PDA

View Full Version : Taking a Step Back - Opposed Rolls



Matthew
2007-08-04, 09:54 PM
During the 1e/2e/3e debates I often hear the complaint that AD&D didn't provide rules for stealth outside of a smattering of Sub Classes and Kits that possessed the Move Silently and Hide in Shadows Skills.

This is a misconception that has come about through the conflating of these special Thief Abilities with conventional stealth. There is no need to go into the specifics here, but it is worth noting one thing: Characters who passed Move Silently and Hide in Shadows rolls were perfectly quiet and hidden. Outside of supernatural senses or magical perception they were completely undetectable. If they failed these rolls, they made conventional stealth checks like everybody else.

The current iteration of D&D did something odd to my mind. It instituted a randomly determined DC for stealth based skills - Opposed Listen and Spot Rolls versus Sneak and Hide. As a DM, I early on dispensed with this idea and began to rely on the 'take 10' mechanic. Basically, because the chance of detection changes depending on distance between subject and object, I just compare the relevant Skills +10 and 'know' when Player Characters or Non Player Characters came within detection range.

At that point I usually introduce the random factor (i.e. the D20 Roll). If it is the Listener or Observer who has come within range, then I require a Listen or Spot Check. On the other hand, if a Character tries to Hide or Sneak within range of the Observer or Listener, then I require a Hide or Sneak Check.

The reason I bring this up in the context of previous editions is because it has recently occurred to me that I am following exactly the same procedure that I do when running those editions. When Characters employed stealth back then, it was the same deal. Automatic success for the most part until I determined (usually by dramatic fiat, but usually on account of their coming too close to their foes) that a check of some sort was required (either a Modified Ability Check or a Fixed Percentage Chance).

So, I have a couple of questions for the Forum:

1) Do you deal with 3e Stealth in the same or a similar way?

2) What do you think of this method of play?

kjones
2007-08-04, 10:28 PM
I use this instead of making dozens of die rolls when my party has to sneak past a group or somesuch.

Your methods seem reasonable, but it makes it too easy for even a mid-level rogue to be an invincible sneaker. Think about it: How many guards are going to have substantial ranks in Listen/Spot, or even a Wis bonus of any kind? (Often a dump stat for those fighter-types.) Thus, I would be surprised if the DCs got much above 15, and a 7th level rogue (10 ranks, +5 dex bonus) will make that automatically. It's boring for everyone if your rogue knows he can sneak past everyone no matter what. Opposed rolls add some uncertainty.

horseboy
2007-08-04, 10:39 PM
I've been at Rolemaster too long. I just do the straight he rolls his sneak, and use that as a target number for any spots.

Golthur
2007-08-04, 11:23 PM
I usually use "take 10" on Listen/Spot for guards and such who are on duty for prolonged periods of time. I reserve rolling for when someone's actually paying attention, and sometimes for elites.

Jasdoif
2007-08-05, 12:11 AM
If I recall right, the DMG suggests assuming that guards who aren't alerted to a threat are taking 10 with their Spot and Listen checks. This being the case, it makes sense to make their rank+10 into a DC for a Hide or Move Silently check. And that being the case, taking 10 on the Hide or Move Silently check may be allowed, and certainly speeds the game along.

It does kind of subvert the intent of it being an opposed roll; but in this case the guards don't know they're making an opposed roll, so I think it's OK. And of course, once the guards are actively on the lookout they'll be making rolls. In this case, you might still allow the stealthy guy to take 10 on the rolls (assuming he/she hasn't actually been detected yet). Stealth tends to be one against many, afterall; it only takes a single guard rolling high on their check to ruin the entire attempt.

Kurald Galain
2007-08-05, 05:44 AM
Yes, please.

I played a dungeon once where the DM was literally rolling three or four dice behind the screen per five-foot step we took. That was SOOOO annoying.

(listen, spot, sneak, hide... took like forever)

Diggorian
2007-08-05, 07:11 AM
1) Do you deal with 3e Stealth in the same or a similar way?

1/2 First off I dispense with the redundancy: Listen and Spot become Notice while Hide and Move silent become Sneak. Skill points are adjusted. We dont have the skills Long Jump and High Jump, why quibble with modalities? :smallamused:

1. I do similar to this in that the passive observer (guard) takes 10 for his Notice as he's not particularly inspecting when all is normal. If alarm has been raised though he'll roll to reflect wariness in scanning, but likely only one for the scene.

