Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it is wrong. No matter how fast light travels, it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it.
And in some cases it has a knife...
This mini guide is meant to be a go to place for people who wish to better understand stealth and hiding but also covers such things as Surprise, Light and Darkness within 5th edition. Before we start I will list the relevant rule sections and pages:
PHB
Chapter 7 Ability Scores (pages 175 Passive Checks + Group Checks, 177 Stealth + Hiding, 178 Perception),
Chapter 8 under Stealth, Noticing Threats, Encountering Creatures and Surprising Foes, Vision and Light + various senses on pages 182-185.
Chapter 9 Hide on page 192, Unseen attackers and targets on pages 194-195, Opportunity Attacks page 195.
Appendix A Conditions on page 291 for Invisibility.
MM
Pages 8-9 for the various senses.
ERRATA
June 10 2015 - PHB errata document: http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ph_errata
NOTES ABOUT ERRATA
-The June 10 2015 errata has changed the way the sight restriction for hiding works as a whole. It explicitely states that the question when it comes to sight is no longer "can an observer see me?" but instead "can an observer see me clearly?". This is a nice boon for hiding in general since it means that many new situations will allow a creature to roll to try to hide. What constitutes being "clearly seen" is left up to the DM to determine, however it is logical to expect anything that makes you uncleartly seen to work. Light obscurement, heavy obscurement, half cover, 3/4 cover would all fall into this conclusion since they all make you unclearly seen. But ETV is going to be the best recommendation this guide can make.
Part 1 Hiding:
When you want to hide, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. This check is against the Passive Perception (determined by each creature's Wisdom score, more on this below) of creatures around you. Several factors revolve around becoming and remaining hidden. Clear sight and noise being the most common.
What does hiding get me in general?:
-Advantage on attack rolls against creatures you are hiding from.
-If you manage to beat a creature's Passive Perception score, you are considered hidden - both unseen and unheard - from it.
-Creature's who can't see you have disadvantage on attack rolls against you. This is true weither the attacker is guessing the target's location or if it the attacker is targeting a creature it can hear but not see (an invisible one for example). If the hiding creature is not in the location that is targeted by the attack, the attack automatically misses.
-There are many more benefits possible depending on your class, race, etc... Monsters also have many unique abilities and features that player characters cannot access easily if at all.
What does being invisible get me in general?:
-An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense (see below). For the purpose of hiding, the creature is heavily obscured. The creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.
-Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have advantage.
What is the difference?:
-An invisible creature does not lose its benefits after making an attack unless whatever grants you the invisibility specifies that you do.
-If you are hidden and invisible and a creature beats your Dexterity (Stealth) check, you do not lose invisibility unless whatever grants you the invisibility specifies that you do.
Restrictions when trying to become hidden or remain hidden:
-You can't hide from a creature who can clearly see you. If you have Total Cover (such as standing behind a wall which covers you completely) or are Heavily Obscured (such as standing in complete darkness) from a creature, it cannot see you as you are completely concealed. The June 10 errata has changed the limits for sight to specifically say it's about being clearly seen and no longer simply "seen". Another way is invisibility which causes you to be unseen(see below).
-In combat, it is assumed by the edition that most creatures are alert (this is DM fiat). So if you move out of hiding (from behind a rock, tree, corner, or whatever was stopping a creature from clearly seeing you) and approach someone you don't necessarily remain hidden. If your DM determines that the creature is distracted, you may be able to remain hidden and gain advantage on an attack before you are clearly seen.
-If your Dexterity (Stealth) check doesn't beat a creature's passive perception, you are not hidden from it. This can be important if creatures enter the area where you are hiding as your stealth check is immediately compared to their passive perception.
-If you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase), you give away your position and lose hidden.
-if you attack while hidden, you lose hidden and give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
-If your Dexterity (Stealth) check is beaten by a creature's active perception check (using the Search action as detailed below), you are no longer hidden from it.
Ways to see/detect hiding or invisible creatures automatically:
-Blindsight allows a creature to perceive its surroundings without relying on sight, within a specific radius. This allows a creature to see invisible creatures or creatures who are hiding. Examples of creatures with this sense would be creatures without eyes, creatures who use echolocation (bats) or have heightened senses (true dragons).
-Darkvision allows a creature to see in the dark within specific radius. If a creature is using darkness to hide, it will not be able to hide from a creature with darkvision. This is a very common sense, especially on creatures who typically live underground.
-Tremorsense allows creatures to detect and pinpoint the origin of vibrations within a specific radius, provided that the creature and the source of the vibrations are in contact with the same ground or substance. Unless the creature hiding is flying or incorporeal, hiding creatures are detected by this sense.
-Truesight is the ultimate sense. It allows creatures up to a specific range, see in normal and magical darkness, see invisible creatures and objects, automatically detect visual illusions and succeed on saving throws against them, and perceive the original form of a shapechanger or a creature that is transformed by magic. Furthermore, the creature can see into the Ethereal Plane within the same range.
-If a creature is using Complete Darkess to hide and a light source illuminates the square the hidden creature is in, it will automatically lose hidden since it can now be seen clearly.
-If a creature is using Total Cover to hide (such as standing behind a wall) and an observer places itself in a way that the hidden creature no longer has total cover, the hidden creature will automaticaly lose hidden since it can now be clearly seen.
Part 2 How Passive Perception works:
Passive perception is already on monster stat blocks. However to determine the passive perception of a character, you simply use the following formulae:
10+Wisdom Modifier. So if you have a 14 Wisdom on a 1st level character, your Passive Perception score is 12 (10 base + 2 from Wisdom). If you have proficiency in Perception, you gain your proficiency bonus. Your score then becomes 14 (10 base +2 from Wisdom + 2 Proficiency).
If you have a negative Wisdom Modifier, you simply deduct your score. So with 9 Wisdom, you have a -1 modifier. If we use the same character as above, your Passive Perception is now 11 (10 - 1 from Wisdom + 2 Proficiency).
When you roll a Dexterity (Stealth) check you compare it to the Passive Perception of creatures around you. So if you roll 15 Stealth and a creature has 14 Passive Perception, as long as you meet the criteria to become hidden (see Part 1) you are now hidden from that creature.
Finding hidden creatures the hard way:
You can use your action to make a Wisdom (Perception) check via the Search Action to try to find a hidden creature or creatures. The result of the check is compared to the Dexterity (Stealth) check of the hidden creature(s). If you tie or beat the Stealth check, that creature or creatures are no longer hidden, though you may not be able to see them in the case of an invisible creature for instance.
Part 3 The things that help to hide
-Invisibility stops creatures who don't have Blindsight, Tremorsense and True Sight from clearly seeing you. Which means you can make a check to hide whenever you want as long as you are invisible. However the PHB states that signs of an invisible creature's passage may still be noticed and you still have to remain quiet. (see above for what it gets you)
-Having proficiency in Stealth means that you get to add your proficiency bonus, this can be as high as your Dexterity score for example and so is very useful to have.
-The Lightfoot Halfling's Naturally Stealthy feature allows you to attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you (Medium and above).
-Wood Elf's Mask of the Wild feature allows you to attempt to hide even when you are lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist, and other natural phenomena.
-The Skulker feat gives you many benefits which revolve around stealth. You can try to hide when lightly obscured from the creature from which you are hiding. When you are hidden from a creature and miss it with a Ranged Weapon Attack, making the attack doesn't reveal your position. Dim light doesn't impose disadvantage on your Wisdom (Perception) checks relying on sight. However it should be noted that the Errata released on June 10 2015 has changed the way stealth works. The question is no longer "can I be seen?" but "can I be seen clearly?" which could mean that this feat is now redundant for hiding. Light obscurement is by definition something that makes you unclear for sight outside of things like creatures with Darkvision (which turns light obscurement into bright light). This is unclear at the time of this update so one should expect table variation.
-More on this section soon
Work in progress
Part 6 Example Scenarios related to this guide:
The double blind: In this scenario you have two warriors attacking each other while being effectively blinded. This could be because they are both affected by the blinded condition via spell effect, being in complete darkness without a special sense, etc.. I'm placing this example here because of the conundrum this scenario creates when it comes to attacking. Fighter 1 has advantage against Fighter 2 because Fighter cannot see Fighter 1. Fighter 1 however has disadvantage as well because HE cannot see Fighter 2. And vice versa. So the bottom line from a mechanical sense is that both fighters aren't affected at all by advantage/disadvantage since they cancel each other. This is important to note because many people find it completely illogical. The point is that because the fighters effectively have the same penalties and avantages, they are fighting on the same level.
