So, when using this combo in battle..im a little confused on how some things can or should play out.
So, say you are using the grid system, 5 feet, etc, and you cast darkness say, on your staff, orb..or a movable object that moves with you. It has a 15ft radius, so it effectively covers about 12 squares, 3 in each direction, and im guessing 15 ft high?
regardless on that point though..based on the rules, and logically the way cover works, you shouldn't gain any kind of actual cover bonus. Others can't see in, or see through it, so I would gain advntage of attack rolls and they get disadvantage on me. And they have blinded status set in, meaning, which is kinda similiar.
That being said..how does/should the DM portray they AI in this. Do they guess at a particular square I may be in..and roll..but auto miss if im not there. Logically maybe the enemy thinks to hit the target center..which in this game..I would be. But what if you cast it on say a rock..or a tree. You say start in 1 square of darkness, attack and reveal your position..then move after attacking to a different position. Should the enemy always still be able to attack you at disadvanage and still be able to hit..regardless of where you actually are? Ideally if there are multiple enemies and the enemy is guessing and locations and they miss, then the next enemy might hit another target.
But if they cant' see..how do they even know they hit..to know if they choose to target the same location. (this is speaking from a "ranged" type of attack, as melee is a little different)
on a similar note..if you are fighting someone on a eye level field..and if they can't see in..then they can't see through..and if your near say a corner they can't move around..the amount of spaces you can occupy..even out of the darkness itself can greatly increase..which can make this..grossly over powered.
But int he same aspect..if they can still hit..at disadvantage always..and not guess..I mean..the DM can just say they always guess right..how should a DM handle that kind of situation?
I am playing a ranged warlock..and rolling for HP..so sitting here at level 4..I only have 16 HP..so I need to find ways to actually be able live through..1 round of combat.
But this kind of situation..is really confusing on how it should play out.
I would expect things like wolves..and such to be able to rely on other senses to find me..fair..but for like..ranged people..im unsure. In one direction..and from a logical and RP standpoint..this is just so overpowered its ridiculous..but if you go by pure rule standings..then it would be a pointless thing to try and defend yourself with..because with 12 ac..even disadvantage rolls are still likely to hit you almost all the time.
They can guess by sound... or by "I attack the centre of the unnatural darkness."
They could also use AoE to try and flush you out.
Yunru wrote:
Aha!
http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4149876
That took some searching. The last couple pages if this topic ended up nosediving into a discussion of how blindness and Darkness work for exactly the situations you're describing.
My own advice, is to just roll with what seems reasonable. Do you think it makes sense for someone to have any idea where the target is (at least with enough accuracy to target the correct 5ft cube) from 120ft away? Basically, the rules allow for knowing where something is by sound, and you have disadvantage on the attack, whether you were lucky and guessed the right square or you knew which square the enemy was in somehow. The Hide action exists to prevent people from knowing which square you're in, implying that if you don't take that action, your location is known. But the rules here are really bare. You're supposed to rule this stuff situationally.
Macv12 wrote:
"Just" disadvantage is by no mean feat a small thing. If you're that worried, dip 2 into Rogue and Hide as a bonus action at the end of each of your turns.
Yunru wrote:
as for spells most of them require you to SEE your target. If you cant see the target you cant target them with spells. I think the same goes for ranged attacks with bows as well.
Also for on page 194 it has an unseen attackers and targets. It states "When you attack a target you cant see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the targets location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automaticly miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not wether you guessed the target's location correctly."
So it looks like you Guess a square. Get disadvantage on the attack roll. And auto miss if you guess wrong.
Why no multiclassing allowed?
Ninja_Ferret wrote:
Rydis wrote:
Ok so there's a few problems with your post and some of the responses you have gotten. First off:
Just because you cannot be seen (invisibility, in darkness, etc) does not mean creatures around you do not know which square you are IN. That is reserved totally and completely for the HIDDEN condition which requires you to roll stealth and beat the passive perception of the creatures around you. So, there's no guess work at all without rolling stealth to hide.
Second, you are correct in saying that if you are in the darkness cloud and do not have a mode of vision capable of seeing through the darkness (a Spell, Darkvision, Blindsight, Tremorsense, and True Sight) you will be considered Blinded for the purposes of making attacks for example. Your opponents will also receive penalties (treating you as being invisible) for attacking you from outside darkness or will be considered blinded while inside it unless they have a special sense.
Should you roll stealth and beat passive perceptions, they must then either guess which square you are in or make an active perception check to try to find you. Should they then succeed, they know which square you are in but still receive all penalties because you're in darkness and not visible IF ANY.
