seeing something in plain sight. Also, it is not a Spot specific DC, it's an example of relative difficulties.So what constitutes 'plain sight'?

On a clear day, a mountain is in plain sight even when it's on the horizon. A man is not. It may be important to know how far away I see objects 'in plain sight'. For instance, telescopes were an enormously valuable tool, both on land and at sea, precisely because they made it possible to see an object that was not hidden at greater distances and in more detail.

So do I see the approaching cavalry troop when they're a mile away, or half a mile, or a thousand feet, or do I not notice them at all until they're two hundred feet away and already inside bow range? They're not hiding, but it makes a difference how alert I am and how good my eyesight is.

I would argue that Spot is a relevant and useful skill for resolving questions like this.


That said, I'd rather not take an approach that requires completely rewriting the spot skill, and incidentally greatly weakening the hide skill (much of the viability of hiding comes from the -1/10ft to spot checks).My proposed house rule applies only to objects that are not hiding.

A man hidden in bushes may be effectively invisible from ten or twenty feet away, especially if they are wearing camouflage. A man hiding in a shadow may be invisible to all but the most perceptive at that distance, likewise. But it is almost inconceivable that I could fail to see that man from that distance, or even from ten times that distance, if they were standing in the open and I were actually looking around me.

Matthew
2007-07-27, 10:17 AM
So what constitutes 'plain sight'?

On a clear day, a mountain is in plain sight even when it's on the horizon. A man is not. It may be important to know how far away I see objects 'in plain sight'. For instance, telescopes were an enormously valuable tool, both on land and at sea, precisely because they made it possible to see an object that was not hidden at greater distances and in more detail.

So do I see the approaching cavalry troop when they're a mile away, or half a mile, or a thousand feet, or do I not notice them at all until they're two hundred feet away and already inside bow range? They're not hiding, but it makes a difference how alert I am and how good my eyesight is.

I would argue that Spot is a relevant and useful skill for resolving questions like this.

The actual line reads: 'Notice something large in plain sight' and it is associated with Spot (which I forgot), but it isn't in the Spot Skill description. That whole table is just meant to illustrate what is meant by DC X in terms of difficulty. There are no definitions to further narrow down the meaning of this within the context of the game, which I think is appropriate, since section it is in says:


Some checks are made against a Difficulty Class (DC). The DC is a number (set using the skill rules as a guideline) that you must score as a result on your skill check in order to succeed.

That, I think is the most important qualifier. In this case, all that is being said is that objects that can be seen have a DC 0 to see [i.e. objects that can be seen, can be seen]. You can add in distance modifiers as you like, but not in such a way as to make something that can be seen unseeable.