Hide and Mv Silently skills are no more!

[DrSpunj]

Hi, AI! Good post! I want to respond to all of it but don't have time for a long post here so I'll tackle the most important ones, IMO.

I've very rarely heard of rogues which are too "finely divided" and moaning about skill points. Rather than expecting to "have a rogue that has both thief skills *and* social skills", you have to pick an archetype. Cat burglar, charming conman, spy, scout, whatever- the fact remains that one has to diversify. Arguing that a thief should de facto be good at thief and social skills is liking arguing that the fighter needs more feats in order to be good at melee *and* archery.

Since we're keeping two detector skills (Spot & Sense instead of Spot & Listen) but combining Hide & Move Silently into Sneak we're only effectively giving a net +1 SP/lvl. That only directly affects Bards, Monks, Rangers & Rogues. It's significant, but Skills are what these classes excel at (or, in the Monks case, give a bit more parity) so we don't feel it's out of line. I don't think a single extra SP/lvl is enough for Rogues (or any other class) to become masters at both thievery & social skills or some other combination. (And I *do* think the Fighter deserves more feats, but that's a different thread. )

Moreover, Hide and Mv Silently interact differently with various spells and effects. Why not roll Silent and Still Spell into 'Stealthy Spell'? How about dealing with a character blind and/or deaf? Sneaking past a guard who has no line of sight (say, in an adjoining room)? All of these scenarios need the Hide/Mv Silently dichotomy.

IMO, they don't. They *do*, however, require separate detector skills. If a mage uses Still Spell but not Silent Spell or is sneaking past a guard without line of sight then an opposed Sneak/Sense check is in order. The dichotomy is retained with two detector skills vs one stealthy skill.

True, but the answer is to HR Invisibility. I use a +20 to Hide if moving and a +40 otherwise, and maintain the DC 20 Spot to see an invisible creature in combat. It's a clarification that might not map precisely onto the (needlessly complicated) RAW, but it works and is consistent with the spirit of the spell.

I need some help here, as I didn't understand what you've said to be a House Rule. That's the interpretation I have of the RAW (clarification: the DC 20 Spot to see an invisible creature in combat means you've pinpointed their square, but they're still invisible & have total concealment from you, so 50% miss chance applies). What is in the RAW to complicate this interpretation? (Maybe we need to start a different thread in Rules or someone could point me towards a previous discussion on the subject? Thanks.)

I'll grant you this. Whilst there are very minor mechanical quibbles (such as effectively giving stealth-focused classes +1 skill point), the two major changes are that I'd argue that under the new rules Stealth is a 'dead-cert' skill. Hide and Mv Silently are always decent skills, but Stealth is now the best single skill in the game. Wizards, sorcerors, finesse fighters, druids, barbarians and their uncles will want this skill. For just 1 skill pt per level, you too can have at least a decent chance of getting a surprise round; and getting one of the detection skills comes a close second in the hierarchy (since everyone has Sneak, everyone will want either Spot or Sense). Buying the whole suite of skills at 4 points/level was prohibitive, but at 2 points/level it's definitely a bargain- far better than Knowledge (history), Craft (alchemy), Jump, Knowledge (nature) or Climb (to think of what other exciting skills the above selection could buy).

Again, while some others have posted here combining our Spot & Sense into a single Perception skill, we thought a long time about it and decided we'd rather keep three skills: Sense, Sneak & Spot. The reasons for that are pretty well laid out in the first thread Nail linked to in his first post. So we're going from 4 SPs to 3 SPs, definitely less but certainly not the bargain you're thinking it is.

And you're right that many other classes may want some Sneak ranks along with some in Spot & Sense. Adventurers of every class often find themselves in places they shouldn't necessarily be, so a few ranks in Stealth seems appropriate to me. It's still a cross-class cost and there are still ACPs involved for many characters. Adventurers also have to be aware of their environment as much as possible if they want to survive to higher levels, so ranks in Sense & Spot are a good investment as well.

