Rogue Clarifications, Ways to gain concealement

[CrimsonRaven]

Aloha Friends. I have a question that's been bugging me. I've been designing a fight my players will soon play versus a rogue and I have some different ways this could go...

First of all This Rogue has the shadow creature tempalte and will either have the obscuring blow or Hide in Plain Sight talent. Maybe both. ( Though it does not seem worh it)

My question here is let's say the rogue does manage to sneak upon my three players on their campsite.

He rolls for stealth normally without having cover since he has Hide in Plain Sight. He does reach them during the night, the rogue has superior darkvision so he can spot them perfectly.
The player ranger has simple darkvision. Still Hide in Plain sight works agianst him, he just does not take the penalties in stealth when the Rogue is 60 feet close. They get as many perceptions as rounds it will take him to reach them right? So Fast Stealth would help here I guess.

How much of a bonus do they get for when the Rogue is just a five foot step away from them? If the rogue does end his turn there?
Or is it the other way around. They should have pentalties for spotting him further away and now that he is close it iss a simple opposed check with no penalties to their perceptions?

Now let's say they are fighting after they spotted him, or after he managed to sneak attack them for the first time. He can cast darkness as an SLA (He is a Drow)
But since it's night and assuming the light level has not changed much, can he simply use Hide in Plain sight to hiade from the guy he is fighting, and since the stealth rules say that stealth does not cost an action ( Thoug most tiems it is rolled as part of a movement, this is not such a case however)
Can the rogue stealth, and then full Attack, gaining sneak attack on the first attack? (as well as attacking an opponent denied Dex to AC)


Would it be the same with the obscuring blow?
If the rogue used obscuring blow, blidning the opponent, the miss chacne from blindness does not stack with the miss chance from Shadow Blend right? (Shadow Creature Template)

[ericgrau]

A shadow creature can get concealment anywhere except bright light. So he can hide anywhere, even right next to the PCs. However striking a PC in melee automatically reveals his square (but doesn't stop miss chance nor sneak attack) to the person who was hit and gives a -20 penalty to the stealth check that follows (to everyone's perception, not just the person who was hit). Even though he has hide in plain sight I personally would still make him hide on his turn whenever he is spotted. Consider it a sort of reblending into the shadows to re-conceal himself. Since a 5 foot step is a free action and he has concealment all around him, less than 5 feet away, I wouldn't make it cost more than a free action to re-hide though. I would let him stay in his square and "shift" a little to re-hide, or move and re-hide if he wants. That's how I best interpret the RAW.

Hide in plain sight lets him make new stealth checks even after he's been spotted, that's all. Normally he wouldn't be allowed to do that even with concealment all around.

Unless Pathfinder changed things (I don't think it did), the distance penalty to perception is -1 per 10 feet.

If players are blind then they can still make perception checks to determine the general direction of the rogue. If they beat his stealth by 20 (much easier right after he attacks), then they can determine his exact square at the time but they still face normal miss chances when attacking that square. No, different miss chances from concealment don't stack nor roll for both. Other miss chances might let you roll for both. Obscuring blow otherwise works similar to above except that beating the stealth check won't stop the 50% miss chance for the blind attacker.

EDIT: Checked the PF SRD. It looks like Pathfinder removed the -20 penalty for melee and only left it in for sniping. That makes things a little wonky; up to you if you want to leave it out. I believe the rest still applies because most of the time PF just copy pastes the 3.5 SRD. Even 3.5 players get confused about whether or not to always apply the -20 in melee anyway; many interpret it as -20 during the attack and no penalty right afterwards. But I based it on the 3.5 FAQ example of spring attack + hide in plain sight (but no auto concealment everywhere), which makes you take a -20 when you move to recoil back into the bushes. If you do leave out the -20 then keep in mind that you are giving the rogue something close to permanent greater invisibility which may make the encounter more difficult than you expected.

[Hrugner]

Your shadow template rogue can hide in normal light, so anything aside from bright light would allow the basic tactic to work. You don't need hide in plain sight since you'll have concealment, which is enough to qualify for sneak. Attacking breaks stealth and you can't hide as part of an attack; this means that, if he wants to re-hide after his attack, he can't end his turn with an attack. Yes he can five foot to rehide, but if the players move at all his pacing will fail. If a player has scent, they will observe him if he's within 5ft and he will be unable to hide in that area.

There are no penalties for hiding right next to someone unless it somehow removes the concealment or cover they were using to hide. One possible rule interpretation that can foul things up is the "sounds of battle". When they attack they will make "the sound of battle" and be easy to pinpoint making him susceptible to readied actions.

If the area is total darkness, then there's no reason to hide as a successful stealth and being in darkness have the exact same effect. Obscuring blow would be enough to rehide one time, it isn't really worth a feat, particularly for someone with the shadow template. Sources of concealment don't stack, you only use the highest concealment.

You should consider how your rogue is tracking down the group. Darkvision is still very limited and without tracking he's going to have a hell of a time finding them.

