Spell Question: Fog Cloud - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Synjin Oct 14, 2014 15:30:41	The text reads: Fog Cloud 1st-level conjuration Casting Time: 1 action Range: 120 feet Components: V, S Duration: Concentration, up to 1 hour You create a 20-foot-radius sphere of fog centered on a point within range. The sphere spreads around corners, and its area is heavily obscured. It lasts for the duration or until a wind of moderate or greater speed (at least 10 miles per hour) disperses it. At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the radius of the fog increases by 20 feet for each slot level above 1st. According to the PHB183, "heavily obscured" creates the "Blinded" condition in Appendix A. That text reads: Blinded • A blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight. • Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage. My question is if a caster drops Fog Cloud around his target(s), the party is essentially firing in at the targets blind especially if the target inside goes first and moves a step or two to the side? Shouldn't there be Disadvantage to attack on both sides?
#2 Overpromises Oct 14, 2014 16:18:13	Synjin wrote:
#3 Gnarl Oct 14, 2014 17:17:17	Synjin wrote:
(Reply to #3) 2Chlorobutanal	Two blind creatures mutually having disadvantage on attacks isn't that much different than two blind creatures having unmodified attacks against each other. The main use of a fog cloud is to obscure vision, which trumps the need for disadvantage on attack rolls in most cases, as without a (non-sight-based) perception check, the attackers can't find the targets to effectively "target" them in the first place.
#5 paulstrait Oct 14, 2014 20:13:02	Yeah, it is stupid only if you think the spell should be doing something that it isn't really designed to do (nor has ever been in previous editions designed to do). The spell has always been more of a defensive spell than an offensive one.
#6 lawrencehoy Oct 14, 2014 22:20:01	I agree, the spell is still useful; it can be used to overcome an enemy's Advantage (or Disadvantage imposed by an enemy), balancing out such Advantage/Disadvantage situations. Also, it would be even more useful to the party with members that have the Blingsight ability, who wouldn't have Disadvantage under such circumstances.
#7 Mind_Flayer_Monk Oct 15, 2014 5:37:41	I could see building whole party combat strategies based on just fighting in a fog cloud every combat.
#8 Timborama Oct 15, 2014 5:59:31	Fog Cloud+Run Away Fog Cloud+Spike Growth Fog Cloud+Ready Action Ranged Attack (perhaps you can convince your DM you see them first before they see you, giving you advantage) Fog Cloud+Everybody Hide Those are the classic situations for Fog Cloud, to me, and that's just off the top of my head! Anyone got any others? Maybe Fog Cloud+Silence? Or defensive versions that involve sight like Fog Cloud=Enemy can't teleport Fog Cloud=Enemy can't cast an offensive spell/attack Fog Cloud=Enemy attacks outside of it with disadvantage (maybe)
#9 Nevvur Oct 15, 2014 7:13:33	Everyone forgetting you can break up your movement? Best use I can imagine is in terrain with no other cover/concealment, to cast it on the party's artillery types. Move out of fog, take a shot, then move back into the fog.
#10 raleel Oct 15, 2014 7:41:58	Also handy for combatting basilisks and medusa. can't see, can't be petrified.
#11 BW0222 Oct 15, 2014 8:50:15	You also have to remember that if you can't see (or otherwise detect something)... you have to guess where your target is. Once you cast fog cloud... you have no idea were in the fog cloud creatures nor do they know where outside the fog cloud you are. Unless you are attacking with an area spell... its pretty hard to guess what square they are in. I don't allow characters to magically remember exact positions over large distances. In play, as soon as darkness, fog cloud, etc. is in play, I remove the figs from the map. Players can then pick squares to fire into/out of and they have no idea if the creature is still there -- baring being attacked in melee, attempting to move into their square, making some good perception checks (hearing often at a disadvantage in a noisy combat), etc. If a PC detects a creature... I'll temporary put their fig on the battlemap. If you don't want to use figs... I'd say you have a 1 in 10 chance of randomly picking where your target is unless you otherwise detect it. Of course it could move again on its next turn. Further, I don't allow them to communicate exact positions. "He is over hear" is pointless if the other PCs can see you either. Advantage and disadvantage typically becomes pointless. Fog cloud would cover a lot of squares and randomly guessing which one might contain something is extremely unlikely.
#12 Noctaem Oct 15, 2014 9:00:38	BW0222 wrote:
(Reply to #4) Clutchbone	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
#14 Jay_Ibero_911 Oct 15, 2014 10:00:50	Clutchbone wrote:
#15 paulstrait Oct 15, 2014 16:15:17	BW0222 wrote:
(Reply to #12) BW0222	Noctaem wrote:
#17 Jay_Ibero_911 Oct 15, 2014 19:09:08	Sorry, but you are explicitly wrong as far as the rules go. Unseen != Hidden. Without a successful stealth check, your location is still known, no guessing is required. Being unseen alone only imposes disadvantage. The rules are designed for balance, not perfect simulationism.
#18 paulstrait Oct 15, 2014 19:17:21	I don't think it is quite so cut and dry. The rules are remarkably vague about perceiving things that are heavily obscured. They say that you potentially can still detect locations of things that you can't see via other senses, and they give you specific rules about hiding. But--and correct me if I'm wrong--I don't believe anywhere the rules contain a line that says "You know the exact location of any creature that is not hiding." What if a creature is 100 feet away, behind 90 feet of stone. Can you detect them? They aren't even trying to hide, they are out in the open dancing around. Do you still want them to roll a stealth check? It seems like an overly rigid (and unjustifiably so) interpretation of the rules. What if someone is 2500 feet away. Do they roll a stealth check? etc. These are areas in which the DM has a lot of latitude, and should. That said, I hope for more guidance on the limits of perception in the DMG.