I know I've read some House Rules from someone here that every PC gets a rotating +1 at every level to Listen, Spot & Search because they are skills that every adventurer, regardless of class, practices all the time as they level & continue to survive. We talked about something like that but decided for this game that we'd rather try this system out. So far it's worked well for us but we're only at levels 6-7 right now. It will be interesting to see how these changes hold up at higher levels.

The other major change is not mechanical. It's simply a one of making the game clunkier. There are a multitude of scenarios whereby a single Hide or Move Silently check is appropriate, but a generic Sneak not. I've outlined a few above, and I'm sure you have the imagination to conceive of others.

Actually, I have trouble picturing them, so I'd appreciate any that you or someone else could elaborate on. I've been thinking Hide & Move Silently needed to be combined from the day 3.0 was released, and was very pleased to exactly that done by Monte Cook in Arcana Unearthed. How commonly does one need to Hide but can be as loud as they want to? Or need to be very quiet but can otherwise move around freely without a chance of being spotted?

Please keep in mind that we have Sense and/or Spot to oppose this Sneak check scenario, whichever of the two is most appropriate is the one we use. If both are appropriate the player gets a +2 to whichever detector skill they use to represent using both skills (effectively all your senses) together.

This is a far more significant change than it appeared, since it effectively halves the number of skill points needed to access stealth and detection, two of the most useful skills in the game.

Again, we're only halving the stealthy SPs, not the detecting SPs. And a finessed-based fighter is actually now LESS likely to multiclass IMO since he can now better afford a few ranks of Sneak since his cost is halved while he sticks with Fighter levels to keep getting the feats & HD that matter to him. If he really wants more SPs to spend on other non-Fighter skills besides Sneak then he should multiclass into Ranger or Rogue since they're the Skill Monkeys.

It sets a clunky precedent: combine Open Locks and Disable Device (even though the two are not only separate but even having different primary abilities), Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana), Climb, Jump and Swim into "Athletics", Balance and Tumble into "Acrobatics", Bluff and Intimidate into "Con", Diplomacy and Gather Information into "Speechcraft", all the Perform skills (as per 3e), etc.

The precedent may not be there in D&D, but it certainly is from other RPGs. We're trying out the Open Lock & Disable Device combination to see if it works. Nail doesn't use a lot of locked doors and/or traps in his game and we don't have a dedicated Rogue so it hasn't come up much one way or the other (and you still get use the correct primary ability, the 3.0 DMG actually talks about pairing different abilities with skills for some situations though I'm not sure if that was cut in the revision, either way, it works for us). As to the others, check out White Wolf's stuff. They have many of the skills you describe like Athletics/Acrobatics, Etiquette, Enigma/Rituals, etc. While much of that goes too far for the game we're playing in right now, I could easily see combining similar skills in the manner you describe but the repercussions would have a significantly greater impact.

We're not interested in making D&D more like Werewolf. We're interested in fixing some problems that we believe are in the Core rules.

Given that no core problem exists, and that some will arise, I'd argue that this is a poor change in contrary to the spirit of 3.5e- which is, after all, about making things less clunky by e.g. subdividing Perform.

Your opinion, and thank you for taking the time to post, but problems do exist in our game. We're coming from two different viewpoints and it's always good to hear the other side.

I'll end by saying that subdividing Perform made things more clunky for the Bard, IMO. Bump the guy to 6 SPs and then effectively take those away by making him spend them on more skills. While it's true that he isn't forced to spend SPs on more than one Perform skill, to be able to swing a weapon in melee or fire a Xbow while using his Bardic Magic every Bard I've ever seen or heard about takes Perform(some Vocal type). Putting extra ranks into Lute or whatever is mechanically pretty pointless unless you have a magical instrument, but my mental imagery of a Bard includes the ability to at least play a few different instruments (especially since the basic mechanics of music are the same, just the execution of making it that differs between them) so the Bard ends up being effectively penalized. YMMV.

Thanks!

DrSpunj

 

[DrSpunj]

Eagles have good vision, but average hearing. Hiding is easier in the dark or with camoflague, but not moving silently. Spotting an owl in flight is no problem, but hearing one is quite tough. Noticing a vital disk on a cluttered desk is difficult, but hearing it is impossible.

You say Stealth but most of those examples are in the Perception area.

Anyone trained to Hide in the dark or with camouflage is pretty much trained to do it quietly since you can't effectively sneak up on someone if they can see or hear you.

Eagles - high Spot, low Sense
Owls - opposed Sneak/Spot check
Disk on Cluttered Desk - likely a Search check, but Spot is a possibility if looking at it across the room

Thanks.

DrSpunj

 

[DrSpunj]

Phase 1:
---------
We had a Stealth Skill (Hide/Move Silently rolled into one) but did not replace Spot/Listen as it would indicate how Stealth was detected.

Problems:
1) Rogues ended up with too many extra points and suddenly were outlcassing Bards in social skills and getting more in Use Magic Device (completly replacing bards). This obviously wasn't good since Bards were a campaign available option - but why choose it if you could be a Rogue.

You're talking about an effective gain of 1 SP/lvl. That's equivalent to playing a Human Rogue vs any other race. I haven't seen the system is that fine-tuned that 1 SP/lvl makes a class obsolete (though if this was vs a 3.0 Bard you have a pretty good case but that's not the fault of the Sneak/Stealth skill! )

2) How do you sense the Stealthy? You use your best skill in Spot/Listen. Thus members of the party maxed out a single skill (Spot or Listen) and we essentially had 2 members with Spot and 2 with Listen maxed out. Essentially Stealth was useless.

This is no different than the Core RAW now. Whether your foe is using Hide & Move Silently or Sneak, there are situational modifiers that have to be taken into account by the DM. As AI said above, sneaking through a room with a guard on the other side allows the guard to make a Listen check (for us it's Sense, but otherwise identical) but not a Spot check. Barbarians & Bards tend to have a good Listen skill since they don't get Spot as class skills, while Druids, Monks, Rangers & Rogues tend to spend ranks in both because they have both as class skills, though only the latter two usually have enough SPs to keep both near/maxed.

3) Reduced cross-class skill division. Wizards who wanted a bit of stealth could now focus on one single skill and not 2 to become stealthy.

As I said above, I don't see this as a problem. They're still paying a significant cost to become Sneaky and they won't be near as good at it with the cross-class maximum. Adventurers do sneaky things all the time and it makes sense that some PCs of all classes would spend a few points here now & again.

Phase 2:
---------
Okay so let's roll Spot/Listen into one skill (Perception) to simply have a counter skill to Stealth.

Problems:
1) Rogues had even more skill points.
2) Even more reduction in cross-skill division.

Here's the step we don't feel is worth taking. I know Nifft, LightPhoenix and others think it's worthwhile, but after discussing it here in this forum and tableside we just don't think it's worth doing in our game. While Perception makes a lot of sense in some ways we like the granularity and level of detail that comes from having two detector skills (but not the level of detail that comes with Spot, Listen, Scent, Blindsense, Tremorsense, etc.).

Thanks.

DrSpunj

 

[Nail]

Thanks for discussing this, folks! It's helpful!

As you might expect, I agree with what DrSpunj has posted, so I won't repeat (much) of that, but I'll pull out a few:

#1) This change (combining Hide and Mv. Sil into Sneak) allows the rogue to become a master at both social and physical skills.
What?! I'm at a loss to explain how this could be true. Perhaps someone subtracted a whole bunch of cool skills from the rogues list when I wasn't looking?

There are many, many skills that are useful for a rogue. It is simply not possible for one rogue to be master of them all, even with a combined Sneak skill. Try putting a few thief archetypes together, and you'll see what I mean.

The sky is not falling, ladies and gentlemen.

#2) This change sets a "clunky" precident.
A strange arguement, given this is a house-rules forum, where we change rules.

Subtracting a few skills is no different, mechanically, than adding a few skills. It certainly does not mean "reduce the skill list to an absurdly small number", and that's not been suggested.