Sneak rolls a proper check to reflect his activeness as soon as guard could possibly perceive him. This depends on circumstance that is nicely laid out in 3.x: non-darkvision guard using a torch means sneak gets rolled 40ft out in the shadowy zone with dimness used as the hide concelament requirement. If Mr. Stealth closes into 20ft without handy cover or distraction, his hiding is negated: DC 0 + size mod + 2 for distance. Also, if guard has darkvision shadowiness doesnt help at all.

Besides visuals, new rolls may be required when treading surface alters say from firm pavement to gravelly texture. New Sneak check to avoid crunching.

Rolling every 10ft I wouldnt do, but would raise the initial Notice check result by 1 for every 10ft closed.


2) What do you think of this method of play?

Ofcourse, IMHO, the more your method is like mine the better it is. :smallbiggrin:

Prometheus
2007-08-05, 12:23 PM
Typically my stealthy characters dump all their skill points into Hide and Move Silently while my guards are lower level. The result is that virtually every stealth check passes anyway.

Roxlimn
2007-08-05, 02:59 PM
Parties in D&D usually have an Encounter Distance - the range at which the first opposed rolls take place, usually dependent on terrain and lighting. The distance is random, but I sometimes average it out.

Party stealth capability is dependent on the worst Hide check, rolled once, against the best Spot check on the opposed party, also rolled once. If neither of them passes, awareness is automatic at half the Encounter Distance. Parties who gain awareness advantage at Encounter Distance can attempt to Hide at half the distance, on another opposed roll, usually modified by immediate tactical terrain.

Lighting is applied as "contrast against background," depending on the ambient lighting and the sense applied. A Daylight spell on a moonless night is going to be extremely noticeable, so I use the size of the spell's radius itself as "creature size" on the Hide modifier, plus an additional "contrast" modifier.

Light in the Darkness imposes an Encounter Distance of 20 times the maximum Shadowy Illumination range of the light, modified for sense. Elves and other creatures with Low Light vision thus have an advantage in these situations, as they spot at longer ranges.

Technically, a Rogue or other character ought to be making a Hide check for every movement they do in a round, modified for movement speed, but I only ask for it if it's specifically a one-on-one situation where the observer has an unusually high chance for spotting the hider.

Matthew
2007-08-06, 07:41 PM
Right, sorry it took so long to get back to this.

Kjones: I dunno, the way I see it that's already what Level 7 Rogues are aiming at. Certainly, they're capable of getting a +20 Modifier by that Level anyway [Focus (+3), Stealth (+2), Dexterity (+5), Skill (+10)], probably more from Magical Items. I just don't want to have to dice for it everytime the Rogue moves or tries to sneak about - after all, it's what he's trained to do. Personally, I find it more annoying (and boring) when Rogue's fail to sneak.

Horseboy: So how many Listen Checks do you roll? One for each individual in the encounter or just one per so many individuals present?

Golthur: Yeah, at first I was doing the same.

Jasdoif: I couldn't find any mention of that in the DMG 1 or 2, but the rules on 'taking 10' certainly imply that it would be okay to do so.

Kurald Galain: Indeed, I can empathise with this.

Diggorian: Heh, indeed. I'm not a big fan of combining Skills, but then I'm not a big fan of the current Skill System either.

Prometheus: I think that is fairly common.

Roxlimn: Okay, so let's see if I can get this straight:



Parties in D&D usually have an Encounter Distance - the range at which the first opposed rolls take place, usually dependent on terrain and lighting. The distance is random, but I sometimes average it out.

Hmmn. I take it you are referring to the 'maximum distance at which a Spot check for detecting the nearby presence of others can succeed' listed in the Wilderness Adventures section of Chapter 3 of Dungeon Master's Guide? Just to be clear this distance only applies to Characters who are actively Sneaking, rather than acting as a general indicator of Encounter Distance. Very random, I have to agree [6D6 x 40' or 240-1,440' on an Open Plain?]. I am rarely inclined to dice for this.


Party stealth capability is dependent on the worst Hide check, rolled once, against the best Spot check on the opposed party, also rolled once. If neither of them passes, awareness is automatic at half the Encounter Distance. Parties who gain awareness advantage at Encounter Distance can attempt to Hide at half the distance, on another opposed roll, usually modified by immediate tactical terrain.

Wait, where is this procedure from? I cannot find it in my DMG. This, I think, refers to encounters with limited light sources where Characters have concealment in areas of Shadowy Illumination.


Lighting is applied as "contrast against background," depending on the ambient lighting and the sense applied. A Daylight spell on a moonless night is going to be extremely noticeable, so I use the size of the spell's radius itself as "creature size" on the Hide modifier, plus an additional "contrast" modifier.

Sure, okay.


Light in the Darkness imposes an Encounter Distance of 20 times the maximum Shadowy Illumination range of the light, modified for sense. Elves and other creatures with Low Light vision thus have an advantage in these situations, as they spot at longer ranges.

Hmmn. Is this an actual rule or the result of your Spotting rule? Could you point to the source?


Technically, a Rogue or other character ought to be making a Hide check for every movement they do in a round, modified for movement speed, but I only ask for it if it's specifically a one-on-one situation where the observer has an unusually high chance for spotting the hider.

Right, yeah. It would be quite a dice rolling nightmare to perpetuate that.

Example 1

So, say a Party of Adventurers (An Elf Sorcerer, Human Fighter, Human Cleric and Dwarf Rogue) are proceeding down a dark corridoor with a Torch that sheds bright light out to 20' and Shadowy illumination for another 20'. At that point, the Elf has vision 40'/80' [where X/X refers to Bright Light/Shadowy Light] from the Torch, the Humans 20'/20' and the Dwarf has Dark Vision out to 60'.
A Party of Orcs would be able to see this light source from a much greater distance than it sheds (800', following what Roxlimin says), and would have Concealment from the Elf at 40-80', the Humans 20-40' and no Concealment from the Dwarf. Unless the Orcs are moving stealthily, the Party will likely hear them long before they see them.

I am starting to find this somewhat confusing...

Diggorian
2007-08-06, 09:31 PM
Example 1

So, say a Party of Adventurers (An Elf Sorcerer, Human Fighter, Human Cleric and Dwarf Rogue) are proceeding down a dark corridoor with a Torch that sheds bright light out to 20' and Shadowy illumination for another 20'. At that point, the Elf has vision 40'/80' [where X/X refers to Bright Light/Shadowy Light] from the Torch, the Humans 20'/20' and the Dwarf has Dark Vision out to 60'.
A Party of Orcs would be able to see this light source from a much greater distance than it sheds (800', following what Roxlimin says), and would have Concealment from the Elf at 40-80', the Humans 20-40' and no Concealment from the Dwarf. Unless the Orcs are moving stealthily, the Party will likely hear them long before they see them.

I am starting to find this somewhat confusing...

Really?

Listen, or the hearing part of Notice :smallwink: , is gonna be the first detector in this situation; unless the dark corridor is a straight 800ft long. I dont recall the 20 times rule but it makes sense. Those trying to be quiet would be detected by the worst Move Silent check of the group, these I'd roll secretly to determine surprise, otherwise the Listen DC is 0 + the biggest armor check penalty .

The delving heroes having been attacked already know this place is inhabited by hostiles. Their Move Silents are secretly rolled, the worst is the half plate wearing shield toting cleric's 5.

The orc squad havent heard of intruders yet and are on their normal patrol. Not trying for stealth the DC to hear them 0 - 1 armor check - 5 for moving more than half speed, so Listen DC -6 (clearly audible for 60ft).

Those actively listening for trouble roll Listen, those not I'd do the take 10, if distracted the -5 is smacked on. Every 1 point that one side's Listen beats the other side's Move Silent roll or Listen DC equals 10ft of range for detect by sound.

The adventurers are focused on survival having barely escaped their last encounters, they stay frosty. The best Listen is the Dwarf rogue's 14. Listen 14 minus -6 DC = 20 means he hears them coming 200ft away. They prepare an ambush.

The orcs bored of patroling have begun a stimulating discussion of would you rather do a gobliness or bugbear babe. Not alert, they're taking 10 with a -1 Wisdom and -5 for distraction: effective Listen check 4 means they wouldnt even hear the trying to be stealthy clanging cleric were she walking with them!

They round a corner to see that down the next length of tunnel is a torch laying beside a gold and jewel bedecked human pinned beneath a large boulder, an apparent cave-in. When they close to investigate/loot, the adventures move out of the Sorceror's Major Illusion to attack in the surprise round.

Confusing? :smalltongue:

Matthew
2007-08-06, 09:46 PM
No, that's not confusing, that's very similar to how I would handle it (except there'd be more 'taking 10' going on). The whole randomly determined Encounter Distance deal, which Roxlimn was referring to, and the various Hide Checks is what I cannot figure into things at the moment.

