Using Bluff to hide while meleeing (with HiPS)

[Tyrol]

I'm pretty sure I understand the mechanism of how this would work. What is not exactly clear to me is the timing.
Picture a character in melee range of at least one enemy. Obviously, the character must have Hide in Plain Sight to even attempt hiding while in melee range (normally it is impossible to hide while being observed). Assuming they are in an environment acceptable for their HiPS usage (I.E. natural terrain for a ranger), I'm pretty sure the mechanism would work something like this:

1) Create a Diversion to Hide - Normal bluff check opposed by sense motive. Right? (Note: Does not provoke an attack of opportunity.)
2) Assuming the diversion bluff is a success, this is followed by a Hide check opposed by spot checks of any enemies who might see the character (DM would determine which enemies get spot checks; obviously at least one). This hide check comes at a -20 penalty for the character, as per the Hide skill which states: "It’s practically impossible (–20 penalty) to hide while attacking, running or charging." If the character succeeds vs all spot checks, they are successfully hidden. (Am I missing anything?)

Now, my question is: What kind of action does all this take? Normally hide can be performed as part of a move action. This is pretty clear to me. What about the bluff? Is it all included as part of 1 move action, thus allowing a standard action to be performed during the same turn? Or does it take another, seperate, type of action? Is it reasonable to conclude that it could work the same way as sniping does (described under the Hide skill), without the 10 foot distance restriction (but only with use of HiPS, which sniping does not require)?

I guess it all comes down to the "Creating a Diversion to Hide" mentioned under the Bluff skill, which does not state what type of action it requires. Anyone shed any light on how this is intended to work under the rules?

Thanks in advance

 

[Lodow MoBo]

Why do you need a diversion to hide when you can hide in plain sight? We have played this as a near invis type ability. Hide in plain sight = no cover or concelment required.

As an example. Normal hide situation: Town watch vs rogue. Townwatch sees rogue. Rogue hides behind a crate. The town watch man can't see the rogue but knows where he is. He saw him hide.

with create diversion: Town watch didn't see him hide so does not know where he is.

Hide in plain sight. Town watchman sees the shagow dancer disapear.
with create a diversion Town watchman does not see him disapear.

 

[Tyrol]

Why do you need a diversion to hide when you can hide in plain sight? We have played this as a near invis type ability. Hide in plain sight = no cover or concelment required.

As an example. Normal hide situation: Town watch vs rogue. Townwatch sees rogue. Rogue hides behind a crate. The town watch man can't see the rogue but knows where he is. He saw him hide.

with create diversion: Town watch didn't see him hide so does not know where he is.

Hide in plain sight. Town watchman sees the shagow dancer disapear.
with create a diversion Town watchman does not see him disapear.

Hmm, interesting points, Lodow. Definitely made me think, and now I have more questions.

Doesn't the Town Watchman know where the shadowdancer is if he sees him dissapear (without creating a diversion)? Especially if the shadowdancer was standing right next to him when he did? Is the shadowdancer considered invisible for the purposes of concealment if he succeeds? Does the shadowdancer who didn't use a diversion catch the town watchman flat-footed if he attacks him (that round or the following round)? What if the Town Watchman decides to attack the square where the shadowdancer dissapeared? Would the Watch then have a 50% miss chance due to the SD's concealment? Assuming he does, if the Watch hits the SD with this swing, does the SD then appear (thus negating any potential benefit the SD could have had during his turn)?

Since it would seem that there would be benefit to using bluff to create a diversion, even with HiPS, my original question still seems relevant. Afterall, creating the diversion with HiPS leads to the Town Watch being more likely to be caught flat-footed (either for an AoO if the Watch provokes one, which he will if he moves [note1: you cannot use the withdraw action to avoid AoOs from an enemy you cannot see, so the Watch could not move without provoking one] or on the SD's next turn, where he'd catch the Watch flat-footed [note2: the Watch could take a 5-foot step to move away without provoking an AoO, but he'd still be within a 5-foot step of the SD when the SD acted]), therefore it seems worthwhile. Unless I am missing something?

 

[Tyrol]

Regarding my original question about what kind of action a Bluff to create a diversion to hide takes, I discovered that it is a bit more clear than I had thought.

Action: Varies. A Bluff check made as part of general interaction always takes at least 1 round (and is at least a full-round action), but it can take much longer if you try something elaborate. A Bluff check made to feint in combat or create a diversion to hide is a standard action. A Bluff check made to deliver a secret message doesn’t take an action; it is part of normal communication.

Not sure how I overlooked that. Sorry!

Is there any way in the RAW to create a diversion to hide as a move action (or part of a move action)?
What if a character has the Improved Feint feat, that allows Feinting to be performed as a move action? Could he use Bluff and Improved Feint to create a diversion to hide as a move action (and thus Hide as part of the move action too)? Or what about the Uncanny Feint ability of an Invisible Blade?

The two uses of bluff in combat (as a fient or to create a diversion to hide) are very similar. The only difference in mechanism seems to be that a Feint check provides the opposer with a BAB bonus. Assuming the RAW is not definitive, would it be unreasonable to conclude that:

A) the Improved Feint feat can be used for diversions, but only if the standard check applicable to Feints is used (Bluff + d20 against Sense Motive + BAB + d20, rather than the normal Bluff + d20 vs Sense motive + d20) - (Would this be a reasonable DM judgement call from an ambiguous RAW? or house hule?)
B) Create a feat that would likely be called 'Improved Diversion to Hide' that would allow it to be performed as part of a move action. (this would likely be a house rule)

Anyone have thoughts on this or insight regarding my above questions? (or links to another discussion - ideally with a good conclusion, but I realize that isn't always possible ).

I did find this thread discussing shadowdancers, HiPS, and spring attack. While it answers quite a few of my questions and highlights the fact that hiding and meleeing does not seem clear in the RAW, it doesn't cover everything.

Thanks,

Tyrol

 

[Thanee]

There is no such feat. Only Hide in Plain Sight allows that, basically.
Creating a diversion just requires a bit more effort, than a move action.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Storyteller01]

ninpotaijitsu teaches a similar technique. Punch at the face to force a guard, then roll behind them while they can't see. then it's a matter of keeping them from seeing you (ever stand behind someone, and move when they try to see whose there?)...

Seems like a standard action, then move action. Can't hide checks be made as part of move actions? Isn't it 15 feet to walk behind a critter with a 5' face from its front (20 if you want to be behind its back)? How far can a critter tumble?

 

[Lodow MoBo]

He has concelment. The town watch knows where he was when he disappeared. if he dose not move then when the town watch attacks that square there is a 50% mischance.

I think the real interesting rule is the rule that states -20 to hide while attacking. Does that mean if you are engaged in melee that you have a -20 to hide.

Also:

If you are not fighting and you hide in plain sight. You walk up to the town watchman. As you swing, does your hide check suddenly get a -20 penalty and offer the Town watchman a new spot?

 

[hong]

ninpotaijitsu

Trans. "way of the ninja potato"

 

[Thanee]

If you are not fighting and you hide in plain sight. You walk up to the town watchman. As you swing, does your hide check suddenly get a -20 penalty and offer the Town watchman a new spot?

I play it, that attacking automatically breaks hide, unless you use the sniping rules.

Hide is impossible as part of a charge action or attack action, but if combined with such during a round, then you get a -20 penalty to your Hide check.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hannibal Barca]

I'm confused Thanee. Are you saying that gaining a sneak attack by attacking while hiding (with -20 hide penalty) is impossible with the RAW?