#3) There's no problem in the RAW you're fixing.
The problem(s) are simple, and laid out in the first message in this thread. They're all valid, and problematic enough to think about. For me, as a DM, my primary motivator from that list were the "Rogue Auto Detect" abilities that are rampant at higher level play. Although Wulf's storyhour is a good example, there are others (in other story hours; Read 'em!)....in fact, examples abound throughout the "Adventure Path" series by WotC itself.

Some have said such creatures are not common. Surely "Animals" are common, eh? All animals automatically detect rogues within 30 feet. Automatically. It's called Scent, and a rogue (given RAW) CANNOT pass even a lowly camel undetected. That's right: a Camel is a fool-proof high-level rogue detector. (Watch out, they spit!) Tremorsense, Blindsense, and Blindsight are frequent enough (but not "common", I'll grant), that the Hide skill is pretty much a useless ability above mid-levels.

#4) Spot and Sense should be combined as well.
In this, YMMV, I admit. (Tip of th' hat to Nifft.) I think that the "Sense" mechanic (pin-point location, but not negate concealment or cover) is different enough from Spot (pin-point location, can see and react to subject's actions) to be a separate skill.

After all, you can know where a subject is, but not see him...and that still puts you at a disadvantage, tactically. The visual sense is important enough to "call out" into a separate skill.

Keep in mind that in our description of these tweaked skills, you either roll a Spot or a Sense check when someone is Sneaking up on you, not both.

 

[Nail]

A note about Invisibility and other magic:

Yep, it's true your high-level rogue should have access to Invisibility, as well as Silence, Nondetection, Disguise Self, Fly, Misdirection,.....oh heck, lets' go all the way and throw in Mind Blank while we're at it.

Now, tell me: What does all of this do for a Rogue that it would not also do for a Fighter?
.
.
.
.
.
Right.

 

[Terath Ninir]

I'm all for house rules. I was simply pointing out that a house rule should be based on more than a feeling of "I'm too limited" but more a feeling of "there is something I want to do that isn't covered in the rules as they stand." or "The rules as they stand do a poor job of representing X"

Combining skills is very clearly the "too limited" option since a combined Stealth or Perception skill is both changing something already covered and taking the skills further from reality rather than closer to it.

Well, while you are certainly free to believe such a thing, that is your opinion, not the opinion of others. I, for one, evaluate rules changes based on *fun*. As a DM, I find it annoying trying to decide "Is this a Listen check? Or a Spot check? Should the rogue roll Hide, Move Silently, or both?" The divisions are arbitrary, for the most part. A guard does not use his eyes *or* his ears, he uses both. (Assuming he's actually guarding and not napping.) A rogue might very occasionally only hide or only move silently, but it's going to be both in the vast majority of cases. Instead of wasting valuable game time deciding what is what, it would be easier for me to go with Sneak and Perception.

Anyone, I think the original poster did a very good job of saying that the rules do a poor job of representing things. The twinky senses that many monsters have go against the spirit of d20. They just automatically detect you. Not even a beholder, with 9 eyes, can *automatically* detect you.

 

[Al]

Tremorsense, Blindsense, and Blindsight are frequent enough (but not "common", I'll grant), that the Hide skill is pretty much a useless ability above mid-levels.

I hardly think that that's justified. A few miscellaneous aberrations have the above, but the lion's share of high level opponents: fiends, high level NPCs, undead don't; and even dragons have Blindsense, which still permits sneak attacks. Even if the regularity of these are causing problems of Hide, it's an argument for altering these specific abilities rather than Hide itself. Change the problem areas rather than the entire system.

Since we're keeping two detector skills (Spot & Sense instead of Spot & Listen) but combining Hide & Move Silently into Sneak we're only effectively giving a net +1 SP/lvl

Granted. The point was directed at Cyberzombie, who specifically said that a multi-purpose rogue was a desirable aim.

I need some help here, as I didn't understand what you've said to be a House Rule

Re: Invisibility. This may or may not be a House Rule; either way I'd argue it's a workable and sensible clarification in the spirit of the rules.

Again, while some others have posted here combining our Spot & Sense into a single Perception skill, we thought a long time about it and decided we'd rather keep three skills: Sense, Sneak & Spot. The reasons for that are pretty well laid out in the first thread Nail linked to in his first post. So we're going from 4 SPs to 3 SPs, definitely less but certainly not the bargain you're thinking it is.

Therein lies two problems. Firstly, there will be substantial buying up of cross-class Sneak, since it is still a bargain at 1sp/level. Many will multiclass to get the higher skill caps, at a cost of 2sp to maintain maxed-out Sneak; effectively tantamount to the current system for class skills. However, the second problem is that under your more moderate system there is a dichotomy between Sneak and Sense & Spot whereby two detection skills are needed to oppose a single Sneak skill. There is thus a mismatch between the applications of Stealth (one skill) and its naturally opposed skills (two). It is equivalent to splitting Sense Motive into two skills in terms of mechanically impact. This makes Stealth even *more* attractive. Under the new mechanism, nearly everyone with the exception of clerics, paladins and tank fighters would be advisable to take Stealth.

Actually, I have trouble picturing them, so I'd appreciate any that you or someone else could elaborate on

If only one sense is appropriate. For example, tiptoeing past a sleeping guard, or moving out of line of sight, or approaching a deafened foe, or interacting with a hearing-based Blindsighted creature. Admittedly, this cleared up by retaining the two detection skills, but this causes the opposed skill mismatch, as outlined above.

And a finessed-based fighter is actually now LESS likely to multiclass IMO since he can now better afford a few ranks of Sneak since his cost is halved while he sticks with Fighter levels to keep getting the feats & HD that matter to him

Au contraire: he needs to multiclass to get access to the class skill max ranks, taking but a single level of Ranger, Rogue etc. Doing so and then being forced to sink 4 skill points per level to get stealth was prohibitive; doing so and then buying up stealth at full ranks for just 2 skill points is definitely worthwhile.

Essentially, no matter whether you retain two or one detection skills, the loss of 'cross-class division', a useful term employed by dvvega, will ensure that nearly every character in the game, with a few exceptions, will buy up Stealth- and possibly even multiclass to buy Stealth up to the class skill maximum ranks level. Were I playing a rational finesse fighter, I would certainly do so. This reignites the 'front-loading' effect of the old 3e, by allowing access to full class skill ranks without the current associated penalties. Giving the rogue +1sp is, indeed, trivial; allowing a multiclassed stealth1/non-stealthX class +2sp is clearly significant.

Moreover, depending on which variation is used, more problems arise. Retaining two detection skills avoid 'clunkiness', but has the dichotomy of using two detection skills to oppose one skill. Nothing other skill in the game is opposed by two to one- and I am certain that you can surmise the reasons. Each opposed skill is opposed by another one: Disguise and Spot, Listen and Move Silently, Hide and Spot, Bluff and Sense Motive etc. There are very sound reasons why one is not opposed by two. Alternately, rolling the detection skills into one generates 'clunkiness'. A myriad of scenarios: the sleeping guard, the kobolds in the next room, the deafened opponent, the Silenced rogue and innumerable others become intractable and dispute-ridden.

This system encourages multiclass cherry-picking of stealth skills; it reduces cross-class skill division; it propagates Stealth to become standardised; and is forced between the Scylla of mismatched opposed skills and the Charybdis of clunk. To what end? Nail has, himself, argued that the +1sp to the rogue is no substantial cause for concern and essentially a minor change. The only major problem tackled is that of the relatively rare and easily circumventable Tremorsense, Blindsense, Blindsight and Scent (yes, animals are common, but the proportion of high CR animals is trivial, and even at low CRs are not an archetypal foe. Moreover, since they cannot communicate, Hide and Move Silently will still be a great use against the animal's allies).

Rather than upsetting the whole system, why not just HR the "rogue detectors", and, if you're hell-bent on it, add one skill point to the stealth classes. It solves all the postulated problems without unleashing the clear problems of rolling Hide and Move Silently together.

 

[DrSpunj]

Even if the regularity of these are causing problems of Hide, it's an argument for altering these specific abilities rather than Hide itself. Change the problem areas rather than the entire system.

We've essentially done that. There are really two House Rules here. The first is to combine Hide & Move Silently into Sneak (more on that below answering your post). The second is combining Listen, Scent, Blindsense & Tremorsense and any other non-visual sense into the Sense skill in such a way that any creature with at least one of those gets a chance to use the skill, while those with more than one are rewarded appropriately for having multiple senses to bring to bear on the opposed check (and none of them are now automatic within a certain distance).

Re: Invisibility. This may or may not be a House Rule; either way I'd argue it's a workable and sensible clarification in the spirit of the rules.

I absolutely agree as it's how I rule it IMC. I just wasn't under the impression my ruling may be at odds with the RAW and was looking for some clarification.

Therein lies two problems. Firstly, there will be substantial buying up of cross-class Sneak, since it is still a bargain at 1sp/level. Many will multiclass to get the higher skill caps, at a cost of 2sp to maintain maxed-out Sneak; effectively tantamount to the current system for class skills.

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree about buying up Sneak as a cross-class skill. To us it's a feature, to you it's a bug. And your game must see substantially more multiclassing than we see in our games as doing so to increase the maximum rank cap just isn't worth the cost in most cases unless it gets you closer to your character concept!.

By dipping into Bard, Monk, Ranger or Rogue for a single level Casters are pushing off their next level of spells, Fighters push off their next feat, Barbarians their Rages, etc. If it's worth dipping into one of those 4 classes because of the other class abilities they grant with a single level plus the maximum rank cap then...well, that's what multiclassing is for, isn't it? To get closer to your character concept? Without a classless generation system you have to add up the advantages and disadvantages of taking on a new class. I'll grant you that if you like being Sneaky then that's another plus at a mitigated cost for dipping into one of those 4 classes, but it's hardly enough reason to justify doing so on its own.

However, the second problem is that under your more moderate system there is a dichotomy between Sneak and Sense & Spot whereby two detection skills are needed to oppose a single Sneak skill. There is thus a mismatch between the applications of Stealth (one skill) and its naturally opposed skills (two). It is equivalent to splitting Sense Motive into two skills in terms of mechanically impact. This makes Stealth even *more* attractive. Under the new mechanism, nearly everyone with the exception of clerics, paladins and tank fighters would be advisable to take Stealth.

I don't see it exactly that way. It does make Sneak more attractive but the current system basically sets you up for failure even without special senses involved. Under the Core RAW if you want to sneak up to someone that has the potential to both hear & see you then you have to make both a Hide check and a Move Silently check while they get both a Listen check & Spot check. That's 4 chances for you to get caught (as a very low roll on either of yours or a very high roll on either of theirs is usually enough to foil the attempt). And that's even taking into account the massive discrepancy in skill bonuses a dedicated stealth PC has over schmucks; dealing with someone even somewhat competent in Spot or Listen and even average rolls can lead to failure.

Under our House Rule you are only making a single opposed check (the dichotomy you take about later on). You only have to make a single Sneak check (and advantage as you've already outlined since you only have to improve a single skill instead of two) and they only get to make a single detector check to oppose your attempt! However, they do get a couple advantages; namely they get to choose whether to oppose your Sneak check with their Sense or their Spot check (likely using their best), and because you are bringing both skills to bear on the situation you get a flat +2 bonus to represent sense synergy.

This reignites the 'front-loading' effect of the old 3e, by allowing access to full class skill ranks without the current associated penalties. Giving the rogue +1sp is, indeed, trivial; allowing a multiclassed stealth1/non-stealthX class +2sp is clearly significant.

This is more a problem with the rules regarding Multiclassing and Maximum Skill Ranks than purely a problem with combining H/MS into Sneak. I concede that it does make Sneak look more attractive, and therefore multiclassing into one of these 4 classes more attractive, but we haven't seen the "everybody wants to be Sneaky" syndrome erupt in our game with this system in place. Is the potential there? Sure, but potential != abuse by a long shot, at least not in our game. YMMV.