If you have any other questions feel free to ask or you can read the guide I made, it could help:
http://community.wizards.com/forum/rules-questions/threads/4148631
Rydis wrote:
All I can say is how I would handle this situation. Assuming at least a semi-intelligent ranged attacker, I woud usually start with visible targets over an individual just shooting into darkness. If it was the case that you are still the most obvious target, then I would have the attacker use one of the following tactics:
1. Aim for last known position. If you just throw up darkness and stand there, you will be just relying on disadvantage.
2. If your darkness is static, and you move around, then proabably do some form of random targeting modified on if you attacked (reverse trajectory) or if they could reasonably hear you. Moving and making a stealth action will certainly increase this range to include the whole area. If your darkness is moving around with you, it might be reasonable for a quick INT check to see if the attackers would realize you should be in the center of it.
3. If there are multiple ranged attackers, then they could coordinate as a group and attack with a spread where you would only have to worry about 1 out of X actually targeting your square.
These are just what I would do for target selection. The most important thing as DM is holding your creatures to the same expectations you would have if the situation was reversed and the characters needed to shoot ranged attacks at an monster hidden in darkness.
Ninja_Ferret wrote:
The thing about knowing which square someone is in makes sense, even from a RL perspective. I am sure that most people with kids can attest to the fact that they know "where" their kids are by sound - even when it is dark and the kids are sneaking out of bed in the dead of night. The human ear is remarkably accurate in pinpointing noise to within a 2-3ft distance (and seeing as creatures occupy 5foot squares, this is good enough to know their location).
Yes, you might not know exactly where they are (which is why you suffer disadvantage), but the game assumes that unless you take the hide action, you are making noise - and performing other activities that give away your position, even when the opponent is blinded (or you are invisible).
Rydis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
"Combatiants often try to escape their foes' notice by hiding, casting an invisibility spell, or lurking in darkness." Page 194 first paragraph of unseen attackers and targets. This makes me believe that you dont have to be HIDDEN to follow these rules. No where in the rules does it state everyone knows where you are at all times unless you use stealth. This set of rules here states otherwise. Meaning you can LURK in a Darkness spell to be hidden and gain the benifits from it. IE the attacker has to guess your square and has disadvantage. Stealth is just ONE way to gain the benifits of unseen attackers and targets. Being invisible and being in a darkness spell are a couple of others.
Again a Marco polo game is a exellent example of how this should play out. Or a game of tag where the tager is blindfolded.
There are many ways you can adjust and rule this kind of thing. You could also make passive perception change things. A higher chance to pick the right square. and so forth. Honestly From what i have seen on these forums in my last week of lurking and posting is you will more then likely get a 50/50 of interpretation of the rules. I havent seen many threads (of the ones i have looked at) Where everyone agrees on something.
Rydis wrote:
Ninja_Ferret wrote:
Ninja_Ferret wrote:
Rydis wrote:
randl wrote:
Rydis wrote:
Rydis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Drop some Int. 10 is baseline/best-normal, so 12 is still "smart". That means you can boost Con to 14 granting +4 HP. That should help you survive until next level, where you can pick up Armor of Shadows.
Yunru wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Rydis wrote:
Hidden = Unheard, Unseen and creatures do not know where you are.
Invisible and Darkness = Unseen.
Are we seriously going to argue that you need to roll stealth to gain hidden to do what it, and only it allows you to do in the rules as per the rules? Why have hidden condition at all if you can be unseen and unheard and have creatures not know where you are if all it takes is being invisible or be in darkness? I think that this confusion is stemming from the early editions of DnD. This stuff has evolved since then at least since 4e. The rules state very clearly that in order to become hidden you have to roll stealth. It also lists exactly what being hidden gives you. And finally it also lists very clearly that being invisible is NOT being hidden and that other creatures still know exactly where you are.
Noctaem wrote:
Rydis, If you are Hidden, then the enemy does not know where you are.
This is *NOT THE SAME* as saying 'if you are not Hidden, the enemy always knows where you are"
Using your Stealth to be Hidden covers all sorts of things; success means they can't see you, can't hear you, no tracks, no causing candles to flicker..etc...etc...
Being invis does not guarantee all of that, but it does mean they can't see you, so they are forced to rely on hearing you, or seeing tracks, etc. As the rulebook clearly tells us, 'the fundemental tasks of adventuring...rely heavily on being able to see'. This is why it becomes easier to Hide when there is visual obscurement, but audio obscurement is not explicitly helpful. When trying to pinpoint where someone is, vision is *MUCH* more effective than hearing. Some folks want to treat them the same.....