See, I would determine an Encounter begins when two parties come within sight or hearing of one another.

Roxlimn
2007-08-08, 07:04 AM
Matthew:



Hmmn. I take it you are referring to the 'maximum distance at which a Spot check for detecting the nearby presence of others can succeed' listed in the Wilderness Adventures section of Chapter 3 of Dungeon Master's Guide? Just to be clear this distance only applies to Characters who are actively Sneaking, rather than acting as a general indicator of Encounter Distance. Very random, I have to agree [6D6 x 40' or 240-1,440' on an Open Plain?]. I am rarely inclined to dice for this.


It's actually more clear in the 3e DMG rather than the 3.5e one. The distance indicated isn't just applied to characters who are actively avoiding detection. It's a general distance indicator for terrain. It's altogether possible to miss people you're trying to look for and who are trying to contact you out in the wild, so it doesn't only apply when you don't want to be found.

Of course, taking steps to actively hide will improve Hide and MS chances of a party significantly, so having your Scout to alert you to possible incoming parties is a huge benefit.

Terrain Encounter Distance isn't the only thing that affects the maximum distance. Darkness, of course, limits sighting severely, as does inclement weather.



Wait, where is this procedure from? I cannot find it in my DMG. This, I think, refers to encounters with limited light sources where Characters have concealment in areas of Shadowy Illumination.


3e DMG. It's a useful rule to use when parties are looking for each other. Automatic Detection is useful for a whole lot of things, actually.



Hmmn. Is this an actual rule or the result of your Spotting rule? Could you point to the source?


Underdark supplement, FRCS, but I was already using rules like this before I saw that rule.

Also, high flying characters who have light, or are well lighted, are exceptions to these rules, and the maximum sighting distance for them is determined using the rules from Stormwrack.



So, say a Party of Adventurers (An Elf Sorcerer, Human Fighter, Human Cleric and Dwarf Rogue) are proceeding down a dark corridoor with a Torch that sheds bright light out to 20' and Shadowy illumination for another 20'. At that point, the Elf has vision 40'/80' [where X/X refers to Bright Light/Shadowy Light] from the Torch, the Humans 20'/20' and the Dwarf has Dark Vision out to 60'.
A Party of Orcs would be able to see this light source from a much greater distance than it sheds (800', following what Roxlimin says), and would have Concealment from the Elf at 40-80', the Humans 20-40' and no Concealment from the Dwarf. Unless the Orcs are moving stealthily, the Party will likely hear them long before they see them.


That's one hell of a torch.

Anyways, assuming the Orcs don't carry light themselves, they'll probably see the party as soon as they establish Line of Sight to the light source or its illuminated area. The maximum range for a Spot chance would be 800 feet, but there aren't a whole lot of corridors that long, so the light distance maximum only usually comes up at night, outdoors.

Yes, unless the Orcs are moving stealthily, the party will most likely hear them before they see them. Isn't it that way in most "sneaky" dungeon stories anyways?

"You hear someone coming."
"Quick! Hide! Douse the light!"

Also, MS checks are only done for people who are moving. Even armored characters who aren't moving or taking actions or making any kind of sound won't make a whole lot of noise.

This occasionally has the rather humorous effect of an armored character trying hard to stay stock still standing in the shadows while a vision-dependent contingent is passing by.

Matthew
2007-08-08, 09:10 AM
It's actually more clear in the 3e DMG rather than the 3.5e one. The distance indicated isn't just applied to characters who are actively avoiding detection. It's a general distance indicator for terrain. It's altogether possible to miss people you're trying to look for and who are trying to contact you out in the wild, so it doesn't only apply when you don't want to be found.

That's an interesting interpretation. Could you cite the 3.0 DMG page numbers. I have to say I find it a bit crazy that the maximum distance you can spot someone moving on an open plain is a quarter of a mile.


Of course, taking steps to actively hide will improve Hide and MS chances of a party significantly, so having your Scout to alert you to possible incoming parties is a huge benefit.

I'm still not clear where it says that Characters make these Hide and Sneak Checks regardless of whether they are actually hiding or sneaking, Maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying, though.


Terrain Encounter Distance isn't the only thing that affects the maximum distance. Darkness, of course, limits sighting severely, as does inclement weather.

Sure.


3e DMG. It's a useful rule to use when parties are looking for each other. Automatic Detection is useful for a whole lot of things, actually.