#19 lawrencehoy Oct 15, 2014 22:11:45	Fog Cloud would allow the creatures inside of it to Hide, with a Stealth check that would impose Disadvantage on Perception checks (or -5 to Passive Perception) due to being unseen (not being able to use sight for the Perception). So, the "guessing" game is only an action away.
#20 paulstrait Oct 15, 2014 22:30:13	Well, it begs the question of whether their precise location can be located down to the square. Again, I understand how the rules on hiding work, but I don't think there is a rule that says that you know the precise location of all real and potential enemies unless they are successfully hiding. Before they need to hide, they have to be perceivable -- again, if they are behind 90 feet of stone, seven rooms away, in the cellar while you are in the second floor of a house, etc., they don't need to make a hide check. They only have to make a hide check when the DM judges that there is an uncertain chance that they will be perceived. Whether that is caused by Fog Cloud is unclear (heavily obscured, if you will). A wall heavily obscures. Now, it seems obvious to me that if someone is taking actions, etc. within the Fog Cloud, they will need to make a stealth check to avoid detection. But there should be lots of factors like, for example, how noisy everything is. If someone is hiding in a fog cloud amidst an earthquake or while some siren is blaring, I just don't see how they are going to be detected due to some incidental noise they make. You could say, that's a hide check with a huge bonus, or an impossibly high bonus, but then we are just talking semantics. But, I'll grant that my view of how perception works appears to be a minority position, so you really don't need to argue the point here (unless you want to) -- I understand that most people tend to see it the way you do. My approach on these things, generally speaking, is to see how the players think it works when they cast it, and then, if it sets up a particularly devestating combination or tactic, it isn't long before NPCs use it against the party. The result is that players tend not to abuse powers or rulings or try to get away with shenanigans that they would be annoyed to have pulled on them.
#21 E-Tallitnics Oct 16, 2014 0:07:51	Synjin wrote:
(Reply to #17) BW0222	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#23 Noctaem Oct 16, 2014 4:11:56	BW0222 wrote:
(Reply to #22) Overpromises	BW0222 wrote:
#25 OoftaMeg Oct 16, 2014 7:31:23	I just reread the rules, and I have to agree with BW0222 that the rules are pretty vague, and a lot is left up to DM discretion. Being totally obscured allows you to hide, but says nothing about whether enemies know where you are. If I'm incorrect, please provide a page number. Let's say your character is in a room, in the middle of combat. He's about to swing his sword at the guy next to him when fog cloud gets cast and everyone is effectively blinded. Does he still know where his opponent (who hasn't had a chance to move) is? Yes. Your character has disadvantage on the attack but he can still swing. Your opponent moves around, choosing to do a melee attack instead of hide I would rule that you still know where he is since he stayed adjacent to you. You swing, once again with disadvantage but manage a hit. Your opponent swings and then withdraws without provoking an attack because your character can't see him. He still hasn't taken an action to hide. Do you know where he went? Well ... maybe. I would say that the rules are silent on this so it depends a lot on the environment. Are you in the middle of a forest? An big empty room? A hallway? Is there a pit your enemy may have jumped over? You know his general direction and I would say that if you get adjacent to him you know where he is, but finding him may require appropriate skill checks. With ranged combat it becomes tougher. Until a creature moves, you know where it is, but after that I would rule (unless the creature is hidden) you only know the general area. Why would I rule this way? The rules are silent on the issue as far as I know so I'm making judgement calls based on what it would be like to have a fight in complete darkness.
(Reply to #23) BW0222	Noctaem wrote:
#27 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 9:02:51	Yeah, I've asked people to provide support for the supposed rule that prohibits a creature from being undetectable (or undetected) without hiding. So far, no one has obliged. The rules explain what hiding does, and when you can do it, and how perception works in that case. But the rules are vague on how heavy obscurement works, probably because there's a difference between being heavily obscured by darkness but being 10 feet away, and being heavily obscured by darkness and being 50 miles away (or behind 90 feet of stone, etc.) The rules also don't indicate how precisely you can detect someone's location on the basis of non-sight senses. If you are behind a closed door, and you listen and hear someone, you clearly can know that someone is "in the room" or "behind the door." But knowing the exact 5' by 5' square (in a game where the grid is an optional variant in the first place)? Sure, you can play that way, but the RAW don't dictate it. If you haven't ever seen the room behind the door, you don't know where the walls are, or what squares are occupiable--so the idea that you can pinpoint the exact square a creature is in strikes me as a bit incredible.
(Reply to #24) BW0222	Overpromises wrote:
(Reply to #27) Overpromises	paulstrait wrote:
(Reply to #29) OoftaMeg	Overpromises wrote:
