Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Undrhil Nov 30, 2014 16:30:59	At our session tonight, we had a .... disagreement ... about how stealth works in 5th edition.   Basically, there was a guy around the corner of a building.  He rolled stealth and was hidden.   He then stepped out from around the corner of the building, which I said broke his stealth, so he wouldn't have advantage on his attack roll.  He then said that he was just peeking around the corner, so as to not break stealth.   The PHB has an entry for Hiding, which says that, during combat, the people fighting are assumed to be looking all directions, which means that breaking cover breaks stealth immediately.  However, the DM can rule that certain circumstances can allow you to keep stealth in a combat.   So, my question is this: how can I be hidden behind a building and make an attack with advantage from stealth?
#2 Illithidbix Nov 30, 2014 16:35:47	Short answer: From Surprise. Before the combat happens. It's a sniper attack, not a midst of battle attack.   The exact intent of the Stealth in combat rules is still a tad open to interpretation, I personally allow my players to hide in combat and attack with advantage when DMing. It's lightfoot halfling rogues that cause the real problem!
#3 Undrhil Nov 30, 2014 16:42:24	This was in the middle of combat, not a surprise round thing.  He was behind a building, none of us knew he was there, except the Druid who was hiding over there in the first place.  When things went south for the bad guys, he took a pot shot from his hiding place, which dropped the Druid.  However, he took that pot shot with advantage.  I could see if he had attacked anyone else, but the Druid knew he was there.    And, about peeking around a corner, I think that to make an attack from around a corner, you either have to put your whole body out there, which breaks cover, or you attack with full cover, which means you are at disadvantage from the full cover, but advantage from hiding (if you hid again) so a flat attack roll.   Is there any way to attack from around a corner without losing the hidden status?
#4 Kentus Nov 30, 2014 17:16:33	In the end the DM decides.   Normally I use (in my games) the assumption, that you only gain advantage on attacks, if the target can't see you coming and I assume, that you have your eyes around at combat. In the said situation I would argue: You couldn't know he was there and a peak view is reasonable without beeing easily seen (especially if light and the distraction of combat comes in, Dexterity (Stealth) for this) and the question would be: What kind of weapon does the attacker uses? Firing a crossbow around a corner without getting noticed fast enough would be more reasonable than a bow or sling, which needs a stance to be used effectively. Otherwise I would not deem a simple corner to be enough, since it provides a hard obstacle between both sides, which would cause the shot to fail.   But like I said, different DMs see things differently and in this case, stealth tactics are more powerful. And it makes it more reasonable to distract a group of enemies, while a sniper would get into position from another angle, which works fine in reality, but won't get rewarded by the rules normally. So a case-to-case basis after all. Maybe he waited some moments until your character made a move, which made it much harder to dodge the incoming missile. ;)
#5 bonethug0108 Nov 30, 2014 17:32:41	First, that sounds a little like DM abuse, especially when he shot the Druid with advantage. Just because you are hidden from one person doesn't mean you are hidden from all. By "RAW" that was wrong. Your DM is within his rights to do it, and if he had a story reason I could understand, but it sounds a little like he was being a jerk.   Second, just because you are looking in all directions doesn't mean you are looking in all directions at once. Were you fighting in enemy that would have you looking in that direction? Well you likely saw him. Were you fighting an enemy that would have you with your back turned? Well you likely didn't see him. But it's up to the DM. The only thing you do know is where the "shot" came from(if you were the one getting hit).   Third, the stealth rules are intentionally vague because they should be ruled on a case by case basis. But the DM shouldn't be using them just to screw the players over.
#6 cowleymen Nov 30, 2014 21:20:24	Stealth is another thing that is greatly helped with some good roleplay. I will always reward good descriptive actions. Even if your only say a sentance or two, powerful word choice is always powerful. Not to mention it will help your DM decide things if he knows in better detial what you are/wanting to do.
#7 Psikerlord Nov 30, 2014 22:49:47	DM discretion/ruling. Such is the way of 5e in general, and stealth in particular.
#8 bawylie Nov 30, 2014 23:27:37	I'd rule that a person can peek around cover and mark targets while maintaining stealth. You've already asked for a stealth roll by this time and it seems to me this sort of thing is covered by that roll.    Once you launch your Attack, you're still hidden until the attack is resolved. After which point, you've given up your position. You might retreat to cover, but your position is relatively certain. Before that point, when you rolled stealth, your position was uncertain & would remain uncertain until a) you did something (for me this has to be an action or significant movement - more than 5') that warrants a change of circumstances or b) someone else changed the circumstances, maybe moving so you're now in Line of Fire (you might still have some cover), or searching for you and finding you.    In other words, I want you as my player to be able to do cool stealth stuff. If it costs you an action, you're getting a benefit from it. To undo something that cost you an action, I feel I must make a reciprocal effort at least.
#9 rghammill Dec 01, 2014 6:16:08	I'm not a fan of the whole 'mark' thing, but other than that I agree. The rules even support that as written.   One of the things that I think confuses people is that you might view the stealth/perception check as determining whether he's hidden. But since there is but one check per round, it's actually covering the actions of that round, including whether the druid notices him jumping out to attack.    In the case of the druid under the circumstances you've described, I would have ruled that when the guy rolled his stealth check, that the druid would have advantage on his opposing perception check, since he knew where he was and is presumably keeping an eye on that location. If the druid succeeded, then the hiding character wouldn't have advantage on his attack, because as soon as he came out the druid would see him. But if the druid failed the check, the hiding character would have advantage, having fooled him as to when or where (high, low, etc.) he jumps out to attack. However, if the druid opted to ready an attack for when the character jumped out, the advantage would be lost.   Ilbranteloth
#10 OoftaMeg Dec 01, 2014 7:53:04	The rules on stealth are pretty vague, especially once you get into combat.  I try to be consistent in my rulings and explain to people how I rule.   My general guidelines: For most characters it takes an action to hide (people tend to forget). The general assumption is that if the enemy is aware of a threat they are actively looking and (unless distracted) it's very difficult to get advantage using stealth. Before combat starts, it depends a lot on the situation.  I try to give PCs a chance to get stealth but it's not always going to always happen.  If the guards are alert and watching it's going to be very difficult. Most guards are not always alert and watching Once combat starts, the enemy may be distracted by someone they are fighting (within limits) I generally use a "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice" logic.  Pop out from behind cover and do a range attack once, ok.  Do it a second time, they're expecting you. This is just how I rule, you should figure out what makes sense and will be fun for the group.  Let your players know how you are going to rule so they know what to expect.  Remember too, that any rules the characters use, the bad guys can use as well.
#11 iserith Dec 01, 2014 7:57:27	bawylie wrote:
#12 AndyDay Dec 02, 2014 10:13:24	As an avid player of first person shooters, I find that stealth and surprise should be a bit more prevalent in combat situations.   In a shooter, I know enemies are there. I know their number. Often, I know their general directioni. But when one pops out from the right side of a wall-and I'm looking left-I'm surprised, and hosed.   Now, not to say I"m going to get nearly this nuanced in an RPG. But the point is, in my opinion, stealth is more than just being unseen. It's also being surprising. To that effect, I have in the past allowed PCs to "surprise" an opponent by drawing and using an unexpected weapon. Even if they're standing in plain sight, the enemy might just not be ready for the swordman to flick a dagger at them.
#13 guachi Dec 02, 2014 20:01:55	OoftaMeg wrote:
#14 Plaguescarred4 Dec 03, 2014 7:05:33	Undrhil wrote:
#15 TheLoneRanger1979 Dec 05, 2014 5:55:18	AndyDay wrote:
#16 TonyBuc Dec 05, 2014 6:42:42	Generally the type of tactic you are describing is sort of the intent of the rules.   He should easily be able to lean out from behind the building and take a shot before he is noticed.    The gray area is if the target knows the character is behind the building and watching the area.    If the target is expecting the shooter to pop out and take a pot shot than it is pretty clear the shooter would not get advantage.    This type of descision is at the whim of the person running the game as each scenario is unique.     If I were DMing, I would allow the tactic once.   If the shooter tried to pop in and out again and shoot the same target I certainly would not give him an advantage.   I would not even force a perception check at that point.   Though if the shooter was moving around the battlefield poping behind cover and poping out in a difficult to predict fashion I could see allowing advantage on any shot if his stealth beat the targets perception.
#17 Slyck314 Dec 05, 2014 9:27:06	I personally let my rogue get away with it on a regular basis. Its entirely based on appropriate cover being available and a hide roll succeeding. It doesn't really make him more dangerous then when he's in melee relying on an ally being adjacent for his sneak attack. Also I don't see this "hidden" as the enemies being completely ignorant of his existence, if they want to avoid the sneak attack the just have to walk around the cover to spot him.
#18 Undrhil Dec 20, 2014 14:16:26	As I said, in this instance, the Druid had been behind a building.  The enemy came up to him and attacked, causing the Druid to flee from behind the building.  On the enemy's next turn, it attacked the Druid with advantage and dropped him.  I complained that the enemy shouldn't have had advantage since the Druid (at the very least) knew the guy was behind the building, but the guy stepping out from behind the building to attack would have stopped him from behing hidden, regardless.  So, the DM said that he just peeked around the corner and attacked with advantage anyway because of the cover of the building.  I didn't even think about the fact that the guy couldn't have been hidden since he didn't take an action to hide and he isn't a Rogue character, from what I remember of the mod.
#19 Noon Dec 20, 2014 19:52:55	Undrhil wrote:
#20 Noctaem Dec 21, 2014 7:08:50	Noon wrote: