Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6986816" data-attributes="member: 6775031">Yeah, but if the PCs know that something is about to ambush them, then they're going to stop and look around until they find it. Unless you want to start getting into the action economy of looking around, you can save a lot of time and energy by just skipping to the part where they notice it. By my reading, that rule - that you can't hide from an alert target who can see you - is just a way of cutting to the chase. All of the stuff about DM discretion letting you hide from someone if they're looking in another direction is stuff that applies outside of combat, when they aren't paying attention.Of course, those rules are also vague and subject to interpretation. If you want to interpret that to say that rogues can dance around in your blind spot unless you pass a check, then you could certainly make an argument to that effect. I just don't know why you would want to, given that the alternative is much faster to play and less prone to shenanigans.On the third hand, Rules As Written say that a polar bear can't hide in a blizzard. If the DM wanted to rule that camouflage will allow you to hide without being behind cover, then I'm almost certain that there's support for that elsewhere in the books, and it would also cover the leopard scenario.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Crimson Binome, post: 6986816, member: 6775031"] Yeah, but if the PCs [I]know[/I] that something is about to ambush them, then they're going to stop and look around until they find it. Unless you want to start getting into the action economy of looking around, you can save a lot of time and energy by just skipping to the part where they notice it. By my reading, that rule - that you [I]can't[/I] hide from an alert target who [I]can[/I] see you - is just a way of cutting to the chase. All of the stuff about DM discretion letting you hide from someone if they're looking in another direction is stuff that applies [I]outside[/I] of combat, when they [I]aren't[/I] paying attention. Of course, those rules are also vague and subject to interpretation. If you want to interpret that to say that rogues can dance around in your blind spot unless you pass a check, then you could certainly make an argument to that effect. I just don't know why you would [I]want[/I] to, given that the alternative is much faster to play and less prone to shenanigans. On the third hand, Rules As Written say that a polar bear can't hide in a blizzard. If the DM wanted to rule that camouflage will allow you to hide without being behind cover, then I'm almost certain that there's support for that elsewhere in the books, and it would also cover the leopard scenario. [/QUOTE]

Verification