Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Sword_of_Spirit Jul 31, 2014 11:50:58	There has been a lot of confusion and disagreement over exactly how stealth is handled, when you have disadvantage on perception, etc. I've gone through multiple thoughts myself, but after comparing the example of the goblin ambush with relevant statements throughout the D&D Basic pdf, I believe the rule as intended is something like the following.   Hiding     To attempt to hide you have to stay out of sight and try to be quite. This normally means you need either cover or to be heavily obscured*, and that you don’t make noise (such as speaking). You can then make a normal Dexterity (Stealth) check to hide as an action. If you cease to be behind cover or heavy obscurement, or if you intentionally make a noise, you no longer are hiding. Under certain conditions the DM may allow you to remain hidden even if you lose your cover or heavy obscurement, such as if you are sneaking up on a distracted creature. Some creatures (such as wood elves and lightfoot halflings) have the ability to hide or remain hidden under special conditions, but otherwise follow the normal rules.   Finding a Hidden Creature    Attempts to notice or find hiding creatures normally rely on both vision and hearing. Make a Wisdom (Perception) check as an action to attempt to find hiding creatures, or compare your Passive Wisdom (Perception) to their Dexterity (Stealth) check if you are not actively searching. If the creature is both heavily obscured and inaudible, you automatically fail this check, unless the DM rules that other traces of the creatures’s passage are evident.  If your ability to either see or hear the hiding creature is somehow hampered, either because the creature is in dim lighting, lightly obscured, heavily obscured, or inaudible, you have disadvantage on this check.   *Invisible creatures are considered heavily obscured.
#2 obsid Jul 31, 2014 12:21:46	I would agree with everything you have written.  But there are still a few unanswered questions in RAW:  1) How much cover is needed to start hiding? (1/2 cover, 3/4 cover, total cover) 2) How much cover is needed once you have already hidden and are moving? (1/2 cover, 3/4 cover, total cover) 3) While you cant hide in a lightly obscured area, can you move into a lightly obscured area without cover and not immediatly be seen without a check?   The answers from various tweets to Mike Meerles seems to be that RAI you need total cover or heavy consealment to start hiding (https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/487278984393011200), but that once hidden you can stay hidden as long as you stay quiet and, have any cover at all (even 1/2 cover) or in a lightly obscured area (https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/487279069092798464).   (You cant require total cover after they have been hidden, as that means you can never attack from stealth as the moment you poke your eye out to see the enemy, he sees you and you lose stealth.)
#3 jaelis Jul 31, 2014 12:48:27	You need total cover to hide, but I think that you can reasonably try to position your body to get total cover behind something that wouldn't normally provide it. You can crouch or lie down behind a low wall, or squeeze behind a pillar. Whether that will work is up to the DM, but you have to accept whatever comes with it: you might have to drop prone, for instance. And generall the creature will have total cover from you as long as you are hiding.   I also think that if you break cover to attack, you get advantage on your attack as long as you haven't had to move, stand up, or take some other action first. So leaning out from behind a pillar to attack would work, but would of course reveal your position.  Because here you are revealing yourself at the same time you attack.
#4 Overpromises Jul 31, 2014 13:26:44	Sword_of_Spirit wrote:
(Reply to #4) obsid	Overpromises wrote:
(Reply to #5) Overpromises	So to detect a creature that is completely out of sight, they get a disadvantage on the check because the light is also dim?
#7 jaelis Jul 31, 2014 13:58:44	I thought the whole point was that you couldn't hide at all if you were visible. So why would dim light make it easier to hide?   I think the decision about disadvantage under various conditions is up to the dm. If you are trying to detect an invisible creature by noticing footprints and dust swirls, then dim light would make it harder. If you are trying to hear a creature hiding behind a door, illumination is irrelevant.
#8 obsid Jul 31, 2014 14:25:08	I agree with you on both of your examples, but for the common case of one creature hiding in the woods while another one searches for them, having dim light makes it harder to see (then full brightness) and as such they have disadvantage on fighting them (using thier eyes to try to see the enemy).
(Reply to #8) Overpromises	obsid wrote:
#10 obsid Jul 31, 2014 14:39:28	Yes the instant they are seen they are no longer hidden.  But this is a case where one side isn't seen and is attempting to remain hidden.  A blinded (or through a wall/door) cannot tell exactly where someone is.  Yes you can get down to about a 5x5 foot area, but you still suffer disadvantage just as if they were invisible.  While you suffer no disadvantage on a roll for a Wisdom (Perception) check to hear them (say through a door), that isnt the same as seeing them.  Any dim light or other light obscured area do provide a disadvantage on any Wisdom (Perception) checks to see the target (not just hear approximately where they are).  So if you want to break someone's stealth in dim light (assuming you dont have low light vision) you are going to be at a disadvantage.
#11 Danny_Montanny Jul 31, 2014 14:38:43	Why include the "What Can You See?" in the Hiding sidebar part if it wasn't intended for use?   "One of the main factors in determining wheather you can find a hidden creature or object is how well you can see in the area."   If you can't see in the area very well, you're gonna have a hard time finding a hidden creature or object. You should be at a disadvantage if you have to rely on hearing alone to find a creature. Just like when you're relying on sight alone to find a trap.
#12 Sword_of_Spirit Jul 31, 2014 16:51:00	Overpromises wrote:
(Reply to #12) Overpromises	Being blinded does not cause disadvantage on the perception check. Any creature being inconvenienced by the dim light can simply close its eyes.
(Reply to #13) 2Chlorobutanal	Overpromises wrote:
(Reply to #14) Overpromises	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
#16 Archon007 Jul 31, 2014 18:22:04	I often wonder if the developers read these posts and wonder "when I write the rule it seemed so simple and easy to understand. What is wrong with these people."
(Reply to #16) Overpromises	Archon007 wrote:
(Reply to #15) 2Chlorobutanal	Overpromises wrote:
(Reply to #13) obsid	Overpromises wrote:
#20 Psikerlord Aug 03, 2014 4:17:44	jaelis wrote:
#21 lawrencehoy Aug 04, 2014 0:11:51	obsid wrote:
#22 Noon Aug 04, 2014 2:28:18	The big question for me was the rogue curse or the cleric curse.   The rogue curse is that if no monsters spot the rogue, all the party gets to act during the surprise round. Thus the rogue curses the enemies with surprise - even if everyone else on the team rolls a two on their stealth, they get a surprise round.   Or it's the cleric curse, where if anyone (most likely the cleric) is spotted the monsters see EVERYONE on the PC's side, thus no one on the PC's side gets sneak attack. No matter if the rogue rolled a 25 stealth, one cleric fouling up and somehow the rogue is seen.   My current reading of the rules is that it's the rogue curse. But it's weird either way (the cleric curse way is just dispiriting, though. Atleast the rogue curse is fun!)
#23 lawrencehoy Aug 04, 2014 3:58:15	Noon wrote: