Hide and Move Silently in Actual Play

[pawsplay]

uhh, I'd say +20 higher than if they weren't invisible.

In that case, it's going to be insanely hard to locate invisible foes if you combine the skills.

 

[Darklone]

I don't know what's the problem with the skills, IMX it's often easier to find the invisible wizard with Silence on himself than the sneaking halfling rogue.

Too many people often assume Invisibility to be an automatic success vs Spot checks. It's not.

 

[Drew]

uhh, I'd say +20 higher than if they weren't invisible.

The Spot skill states "A Spot check result higher than 20 generally lets you become aware of an invisible creature near you, though you can’t actually see it."

Listen as written would allow you to hear an invisible creature opposed by its Move Silently. I'm not sure that there's a difference between making the really high Spot check vs the Move Silently. In either case, you're aware that something is there but you can't see it.

I'm not sure that a bonus is required. Under the rules are written, invisible Lidda would still need to make a MS check. Using Sneak/Notice, if the Monster wins the contested roll, it is aware of something there (just as if it had made a Listen check) but can't actually see anything. The bonus could come in to play if the monster has poor hearing or something.

In any case, this seems to be going the way of House Rules, which is not where I wanted to take it. I'm just looking for people's experience on using these skills at the actual table.

 

[Kmart Kommando]

Well, if spot/listen are combined and move silent/hide are combined, then you're obviously going to hear an invisible opponent before you're going to see them. And ditto the opposite for a silenced opponent.

 

[Felix]

Silence and Invisibility make this combination problematic. As does pitch darkness, Darkvision, Blindness, Deafness, blindfolds, and other situations that restrict one sense and not the other. As well does someone who specializes in Hiding or Moving Silently but not the other, or has some kind of benefit or penalty to one but not the other.

 

[Legildur]

Too many people often assume Invisibility to be an automatic success vs Spot checks. It's not.

Yes, my DM keeps making the same mistake. I have to keep reminding him because of my Druid's +35 Spot check modifier.

 

[Kmart Kommando]

Silence and Invisibility make this combination problematic. As does pitch darkness, Darkvision, Blindness, Deafness, blindfolds, and other situations that restrict one sense and not the other. As well does someone who specializes in Hiding or Moving Silently but not the other, or has some kind of benefit or penalty to one but not the other.

It's only a problem if you let it be. It is still your skill vs their senses. If you change something around one or more skills, then obviously you'd have to change the bonuses and penalties associated with those skills.

 

[Darklone]

Yes, my DM keeps making the same mistake. I have to keep reminding him because of my Druid's +35 Spot check modifier.

Yupp. I had an wildelf eagle shaman (druid variant in kalamar with totem power... spot bonus. Wildelf adds another +4 to spot). Same there, at higher levels with magic items I topped a +50 spot bonus. I spotted the invisible hiding halfling rogue, the wizard with See invis didn't.

 

[Felix]

It's only a problem if you let it be. It is still your skill vs their senses. If you change something around one or more skills, then obviously you'd have to change the bonuses and penalties associated with those skills.

Obviously, but how much?

The guard is blind, but has trained his ears expertly. So he suffers a penalty to Perception? How much? But his hearing is really really good.

The rogue sneaking up is silenced but he's carrying a flashing neon sign. So he suffers a penalty to Sneak. How much of one?

If these two characters interact in a Sneak v Perception roll with their respective penalties it is possible for the guard to notice the rogue. This should not be possible.

---

Sure, it's easy to say "it isn't possible for the guard to detect the rogue", but this hyperbole points out the difference twixt the two. When the circumstances are not quite so severe as they are here the ruling becomes more difficult to adjudicate. I don't claim that it isn't possible to roll the skills into Sneak v Perception, merely that it creates more situations for the DM to rule upon; having seperate skills removes the need to arbitrarily rule from the DM and establishes firm expectations for the players. A consistent set of expectations is a virtue, and a reduction in required arbitrary rulings from the DM assists that.

You can do it, surely, but situations similar to but less severe than the blind guard v the Electric Cowboy rogue exist and they can potentially cause problems. At the very least the DM should be aware that such potential problems exist and try to be prepared for them.

 

[darthkilmor]

Surprised this hasnt been shunted to the house rules forum yet.

I've combined them in my campaign ( Stealth and Awareness ). No real valid reason to keep them apart. (kind of like how there's no more intuit direction imho).

Also shifted/combined a few other things around to try and have an equal spread of skills and ability scores. (if that made sense).
Also have the same # of max ranks for class & cross class skills.
My fav is added a Run skill. +5ft of movement for every 5 ranks.