Forked Thread: spot checks, range?

[aboyd]

Forked from: Spell Compendium: What are the "broken" spells?

And with the spotting rules of 3.5 (one of the worst changes from 3.0 to 3.5) based on the Spot check and the -1/10' distance, nobody is seeing anybody at extended fireball ranged anyway.

I never understood spot ranges, nor do I understand the -1/10' thing, nor do I understand the difference between 3.0 and 3.5 spot systems. Would someone enlighten me?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I forget the changes from 3.0 to 3.5, but I'm pretty sure you only have to spot things that are hidden/hiding. You shouldn't have to make a check just to see people standing out in the open at 300 feet away, for example. Otherwise, taking ten, the average person could never see past 100 ft; or 200 ft if taking 20, which is clearly wrong IMHO.

 

[Herzog]

Spot checks in relation to the start of an encounter are made to determine which of the parties is aware of the other before the other side is aware of them.....

If I'm not mistaken, size modifiers come into play there.

Whether your eventual result is 10 or -100 does not really matter. There is no fixed DC to roll against, you compare your result to that of the opponent. Which also means distance becomes irrelevant, since you both have the same distance modifier....

I've had a discussion before discussing the possibility to use spot checks to determine starting encounter distance in open fields.
In that case, it's best to set a fixed DC (like '0'), let the players make their spot roll (I've got 25!) and multiply that number by 10 (250!).

That will be 'when' the opponents become aware of eachother and you can start the encounter. This is to avoid all encounters starting at 30 foot, making long range bow attacks useless....

Of course, that's house rule territory. Normally, the opposed spot checks determine when one side becomes aware of the other, and only when that side decides to hide while approaching do you get spot vs hide checks (which include the distance modifier)

 

[aboyd]

StreamOfTheSky has part of it.

I believe one of the issues went like this. Each type of land in 3.5 edition has a maximum spot distance. For example, on the plains, the average max distance for spotting is 840 feet. That's -84 to your spot check. The penalty completely undermines the maximum spot distance. If the penalty is correct, on the plains you can't spot something more than probably 200 or 300 feet away, and that's assuming you got a really lucky roll and had a lot of points in spot. So which rule is right?

So, a normal reading of the rules shows that they undermine... themselves. Plus, it's so far from reality that it's bizarre. In reality, people can spot other people from miles away on the plains.

Someone suggested at one point that spots were supposed to have the "-1 per 10 feet" applied to the maximum spot distance. So on the plains, at 840 feet you'd be doing normal rolls to spot. But if you tried to spot at 1040 feet, you'd have -20 (-1 for each 10 feet beyond the 840). That models reality far better, and helps the rules to actually work together. However, this is all a guess, all based upon previous forum posts, and still maybe isn't what billd91 was talking about. Perhaps I should just PM him.

 

[Herzog]

the distance modifier to spots is only relevant when someone is hiding.

you need something to hide behind to be able to hide.

on the plains, there is nothing to hide behind.

unless someone is hiding, there is nothing to compare your spot check against, so getting a -84 on your spot check doesn't mean anything because you have no DC to compare it to.

The only thing left to use spot without hiding is to determine surprise.
Since both parties in a potential encounter have the same modifier from distance, the modifier can be ignored. The party with the highest spot gains surprise.

That still leaves encounter distance to be determined, but the abovementioned rule is a HOUSERULE, and to my knowledge no official rule exists to detemine encounter distance (at least, not based on spot checks)

 

[aboyd]

That still leaves encounter distance to be determined, but the abovementioned rule is a HOUSERULE, and to my knowledge no official rule exists to detemine encounter distance (at least, not based on spot checks)

From my link in the previous post:

Spot checks may be called for to determine the distance at which an encounter begins.

the distance modifier to spots is only relevant when someone is hiding.

From my link in the previous post:

A penalty applies on such checks, depending on the distance between the two individuals or groups

 

[Herzog]

Spot checks may be called for to determine the distance at which an encounter begins.

Again, there is NO DC to compare this to!

Therefore, the only thing to compare your Spot roll to is either:

1. Hide checks (which requires the other party hiding)
2. Spot checks (to determine whether you spot the other party before they spot you)

Since, when determining encounter distance, party A will be exactly as far from party B as party B is from party A, both parties suffer the same distance modifier to spots, thus making the modifier irrelevant.

Note that neither the referenced Spot section nor the wilderness section gives any indication of Spot DC's for spotting people (at most, for things like forest fires etc.)

Also note that if you can give me a reference to a spot DC for detecting people (who are not hiding), I will give in....

 

[irdeggman]

Again, there is NO DC to compare this to!

Well you can use the table 4-3 information as "guidelines"

Difficulty

Very easy (DC 0) - Notice something large in plain sight (Spot).

Up through Nearly Impossible


It is all about the situation the DM decides on.

Unless distracted pretty much anyone can see an approaching army across a field.

Now picking up a small handful of people from the horizon becomes more difficult the farther away they are.

It must be remembered that the DM determines who is aware of whom at the start of an encounter - so no specific numbers are given for that one - it is all up to the DM.

 

[Herzog]

Allright, I give.

Although I have to say that is a very bad example. (not by you, but by the PHB) of an 'easy' DC.

1. It doesn't include any indication of size (important, since size modifiers play a significant role in determining spot modifiers)
2. It doesn't include distance, the second big modifier on spot.
3. It is, as far as I know, the only reference to a (fiexed) spot DC in the book.

Nevertheless, this would make the 'default' DC for noticing something DC 0, making aboyds observation that this would make it impossible to reach the maximum distance you can see things using spot checks when applying the -1 per 10' correct.

 

[irdeggman]

Nevertheless, this would make the 'default' DC for noticing something DC 0, making aboyds observation that this would make it impossible to reach the maximum distance you can see things using spot checks when applying the -1 per 10' correct.

If one is even called for - the DM doesn't ahve to call for a spot check to noticie something.

Also "circumstantial" or "situational" modifiers can be applied by the DM also.

Still, in most cases I don't think you even call for one - the DM chooses who sees who and at what distance.