Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User3
Prince
Posts: 3974
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by User3 »

I remember reading back at Nifty some posts where Frank and another person were claiming that HiPS was nowhere near as glamorous as it appears to be. Claiming that if you were buffed out in Hide and Bluff skills, you could accomplish pretty much everything that HiPS does without having to take the rather sub-optimal segue into Shadowdancer.

Well, I've been seeing some threads at the WotC boards lately like this:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.p ... 959[br][br]... where people are either singing the praises of the overpowered aspects of HiPS or complaining that they can't deal with HiPS-armed adversaries.

**

My query to Frank and others is ..... just how good/bad *is* Hide in Plain Sight? And how do you demystify/debunk its supposed power and superiority over say, a Rogue who does not have it, but is maxed out in Hide and Bluff?

Thanks!
User avatar
fbmf
The Great Fence Builder
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by fbmf »

Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Username17 »

OK, here's what HiPS does in 3rd edition D&D:

If you have been spotted, and want to hide, you don't have to expend an action to bluff if you want to hide without passing behind an object.

That's it.

Here's what it does in 3.5:

As above, except that it also obviates the need to have an object while hiding (as in 3.5 you are no longer able to begin hiding "in the open" - whatever that means).

So... um... once again, if you are hiding successfully, HiPS does nothing. If you are not hiding successfully, you are probably still up a creek as HiPS does not make the extremely substantial penalties you will doubtless be engendering go away.

For the record: it's -10 to begin hiding while observed under ideal conditions, -20 if you made and attack or run move this round. So if you aren't already successfully hiding, I don't see how you are going to pull off a fade away while observed with any facility - it's an opposed roll and now you are penalized by perhaps as much as the entire d20!

So yeah, HiPS is now better than it used to be, because normal people are more restricted in how they begin hiding, but it still sucks.

-Username17
User avatar
Count Arioch the 28th
King
Posts: 6172
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Count Arioch the 28th »

How about having hide in plain sight drops the -10 penalty for being in sight, and reduce the run or attack poeanlty by -10, to -10?
In this moment, I am Ur-phoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my int score.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Username17 »

How about having hide in plain sight drops the -10 penalty for being in sight, and reduce the run or attack poeanlty by -10, to -10?


That would be much better than the two or three versions of the ability that have been printed in official sources.

That would be a pretty decent ability, actually. Although the fact that it is Supernatural would make it share all the drawbacks of Improved Invisibility except for people being able to see you with Will Saves (and most DMs forget that people get Will Saves to see Invisible people anyways). So as a 7th+ character level power it wouldn't be much - but at least it would be something that people might actually make use out of.

After all, people are presently able to frequently win that attack and hide check (especially with ranged weapons) as things currently stand - and getting a +10 on that would make that a really workable strategy for some of the people for whom it is presently only a bare option.

-Username17
Thoth_Amon
Journeyman
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Thoth_Amon »

Ah, but can you hide (with cover) and then sneak across a 120 foot open field in daylight (where there is no cover) to the wall of a castle while there are guards on the castle wall watching?

Is this possible?

TA
User avatar
fbmf
The Great Fence Builder
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by fbmf »

Here we go again... :wink:

Game On,
fbmf
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Username17 »

Is this possible?


Of course it is.

Once you are hiding, people have a spot distance to see you based upon your hide check. That is to say, people have to make a spot check to see you whether you are in the open or not.

And if your hie check beets their spot check, they don't see you.

-Username17
Thoth_Amon
Journeyman
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Thoth_Amon »

I agree, but there are certainly those who would argue that you need to retain partial cover at all times or you are auto-spotted.

I won't bother to link you to Nifty, but suffice it to say that attrition has won the day and our way of handling the hide rules did not win over any adherents.

TA
User avatar
fbmf
The Great Fence Builder
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by fbmf »

I linked to it above. The other camp kept insisting they were right. I was accused of insulting people. I gave up.

Game On,
fbmf
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Username17 »

I agree, but there are certainly those who would argue that you need to retain partial cover at all times or you are auto-spotted.


Why even have spot distances for "grassland" or "indoors" then?

The game mechanic is that if you are within view of someone indoors, and you haven't seen them yet, you have to make a spot check to see them - with a +1 bonus for every ten feet closer to you they are than the limit of your sight (the far wall).

