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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 7217274" data-attributes="member: 6787503">Thanks for this interesting example. For clarity and to understand the mechanics involved in play, allow me to recapitulate. The rogue is face to face with the enemy when she creates a distraction. Perhaps the DM gates this behind a CHA (Deception) check, the successful outcome of which is that the enemy momentarily faces away. In any case, the moment the enemy turns away, the rogue "takes the Hide action" in the blind-spot created by the enemy's distraction. A DEX (Stealth) check is called for. Success means the enemy loses track of the rogue's location, and failure that the enemy still knows where the rogue is and will continue to track her as she moves. Then, the rogue sneaks behind a nearby source of total cover in the hope that her check was successful. Is that just about how it would play out at your table? I admit this approach seems well suited to producing the type of narrative you desire. At my table, facing is seldom, if ever, a concern. The six-second combat round is the shortest unit of time I usually consider, which is generally enough time for a creature to maintain awareness of all 360 degrees of its surroundings. It's certainly enough time for the enemy to quickly glance over her shoulder and then turn her attention back to the rogue, so there's a difference in granularity in how we track time. I wouldn't freeze-frame the enemy facing the other way while allowing the rogue to take her full action and movement.More on-topic, however, is that even with the enemy's back turned, I would consider the rogue's position to be "in the open". It isn't a place where she could hide and stay hidden once the enemy, or some other observer, turned to face her, so I would require her to move behind the nearby cover first and then hide. Of course, this would mean the enemy could track her movement to the hiding place, and we're back to the question of whether the hiding place is of sufficient size to create uncertainty about the rogue's position.If the rogue became invisible in front of her enemy, she could hide right there and then because she would be heavily obscured by that condition. Without being obscured in any way, it's questionable whether she could hide in the momentary blind-spot created when her enemy glances over her shoulder.Of course, hiding and being hidden is only from the point of view of a particular creature (which incidentally, I believe, is why it couldn't be a condition). In this case, the castle wall is serving as an obstruction to the guards' vision and satisfies the requirement for an appropriate circumstance. Once hidden behind the obstruction, the DM could rule that hidden creatures could approach due to the guards' distraction.I agree completely. I believe it's part of the DM's job to not only decide whether appropriate circumstances are present, but to describe them as such as well. As I said, facing rarely comes up in my games, but if it was a consideration it would be noted. I also do my best to always let the players know if terrain or weather conditions are conducive to hiding during overland travel, so they can decide if they want to move at a slow pace or risk moving faster.</blockquote>

Verification