can you take 10 on a hide check?

[evilbob]

Oh, and WOOT - 500 posts.

 

[Mistwell]

I promise I already agreed with you.

I agree that "options and not restrictions" is the goal of the game. I also am arguing that this is by no means an "artificial limitation" but, in fact, how the skill works. Hide is not an action (the exception given is for a specific manuver; I believe it was intended for this to be an example of the "type" of exceptions you would encounter, which are specific actions regarding Hide) so you can't "hide" when no one is Spotting you.

And my argument about the use of Hide defaults to the description of the Hide skill. I disagree with your statement: I'm not trying to say that there "is not and never will be" an application of Hide that is not reactive, nor am I trying to limit the rules in some additional way; I'm saying that if you want to use a Hide check to hide, it is a reactive check and you cannot do it under the circumstances dictated by "taking 10."

I disagree, and there you go using "reactive" again to describe hide. You CANNOT use hide as a reaction to an observer trying to spot you - by definition in the text of hide you cannot hide when being observed. You must use it prior to being oberved, and hence it is NEVER in reaction to someone who could be spotting you (because then you cannot hide). You always roll hide first. Now it might be at a time when you are being distracted or threatened by something (like a trap that threatens you, or a hundred things that could be distracting), in which case you cannot take 10. But it's not "reactive" to an attempted spot check by definition. If you're reacting, you're too late to hide.

 

[irdeggman]

I disagree, and there you go using "reactive" again to describe hide. You CANNOT use hide as a reaction to an observer trying to spot you - by definition in the text of hide you cannot hide when being observed. You must use it prior to being oberved, and hence it is NEVER in reaction to someone who could be spotting you (because then you cannot hide). You always roll hide first. Now it might be at a time when you are being distracted or threatened by something (like a trap that threatens you, or a hundred things that could be distracting), in which case you cannot take 10. But it's not "reactive" to an attempted spot check by definition. If you're reacting, you're too late to hide.

I agree with Mistwell here.

I believe when you are saying "reactive" you actually mean "opposed". The two ar different and mean different things.

Hide is always an "opposed" check.

Spot is a skill than can be reactive or reflexive (that is it isn't an action) or it can be active or proactive becasue it does take an action.

Spot is reactive when someone is hiding (as a free action) or it can be proactive (when looking for someone who is hiding or when you failed the first time).

 

[Hypersmurf]

And I am arguing that it is, and your disguise example I believe goes a good way in this interpretation's favor. Disguise specifically says you need to make the check, and then it is later opposed. Forgery does, too. If hide worked like that, it would say that.

Actually, Forgery specifically states that you don't need to make your Forgery check until it is opposed - as with Disguise.

If I forge a document on Monday and show it to a guard on Wednesday, I make my Forgery check on Wednesday.

-Hyp.

 

[Jhulae]

I must not have explained this very well at all.

Because if a check is what I'm calling "reactive" you cannot take 10: you're being threatened or distracted, and you are "reacting" to another creature. When I say "proactive" I mean taking a skill check before you need it; i.e. doing something ahead of time when you are not threatened or distracted, and you can take 10. I'm just trying to qualify the two situations with descriptive terms.

I have to completely disagree with you here: being in range of a melee attack does threaten you, but "being threatened or distracted" includes much more than "being in range of a melee attack." It includes any kind of battle situation. For example, if a balor is running at your rogue, you can't "take 10" on an open lock check just because he's not currently in melee range. In the same way, if someone is actively looking for your character, you cannot take 10 on a hide.

Well, having someone look at (or for) you, is honestly, neither threatening nor distracting. While it may *result* in being threatened, such is not always the case. If you're a 10th level rogue who's trying to ambush a 1st level merchant who's got a lot of cash on him, he's no threat. You can easily kill him. And, while the thought of all the money he's got may be distracting, that's not the kind of distraction the rules are specifying.