#31 Ahglock Oct 16, 2014 10:48:16	I think BW0222 has the right answer on this one. While concealment lets you hide there is no rule that says unless you hide you at automatically and precisely located. A DM determines is a test necessary and is a test possible whenever a player states a action. With something like fog cloud the DM an easily rule anyone who is past melee range requires a perception 15 test to locate, or its a automatic success or fail based on the situation.
#32 Jay_Ibero_911 Oct 16, 2014 10:58:48	The only way your location is unknown is if you are BOTH unseen AND unheard. Fog cloud makes you unseen, but not unheard. To see if you can be unheard as well, you have to make a stealth check to hide. Any other ruling COMPLETLEY NEGATES THE EXISTANCE OF THE HIDE ACTION.
(Reply to #32) OoftaMeg	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#34 eleran Oct 16, 2014 11:33:43	Why would anyone on either side of the fog be able to even target someone on the other side with a targeted attack? Don't you have to see something to target it with say an arrow or a targeted spell?
#35 Direach Oct 16, 2014 11:45:01	We recently used this spell to good effect by hitting the enemies with faerie fire before the fog cloud landed on them. They were hampered by the fog, but the DM ruled that the faerie fire provided enough illumination of the targets that we could attack them normally (without advantage). We won with hardly a scratch! Depending on your DM, your mileage may vary.
#36 Jay_Ibero_911 Oct 16, 2014 12:07:19	Ok, time to end this. The game is not a simulation, realism need not apply. U n s e e n A t t a c k e r s a n d T a r g e t s Combatants often try to escape their foes’ notice by hiding, casting the invisibility spell, or lurking in darkness. When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target’s location correctly. When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
(Reply to #34) OoftaMeg	eleran wrote:
(Reply to #36) OoftaMeg	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#39 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 13:22:07	Overpromises wrote:
#40 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 13:25:35	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
(Reply to #39) Overpromises	paulstrait wrote:
#42 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 14:26:04	You posted a rule that said that sides notice one another. You didn't post a rule that says you automatically know the location of every enemy in the world that isn't hiding from you. I don't need to explain the difference; you know it already.
#43 Noctaem Oct 16, 2014 14:42:23	Yeah guys, the rules have been provided which clearly shows how being hidden works and the restrictions which revolve around it. I've also linked the mini guide I made to help further. What Jay said is right: "Ok, time to end this. The game is not a simulation, realism need not apply." It seems everytime you guys start arguing in a thread it is primarily from this angle. And you use this to try and change the rules in the book. Stop arguing for realism in a table top RPG game. This does not make your argument valid when talking about the rules of the game. And I have to add, if you decide to houserule or change how these rules function at your table, that's your prerogative. But don't come to the rules forum and argue with them.
#44 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 15:01:39	No one is questioning how hidden works. Nor is anyone talking about realism. It is a question of the RAW -- they do not give all creatures the ability to know the location of every enemy of theirs in the multiverse that is not hiding. If you accept that premise, then the question becomes where to draw the line. You are asserting that the RAW prescribe no line, but the RAW do not. They discuss hidden, but do not state that if you exclude those who are hidden, you know the precise location of any enemy of yours in the multiverse.
(Reply to #43) OoftaMeg	Noctaem wrote:
#46 Noctaem Oct 16, 2014 16:58:16	I think that these tangent far fetched examples to disagree about how the rules in the book work, via simulationism or appealing to realism, aren't helping you make a coherent argument. Not everything is covered in the PHB. Congratulations, one of you came up with a situation that is not explicitely covered by the rules (a horn blowing in mountains shrouded in mist). That doesn't mean that the rules in the book change.
#47 Ahglock Oct 16, 2014 17:24:23	The problem is you actually don't have a rule showing that you do know where people are when obscured. The rules are silent on this issue. You are adding rules to say that if you are not hidden your location is known. That rule is no where in the book as far as I know.
#48 Noctaem Oct 16, 2014 17:38:07	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
(Reply to #46) OoftaMeg	Noctaem wrote:
#50 Noctaem Oct 16, 2014 17:55:54	Well let's explain this again. The hidden condition is what the game system uses to represent a creature you can't see nor hear. Under that condition, it's not possible to pinpoint where the creature is. The rules themselves specifically state that the creature must be unheard and unseen. So in your example, the creature blowing the horn is unheard and unseen until it blows the horn. It's position is now known because the party can hear the horn its blowing. After the horn is blown, the creautre is once again unheard and unseen and is once again hidden so the party cannot know it's location. So that's how I would follow the RAW and still resolve the situation you gave. While the creature is not blowing the horn, the creature is hidden and while it is, its position is known to the party.
(Reply to #50) OoftaMeg	Noctaem wrote:
#52 randl Oct 16, 2014 18:31:00	Noctaem wrote:
#53 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 19:20:43	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #53) AaronOfBarbaria	paulstrait wrote:
