Can you "Take 20" to Hide?

[Storyteller01]

Taking 20 has two main "requirements" - enough time and consequences for failure. While there are consequences for failure in almost every opposed skill check, I would say that if a character had enough time, he could take 20 on a hide check regardless. To me, it would represent the character spending time to find things that better screen him, finding the best position to be in to make maximum use of light sources, and blending into his environment as best he can.

Does this mean that the guard who spends significant time looking for the character should take 20 for spot checks?

 

[Storyteller01]

Well, there's no penalty for failure on Hide checks.

Other than having to run for your life?

 

[Rahula008]

Seems like it would be in the rules, or the FAQ, but I spent a fair amount of time reading through both and could not find a clear answer.

I think that if you make Hide checks before the fact, then you could take 20, but if you only make the check when someone tries a Spot, then 20 tries isn't really going to work.

What I could really use would be a reference that clears up the issue for all opposed skill checks. I'm not even sure if you roll one Hide that everyone Spots against, or if you roll a Hide for each person trying to Spot you

My 2cents. Hide is an opposed ckeck thus it carries a penelty for failure no matter what (when the monster comes along he might see you) thus you can't take 20. If you read the Hide Skill entry in the PH it hints at only certain skills allow the posibility of a Take 20. Still it seems pretty clear. The point is moot however since you get a +40 bonus for being invisible and immobile. With enough time one could argue they were effectively 'invisable'. The Hide entry also states that if no one can see you no check need be made. One last remark, these are all circumstance bonuses we're talking about.

 

[Steve Jung]

Last time this was discussed, there was an example I found interesting.

There are three goblins sitting in a clearing beside a tent, talking. The PC in the woods wants to sneak to the edge of the clearing to listen to their conversation.

Does he make one hide check, opposed by three spot checks? Or does he make three hide checks each opposed by a single spot check?

Let's say he successfully gets to his position. He listens to the goblins talk for a couple of rounds. Do the goblins get more spot checks while he's staying still doing nothing if they don't specifically take an action to try and see something previously missed? If they do - or if one of them looks around - is the new spot check opposed by the previously rolled hide check, or by a new roll?

Now the tent flap opens, and a hobgoblin comes out to complain that the goblins are making too much noise. Does he get a spot check to notice the hiding PC? If so, is it opposed by the previously rolled hide check, or a new roll?

-Hyp.

Hmm. In the first case, I'd say 3 Hide checks each with a Spot roll. Each goblin has a different angle to the hider.

In the second case, they don't get free Spot checks. If one of the goblins does make a Spot check, then I don't know if the hider should make a new Hide check or not.

In the last case, the hobgoblin should get a free Spot check. I'd say the hider makes a new Hide check.

 

[airwalkrr]

If I Hide from a goblin, with a roll of 17 vs his Spot roll of 12, I am hidden, right? Next round, a hobgoblin comes along. Do I need to roll a second Hide check despite not moving, or does the hobgoblin oppose my existing 17 with his new Spot roll?

-Hyp.

The Hide check is made when hiding, but I usually make such checks secretly anyway since the player doesn't always know how well he hid. Because the Hide check is made when hiding, the player does not make another check until he moves or take a move action to Hide again. That is just my interpretation of the rules. I could be wrong.

 

[airwalkrr]

I may be mistaken but here is my opinion:

I walk into a room and want to wait in hiding for the return of I creature I plan to kill, so I have plenty of time to hide. I think it would be much harder to find me just walking into the room and taking a look around (a spot check) then if I was there, heard someone at the door and jumped behind something. Therefore I believe I should take a 20, if not an incremental bonus for a set time (ie. +1 per round).

I think this is already provided for with the take 10 rules. If you are not being threatened and there is no nearby danger (i.e. you want to lie in wait), then you can play it safe and take 10 on a Hide check. However, if you are poking around a room and hear a creature coming, you have to think fast. You are in a threatened situation so you have to roll.

 

[airwalkrr]

Does this mean that the guard who spends significant time looking for the character should take 20 for spot checks?

Why not? There is no penalty for failing a Spot check other than not finding the character, which you did not know beforehand anyway. The same principle applies to searching for traps. I can stand 10 feet back from a door and examine it carefully for two minutes, thus taking 20. If the door is trapped, it is not going to spring on me if I just stand there. Why could I not look around a room carefully for two minutes to see if anything is lurking in the shadows. Of course, a hiding character might realize that someone is trying to take 20 and intervene before the take 20 is complete. It is possible to interpret this as a penalty for failure, in which case the DM might not allow the character to take 20, but instead start rolling. The DM decides the hiding NPC will wait for three rounds before realizing that the character making Spot checks is trying to take 20 (or he might have the character take 1 minute to make a Sense Motive check before realizing this). If the player making Spot checks has not found the hiding NPC by such a point in time, the DM may decide the hiding character takes another action.