No, taking 10 in this instance represents trying to find an adequate spot to hide. Definitely not the best location, but not the worst. The 'Average' hiding spot for someone of your particular skill.

 

[Hussar]

Actually, Forgery specifically states that you don't need to make your Forgery check until it is opposed - as with Disguise.

If I forge a document on Monday and show it to a guard on Wednesday, I make my Forgery check on Wednesday.

-Hyp.

And this is precisely the way all opposed checks are made. If I set an ambush an hour in advance, I don't make the hide check until there is an observer to hide from. Preparing the ambush site could possibly give me a circumstance bonus to hide and would certainly provide me with the cover with which to hide in. However, I couldn't prep the hiding place an hour beforehand and claim to take 20, or actually roll a hide check.

In other words, you cannot perform opposed checks without an opposition.

OTOH, I would allow you to take 10 on that check. While it does somewhat come under the "stressful" clause of taking 10, you've also had lots of time to get comfortable and whatnot, so I wouldn't be too stressed allowing you to do it.

 

[Hypersmurf]

And this is precisely the way all opposed checks are made. If I set an ambush an hour in advance, I don't make the hide check until there is an observer to hide from.

Now, if three observers wander past in three consecutive rounds, an hour after you prepared your ambush, do they all oppose a single Hide roll, or do you make a separate Hide roll for each?

-Hyp.

 

[TYPO5478]

Because if a check is what I'm calling "reactive" you cannot take 10: you're being threatened or distracted, and you are "reacting" to another creature. When I say "proactive" I mean taking a skill check before you need it; i.e. doing something ahead of time when you are not threatened or distracted, and you can take 10. I'm just trying to qualify the two situations with descriptive terms.

I think this is getting more complicated than skill checks need to be. We don't need this terminology. Just make the check whenever you do something that requires a check (unless the description says otherwise, like Forgery). Roll your Hide check when you hide, not when someone decides to look for you. You're still hidden even if no one's looking for you. As soon as they try to see you, they can oppose your Hide check with their Spot check.

People seem to be ready to compare Hide to Disguise and Forgery. There is no language in the Hide description that says a character shouldn't make a Hide check until someone else tries to Spot him. Nor is there language to that effect in Disguise (even though the Forgery description makes it sound like there is). In fact, Disguise states that "an individual makes a Spot check to see through your disguise immediately upon meeting you and each hour thereafter." It doesn't say that your Disguise check has to be made at the same time. Likewise, Hide says "If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide." How could you possibly Hide in reaction to someone Spotting you?

I have to completely disagree with you here: being in range of a melee attack does threaten you, but "being threatened or distracted" includes much more than "being in range of a melee attack." It includes any kind of battle situation.

I might agree with you if there weren't a specific game definition of "threatened," but there is. "Distracted," however, is another matter.

For example, if a balor is running at your rogue, you can't "take 10" on an open lock check just because he's not currently in melee range. In the same way, if someone is actively looking for your character, you cannot take 10 on a hide.

The rogue is not threatened by the balor until the balor is in range to attack him. However, I think you're right not to allow him to take 10; I would consider the rogue distracted by the immediately impending danger of being run through by a humongous demon. In the situation of hiding, I do not consider the potential of someone looking for you later to be a considerable distraction while attempting to hide (and I certainly wouldn't consider it being threatened).

Why would you believe I was talking about hiding after being spotted?

Because that's when reactions happen: after the event they're reacting to. You can't react to something that hasn't happened yet. If you're using Hide reactively, it has to be in reaction to something, and that something is a Spot check. But if the Spot check has already happened and you're not hidden, then he's already seen you; there's no point in hiding. On the other hand, if you make your Hide check when you hide then anyone who comes along can oppose it (without having to react to it).

If someone has spotted you, then it was because you were hiding and they beat your hide check.

Not true, unless you're saying that you can't spot something that isn't hidden.

you roll a hide in reaction to or "in opposition to" an opposed spot check.