You're going to have to point me to the page, I'm afraid. I can't seem to find this in the 3.5 DMG.


Underdark supplement, FRCS, but I was already using rules like this before I saw that rule.

Okay. I will have to take a look at that.


Also, high flying characters who have light, or are well lighted, are exceptions to these rules, and the maximum sighting distance for them is determined using the rules from Stormwrack.

Okay


That's one hell of a torch.

Hmmn? It's just the one listed in the PHB, I think.


Anyways, assuming the Orcs don't carry light themselves, they'll probably see the party as soon as they establish Line of Sight to the light source or its illuminated area. The maximum range for a Spot chance would be 800 feet, but there aren't a whole lot of corridors that long, so the light distance maximum only usually comes up at night, outdoors.

Yes, unless the Orcs are moving stealthily, the party will most likely hear them before they see them. Isn't it that way in most "sneaky" dungeon stories anyways?

"You hear someone coming."
"Quick! Hide! Douse the light!"

Also, MS checks are only done for people who are moving. Even armored characters who aren't moving or taking actions or making any kind of sound won't make a whole lot of noise.

This occasionally has the rather humorous effect of an armored character trying hard to stay stock still standing in the shadows while a vision-dependent contingent is passing by.

So, just to be clear. You would roll a Spot Check against a Hide Check to see the light at a distance of 800'? Just for the purposes of this discussion, let's assume that everybody is magically silenced and that the corridor is indeed 1000' long and otherwise pitch black.
Walk me through how you would handle the Orcs spotting the Player Characters and point me to the rules in the 3e DMG, because I am having a hard time finding them.

Roxlimn
2007-08-08, 11:41 AM
Matthew:

The rules are in the old 3e DMG, not in the 3.5e DMG. They would be listed under the Encounter rules.



That's an interesting interpretation. Could you cite the 3.0 DMG page numbers. I have to say I find it a bit crazy that the maximum distance you can spot someone moving on an open plain is a quarter of a mile.


It isn't really empty open plains. It's got farmsteads and tall grasses and cows and such.



So, just to be clear. You would roll a Spot Check against a Hide Check to see the light at a distance of 800'? Just for the purposes of this discussion, let's assume that everybody is magically silenced and that the corridor is indeed 1000' long and otherwise pitch black.
Walk me through how you would handle the Orcs spotting the Player Characters and point me to the rules in the 3e DMG, because I am having a hard time finding them.


No. Given extreme contrast (light against pitch dark) and no intervening details, I would rule light an auto-spot. In fact, I would rule that an elevated light in pitch darkness the size of a Daylight spell would be an auto-spot in clear weather, up to line of sight, taking height into consideration.

The 3e DMG is silent in this scenario because it's not a wilderness setting, and in that case, you have to use your best judgment.

Of course, it's just the light that's spotted. Detail would be another thing entirely, and that would be purely extrapolated from 2e sources.

Matthew
2007-08-08, 10:58 PM
Matthew:
The rules are in the old 3e DMG, not in the 3.5e DMG. They would be listed under the Encounter rules.

Ah, I think you are misremebering or I am misunderstanding you. It's not an opposed Roll. Unless the Characters are actively Hiding, the Spot DC is 20, modified by size and conditions (3.0 DMG, pp. 59-60). If both fail to spot the other then detection is automatic at half distance. Interestingly, it doesn't say what happens if one group spots the other and then they close to half spotting distance. These rules are a mess.


It isn't really empty open plains. It's got farmsteads and tall grasses and cows and such.

Yeah, I get that; pretty random, though. In 2e the initial spotting distance was 1500 Yards under the best conditions (or in the case of a fire in the dark), with different degrees of clarity the closer the parties approached and otherwise modified to account for terrain and illumination.


No. Given extreme contrast (light against pitch dark) and no intervening details, I would rule light an auto-spot. In fact, I would rule that an elevated light in pitch darkness the size of a Daylight spell would be an auto-spot in clear weather, up to line of sight, taking height into consideration.

The 3e DMG is silent in this scenario because it's not a wilderness setting, and in that case, you have to use your best judgment.

Of course, it's just the light that's spotted. Detail would be another thing entirely, and that would be purely extrapolated from 2e sources.

Fair enough. I will have to take a look at the Underdark Sourcebook.