#55 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 20:11:47	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #54) randl	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #54) OoftaMeg	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#58 Ahglock Oct 16, 2014 20:28:39	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #58) AaronOfBarbaria	Ahglock wrote:
#60 paulstrait Oct 16, 2014 23:00:25	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#61 Ahglock Oct 17, 2014 7:52:18	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#62 Noctaem Oct 17, 2014 8:10:23	But again, realism/simulationist arguments are irrelevant to the game rules. Fog could make you unseen, sure. But not unheard.
(Reply to #62) OoftaMeg	Noctaem wrote:
#64 Noctaem Oct 17, 2014 8:43:51	it's simple, one of the biggest problems if it doesn't work this way is that the hidden condition becomes meaningless. Why have a condition with specific rules regarding creatures not knowing where you are and having to guess where you are while hidden if you can have the same effect just by standing in fog without additional actions? Or any of the other examples given that go against the hidden rules? If you have rules for a condition (hidden) that does exactly what you want to achieve, why not just follow them?
(Reply to #64) OoftaMeg	Noctaem wrote:
#66 Plaguescarred1 Oct 17, 2014 10:06:51	To hide you normally must already be unseen, so what would it give you by also successfully becoming uneard of if not that your position is not known anymore? The hiding rules do mention that if you make noise, you give away your position, which means that being hidden makes your position unknown so its logical to assume that if not hidden your position is known. PHB177 Hiding: You can’t hide from a creature that can see you, and if you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase), you give away your position. Both the hiding rules and the invisible condition mention that sign of an invisible creature's passage might still be noticed and that its location can be detected if it make noise or leave tracks. Since you are not unseen and heard unless you hide, we can presume your location is known even when unseen such as when invisible or heavily obscured. PHB177 Hiding: An invisible creature can’t be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, however, and it still has to stay quiet. PHB291 Invisible: The creature’s location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves. Its also confirmed in Unseen Attacker and Target when it differentiate between guessing the target’s location and targeting a creature you can hear but not see, which again to me mean that a creature that can be heard but not seen doesn't have to guess their location as its already known. PHB195 Unseen Attacker and Targets: When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see.
#67 OoftaMeg Oct 17, 2014 11:19:45	There is a difference between knowing approximate location and exact location (within 5 feet). Do you hear somebody right next to you? You probably know exactly where they are. Someone yells from a hundred yards away but you can't see them? I'd rule that you know their rough location, but not within 5 feet. If you hear someone on the other side of a closed door (or wall of totally obscuring fog) would you know exactly where they are? I would say that you know they are located somewhere in the adjacent room, not necessarily where they are in the room. It's not a contradiction, it's a judgement call of how accurate you are knowing their location. If I say that you are located somewhere in Boston, and you say you are located in 22 West Maple, apartment 22, sitting at your desk we are both correct. If a person is hidden in the adjacent room, you wouldn't even know they were there. Hear a person? You know where they are, but accuracy is up to the DM.
(Reply to #67) Timborama	OoftaMeg wrote:
#69 jonathonhawke Oct 17, 2014 12:56:01	Timborama wrote:
#70 paulstrait Oct 17, 2014 13:22:47	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #70) BlinkBlink	paulstrait wrote:
(Reply to #71) OoftaMeg	BlinkBlink wrote:
#73 Noctaem Oct 18, 2014 8:28:29	again, it's about game balance.
#74 paulstrait Oct 18, 2014 12:29:30	BlinkBlink wrote:
#75 paulstrait Oct 18, 2014 12:28:19	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #75) AaronOfBarbaria	paulstrait wrote:
(Reply to #76) OoftaMeg	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#78 AaronOfBarbaria Oct 18, 2014 21:25:02	So what, you have to roll perception to be able to target them? How is that different from trying to target a hidden creature?
#79 paulstrait Oct 18, 2014 21:27:41	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#80 paulstrait Oct 18, 2014 21:35:05	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#81 paulstrait Oct 18, 2014 21:45:12	Let me try to redirect the question a little bit. Suppose a character is heavily obscured and within the boundary of a silence spell. Furthermore, suppose that none of that character's enemies have any special senses (they are just normal humans) and none of them are doing anything particularly special to locate the character. Do they know the location of that character, down to the 5' by 5' square it is standing in, if that character does not hide? Second question. Suppose all of ones enemies are blinded and deafened. Do you need to take the hide action if you want them not to know what 5' by 5' square you are in?
(Reply to #78) OoftaMeg	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#83 Ahglock Oct 19, 2014 9:13:36	And to those scenarios you can add a dc X perception check based on factors like range, background noise, terrain etc. there is a nice chart that helps figure out what dc to use based on how hard you would think it would be. Someone who tries to hide would have that as a minimum result so even if they rolled a 1 it's still difficult due to all the other noise.