Moreover, depending on which variation is used, more problems arise. Retaining two detection skills avoid 'clunkiness', but has the dichotomy of using two detection skills to oppose one skill. Nothing other skill in the game is opposed by two to one- and I am certain that you can surmise the reasons.

And ours maintains that when the opposed roll is made. At most you get a flat +2 bonus on the detection side which is very little when stacked up against those massive bonuses you were quoting for most dedicated Sneaky types in your earlier post.

It's true that someone could max Sense/Listen instead of Spot, but Barbarians & Bards are already forced to do that under the RAW. It's true that Druids, Monks, Rangers & Rogues could focus on Sense or Spot rather than both, but this is still also possible under the RAW wrt Listen & Spot. Those reasons aside you yourself have listed a number of situations where only a Sense/Listen or Spot check may be made, so keeping both at ranks if possible is always worthwhile.

The only major problem tackled is that of the relatively rare and easily circumventable Tremorsense, Blindsense, Blindsight and Scent (yes, animals are common, but the proportion of high CR animals is trivial, and even at low CRs are not an archetypal foe. Moreover, since they cannot communicate, Hide and Move Silently will still be a great use against the animal's allies).

Unless your Familiar can talk, and even before then you must decide what type of information is transferred through an Empathic Link. A sense of alarm because something unknown is within the 30' Scent range (60' if downwind) is often enough of a clue to spoil an ambush around a corner. It's only a Move Action at that point for the Animal to figure out the direction of the scent even if there are several potential directions an attack could come from.

And if you have an Animal Companion your DM had better be describing the uneasiness of that companion when/if something unknown and potentially hostile gets within 30' of its nose. How many times in fiction and movies are the horses, dogs, whatever the first things to sense something isn't right? Even the packhorse or donkey you have to haul your loot is enough in this case to tell you something isn't right (though IMC I ask for Handle Animal checks if it's not an Animal Companion or Familiar to pick-up on the fact that the animal is skiddish for some reason).

Now, I know being within 30' is often more than close enough to spring the ambush, but Nail's plans for many of our foes have been spoiled completely by our Druid's Viper and my previous Halfling Paladin's Riding Dog when moving from one area to another inside or underground. That situation occuring over and over again was what prompted the revision of Listen, Scent, Blindsense & Tremorsense into the Sense skill.

Thanks!

DrSpunj

 

[tensen]

The benefits are many:

• Less skills means PCs can spend skill points on other things. Rogues, especially, are loaded with necessary skills that are too "finely divided". Open Locks and Disable Devices are another example of this.

• 
  
  I've played in two campaigns now where characters that are really good with one of those skills is not good with another.
  My current character is a ranger/rogue. Knows disable device well... for sabotaguing things. He is a military person. But for open locks... he has a high strength. He just kicks in doors if he needs to.
  
  The other campaign we had someone that could pick a lock with a piece of hair. absolute master of the skill. With magic items to boost the skill further. But he was completely oblivious to things around him. Bad search, listen, and spot skills. Never bothered to learn disable devices, because he never noticed the traps.

 

[Nail]

I've played in two campaigns now where characters that are really good with one of those skills is not good with another.....

Excellent character concepts!

I'd rather this thread not digress too far away from the "combine Hide and Mv Silently" topic, tho'. Suffice it to say that combining those two skills (Hide, Mv Sil.) allows rogues a bit more leeway with skill selection.

Look at it this way: currently, a person who wants to play the classic thief archetype needs to have:

• Climb
• Disable Device
• Hide
• Listen
• Move Silently
• Open Lock
• Search
• Spot
• Tumble

That's 9 skills...and that's just the bare minimum, without any social skills or other cool and unique skills. Heck, I even left Escape Artist off the list!

By combining Hide & Mv. Silently, the rogue has 1 extra skill point. Not a huge change, surely; but just a bit more wiggle room.