Tor the Fallen
2007-08-09, 02:00 AM
Think about it: How many guards are going to have substantial ranks in Listen/Spot, or even a Wis bonus of any kind? (Often a dump stat for those fighter-types.) Thus, I would be surprised if the DCs got much above 15, and a 7th level rogue (10 ranks, +5 dex bonus) will make that automatically. It's boring for everyone if your rogue knows he can sneak past everyone no matter what. Opposed rolls add some uncertainty.

Uh, at least one guard/guard unit. Why else assign them to guard duty?

TheOOB
2007-08-09, 02:06 AM
I've allways held my opposed rolls against the PCs for when the result is important and conflict is near. I only require stealth checks when the character is beyond a basic safe sneaking distance, and only make an opposed check when the character does something that would get their attention.

Matthew
2007-08-09, 06:17 PM
That sounds very similar to how I handle it, but how do you determine the 'basic safe sneaking distance'? By 'taking 10', like me, or some other method?

Roxlimn
2007-08-10, 01:40 PM
Matthew:



Ah, I think you are misremebering or I am misunderstanding you. It's not an opposed Roll. Unless the Characters are actively Hiding, the Spot DC is 20, modified by size and conditions (3.0 DMG, pp. 59-60). If both fail to spot the other then detection is automatic at half distance. Interestingly, it doesn't say what happens if one group spots the other and then they close to half spotting distance. These rules are a mess.


Ah. You are correct in that. It's just that my guys are usually actively Hiding, or else have astronomical Spots and don't care about being spotted so I rarely make use of the base 20 rule.

What happens when one group spots the other and they close to half distance, is that the Encounter begins and people start making opposed checks. I had thought that that was the intent.

Matthew
2007-08-10, 01:43 PM
There is no Opposed Roll for when characters are making use of stealth either, apparently. The DC is 25 + Ranks in Hide (If I remember rightly).

Heh, yeah, I know the encounter is supposed to begin once they reach half distance, but what of ambushes? There are rules for avoiding enemy patrols (which in my opinion are not very good), but there are no rules for ambushing them beyond these rather abstract, randomly determined distances.

Roxlimn
2007-08-10, 01:51 PM
Could be. I had used 15+Hide check by my notes, and that seems like I modified that from the 25+Hide rule. Didn't seem sporting to always give the Scouts impossible to beat hide chances.



Heh, yeah, I know the encounter is supposed to begin once they reach half distance, but what of ambushes? There are rules for avoiding enemy patrols (which in my opinion are not very good), but there are no rules for ambushing them beyond these rather abstract, randomly determined distances.


The way we did it is that we rolled normal party Hide check at half the distance, and if nobody moves and forces a MS check, it's a surprise round in favor of the Hiding party.

Matthew
2007-08-10, 01:56 PM
Could be. I had used 15+Hide check by my notes, and that seems like I modified that from the 25+Hide rule. Didn't seem sporting to always give the Scouts impossible to beat hide chances.

I agree.


The way we did it is that we rolled normal party Hide check at half the distance, and if nobody moves and forces a MS check, it's a surprise round in favor of the Hiding party.

Sounds like a good idea. I think I would probably continue using 'take 10' mechanics at the Half Distance juncture, which would mean the Encounter would evolve as described in my initial Post. I think I would allow a Surprise Round to occur when the Player Characters act or are discovered.

Still, the fact that they are missing the discussion about Encounter Distance from the 3.5 DMG is a pretty annoying oversight. Did it turn up in errata or anything, I wonder?

Roxlimn
2007-08-10, 02:25 PM
In fairness, the Encounter Distance still appears as Max Spot distance. You could rule it an alternate way.

Using only 3.5e rules, you could ask the party for a Spot roll, opposed by the monster's Hide scores, modified by the distance modifier on page 83 of the PHB. Same vice versa. Whoever scores better relatively spots the opposing party at the distance where the winning Spot check succeeds against the losing Hide check.

Does that sound like a reasonable replacement?

Matthew
2007-08-10, 02:40 PM
Yeah, that sounds reasonable, but I rather suspect that this was an error of editorial omission on the part of the authors of the 3.5 PHB. It should be interesting to see whether it features in the 'revised compilation' text.

I think that in the absence of a more explicit method, I'm relatively happy to continue running things the way I have been. It's definitely been an interesting discussion, though, as I have never really had need to refer to the Encounter Distance Rules.

Roxlimn
2007-08-10, 03:13 PM
Maybe that's why they never got reprinted. :smallwink:

Matthew
2007-08-10, 05:29 PM
Heh, heh. You could well be right about that.