Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="dr_nukem" data-source="post: 211508" data-attributes="member: 2253">I'm confused here.&nbsp; Initially you're saying a 1/2 move + 1/2 move is incorrect (ie, you don't agree with it) but then your example of 15+15=30 is just that?1/2 movement = 15' -- first move action1/2 movement = 15' -- second move actiontotal distance covered -- 30'But why?&nbsp; If the PC has Hide in Plain Sight or simply moves around a corner then hides again, why should this second hide attempt automatically fail?I would agree with that, except the PC is sacrificing 1/2 of his total movement for the round to avoid the check penalty.&nbsp; If the PC (base speed 30') did a double hide move of 60', then sure, whack 'em with the -5 penalty.&nbsp; However, what if the PC only moves a total of 30' in that Double Move (1/2 base + 1/2 base)?&nbsp; He's given up 30' of movement (1/2 possible total) to be sneaky...shouldn't he be rewarded (ie, no penalty) for that?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="dr_nukem, post: 211508, member: 2253"] I'm confused here. Initially you're saying a 1/2 move + 1/2 move is incorrect (ie, you don't agree with it) but then your example of 15+15=30 is just that? 1/2 movement = 15' -- first move action 1/2 movement = 15' -- second move action total distance covered -- 30' But why? If the PC has Hide in Plain Sight or simply moves around a corner then hides again, why should this second hide attempt automatically fail? I would agree with that, except the PC is sacrificing 1/2 of his total movement for the round to avoid the check penalty. If the PC (base speed 30') did a double hide move of 60', then sure, whack 'em with the -5 penalty. However, what if the PC only moves a total of 30' in that Double Move (1/2 base + 1/2 base)? He's given up 30' of movement (1/2 possible total) to be sneaky...shouldn't he be rewarded (ie, no penalty) for that? [/QUOTE]

Verification