On the other hand, there is a clear penalty for failing a Hide check: being found. In the case of a Spot check, failing does not change the default condition (i.e. that you cannot see the character in the first place). But in the case of a Hide check, failing DOES change the default condition (i.e. that you cannot be seen). Hence, you cannot take 20 on Hide.

 

[airwalkrr]

Hmm. In the first case, I'd say 3 Hide checks each with a Spot roll. Each goblin has a different angle to the hider.

There is no facing in 3.5. The angle the goblins have (and the randomly determined advantage thereof) is determined by the random roll of the d20 comprising the goblin's Spot check. Only one Hide check would be required to get an idea of how well the character is hidden.

 

[Hypersmurf]

On the other hand, there is a clear penalty for failing a Hide check: being found. In the case of a Spot check, failing does not change the default condition (i.e. that you cannot see the character in the first place). But in the case of a Hide check, failing DOES change the default condition (i.e. that you cannot be seen). Hence, you cannot take 20 on Hide.

Hang on... you only need to make a Spot check to see someone who is hiding. Someone who isn't hiding is in plain sight.

So the default condition is that you can be seen; failing a Hide check leaves you no worse off than not attempting to hide at all, which is how I define "No penalty for failure".

Let's say I'm trapped on a ledge in a canyon. There's a rope some distance up that I could use to escape, and there's a path across the canyon that I could walk up. Either way requires a Jump check.

If I don't try to jump, I stay on the ledge.

If I try to jump up to grab the rope and fail, I wind up back on the ledge. I'm no worse off than if I hadn't attempted the jump in the first place; there is no penalty for failure. Take 20 not a problem.

If I try to jump across the canyon and fail, I fall to a grisly death on the rocks below. I'm in a worse position than if I hadn't attempted the jump at all; there is a penalty for failure, and I cannot Take 20.

If there's a goblin coming and I don't attempt to hide, the goblin sees me. If I attempt to hide and fail, the goblin sees me. I'm no worse off for having tried and failed; there is no penalty for failure.

The Hide check is made when hiding, but I usually make such checks secretly anyway since the player doesn't always know how well he hid. Because the Hide check is made when hiding, the player does not make another check until he moves or take a move action to Hide again.

Okay. Now, you earlier said:

"If your opponents were trying to Spot you and willing to let you keep trying to Hide until they failed to see you, then you could take 20."

So, let's say that before the enemy comes close, you have your buddy try to spot you. He is willing to let you keep trying to Hide until he fails to see you.

Once you stop making rolls, that's the result used for your Hide check until you move or take a move action to Hide again.

So, when you Take 20, per the rules for Taking 20, you fail repeatedly (meaning your friend will automatically Spot you) until the end of the duration - twenty times longer than a single skill check would take - at which point your result is calculated as if you had rolled a 20.

Let's say I have a Hide score of +25 and my buddy has a Spot of +2. If I attempt to hide from him as a move action, then even if I roll a 1 and he rolls a 20, my 26 beats his 22. If, however, I Take 20 to try to hide from him, I fail repeatedly - he spots me every time, until I get to the end of my Taking 20, at which point my Hide check is calculated as 45.

Now my buddy goes away, and I remain where I am until the opponent shows up... and makes a Spot check opposed by my 45.

Based on your two statements - the existing Hide roll opposes all the spotters until I move, and if someone lets me keep trying to Hide I can Take 20 - do you see any problems with the process?

-Hyp.

 

[Joshua Randall]

Let's say I have a Hide score of +25 and my buddy has a Spot of +2. If I attempt to hide from him as a move action, then even if I roll a 1 and he rolls a 20, my 26 beats his 22. If, however, I Take 20 to try to hide from him, I fail repeatedly - he spots me every time, until I get to the end of my Taking 20, at which point my Hide check is calculated as 45.

Er, what? If he cannot Spot you even when you roll a 1, then don't you succeed every time that you Take 20?

Or are you treating the "you fail repeatedly" part of Take 20 as literally true? I always interpreted it to mean, "First you roll a 1. Then you roll a 2... likely you are failing your checks here, but eventually you roll a 20 which presumably (although not necessarily) makes you succeed."