Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 8377994" data-attributes="member: 6779196">Who said they can’t remember where they were attacked from and allow it to occur round after round and do nothing about it? If you know the rogue keeps hiding behind the pillar, just walk around the pillar and put your sword through his gut! But when he is behind the pillar and sufficient quiet and varying the timing and height of his attacks (i.e. passed his Stealth check vs. your passive Perception), it’s going to be harder to avoid being hit by his arrow than if he were just standing out in the open.It only says that based on your assumptions of what’s happening in the fiction. Some of us have a different set of assumptions, which allow a rogue hiding in the same spot to make sense and not make the creatures they’re hiding from look like idiots.Again, you’re assuming we’re all working from the same set of narrative assumptions. I agree that if you assume a successful hide check means your opponents have absolutely no idea where you could possibly be, then it would be stupid for you to be able to hide in the same spot more than once. However, since certain rules (like the lightfoot halfling’s naturally stealthy) seem to indicate that it is possible to hide in the same spot more than once, I find the natural conclusion to be that that isn’t an accurate narrative assumption. So I’ve adjusted my understanding of what’s happening in the fiction to account for what the rules seem to be implying. The rogue who hides behind the pillar gets the benefit of being hidden (advantage on attack rolls and attack rolls against them have disadvantage), so that benefit must come from the opponent not being able to get a clear shot at the rogue or see and read the rogue’s attack telegraphs, rather than having no idea where the rogue could possibly be.You should not make so many assumptions about the way other people play based on very little information.</blockquote>

Verification