Actually, that's nearly impossible (actually impossible in many cases) - so technically you should be able to successfully stay hidden by pressing yourself against the wall most of the time.

That's what the rules really say - it's in the DMG under "spotting distance".

-Username17
User avatar
fbmf
The Great Fence Builder
Posts: 2590
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by fbmf »

You're preaching to the choir, dude. I assure you.

Game On,
fbmf
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Username17 »

Oh... I think I do.

In 3.5, the "blind" condition grants 100% concealment, but is no longer tied to invisibility. The "Blindfighting" feat grants your dex bonus back against "invisible" foes - who also have 100% concealment, but are in no way tied to people being blind.

So "blindfighting" (by some sort of logic anyway), does not actually give you any defensive benefit whilst "blind" or "in the dark" - only when you can see but your enemy is transparent.

That's about as far as the dark side of rules lawyering can go in that direction - and I think I know about as much power as it has.

-Username17
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Re: Hide in Plain Sight ... and Frank's take on it.

Post by Username17 »

Here's a scenario as defined in the rules:

Neo (a first level Paragon Human Expert) creeps into the inner sanctum of The Architect. Neo wears only black, the room is only white. The Architect is sitting down some 20 feet from the door, which is in the wall. The Architect appears to be reading something of extreme interest, because he does not look up.

Neo is currently hiding, which penalizes his own spot checks by -2. He is at the limit of the Architect's unobstructed vision, so he cannot be seen at all (the architect cannot even begin to make Spot checks until he gets to one half the encounter distance, which is in this case line of sight to begin with).


Neo sees the architect, however, and begins to plan his attack.

The architect is not attempting to hide, so the DC to spot him at the limit of vision is a base 20, modified by contrast (probably a -2 to DC), for a base DC of 18. Neo has a +17 Spot check because he is a Paragon Human. Even with his -2 penalty for hiding - his chance of flubbing this roll is very low. The encounter has now begun for Neo, but not for the Architect, and Neo can take combat actions to his heart's content.


Neo slowly circles around the Architect, going to smack him in the back of the head. The Architect does not look up.

Neo has gone within 10 feet of the Architect, allowing the Architect to make "normal spot checks" against Neo's Hide. Neo, being a Paragon Human has a +17 to Hide despite his lack of even a single rank in the skill. Neo also has a -5 circumstance penalty to his Hide check because he contrasts with the wall behind him, but a +5 bonus because he wears an Elven Cloak - the Architect is a Cleric with a Wisdom of 24 and no ranks of spot. They make opposed rolls, and Neo wins handily because he has so much larger of a bonus.


Standing behind the Architect, Neo punches him in the back of the head. The Architect whips his head around, but Neo circles faster and the Architect is unsure of what is going on.

Neo makes an attack roll against a flat footed Architect. Unsurprisingly, he hits. The Architect is now "in combat", because he has taken damage. Next round, he can roll initiative and begin taking combat actions. However, he still must spot Neo before he has "encountered" him. Again they roll opposed Spot Vs. Hide checks (this time Neo suffers a -20 penalty to Hide), and despite the fact that the Architect is adding +7 to his roll and Neo is subtracting 3 (net), Neo still rolls higher and the Architect has not yet "encountered" him. Thus, the Architect has no more ability to target him with attacks than he did when he first heard that Neo had entered the building.


The Architect begins by hurling a brand of white hot plasma wildly through the room. Neo ducks in on the side and pops the Architect in the side of the head. The Architect whips his head around "Ha! I see you now, mortal!"

The Architect rolls initiative, and Neo delays his action until after the Architect is commited.The Architect guesses at Neo's location and casts Flame Strike Defensively. His concentration check easily beats the DC of 20 and the spell goes off without provoking an attack of opportunity. However, the Architect guesses wrong, and the Flame Streike goes off harmlessly. Neo attacks again, and because the Architect still has not "encountered" Neo - he's still flat footed. Unsurprisingly, he connects again. He makes another Hide vs. Spot roll, and his luck does not hold out - the Architect has spotted him.


The Architect grins, turns towards Neo, and his eyes begin to glow. Neo says "whoa."

---

That's pretty generous - you'll note that it is trivial for actual high level characters to get a much higher Hide check than that in our example. But that is what it says.

-Username17
Post Reply