Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 7290713" data-attributes="member: 6802951">That depends on whether their Stealth check succeeded or not. If you're behind total cover, no stealth check is required because all of you is hidden. If you stick part of yourself out of the cover, that is when you need to make a stealth check, because that is when the possibility of being seen exists.If someone is popping out of exactly the same place every round though, I'd allow at least advantage, if not automatic detection to an opponent that is specifically watching that place. I don't see that as going against Jeremy's ruling however, because that is a response to a repeated action combined with a specific declaration rather than the more general case Jeremy is addressing.&nbsp;I regard that as a little too abstract, since it is too much of the &quot;Physicist's answer&quot;.It requires envisioning an infinitely thin attacker and weapon. I have enough trouble thinking of how that works, and I'm pretty sure that I couldn't actually explain it to my players.Stand behind a corner. That is your total cover. Stick one arm outstretched and put the other underneath your chin. That is your arrow. Now look at something around the corner, pointing at it with your outstretched arm with a clear path to your other hand. You are now in a position to attack the object you're looking at.Do you find that part of you relative to the object is now visible from the object's point of view? Would you regard yourself to still be in total cover relative to that object, or do you think that some of you is exposed to it?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cap'n Kobold, post: 7290713, member: 6802951"] That depends on whether their Stealth check succeeded or not. If you're behind total cover, no stealth check is required because all of you is hidden. If you stick part of yourself out of the cover, that is when you need to make a stealth check, because that is when the possibility of being seen exists. If someone is popping out of exactly the same place every round though, I'd allow at least advantage, if not automatic detection to an opponent that is specifically watching that place. I don't see that as going against Jeremy's ruling however, because that is a response to a repeated action combined with a specific declaration rather than the more general case Jeremy is addressing. I regard that as a little too abstract, since it is too much of the "Physicist's answer". It requires envisioning an infinitely thin attacker and weapon. I have enough trouble thinking of how that works, and I'm pretty sure that I couldn't actually explain it to my players. Stand behind a corner. That is your total cover. Stick one arm outstretched and put the other underneath your chin. That is your arrow. Now look at something around the corner, pointing at it with your outstretched arm with a clear path to your other hand. You are now in a position to attack the object you're looking at. Do you find that part of you relative to the object is now visible from the object's point of view? Would you regard yourself to still be in total cover relative to that object, or do you think that some of you is exposed to it? [/QUOTE]

Verification