[CrimsonRaven]

Look I appreciate the help. But some things you said I have to pinpoint to make sure I realized properly what you did say. Forvie me If I make a mistake since I am somewhat drunk as I write this and I ahve forgotten how to use quotation as well XD

However striking a PC in melee automatically reveals his square, to the person who was hit and gives a -20 penalty to the stealth check that follows
The miss chacne is always there even if you are able to see him(beat the stealth with your perception) because you can see the outline clearly it's like a shadow. So this one is bvious.
Hwoever I was confused about the -20. Yes attacking someone does reveal your location obviously, but I dont udnerstand why it would make it harder for someone to hide. Now the other person is alert that someone is there, but it is someone merging with the shadows so its not like the fact that they saw him for a second attacking should change anything.

I mean I understand that they are being more alert if that's the explanation, but this percisely why the players now know it, and willa ct based on it. I think that alone is enough to explain the alert part... Hmm I will have to think about using this or not.

Now I am curious as to whether he needs Hide in Plain sight to hide whil ebeing observed or not since he is in perpetual concealment during the night. I had not read the shadow creature properly and thought the concealement part was only about the 20% miss chance, now I realize how much more situationally potent it is!

Attacking breaks stealth and you can't hide as part of an attack; this means that, if he wants to re-hide after his attack, he can't end his turn with an attack.

Stealth from before

Round 1 Attack (one attack and move+hide)
Round 2 >> >>
Also Couldn't he just use a five foot after his full attack and hide with it?

If the area is total darkness, then there's no reason to hide as a successful stealth and being in darkness have the exact same effect

Still I might want to stealth to not be heard? It will be much easier but I would like if they had no idea in what square I would be, before attacking.
I mean maybe RAW it's the same but personally if someone had a very good perception score I would let them hear someone approaching. Still the miss chance would apply (20% or 50% in this case?)
but they would know the general direction square



Finally it doesn't matter much to me since this creature/rogue whatever is an expert fainter as well(You lose one attack but moste likely Sneak on all the rest :D ). But hiding has its perks as well, besides the ongoing cocnealement, the enemy may not know your square :D

[ericgrau]

Look I appreciate the help. But some things you said I have to pinpoint to make sure I realized properly what you did say. Forvie me If I make a mistake since I am somewhat drunk as I write this and I ahve forgotten how to use quotation as well XD

However striking a PC in melee automatically reveals his square, to the person who was hit and gives a -20 penalty to the stealth check that follows
The miss chacne is always there even if you are able to see him(beat the stealth with your perception) because you can see the outline clearly it's like a shadow. So this one is bvious.
Hwoever I was confused about the -20. Yes attacking someone does reveal your location obviously, but I dont udnerstand why it would make it harder for someone to hide. Now the other person is alert that someone is there, but it is someone merging with the shadows so its not like the fact that they saw him for a second attacking should change anything.
Actually the miss chance remains at 50% even if you are struck in melee. You know exactly where the attack came from but you don't necessarily see the creature at all. The -20 is because attacking or other violent activity makes it extremely hard to hide. You blend into shadows just fine and keep the 20% miss chance, but the player is likely to be able to see the outline afterwards. Merely seeing the hider doesn't cause the -20 for the follow up check. The hider's violent action did it. On the next turn after the attack it's reasonable to get rid of the -20. However it looks like Pathfinder didn't keep the -20, so up to you if you want to use it.



Now I am curious as to whether he needs Hide in Plain sight to hide whil ebeing observed or not since he is in perpetual concealment during the night. I had not read the shadow creature properly and thought the concealement part was only about the 20% miss chance, now I realize how much more situationally potent it is!

Attacking breaks stealth and you can't hide as part of an attack; this means that, if he wants to re-hide after his attack, he can't end his turn with an attack.

Stealth from before

Round 1 Attack (one attack and move+hide)
Round 2 >> >>
Also Couldn't he just use a five foot after his full attack and hide with it?

Yes he needs hide in plain sight to re-hide while being observed. Even though he's in perpetual concealment, he's not in perpetual total concealment. That means once he's spotted the observers eyes can follow him and it's impossible to hide again. It's like watching someone walk into some foliage that doesn't completely cover him. You instanly say "Yeup, he's right there". But if he was standing in that same foilage and you walked up to him, you might not notice him even though part of his body isn't covered. Breaking the observation completely also allows rehiding. For example go behind cover so large that a foe can't see you regardless of your stealth check, then leave that cover to partial cover/concealment and make a new stealth check. Or you use a bluff check and a standard action to create a distraction ("Hey! What's that over there?") letting you break sight long enough to re-hide. Or you use hide in plain sight and skip all that. Way better.

IMO yeah just re-hide at the end of his full attack. IMO it's at -20 by 3.5 rules and what makes sense to me. But strictly by Pathfinder there's no -20. So up to you.



If the area is total darkness, then there's no reason to hide as a successful stealth and being in darkness have the exact same effect

Still I might want to stealth to not be heard? It will be much easier but I would like if they had no idea in what square I would be, before attacking.
I mean maybe RAW it's the same but personally if someone had a very good perception score I would let them hear someone approaching. Still the miss chance would apply (20% or 50% in this case?)
but they would know the general direction square

Yes absolutely you would still want to roll stealth to not be heard. Beating your stealth lets him find out you're "over there somewhere" (general direction and rough distance I guess). Enough for a fireball perhaps. Beating your stealth by 20 gives him your exact square. But in both cases in total darkness (and no darkvision) the miss chance stays at 50% because you aren't seen.

[CrimsonRaven]

I see! I get it quite well know! Thank you very much!

I might keep that -20 for one round only. :D