Scent and Darkvision vs Shadowdancer

[mikebr99]

But during a Full Attack action? <shakes head> I don't buy it. I'm not firmly against it, but it just doesn't "play well", I think, either cinematically or logistically.

(And the rules don't say otherwise.)

Sure they do... and you agreed in post #51.


Mike

 

[Nail]

Errr???

You said:

... Hide MUST be at least part of your move action...

And I said:

Yup.

I.e.: Hide works as written as part of Move Action, not as part of a Full Attack action. Capiche?

 

[mikebr99]

Hide works as written as part of Move Action, not as part of a Full Attack action. Capiche?

I sure do. I was just pointing out that the rules DO say otherwise to being part of a full attack action, when you said...

I'm not firmly against it, but it just doesn't "play well", I think, either cinematically or logistically (high level rogues could have more than 4 attacks per round!).

(And the rules don't say otherwise.)

And I was just pointing out that you'd agreed with me, that Hide MUST be used as part of a move equiv. OR be a move equiv. action all on it's own. These are the only two ways to use Hide (& running, & charging).


Mike

 

[Abraxas]

Sure it does...
Quote:
you make a Hide check as part of movement, so it doesn’t take a separate action.

Except that you keep removing the "Normally" at the beginning of this statement. If it said just what you quote I wouldn't disagree, but once you put that in - well you know my view on this.

They just weren't explicit enought to spell out that it is a std. attack action that can be accomplished while also hiding as your move equiv. action.

They didn't have to be explicit for my interpretation to make sense, they do for yours.

And I am trying to show you the error in your thinking.

Then you have and will continue to fail, misearbly. The RAW can be interpreted in two ways - and your interpretation requires a more convoluted reading than mine. There is no error to correct.

This is where, beleive the the wording of the skill went wrong... if you complete the harder hide skill DC check for sniping... you never do come into view. You remain hidden for the complete turn. Now this may be a house rule, but I beleive it's the intent of the RAW.

This is another assumption on your part, and it has to break other RAW in order to work. I think the intent of the RAW is clear, Hide while attacking (full round action or standard action) with a -20 penalty, and it doesn't require a houserule to work with the other RAW.

Your arguements are not convincing - but no worries you and i don't game together so we don't have to butt heads over each other's rules interpretation.

Cover or HiPS - full round of Sneak Attacks at -20 to your hide check, works for me and fits the rules.

 

[Nail]

..but with your interpretation, someone can GRAPPLE and still be hiding.

 

[Nail]

"Ouch! Would someone get this guy off of me? I would myself, but I just can't find him!"

 

[Nail]

BTW, for those of you still paying attention and who think that a Full Attack action is allowable while using the Hide skill.....

....is the claim, then, that hiding is simply "being invisible, with a skill check"? Functionally equivalent, anyway? That doesn't sit right, I think.

 

[Majere]

Ok let me get this right

The RAW say it is normally part of a move action.
Could this be that because NORMALLY you re trying to move while hidden.

SOMETIMES you try and do other things too, like attack, run, play the accordian. But there make it harder to hide so you take a penalty. Could it not also be that SOMETIMES you can hide as part of an action (Hiding while attacking) or while performing a full round action (casting a spell, full attack charging)

Why is it that, according to mikes ruling, I can charge 80' wielding a two handed vorpal sword of death, cut the head off of guard one with a sinlge blow and leave gaurd two standing dumbfounded muttering:
"What who... oh my god, I didnt see a thing.. his head came off!! "

But I cant sneak up to someone, stab him two or three times and them escape into the shadows ?

Your interpretations not only make no sense but have no foundings. The rules explicitally state that hiding DOES NOT HAVE TO BE part of a movement, it just happens that it normally is.
HENSE THE WORD NORMALLY


Majere
Stabed you 5 times, and gets 35 on his hide check, you may now roll your spot check.

 

[mikebr99]

Ok let me get this right

Why is it that, according to mikes ruling, I can charge 80' wielding a two handed vorpal sword of death, cut the head off of guard one with a sinlge blow and leave gaurd two standing dumbfounded muttering:
"What who... oh my god, I didnt see a thing.. his head came off!! "

Because Charging is specifically mentioned... and it includes movement... And also note, that you need total cover/concealment the entire time to accomplish this (excluding HiPS).

But I cant sneak up to someone, stab him two or three times and them escape into the shadows ?[?QUOTE]You can... it just may take a few rounds.

Your interpretations not only make no sense but have no foundings. The rules explicitally state that hiding DOES NOT HAVE TO BE part of a movement, it just happens that it normally is.
HENSE THE WORD NORMALLY

Right, normally it is part of movement, when you are sniping, it is a move equiv. all on it's own. As it is with stabbing someone once... a move equiv. action. To stay hidden while attacking (once).

It's either part of movement, or it is your move part of your turn. Either way, that only leaves a std. action left in your turn.


Mike

 

[Abraxas]

..but with your interpretation, someone can GRAPPLE and still be hiding.

Actually, with HiPS (and only with HiPS) you can use mikebr99's interpretation and hide while grappling.

You can start a grapple as a standard action. Once grappling you can make a grapple check to move - if you win you are moving and a hide check can be made while moving