Think of it this way. If you are in a large field, and there are two bad guys somewhere in the field. One is invisible, one is not.
Can you track both of them just as easily?? Some here would say 'Yes"... do you agree with that approach? If you think it makes sense that you can always hear an invisible person 100' away - well enough to know *exactly* which square he is in - then play it that way. But to me that is non-sensical.
If the invisible person (or person in Darkness) is nearby, or particularly loud, or bumps into a table.... then sure, you can tell where they are (or have a better chance). But someone a distance away...... do you really think you will know exactly where they are?
The rules say you 'can' detect someones location via sound... that is not the same as saying you 'do' or 'will' or 'always can' detect that... it is just saying it is *possible*. You *can* win the basketball game with a half-court shot... doesn't mean it always happens... it means it is a possibility.
You are correct, the Darkness-Devil sight is a *very* powerful combo, possibly broken. But it also has some limitations
Allies: Unless you start in a large field, your darkness is going to hamper your allies a bunch too. Trying to use this in a 20x40 room isn't going to work out as well.
Target: It may make you the primary target. Mooks may try and 'flood the zone'... rushing into the darkness to try and grapple you or whatever. Or they may dump AoE spells they would normally reserve.
Enemies may end up retreating, which can be good or bad, depending on what you cast Darkness on, and where they retreat to.
Orethalion wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Rydis wrote:
You also have to keep in mind that the game also states that you call for checks like this when they are meaninful. I think iserith says it best but there's no reason to ask someone to roll stealth vs someone 600 feet away. It's just not meaningful in most cases. I mean unless you're moving through a field in front of a castle trying to evade the sentries using stealth, sure ok that's meaningful but you have to use your judgement to see if there's the risk of failure involved.
In combat, if you're in a cloud of darkness you aren't hidden and everyone knows which square you're in. That's just fact. If you roll hidden and succeed to beat passive perception you are unseen + unheard + no one knows which square you're in and have to either guess or roll an active perception check. There is no other way to gain this benefit in the rules. But again this only applies to times when there's a chance of failure. If you have a character on one side of a continent there's 0 chance of some random peasant knowing where you are or even at a lesser scale where you are in the same city. but that's not what the rules for hidden and stealth were designed for. It's not about that kind of situation and bringing that up is just a disingenous argument.
In your post above you say you cast it 100 feet away and then approach to within 10 feet. At some point (decided by the circumstances and DM) creatures will notice the blob of darkness moving toward them and/or will hear you. That's what stealth is for, to be unseen and unheard and not have creatures know where you are.
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
In order to be hidden you must be unseen. Making too much noise makes you lose hidden. So by definition if you are hidden you are unseen and unheard + no one knows where you are. What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Just because you can't move doesn't mean you're restrained.... You can't just claim to be hidden when you haven't taken the action which is specifically required to become hidden -> Rolling a stealth check and beating the passive perception of stuff around you. How can you be hidden without taking the action to become hidden in the first place? This isn't even ambiguous, the rules literally REQUIRE you to roll stealth to become hidden, there's no other listed way of achieving hidden. Show me where the "hard rules" say you can become hidden without rolling stealth. What you've quoted so far doesn't say that at all. All you've quoted is basically the requirements to be/remain hidden, being unseen and arguably unheard.
Rydis wrote:
Long live common sense and DM-as-adjudicator empowerment!
If the OP still cares...
Darkness means you cannot be seen.
You have advantage on attacks against creatures that can't see you.
Creatures that can't see you have disadvantage on attacks against you.
Creatures determine a square to attack (PHB, p 194 "Making and Attack" - the first step is to choose a target, "a creature, an object, or a location" If they can't see you, then it can still be a "location", i.e., a square it thinks you're in). If you are not in it, it automatically misses.
Creatures can still make a passive perception check to notice you without trying (hear your breathing, smell you, whatever) with a -5 if they have disadvantage, or a +5 if they have advantage (PHB, p 177).
Those are the automatic outcomes of being unseen as per the text of the PHB. You can have situational outcomes that affect action moving forward - trying to hide with a Stealth check, active perception checks from monsters, attack with surprise, etc. Situational outcomes will require ajudication by the dice or DM. Simply standing in a big magical cloud does not automatically mean you are hidden. You can be, but it takes agency or action on your part.
