Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ridley's Cohort" data-source="post: 73718" data-attributes="member: 545">I do not think there is a clear cut answer to this one.&nbsp; I have participated in heated debates on this topic.On one side we have those who assert that invisible is simply the same thing as not visible.&nbsp; In-visible.&nbsp; Not-visible.&nbsp; Same as hidden.&nbsp; Right?&nbsp; On the extreme wing of this argument, there are those who say the rules don't mention anything explicitly about attacks revealing your position, so Rogues can get their full multi-sneak even while still Hiding.The other side points out there are no rules that explicitly equate Invisibility with Hiding.&nbsp; Furthermore there are no rules that say you can attack while Hiding at all.&nbsp; So when you attack, you are no longer Hiding.&nbsp; If initiative has already begun, no one is flatfooted, so no sneak attack at all.Of course there is also the middle ground.I advocate that during combat (well after initiative starts) allow the first attack of a multiattack from (normal) Invisibility or Hiding to be a sneak attack and the rest to be normal.&nbsp; In this case, Hiding is the same as Invisible.&nbsp; Furthermore attacking presumes no attempt to remain hidden, so you are spotted automatically (unless viewing conditions are especially bad).&nbsp; Of course you may move and attempt to hide again, conditions allowing.I think this &quot;house interpretation&quot; is simple, consistent, playable, and gives appropriate rewards and incentives to Rogues without making every Halfling with an Elven Cloak a sneak attack machine.IMHO, even a +20 bonus is not adequate to stop the Hiding Sneak Attack Machine.&nbsp; A 10th level Rogue can easily automatically hit 40+ on his Hide every single check.&nbsp; So +20 is not quite as high as you might think.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ridley's Cohort, post: 73718, member: 545"] I do not think there is a clear cut answer to this one. I have participated in heated debates on this topic. On one side we have those who assert that invisible is simply the same thing as not visible. In-visible. Not-visible. Same as hidden. Right? On the extreme wing of this argument, there are those who say the rules don't mention anything explicitly about attacks revealing your position, so Rogues can get their full multi-sneak even while still Hiding. The other side points out there are no rules that explicitly equate Invisibility with Hiding. Furthermore there are no rules that say you can attack while Hiding at all. So when you attack, you are no longer Hiding. If initiative has already begun, no one is flatfooted, so no sneak attack at all. Of course there is also the middle ground. I advocate that during combat (well after initiative starts) allow the first attack of a multiattack from (normal) Invisibility or Hiding to be a sneak attack and the rest to be normal. In this case, Hiding is the same as Invisible. Furthermore attacking presumes no attempt to remain hidden, so you are spotted automatically (unless viewing conditions are especially bad). Of course you may move and attempt to hide again, conditions allowing. I think this "house interpretation" is simple, consistent, playable, and gives appropriate rewards and incentives to Rogues without making every Halfling with an Elven Cloak a sneak attack machine. IMHO, even a +20 bonus is not adequate to stop the Hiding Sneak Attack Machine. A 10th level Rogue can easily automatically hit 40+ on his Hide every single check. So +20 is not quite as high as you might think. [/QUOTE]

Verification