Here's the problem! "In opposition to" does not mean the same thing as "in reaction to." Here's the section on opposed checks:

Opposed Checks

An opposed check is a check whose success or failure is determined by comparing the check result to another character’s check result. In an opposed check, the higher result succeeds, while the lower result fails. In case of a tie, the higher skill modifier wins. If these scores are the same, roll again to break the tie.

There's nothing there that says opposed checks are in reaction to another character's actions. They could happen simultaneously (like during a Trip attempt) or hours apart (like with Disguise). They're not reactive; they're just opposed.

If no one is spotting you, then you don't need to roll a hide check. You are just - to use the english language word that is not a D&D term - hidden.

Again, not true. You don't need to make a Hide check if you're not going to hide, not if someone is not going to look for you. That's like saying you don't need to make a Diplomacy check when you attempt to negotiate; you make the check when the other party responds. Can they simply negate your attempt by never responding? Does an unopposed check automatically fail instead of automatically succeeding?

Nothing, so long as you realize that you're actually "making the check" once someone is trying to "spot" you, and not beforehand.

How can someone attempt to oppose your Hide check with Spot if you're not already hidden?

My argument is that it is not. Neither skill is passive; they are made in reaction to each other. There is no need for a hide check if nothing is spotting you.

The rules don't say, "Your Hide check is opposed by the Spot check of anyone who is trying to see you." They say, "Your Hide check is opposed by the Spot check of anyone who might see you." If they might see you, then they also might not see you. You roll the check whether they're going to try to see you or not.

And this is precisely the way all opposed checks are made. If I set an ambush an hour in advance, I don't make the hide check until there is an observer to hide from.

Cite your source. There's nothing in the Hide description nor the description of Opposed Checks to indicate that is the case. That may be why that clause is included in Forgery and not in Opposed Checks.

I disagree, and there you go using "reactive" again to describe hide. You CANNOT use hide as a reaction to an observer trying to spot you - by definition in the text of hide you cannot hide when being observed. You must use it prior to being observed, and hence it is NEVER in reaction to someone who could be spotting you (because then you cannot hide). You always roll hide first. Now it might be at a time when you are being distracted or threatened by something (like a trap that threatens you, or a hundred things that could be distracting), in which case you cannot take 10. But it's not "reactive" to an attempted spot check by definition. If you're reacting, you're too late to hide.

Amen.

 

[SlagMortar]

The basis for this question is whether or not hide (and honestly, by extension this could cover spot, listen, and move silently, since they are all opposed checks along the same lines) is something you do reactively or proactively - thus determining when you are actually "making the check," thus determining if you can actually take 10.

Note that the description of disguise specifically mentions that you are allowed to take 10 on spot checks. A small bit of further evidence can be found in the table listing DC's to hear different things in the listen skill. It lists the DC to hear a 1st level rogue using Move Silently as 15. The DC would only be fixed if the rogue was taking 10. I agree this one is hardly conclusive, but taken with the disguise example, I think there is enough evidence to conclude that you can take 10 on opposed checks, even reactive checks.

It seems to me the entire argument in favor of prohibiting taking 10 is predicated on not being able to take 10 on reactive checks. The disguise example makes it clear to me that you can take 10 on reactive checks.

 

[Dheran]

Now, if three observers wander past in three consecutive rounds, an hour after you prepared your ambush, do they all oppose a single Hide roll, or do you make a separate Hide roll for each?

As an opposed roll, each check must be made separately. The alternative assumes identical conditions:

• The hidden person hasn't moved -- or even breathed -- in the intervening hour.
• No other movement has taken place, so you've got to freeze the wind and the sun position when you set up your ambush, too.
• The three observers must be in exactly the same location when they make their Spot checks.

Since D&D doesn't have rules for replicating identical conditions, and does have simple, clear rules for making opposed checks, you make three consecutive Hide rolls for three consecutive observers.