Personally, as a DM, if you don't say "I'm trying to hide (or not be seen, heard, smelled, whatevs) from that creature", when it is close enough to trigger a passive check, I would assume you aren't hiding. So, you might be unconciously shifting your weight and letting your armor clank, or whatever it is that might happen if you aren't making an active effort to be undetected.
HTH.
Noctaem wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
feartheminotaur wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
My friend just cast cause deafness on the hobgoblin. I then cast darkness on myself. But alas, the hobgoblin still knows where I am because I have not yet taken an action to make a hide check. Woe is me!
Noctaem wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
feartheminotaur wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Undrhil wrote:
Rydis wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Assuming the lack of unusual or extenuating circumstances, of course...
But yes. If someone can neither see nor hear you, it seems they failed to notice you by default. Thus you are hidden from them.
But I'm just speaking from the POV of a DM using common sense...
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Honestly? I don't really care about the technicality of it. I'm not a RAWior.
When you parse something down enough, you can often make it say all kinds of odd things.
I think the RAI is clear though. If someone is unaware of you (can't see or hear you generally being good enough in most circumstances), that's "hidden".
Is everyone missing the obvious first paragraph. Should i quote it AGAIN?
"Combatiants often try to escape their foes' notice by hiding , casting the invisibility spell. or lurking in darkness."
Now why would they mention all these ways to escape notice if the only way to do that was by a stealth check. Why wouldnt they just say by passing a stealth check? WHY ? Because there is more ways to be unobserved then just hiding and a stealth check.
Now onto the second paragraph.
"When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you are guessing the targets location or targeting a creature you can hear but not see.. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automaticly miss, but the DM typically says the attack just missed. not whether you guessed the target's location or not."
Now this says when they try to target you they get disadvantage. Now it never says when you have to guess or when you know they are there. A common sense judgement call is needed here for dms it seems. but if you guess wrong you miss.
So going by your logic you are only hidden when you use the stealth roll to hide. Right?
So objects cant make a stealth roll. Thus i always know where every object in the world is. No more seceret doors. No more hidden traps. Sorry DM. Your rules. Unless it makes a stealth roll it cant be hidden thus everyone knows EXACTLY where it is.
Weighing in on a few things discussed so far.
While RAW only lists one way of explicitly gaining the hidden status, I'm with the majority that says there are other possible ways of gaining the hidden status. The square and rectangle example above is an excellent demonstration of why. As mentioned, nowhere does RAW restrict the hidden status to the hide action. Noct has basically ignored the valid points others have made, all his responses amount to attacks, never responses, but he is right that the only RAW guarantee of the hidden status is the hide action. RAW defines the hidden status as being unseen, unheard, and location unknown. It seems reasonable to me that if you achieve all of these through other means you should be hidden, by argument of equivalence. How does a creature know where you are? Usually by either seeing or hearing you. Is this stated? Kind of, indirectly, in a few places. PHB 291 for example.
Invisible
- An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense. For the purpose of hiding the creature is considered heavily obscured. The creatures location can be detected by any noise it makes and any tracks it leaves.
- Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creatures attack rolls have advantage.
So, if you are invisible, have pass without trace on you, and are wearing elvenkind boots, your location cannot be detected by any of the criteria mentioned. This strongly implies that the creatures location would be unknown, unless there exists another circumstance that would reveal the your location, despite not having taken a hide action. If you disagree I think we could make a case of specific beats general. Otherwise I'm confident a majority opinion will disagree with you, tweet the devs otherwise if you want to convince me.
Using this as a precedent, if you are in a situation where you would gain the same benefits of invisibility, the same reasoning should apply that you can gain the hidden status without hiding.
If for any reason (r):
- You cannot be seen without the aid of magic or a special sense.
- Attack rolls against you have disadvantage because of r
- Your attack rolls have advantage because of r
Then:
- For the purpose of hiding, the creature is considered heavily obscured.
- Your location cannot be detected so long as the creature can hear no noise you make or see tracks you leave.
Darkness qualifies under this chain of reasoning. There are other examples in the PHB that are similarly not going to be direct enough to convince a combative rules lawyer who has already made his mind. But I hope this is a convincing RAW example to the rest of you.
While it is rediculous to claim that every creature automatically knows where every other creature is, the combat rules are reasonably clear that this is the default state by RAW. You essentially have 360 degree awareness to an undefined distance. Nocts stance very programatic and would not actually fly in something like a courtroom or most tables for that matter. There exist several examples which hint that he is wrong rather than directly contradicting him. He can debate this point in a mathematical sense with formal proofs without utterly losing. Outside of a formal proof environment I find his argument unconvincing.
