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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rodney Mulraney" data-source="post: 7218153" data-attributes="member: 6904821">But who is claiming that hiding - peek - shoot is useless? you get advantage from being an unseen attacker if you do that. You are not immediately seen, unless your stealth/hide check was unsuccessful.The idea is that you have succesfully hidden behind a tree or something, that is a given. If you think that is impossible, well you are wrong, and check the links I posted earlier to confirm that.Now from that given point of successfully hiding, THEN what happens next is the issue:1. You do not move, you just peek and shoot - win; you get unseen attacker for that.2. You decide to move towards an enemy, who knows you hid behind that tree. You move out of hiding. Normally your stealth automatically breaks then, BUT if the enemy is sufficiently distracted you MIGHT not break your stealth and be able to get into melee range and attack with unseen attacker advantage.This is all just fact.Now the issue is the capitalised MIGHT, either you do break stealth or you do not; the fact here is that it is down to the DM's adjudication. There are supposed to base that decision off of how distracted the enemy is supposed to be.FrogReaver as a DM says he would almost always break your stealth. I am saying as a DM it would be very much easier and more probable that I would not break your stealth.Everything is good and right with the world, why are we even arguing ?I think FrogReaver is saying my DM adjudication is somehow wrong, but he has no basis for saying that. My decision seems more inline with official sources thoughts on the matter. FrogReaver is just claiming confusion as to how all the fluff works out... shrug...</blockquote>

Verification