Some questions on the Hide skill (world's dumbest rule question?)

[mikebr99]

So, how would you guys handle the "around the corner" issue? If a rogue is hidden around a corner and readies an action to attack when the guard comes around the corner, does the rogue get a sneak attack? The moment the guard rounds the corner, the rogue no longer has cover and is spotted... but does the readied action go before the guard sees the rogue? In real life the situation is exactly the kind of event that someone would be able to "sneak attack" in, but the rules don't seem to allow for it

Crappy illustration to try to make the situation clear (R=Rogue, G=Guard):

R/\G
/ \

This is what the expanded description in Complete Adventurer p101 is for... moving from cover to attack.

Mike

 

[buzz]

So, how would you guys handle the "around the corner" issue? If a rogue is hidden around a corner and readies an action to attack when the guard comes around the corner, does the rogue get a sneak attack?

If the rogue's attack initiates the fight, then we're in a surprise round and thus the guard is flat-footed anyway.

If this is mid-fight, the rogue can attack the guard while still behind cover.

-G
RX

If X is the wall, the rogue has cover while still being able to attack. Granted, the guard has cover from the rogue, too.

One thing to remember is that the rogue has total cover until the guard gets to this point (assuming the guard is walking straight from the right, duh); this obviates the need for a Hide check, I believe. The opposed Hide v. Spot doesn't really need to happen until the guard is in the position depicted above.

At least, I think that's right.

 

[Nail]

If this is mid-fight, the rogue can attack the guard while still behind cover.

-G
RX

In fact, that's the only way to do this -- once the guard rounds the corner, the rogue has no cover, and therefore is not hiding.

Arravis, the "around the corner" issue isn't modeled well in 3.xe -- we don't have any rules about "surprising someone" in the middle of a battle by hiding and then appearing again. The reason it works in the movies (etc) is because it's cool to show that kind of action. Keep in mind that in the "real world", the hider would hear the guard approach, and try to time his shot to exactly when the guard came around the corner.

In 3.xe, the rogue would have to ready an action: "As soon as the guard enters the square around the corner (and thus we both have cover, so I can still be hiding), I attack!"

 

[Arravis]

Hmm... How does everyone model "shadowy illumination"? To keep with the corner-rogue scenario, what if the rogue is on the shadow side of the building, let's say the sun is in the western sky and the rogue is on the east side of the building. Would that be enough to consider it "shadowy illumination"?

In my experience the "hiding around the corner" scenario is quite plausable and usable in real-life. I used it hundreds of times as a kid, playing "war" with friends, and any other number of games. Yes, in D&D it's adults with experience, etc, but there is some merit to the tactic.

 

[pawned79]

Are we saying that a hidden opponient does catch you flat-footed if you fail to spot them? Even if you saw your opponient run behind cover but then lost sight of them in the middle of a combat?

For example, lets say there is a big brawl going on outside. There are half a dozen people fighting another half a dozen people. Some with swords, and some with arrows. You are a sword guy and you go first and hit the nearest opponient with your sword. Your turn is done. Next some opponient twenty feet from you with a crossbow steps behind a cart and hides. His turn is done. Next round eventually comes. You do not spot the fellow that is now hiding with his crossbow behind the cart. You hit your melee opponient with your sword again to end your turn. Next, the crossbowman shoots at you and hits. Are you flat-footed to the crossbowman? Do you receive sneak attack damage?

Does Hide beats Spot always yield a flat-footed sneak-attackable status?

Patrick

 

[buzz]

Hmm... How does everyone model "shadowy illumination"? To keep with the corner-rogue scenario, what if the rogue is on the shadow side of the building, let's say the sun is in the western sky and the rogue is on the east side of the building. Would that be enough to consider it "shadowy illumination"?

If the DM says so.

Seriously, the prevailing conditions are what the DM sets up when they design the encounter. Granted, no amount of shadowy illumination is going to make a difference if you can be directly observed.

 

[buzz]

Are we saying that a hidden opponient does catch you flat-footed if you fail to spot them? Even if you saw your opponient run behind cover but then lost sight of them in the middle of a combat?

Yes.

 

[gnfnrf]

Are we saying that a hidden opponient does catch you flat-footed if you fail to spot them? Even if you saw your opponient run behind cover but then lost sight of them in the middle of a combat?
Patrick

That depends on what you mean by "lost sight of them."

If you are being observed, you can't hide. As far as I can tell, (though, again, this is less precise than I would like) if you are observed moving to partial cover, you cannot hide in that cover. In order to hide, you need to gain full cover (go around the corner), then come back to regular cover and hide.

Personally, I wouldn't allow this all in one turn, but there's no rules justification for that that I can see.

--
gnfnrf

 

[Arravis]

I AM the DM, and I'm looking for clearer definitions of all of this. I don't know, if by the rules as written, "shadowy illumination" is even possible in daylight. Can a player hide on the shadowy side of a building? Can he hide in a shadowy alley? Can he hide in a shadowy hole in the ground?

A clearer definition of these kind of circumstances would be nice. Earlier editions of D&D were'nt really attempting to make meta-game mechanics which spanned as a single cohesive unit. These are the kind of rules that need clarity (pun intended again) if you're going to have this kind of system.

 

[buzz]

Arravis, my comment baout it being up to the DM was only partially humorous. D&D, afaik, doesn't defne when or what causes shadowy illumination in the same way that it doesn't define what causes inclines steep enough to require a Climb check or water deep enough that you need to use Swim. These are aspects of the environment that are part of encounter design. All D&D can do is say, "Here are some rules to cover such circumstances." I think most other RPGs work likewise.

Other than specific rules about torches and such, whether, e.g., a barn's shadow creates an area of shadowy illumination is pretty much a DM call.

Once it's determined that there is shadowy illumination, then D&D gives you rules. In this case, shadowy illumination does provide concealment, ergo, it creates an opportunity to use Hide (if you're not being directly observed).