The unseen attackers clause on page 184 does not say to me that an invisible character or a character lurking in darkness is hidden and it does not say that unseen and unheard grants hidden explicitly. The three examples listed are directly relevant to the second paragraph as times where disadvantage is applied to attacks. They are not used as alternative examples of when you are hidden, rather they are examples of unseen as section title supports. Invisibility is particularly clear on that point.
I think a fair abstraction is that if you evade all of the primary senses of a creature it should not know where you are, regardless of what those senses are, whether it's using echolocation, blindsense, smell, taste, etc. I'm of the opinion that unseen and unheard are standins for the primary senses that most creatures use, and if hidden -> unseen, unheard, and location unknown then it seems reasonable that having all of those -> hidden. This applies until the DM has another means by which a character can detect your location. Environmental issues such as heavy dust would make your tracks more evident, heavy rain might leave a sillouette, a cone spell may leave a missing imprint where it hits a person in the darkness bubble. All of the above are places where an abstraction of the rules, combined with the judgement of the DM is necessary to bring the world to life in a predictable way that doesn't frustrate the table.
Regarding a moving darkness cloud by casting it on an object. I think a clear reading of the rules is fairly self-evident. I'll highlight some of the parts if 4 paragraphs is too many rules to read.
PHB 204.
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. The spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect.
Sphere
You select a sphere's point of origin, and the sphere extends outward from that point. The sphere's size is expressed as a radius in feet that extends from that point.
A sphere's point of origin is included in the sphere's area of effect.
Darkness PHB 230
Range: 60 feet
...
Magical darkness radiates from a point you choose to fill a 15-foot-radius sphere for the duration. The darkness spreads around corners. A creature with darkvision cant see through this darkness, and non-magical light can't illuminate it.
If the point you choose is on an object you are holding, or one that isn't being worn or carried, the darkness emanates from the object and moves with it. ...
WizardV wrote:
Rydis wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
As others have pointed out, I would agree that from a strict RAW perspective, people probably know where you are unless you take the hide action.
In addition, there are situations where even if you are in a cloud of darkness a (ranged) attacker may still know where you are well enough to still target you with disadvantage:
- you are in a 5 ft wide corridor or have other obstacles blocking your movement. Since you can only move along the same line that the missile is going to travel anyway, it doesn't really matter.
- It's relatively quiet where you are, and you're on a hard surface. Wearing clogs.
I'd still probably let you move and give a stealth check (disadvantage for the clogs maybe) without taking an action. - There are multiple ranged attackers and one just hit you. That probably made enough noise (and you probably involuntarily said "oww") so that others can target.
- You just cast a spell and the enemy attackers had readied actions to fire back before you have a chance to move.
But this is why we have a DM, not a computer running our games. So they can look at a situation and say "does this make sense".
Stealth and hiding is one of the biggest areas left up to DM discretion in the book and I think that's fantastic.
Orethalion wrote:
1eejit wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
It seems that you've conceded that you do need to roll a stealth check (which was the point I was discussing with you), you've just now shifted your argument to be that a DM can give a free stealth check to a player instead of that player taking the action to hide. Which is a ruling any DM can make arbitrarily. So there's not much more we can discuss since you're now resting your entire statement on DM fiat and how you would rule at your table. Bye!
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
1eejit wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
1eejit wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
1eejit wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Now, to address the issue of Hidden=Unseen + Unheard. I agree with the gist of your argument. There are ways of being 'hidden' without making a Hide/Stealth check. Hidden just means they don't know where you are.
But I don't think Unseen and Unheard is necessarily an exhaustive list. If you are invisible with a silent spell, and wading through 2-3 feet of water.... you are not 'hidden'. There is no 'hidden' condition, you are never 'hidden' like you could be invisible, or unconscious, or poisoned. Hidden only makes sense as a comparison, you are "hidden from...." like you would be "Taller than...." If someone doesn't know where you are... you are hidden from them. If they can see you, they know where you are. If they can hear you, they - likely - know where you are. If they can see your passage through water, or smoke, or flour, they know where you are.
That said, if you step behind a rock, so I can't see you and can't hear you..... I still know where you are, and would not consider that 'hidden'.
Orethalion wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Lucas_Blackstone wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
I would recommend that we not call the hidden condition or the act of hiding a skill. It's not. Stealth is a skill which allows you to become hidden and creates the DC needed to find someone who is hiding. But hiding itself is not.
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote: