Sniping with greater invisibility

[Lamoni]

I am a little confused at how this works. Let's say you are a sorcerer with greater invisibility (against nothing with scent). You attack with a magic missile and then immediately attempt a hide check at a -20 penalty (sniping). However the fact that you remained stationary with greater invisibility gave you a +40.

Now let's say that you ignore the entry on sniping and you just fire a magic missile and then move 10 feet in one direction. Your enemies try to spot you, but since you are invisible you get a +20 to your hide check. Can you even use a hide check?

Sniping: If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a –20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot.

Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Spot checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Hide checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Hide checks when not moving (even though opponents can’t see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual clues).

From the skill section it sounds like you can't use the hide skill after making a ranged attack unless you are sniping (and therefore not moving). However, if you are invisible and you move after casting a spell, the enemies would try to spot you. If you don't get a hide check, what is there to oppose their spot check? What if you declare that you aren't trying to snipe, but still don't move out of the spot where you cast the spell? Does that mean you would no longer have the -20 to your hide check when they tried to spot you?

It seems like any of the following three options would be possible...

1. You try sniping... You cast a spell, then take a hide check at -20 (but with the +40 from greater invisibility)
2. You just cast a spell, but remain in that same square. They try to spot you, but you have a +40 from greater invisibility
3. You cast a spell and then move. They try to spot you and you roll your opposed hide check at a +20 from greater invisibility.

If those are true, why would anyone try sniping? If you are forced to take the -20 to hide as if you were sniping even if you didn't declare it... it still makes remaining in the same spot equal to moving to another spot so you are just as hard to spot. I am assuming that the -20 to hide comes from them possibly seeing the origin of the attack so it wouldn't be fair to have them make a spot check to see the spell's origin... that is already calculated in the hide check.

Do I understand this right? Where are my errors, and could you point me to other relevant passages from the SRD? PHB, DMG, and MM would also work.

There is also the possibility that you never need to take the -20 while invisible because you don't need to conceal yourself after the shot. You already have total concealment.

 

[Datt]

Well it would be 2 or 3 and not 1 for one reason. You are not making a ranged attack. You are casting a spell and therefore not sniping.

 

[DarkMaster]

I am a little confused at how this works. Let's say you are a sorcerer with greater invisibility (against nothing with scent). You attack with a magic missile and then immediately attempt a hide check at a -20 penalty (sniping). However the fact that you remained stationary with greater invisibility gave you a +40.

Now let's say that you ignore the entry on sniping and you just fire a magic missile and then move 10 feet in one direction. Your enemies try to spot you, but since you are invisible you get a +20 to your hide check. Can you even use a hide check?



From the skill section it sounds like you can't use the hide skill after making a ranged attack unless you are sniping (and therefore not moving). However, if you are invisible and you move after casting a spell, the enemies would try to spot you. If you don't get a hide check, what is there to oppose their spot check? What if you declare that you aren't trying to snipe, but still don't move out of the spot where you cast the spell? Does that mean you would no longer have the -20 to your hide check when they tried to spot you?

It seems like any of the following three options would be possible...

1. You try sniping... You cast a spell, then take a hide check at -20 (but with the +40 from greater invisibility)
2. You just cast a spell, but remain in that same square. They try to spot you, but you have a +40 from greater invisibility
3. You cast a spell and then move. They try to spot you and you roll your opposed hide check at a +20 from greater invisibility.

If those are true, why would anyone try sniping? If you are forced to take the -20 to hide as if you were sniping even if you didn't declare it... it still makes remaining in the same spot equal to moving to another spot so you are just as hard to spot. I am assuming that the -20 to hide comes from them possibly seeing the origin of the attack so it wouldn't be fair to have them make a spot check to see the spell's origin... that is already calculated in the hide check.

Do I understand this right? Where are my errors, and could you point me to other relevant passages from the SRD? PHB, DMG, and MM would also work.

There is also the possibility that you never need to take the -20 while invisible because you don't need to conceal yourself after the shot. You already have total concealment.

actually if the projectile of your spell is visible and can be traced back to the caster I would consider it sniping(usually ray are considered as range weapon). ow you are confusing spotting invisible and hidden. If you don't move then if the opponent spot you that's it. if you are trying to hide back then you have two chances of confusing the enemy one for hidding and one to spot you invisible (if the hide check fails). and for three same thing except that it is easier to spot you since you move.

Therefore
to spot you in
1) you need 1 spot check
2) you need to spot vs hide and spot check
3) 1 spot check

 

[Lamoni]

Therefore to spot you in
1) you need 1 spot check
2) you need to spot vs hide and spot check
3) 1 spot check

I am guessing you meant 2, 1, 3 because in 1, you were trying to hide.

Anyway, you are saying that if I don't attempt to hide, I can be spotted with a single check, but if I am hiding, I would have to be spotted and found?
So if I cast a spell and then hide (sniping) they would first have to spot me where I would roll an opposed hide check with a +40 bonus because I didn't move, and then if I was spotted, they would have to roll another spot check with my +20 (+40 -20) bonus. This doesn't make much sense to me.

you are confusing spotting invisible and hidden

could you explain the difference? In the SRD under the section about spotting invisible opponents it only mentions that the person has a +20 to their hide check. Why would you use an opposed hide check if it wasn't hiding? I don't see any other rules that are just for spotting invisible. Maybe I am missing them. Could you point them out?

 

[Lamoni]

Well it would be 2 or 3 and not 1 for one reason. You are not making a ranged attack. You are casting a spell and therefore not sniping.

I believe that it depends on the spell whether or not you would call it a ranged attack. If the spell is harming an enemy at range, I would call it a ranged attack. Although I agree that it is not made with a ranged weapon. I believe that the rules support this position, but I am too lazy to look anything up. Anyway, it doesn't really matter. Let's say that the example and question is about an invisible ranger that is shooting a bow with the manyshot feat. I think we can agree that that is a valid ranged attack that can be used with sniping, but if not, we can say he shoots only one arrow.

It just seems like one interpretation makes sniping irrelevant in this case (which I am starting to agree with). Once you are invisible, you are automatically hidden with complete concealment. However they can still notice you by other visual clues so you roll to see how well you are hidden. You don't need to re-conceal yourself as with sniping because you are already 100% concealed.

This wouldn't make your hide skill irrelevant, but just make sniping unusable in this case. Sniping sounds like it is meant for taking shots while hiding in a tree. Not for invisible people to use.

 

[DarkMaster]

The first condition to spot an invisible creature would be that if it wasn't invisible you could see it, right.
Now if you're hidden than trying to spot you while you are invisible is irrelevant since you are hidden(even if you were not invisible they would not be able to see you).

I know it may sound confusing but when you think about it, it makes perfect senses.

 

[DarkMaster]

The first condition to spot an invisible creature would be that if it wasn't invisible you could see it, right.
Now if you're hidden than trying to spot you while you are invisible is irrelevant since you are hidden(even if you were not invisible they would not be able to see you).

I know it may sound confusing but when you think about it, it makes perfect senses.

Oups, I just checked the SRD. last month I was bashed becaused I was thinking like you. But you are actually right. The SRD specifically say that you gian a bonus to your hide check.

My old ruling (before being bashed was) If you are invisible +40 or +20(still/move) and -20 since you just shot (for all case). The advantage of hidding is that you add your hide skill roll to the DC to spot you. Thanks a lot, and sorry if I confused you.

To spot you
1) DC+40 -20 + d20+ hide skill ;active hidding
2) DC 40 - 20 ; passive hidding
3) DC 20 - 20 ; passive hidding while moving

 

[Lamoni]

The first condition to spot an invisible creature would be that if it wasn't invisible you could see it, right.
Now if you're hidden than trying to spot you while you are invisible is irrelevant since you are hidden(even if you were not invisible they would not be able to see you).

I know it may sound confusing but when you think about it, it makes perfect senses.

This is how I am seeing it. The first condition as you say is to have a line of sight. The second condition is to beat a hide check. Being invisible doesn't become irrelevant. That is HOW you are hiding. Normally you try to blend in with your surroundings so you are unnoticed. When you are invisible, you blend in perfectly and your hide check only refers to not stepping in water, don't make imprints in the muddy area, etc. Therefore I think in order to spot an invisible person, you need to overcome their hide check because they are always hiding while the spell lasts.

With this interpretation, making a second spot check wouldn't make sense because by spotting them at first you already overcame a hide check... no need to make another. My mind is getting more and more made up as I think about it, but I will still be glad if I am proven wrong. My intent is to discover what is right according to the rules... not to be the person who is right at first.

 

[FireLance]

Hmm... I've always interpreted "immobile" to mean in order to get a +40 bonus to your Hide check, you cannot move at all. Simply staying the same 5-foot square is not enough.

If you attack, you are moving and you "only" get a +20 bonus to Hide. If you cast a spell with a somatic component, you are moving and you "only" get a +20 bonus to Hide.

For what it's worth, I would say that the sniping rule does not apply when you are invisible. The additional -20 penalty represents the fact that you have to move extra quickly or extra carefully to remain hidden after an attack (either duck back behind a tree, or fire your weapon so that the leaves of the bush you're hiding behind don't move and betray your location). If you're already invisible, you don't need to take any extra precautions. Your opponents already can't see you and have to discern your location from environmental clues.

 

[Lamoni]

Hmm... I've always interpreted "immobile" to mean in order to get a +40 bonus to your Hide check, you cannot move at all. Simply staying the same 5-foot square is not enough.

Makes sense to me. That makes another good use for the still spell metamagic feat. Although speaking would also give away your location depending on how softly you could say the words and how loud the surrounding environment was. But at least listen doesn't pinpoint your location.