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Synjin

Oct 14, 2014 15:30:41

The text reads:

Fog Cloud
1st-level conjuration
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 120 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Concentration, up to 1 hour
You create a 20-foot-radius sphere of fog centered on a
point within range. The sphere spreads around corners,
and its area is heavily obscured. It lasts for the duration
or until a wind of moderate or greater speed (at least 10
miles per hour) disperses it.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a
spell slot of 2nd level or higher, the radius of the fog
increases by 20 feet for each slot level above 1st.

According to the PHB183, "heavily obscured" creates the "Blinded" condition in Appendix A. That text reads:

Blinded
• A blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails
any ability check that requires sight.
• Attack rolls against the creature have advantage, and
the creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage.

My question is if a caster drops Fog Cloud around his target(s), the party is essentially firing in at the targets blind especially if the target inside goes first and moves a step or two to the side? Shouldn't there be Disadvantage to attack on both sides?

Overpromises

Oct 14, 2014 16:18:13

Synjin wrote:

Gnarl

Oct 14, 2014 17:17:17

Synjin wrote:

(Reply to #3)

2Chlorobutanal

Two blind creatures mutually having disadvantage on attacks isn't that much different than two blind creatures having unmodified attacks against each other.

The main use of a fog cloud is to obscure vision, which trumps the need for disadvantage on attack rolls in most cases, as without a (non-sight-based) perception check, the attackers can't find the targets to effectively "target" them in the first place.

paulstrait

Oct 14, 2014 20:13:02

Yeah, it is stupid only if you think the spell should be doing something that it isn't really designed to do (nor has ever been in previous editions designed to do). The spell has always been more of a defensive spell than an offensive one.

lawrencehoy

Oct 14, 2014 22:20:01

I agree, the spell is still useful; it can be used to overcome an enemy's Advantage (or Disadvantage imposed by an enemy), balancing out such Advantage/Disadvantage situations.

Also, it would be even more useful to the party with members that have the Blingsight ability, who wouldn't have Disadvantage under such circumstances.

Mind_Flayer_Monk

Oct 15, 2014 5:37:41

I could see building whole party combat strategies based on just fighting in a fog cloud every combat.

Timborama

Oct 15, 2014 5:59:31

Fog Cloud+Run Away

Fog Cloud+Spike Growth

Fog Cloud+Ready Action Ranged Attack (perhaps you can convince your DM you see them first before they see you, giving you advantage)

Fog Cloud+Everybody Hide

Those are the classic situations for Fog Cloud, to me, and that's just off the top of my head!

Anyone got any others?

Maybe Fog Cloud+Silence?

Or defensive versions that involve sight like

Fog Cloud=Enemy can't teleport

Fog Cloud=Enemy can't cast an offensive spell/attack

Fog Cloud=Enemy attacks outside of it with disadvantage (maybe)

Nevvur

Oct 15, 2014 7:13:33

Everyone forgetting you can break up your movement? Best use I can imagine is in terrain with no other cover/concealment, to cast it on the party's artillery types. Move out of fog, take a shot, then move back into the fog.

#10

raleel

Oct 15, 2014 7:41:58

Also handy for combatting basilisks and medusa. can't see, can't be petrified.

#11

BW0222

Oct 15, 2014 8:50:15

You also have to remember that if you can't see (or otherwise detect something)... you have to guess where your target is. Once you cast fog cloud... you have no idea were in the fog cloud creatures nor do they know where outside the fog cloud you are. Unless you are attacking with an area spell... its pretty hard to guess what square they are in.

I don't allow characters to magically remember exact positions over large distances. In play, as soon as darkness, fog cloud, etc. is in play, I remove the figs from the map. Players can then pick squares to fire into/out of and they have no idea if the creature is still there -- baring being attacked in melee, attempting to move into their square, making some good perception checks (hearing often at a disadvantage in a noisy combat), etc. If a PC detects a creature... I'll temporary put their fig on the battlemap. If you don't want to use figs... I'd say you have a 1 in 10 chance of randomly picking where your target is unless you otherwise detect it. Of course it could move again on its next turn. Further, I don't allow them to communicate exact positions. "He is over hear" is pointless if the other PCs can see you either.

Advantage and disadvantage typically becomes pointless. Fog cloud would cover a lot of squares and randomly guessing which one might contain something is extremely unlikely.

#12

Noctaem

Oct 15, 2014 9:00:38

BW0222 wrote:

(Reply to #4)

Clutchbone

2Chlorobutanal wrote:

#14

Jay_Ibero_911

Oct 15, 2014 10:00:50

Clutchbone wrote:

#15

paulstrait

Oct 15, 2014 16:15:17

BW0222 wrote:

(Reply to #12)

BW0222

Noctaem wrote:

#17

Jay_Ibero_911

Oct 15, 2014 19:09:08

Sorry, but you are explicitly wrong as far as the rules go. Unseen != Hidden. Without a successful stealth check, your location is still known, no guessing is required. Being unseen alone only imposes disadvantage. The rules are designed for balance, not perfect simulationism.

#18

paulstrait

Oct 15, 2014 19:17:21

I don't think it is quite so cut and dry. The rules are remarkably vague about perceiving things that are heavily obscured. They say that you potentially can still detect locations of things that you can't see via other senses, and they give you specific rules about hiding. But--and correct me if I'm wrong--I don't believe anywhere the rules contain a line that says "You know the exact location of any creature that is not hiding." What if a creature is 100 feet away, behind 90 feet of stone. Can you detect them? They aren't even trying to hide, they are out in the open dancing around. Do you still want them to roll a stealth check? It seems like an overly rigid (and unjustifiably so) interpretation of the rules. What if someone is 2500 feet away. Do they roll a stealth check? etc.

These are areas in which the DM has a lot of latitude, and should.

That said, I hope for more guidance on the limits of perception in the DMG.

#19

lawrencehoy

Oct 15, 2014 22:11:45

Fog Cloud would allow the creatures inside of it to Hide, with a Stealth check that would impose Disadvantage on Perception checks (or -5 to Passive Perception) due to being unseen (not being able to use sight for the Perception). So, the "guessing" game is only an action away.

#20

paulstrait

Oct 15, 2014 22:30:13

Well, it begs the question of whether their precise location can be located down to the square. Again, I understand how the rules on hiding work, but I don't think there is a rule that says that you know the precise location of all real and potential enemies unless they are successfully hiding. Before they need to hide, they have to be perceivable -- again, if they are behind 90 feet of stone, seven rooms away, in the cellar while you are in the second floor of a house, etc., they don't need to make a hide check. They only have to make a hide check when the DM judges that there is an uncertain chance that they will be perceived. Whether that is caused by Fog Cloud is unclear (heavily obscured, if you will). A wall heavily obscures.

Now, it seems obvious to me that if someone is taking actions, etc. within the Fog Cloud, they will need to make a stealth check to avoid detection. But there should be lots of factors like, for example, how noisy everything is. If someone is hiding in a fog cloud amidst an earthquake or while some siren is blaring, I just don't see how they are going to be detected due to some incidental noise they make. You could say, that's a hide check with a huge bonus, or an impossibly high bonus, but then we are just talking semantics.

But, I'll grant that my view of how perception works appears to be a minority position, so you really don't need to argue the point here (unless you want to) -- I understand that most people tend to see it the way you do.

My approach on these things, generally speaking, is to see how the players think it works when they cast it, and then, if it sets up a particularly devestating combination or tactic, it isn't long before NPCs use it against the party. The result is that players tend not to abuse powers or rulings or try to get away with shenanigans that they would be annoyed to have pulled on them.

#21

E-Tallitnics

Oct 16, 2014 0:07:51

Synjin wrote:

(Reply to #17)

BW0222

Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:

#23

Noctaem

Oct 16, 2014 4:11:56

BW0222 wrote:

(Reply to #22)

Overpromises

BW0222 wrote:

#25

OoftaMeg

Oct 16, 2014 7:31:23

I just reread the rules, and I have to agree with BW0222 that the rules are pretty vague, and a lot is left up to DM discretion. Being totally obscured allows you to hide, but says nothing about whether enemies know where you are. If I'm incorrect, please provide a page number.

Let's say your character is in a room, in the middle of combat. He's about to swing his sword at the guy next to him when fog cloud gets cast and everyone is effectively blinded. Does he still know where his opponent (who hasn't had a chance to move) is? Yes. Your character has disadvantage on the attack but he can still swing.

Your opponent moves around, choosing to do a melee attack instead of hide I would rule that you still know where he is since he stayed adjacent to you.

You swing, once again with disadvantage but manage a hit. Your opponent swings and then withdraws without provoking an attack because your character can't see him. He still hasn't taken an action to hide.

Do you know where he went? Well ... maybe. I would say that the rules are silent on this so it depends a lot on the environment. Are you in the middle of a forest? An big empty room? A hallway? Is there a pit your enemy may have jumped over? You know his general direction and I would say that if you get adjacent to him you know where he is, but finding him may require appropriate skill checks.

With ranged combat it becomes tougher. Until a creature moves, you know where it is, but after that I would rule (unless the creature is hidden) you only know the general area.

Why would I rule this way? The rules are silent on the issue as far as I know so I'm making judgement calls based on what it would be like to have a fight in complete darkness.

(Reply to #23)

BW0222

Noctaem wrote:

#27

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 9:02:51

Yeah, I've asked people to provide support for the supposed rule that prohibits a creature from being undetectable (or undetected) without hiding. So far, no one has obliged. The rules explain what hiding does, and when you can do it, and how perception works in that case. But the rules are vague on how heavy obscurement works, probably because there's a difference between being heavily obscured by darkness but being 10 feet away, and being heavily obscured by darkness and being 50 miles away (or behind 90 feet of stone, etc.) The rules also don't indicate how precisely you can detect someone's location on the basis of non-sight senses. If you are behind a closed door, and you listen and hear someone, you clearly can know that someone is "in the room" or "behind the door." But knowing the exact 5' by 5' square (in a game where the grid is an optional variant in the first place)? Sure, you can play that way, but the RAW don't dictate it. If you haven't ever seen the room behind the door, you don't know where the walls are, or what squares are occupiable--so the idea that you can pinpoint the exact square a creature is in strikes me as a bit incredible.

(Reply to #24)

BW0222

Overpromises wrote:

(Reply to #27)

Overpromises

paulstrait wrote:

(Reply to #29)

OoftaMeg

Overpromises wrote:

#31

Ahglock

Oct 16, 2014 10:48:16

I think BW0222 has the right answer on this one. While concealment lets you hide there is no rule that says unless you hide you at automatically and precisely located. A DM determines is a test necessary and is a test possible whenever a player states a action. With something like fog cloud the DM an easily rule anyone who is past melee range requires a perception 15 test to locate, or its a automatic success or fail based on the situation.

#32

Jay_Ibero_911

Oct 16, 2014 10:58:48

The only way your location is unknown is if you are BOTH unseen AND unheard. Fog cloud makes you unseen, but not unheard. To see if you can be unheard as well, you have to make a stealth check to hide. Any other ruling COMPLETLEY NEGATES THE EXISTANCE OF THE HIDE ACTION.

(Reply to #32)

OoftaMeg

Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:

#34

eleran

Oct 16, 2014 11:33:43

Why would anyone on either side of the fog be able to even target someone on the other side with a targeted attack? Don't you have to see something to target it with say an arrow or a targeted spell?

#35

Direach

Oct 16, 2014 11:45:01

We recently used this spell to good effect by hitting the enemies with faerie fire before the fog cloud landed on them. They were hampered by the fog, but the DM ruled that the faerie fire provided enough illumination of the targets that we could attack them normally (without advantage). We won with hardly a scratch! Depending on your DM, your mileage may vary.

#36

Jay_Ibero_911

Oct 16, 2014 12:07:19

Ok, time to end this. The game is not a simulation, realism need not apply.

U n s e e n A t t a c k e r s a n d T a r g e t s
Combatants often try to escape their foes’ notice
by hiding, casting the invisibility spell, or lurking
in darkness.
When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have
disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether
you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting
a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in
the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but
the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not
whether you guessed the target’s location correctly.
When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on
attack rolls against it.
If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when
you make an attack, you give away your location when
the attack hits or misses.

(Reply to #34)

OoftaMeg

eleran wrote:

(Reply to #36)

OoftaMeg

Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:

#39

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 13:22:07

Overpromises wrote:

#40

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 13:25:35

Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:

(Reply to #39)

Overpromises

paulstrait wrote:

#42

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 14:26:04

You posted a rule that said that sides notice one another. You didn't post a rule that says you automatically know the location of every enemy in the world that isn't hiding from you. I don't need to explain the difference; you know it already.

#43

Noctaem

Oct 16, 2014 14:42:23

Yeah guys, the rules have been provided which clearly shows how being hidden works and the restrictions which revolve around it. I've also linked the mini guide I made to help further.

What Jay said is right:

"Ok, time to end this. The game is not a simulation, realism need not apply."

It seems everytime you guys start arguing in a thread it is primarily from this angle. And you use this to try and change the rules in the book. Stop arguing for realism in a table top RPG game. This does not make your argument valid when talking about the rules of the game.

And I have to add, if you decide to houserule or change how these rules function at your table, that's your prerogative. But don't come to the rules forum and argue with them.

#44

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 15:01:39

No one is questioning how hidden works. Nor is anyone talking about realism. It is a question of the RAW -- they do not give all creatures the ability to know the location of every enemy of theirs in the multiverse that is not hiding. If you accept that premise, then the question becomes where to draw the line. You are asserting that the RAW prescribe no line, but the RAW do not. They discuss hidden, but do not state that if you exclude those who are hidden, you know the precise location of any enemy of yours in the multiverse.

(Reply to #43)

OoftaMeg

Noctaem wrote:

#46

Noctaem

Oct 16, 2014 16:58:16

I think that these tangent far fetched examples to disagree about how the rules in the book work, via simulationism or appealing to realism, aren't helping you make a coherent argument. Not everything is covered in the PHB. Congratulations, one of you came up with a situation that is not explicitely covered by the rules (a horn blowing in mountains shrouded in mist). That doesn't mean that the rules in the book change.

#47

Ahglock

Oct 16, 2014 17:24:23

The problem is you actually don't have a rule showing that you do know where people are when obscured. The rules are silent on this issue. You are adding rules to say that if you are not hidden your location is known. That rule is no where in the book as far as I know.

#48

Noctaem

Oct 16, 2014 17:38:07

Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:

(Reply to #46)

OoftaMeg

Noctaem wrote:

#50

Noctaem

Oct 16, 2014 17:55:54

Well let's explain this again. The hidden condition is what the game system uses to represent a creature you can't see nor hear. Under that condition, it's not possible to pinpoint where the creature is. The rules themselves specifically state that the creature must be unheard and unseen. So in your example, the creature blowing the horn is unheard and unseen until it blows the horn. It's position is now known because the party can hear the horn its blowing. After the horn is blown, the creautre is once again unheard and unseen and is once again hidden so the party cannot know it's location.

So that's how I would follow the RAW and still resolve the situation you gave. While the creature is not blowing the horn, the creature is hidden and while it is, its position is known to the party.

(Reply to #50)

OoftaMeg

Noctaem wrote:

#52

randl

Oct 16, 2014 18:31:00

Noctaem wrote:

#53

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 19:20:43

Noctaem wrote:

(Reply to #53)

AaronOfBarbaria

paulstrait wrote:

#55

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 20:11:47

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

(Reply to #54)

randl

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

(Reply to #54)

OoftaMeg

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#58

Ahglock

Oct 16, 2014 20:28:39

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

(Reply to #58)

AaronOfBarbaria

Ahglock wrote:

#60

paulstrait

Oct 16, 2014 23:00:25

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#61

Ahglock

Oct 17, 2014 7:52:18

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#62

Noctaem

Oct 17, 2014 8:10:23

But again, realism/simulationist arguments are irrelevant to the game rules. Fog could make you unseen, sure. But not unheard.

(Reply to #62)

OoftaMeg

Noctaem wrote:

#64

Noctaem

Oct 17, 2014 8:43:51

it's simple, one of the biggest problems if it doesn't work this way is that the hidden condition becomes meaningless. Why have a condition with specific rules regarding creatures not knowing where you are and having to guess where you are while hidden if you can have the same effect just by standing in fog without additional actions? Or any of the other examples given that go against the hidden rules? If you have rules for a condition (hidden) that does exactly what you want to achieve, why not just follow them?

(Reply to #64)

OoftaMeg

Noctaem wrote:

#66

Plaguescarred1

Oct 17, 2014 10:06:51

To hide you normally must already be unseen, so what would it give you by also successfully becoming uneard of if not that your position is not known anymore? The hiding rules do mention that if you make noise, you give away your position, which means that being hidden makes your position unknown so its logical to assume that if not hidden your position is known.

PHB177 Hiding: You can’t hide from a creature that can see you, and if you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase), you give away your position.

Both the hiding rules and the invisible condition mention that sign of an invisible creature's passage might still be noticed and that its location can be detected if it make noise or leave tracks. Since you are not unseen and heard unless you hide, we can presume your location is known even when unseen such as when invisible or heavily obscured.

PHB177 Hiding: An invisible creature can’t be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, however, and it still has to stay quiet.

PHB291 Invisible: The creature’s location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.

Its also confirmed in Unseen Attacker and Target when it differentiate between guessing the target’s location and targeting a creature you can hear but not see, which again to me mean that a creature that can be heard but not seen doesn't have to guess their location as its already known.

PHB195 Unseen Attacker and Targets: When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see.

#67

OoftaMeg

Oct 17, 2014 11:19:45

There is a difference between knowing approximate location and exact location (within 5 feet). Do you hear somebody right next to you? You probably know exactly where they are. Someone yells from a hundred yards away but you can't see them? I'd rule that you know their rough location, but not within 5 feet.

If you hear someone on the other side of a closed door (or wall of totally obscuring fog) would you know exactly where they are? I would say that you know they are located somewhere in the adjacent room, not necessarily where they are in the room. It's not a contradiction, it's a judgement call of how accurate you are knowing their location. If I say that you are located somewhere in Boston, and you say you are located in 22 West Maple, apartment 22, sitting at your desk we are both correct.

If a person is hidden in the adjacent room, you wouldn't even know they were there. Hear a person? You know where they are, but accuracy is up to the DM.

(Reply to #67)

Timborama

OoftaMeg wrote:

#69

jonathonhawke

Oct 17, 2014 12:56:01

Timborama wrote:

#70

paulstrait

Oct 17, 2014 13:22:47

Noctaem wrote:

(Reply to #70)

BlinkBlink

paulstrait wrote:

(Reply to #71)

OoftaMeg

BlinkBlink wrote:

#73

Noctaem

Oct 18, 2014 8:28:29

again, it's about game balance.

#74

paulstrait

Oct 18, 2014 12:29:30

BlinkBlink wrote:

#75

paulstrait

Oct 18, 2014 12:28:19

Noctaem wrote:

(Reply to #75)

AaronOfBarbaria

paulstrait wrote:

(Reply to #76)

OoftaMeg

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#78

AaronOfBarbaria

Oct 18, 2014 21:25:02

So what, you have to roll perception to be able to target them? How is that different from trying to target a hidden creature?

#79

paulstrait

Oct 18, 2014 21:27:41

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#80

paulstrait

Oct 18, 2014 21:35:05

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#81

paulstrait

Oct 18, 2014 21:45:12

Let me try to redirect the question a little bit. Suppose a character is heavily obscured and within the boundary of a silence spell. Furthermore, suppose that none of that character's enemies have any special senses (they are just normal humans) and none of them are doing anything particularly special to locate the character. Do they know the location of that character, down to the 5' by 5' square it is standing in, if that character does not hide?

Second question. Suppose all of ones enemies are blinded and deafened. Do you need to take the hide action if you want them not to know what 5' by 5' square you are in?

(Reply to #78)

OoftaMeg

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#83

Ahglock

Oct 19, 2014 9:13:36

And to those scenarios you can add a dc X perception check based on factors like range, background noise, terrain etc. there is a nice chart that helps figure out what dc to use based on how hard you would think it would be. Someone who tries to hide would have that as a minimum result so even if they rolled a 1 it's still difficult due to all the other noise.