As example cases of the double blind, here are two situations posted on the forum by turri:
Case 1:
Creature A is in a heavily obscured area, Creature B is in a heavily obscured area.
A is "blinded" if he targets B, and so is B.
If A attacks B, he rolls 1 dice(Both of them are "blinded", so advantage and disadvantage ends in a normal roll)
A can roll stealth and become "hidden" from B, as long as A stay's in the area, and B has no darkvision
Case 2:
Creature A is in a heavily obscured area, Creature B is in non obscured Area.
IF A attacks B, he has advantage, because B is "blinded" when defending from A
IF B attacks A, he has disadvantage, because B is "blinded" when attacking A
A can roll stealth and become "hidden" from B, as long as A stay's in the area, and B has no darkvision
Halfling Hiding: Because of the racial ability of the Halfling race, it is possible for them to hide behind allies so long as the ally is between them and another creature. Because of this, it is completely legal and in fact intended for them to be able to hide behind an ally, attack which causes them to lose the hidden condition and then simply hide once again behind the same ally. As long as the requirement, that the ally be between the halfling and other creatures, is true they can always re-hide should they lose hidden. The recent errata to hiding has further clarified that halfling's can hide behind an ally without any problem but at the same time has made this racial trait potentially obsolete since you might be able to hide behind an ally by default. It all depends on what the DM considers being "unclearly seen". Ask your DM!
Wood Elf Hiding: Just like the halfling, a Wood Elf is capable of attacking from hiding and then hide once again without having to move so long as the Wood Elf is within the required environment as detailed in the feature itself. The recent errata to hiding and vision has made the wood elf trait possibly obsolete depending on what you consider being "unclearly seen". Ask your DM!
Work in progress.
Thanks for the great guide Noctaem this should help a lot!
Noctaem wrote:
You might want to incorporate what is being Invisible entails and the difference between hidden and insivibleI think it could be useful
Great write up Noctaem!
I ran dragon encounter recently and I guess I used blindsight incorrectly with the dragon. Is it safe to say that it's impossible to sneak up on a dragon? I was using it's passive perception unless the dragon was actively looking for the rogue, which is wasn't because it was being distracted by an archmage.
vectner wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
I'd also add;
Noctaem wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
A creature hidden behind a corner wall, heavily obscured effect like a fog cloud (or an ally if halfling) will not remain hidden at the moment an enemy moves to a position where it can now clearly see it.
One inference that people sometimes miss is that, because "when you attack while hiding you get advantage" implies "that you can attack while hiding". This is important because you cannot attack a creature with total cover. Therefor you can remain hidden even when you dont have total cover. You need total cover to START hiding (thats what the rules say unless you are a lightfoot halfling/wood elf), but once hidden even partial cover is enough to remain hidden. This allows you to "lean" out behind the corner and attack with advantage (otherwise the mere act of leaning out would mean you immediately lose hidden status and dont get advantage).
I think the most important thing to note is the devs have stated in videos and on twitter that the DM is supposed to make "rulings" on stealth scenarios, and that the rules are intentionally vague to facilitate such. From memory Mearls gave an example ruling, he said if a lightfoot halfling tries to hide in the same spot twice in one combat (eg behind an ally), then his ruling would be that that could be possible, but to use common sense, and that he would impose disadvantage on the check.
Also I'm not sure that every hide check is made against passive perception. DMs might rule that hiding in combat calls for a contest: an active stealth check vs an active perception check, as opposed to a stealth check vs passive perception. The guys in combat will be keeping a lookout after all. Passive perception, as I read it, is really supposed to be for when (i) you dont want to tip the players off to a surprise trap or ambush by rolling before it happens, or (ii) when you want to represent making checks repeatedly over and over across a period of time (eg while roleplaying style exploring, as opposed to round by round combat).
obsid wrote:
Another pertinent rule to this guide;
PHB182 Noticing Threats: Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores o f the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat. The DM might decide that a threat can be noticed only by characters in a particular rank. For example, as the characters are exploring a maze o f tunnels, the DM might decide that only those characters in the back rank have a chance to hear or spot a stealthy creature following the group, while characters in the front and middle ranks cannot. While traveling at a fast pace, characters take a - 5 penalty to their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to notice hidden threats.
Plaguescarred wrote:
obsid wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
So a character sitting in the dark can't see a burning torch 50' away?
jonathonhawke wrote:
Thats what it says RAW, but I agree, no sane DM wouldn't house rule it. (probably by changing the light rules so that you can be heavy conealed from someone while they are normal or lightly consealed to you).
jonathonhawke wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
The 50' away light thing doesn't bother me, it appears to be an overly technical reading. What seems more of an issue is two foes fighting in total obscurement. Each would have disadvantage on attacking the other from the obscurement, but also each would have advantage on attacking the other under the unseen attacker rolls, which would seem to cancel each other out. But it seems to me that the inability to see should override.
slaughterj wrote:
I get that but I still think that people wildly swinging in the dark shouldn't be on par with people fighting in a lit fight.
slaughterj wrote:
I could see a situation where, in total darkness, two "blinded" opponents in direct combat would have normal rolls (because their adv and disadv cancel out) but they could also have a cat and mouse fight where they try to "out stealth" each other, using the hide action to roll for stealth (versus passive perception scores) and perhaps gaining an additional advantage to attack (which, by RAW, isnt allowed but seems to be a thematic bit of DM fiat) if one gains stealth over the other. So rogues and the like with good stealth scores would excell at this type of combat.
slaughterj wrote:
Trance-Zg wrote:
Ways to see/detect hiding or invisible creatures automatically:
I'm still working on this guide, it's just been a tad crazy lately for me at work. I'm going to be taking a few days to get everything sorted out and finish up the guide to make it truly a good resource to have. Thank you to all those who gave feedback/suggestions so far. I'll be implementing your suggestions asap.
slaughterj wrote:
I think it's a game balance issue. The sort of situation where both attackers are on level ground when it comes to the advantages and disadvantages of the situation they are currently in. Not being able to see yourself but your opponent not being able to see the attack coming. Anyway when I fill out the light portion of the guide I'll mention this sort of situation.
And the be honest, in actual play this sort of situation will be kind of rare. Most monsters that would be in a total darkness environment would have darkvision for example or some other sense.
I'd love it if somebody would add some descriptive scenarios to this thread, to illustrate some of the more complex ways stealth can be used (or lost), especially in combat. E.g., could a lightfoot halfling stand behind his companion, "re-stealth", and then re-emerge to get another surprise attack?
Sure I can create some generic example situations if it'll help. Especially for Halflings like you said.
Could a huge Mammoth summoned by Conjure Fey be an acceptable thing to hide behind?
IxidorRS wrote:
IxidorRS wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Elfcrusher wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
If the book says blue and I say blue in my guide, what I'm saying is RAW. I understand this is difficult for you to understand. That's what this guide will be doing. For most of the rule elements within this guide, there is only 1 RAW reading. Many people are going to help me flesh out this guide as they have already begun doing in the previous posts which I appreciate. Trying to muddy the waters like you're doing however is not appreciated. Thanks for posting, but please stop doing that in a guide meant to help others.
Noctaem wrote:
So party of 3 enters a room with 3 hiding monsters. Party member 1, only, is Stealthing. Here are the rolls:
Monster 1 - Stealth 20, PP 10
Monster 2 - Stealth 6, PP 14
Monster 3 - Stealth 12, PP 12
PC1 - Stealth 13, PP 10
PC2 - PP 14
PC3 - PP13
Who is surprised? Who can attack who on round 1?
zeim wrote:
Actually, Monster 2 can see PC 1.
Noctaem wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Noon wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
paulstrait wrote:
Noon wrote:
paulstrait wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
So, thinking on the issues with stealth, the problem is really that the rules simply don't work as they exist- at least without invoking the 'DM's judgment' escape clause on 177. While I'm happy with said DM judgment, it obviously gives the RAW lawyers here seizures. Yet the idea that you need total cover or obscurement to hide is ridiculous on its face, both because it's redundant (if you're stationary in total cover/obscurement, why do you need to hide in the first place? you're out of sight, special senses aside) and because it leads to the paradox where you can never attack from stealth because being able to see your target breaks stealth (without special traits that shouldn't be unviersally necessary). While I think most sane home DMs will run more leniently than this, the rules are still problematic.
By contrast, in the final playtestests, they had simple (and still DM-empowering) stealth rules that covered a full spectrum of both obscurement and cover: light/heavy obscurement, and various levels of cover up to full. Stealth required either heavy obscurement (or light with appropriate features as in release) or half cover+ (or other circumstances that the DM determined made hiding appropriate). This of course yields the more reasonable scenario where you can hide without being totally invisible already, and allows reasonable stealth-oriented play. For whatever reason, this section of rules was dropped in favor of the sidebar on 177.
So that's my solution, I'm just going to use the October playtest rules until they fix this in an FAQ.
danyc wrote:
Sure. I mean, my personal take on the rules as they're presented now is that the RAI of the 'can see you part' is to rule out vanishing in plain sight, not any and all stealth with other creatures present, but they really worded it badly. And I think its simply an oversight in dropping any reference to using cover for stealth, which used to explicitly be there. It should be there, as its pretty fundamental to the idea of what hiding is.
I didn't play in the playtests... but it does seem like a line or two about nearby cover would have helped.
Here's a question:
A character is hiding rear partial or total cover and in his turn decides to make a ranged weapon attack with a bow or a cossbow or any other ranged weapon. The manual in p 196 says this:
Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover during combat, making a target more difficult to harm. A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side o f the cover.
Does it mean that, beacuse he is hidding rear the cover and wants to roll with advantage, his target recives the bonus to AC from cover?
Is the cover actually 'covering' any of the target? Or can the archer see the entire target?
svargth wrote:
Thanks.
So, sharpshooter is a great help because you ignore the cover wich is helping you to hide, isn't it?
svargth wrote:
Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
Yes invisibility is one of the best ways. It's listed in the OP and has its own entries to explain how it works in relation to hiding.
paulstrait wrote:
obsid wrote:
Thanks for this guide. Question I've had trouble answering -
If one member surprises a group of enemies, are they all surprised and do they all lose their initial turn? For instance, we were playing the other day, and we'd have our rogue constantly try and sneak into an area while everyone else waited around a corner, the rogue would then backstab someone in attempts to surprise them all.
Also, if the rogue fails to hit with the backstab, are all the enemies still surprised regardless?
Noctaem wrote:
Elfcrusher wrote:
cjblaney0 wrote:
I've updated the guide with further information about light/darkness as well as some of the suggestions from people in the comments. I'll continue to update of course.
Would you be able to add some detail regarding Keen Sense?
The Keen Sense ability, MM Lion et. al., provides advantage on Perception checks when that sense is used. I've allowed the NPC characters to use this to negate the disadvantage on attacks which is present when vision is impaired (i.e. fog cloud or Darkness). Whether that ruling is RAW or RAI can be debated, but I suspect some players of Druids may be using Keen Sense to find hidden creatures.
Noctaem wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Cooperjera wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Greenstone.Walker wrote:
I'd also include a bit about the Ranger level 18 feature Feral Senses, "At 18th level, you gain preternatural senses that help you fight creatures you can’t see. When you attack a creature you can’t see, your inability to see it doesn’t impose disadvantage on your attack rolls against it. You are also aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened."
Interestingly, if we are looking for guideposts on how to interpret vague rules, this is a pretty good one. If you need to be an 18th level ranger to become aware of the location of an invisible creature that ISN"T HIDDEN, it seems that the word "can" in the description of foiling invisbility should be read as "with the appropriate skill check or class feature, you can detect an invisible creatures location, based on it's scent, sounds it makes or tracks it leaves" instead of "automatically."
I'd also maybe just clearly post the different options for interpreting what happens after you are hidden. I've seen at least two ways of looking at it. 1) Giving away your location is a single event that happens at a specific time and then is over or 2) Giving away your location ends the "hidden" condition until you hide again.
Personally, I think it should be the former - for example, you are hiding behind a wall, with an archway on either end, each leading into the adjoining room. You are "hidden". Then you intentionally knock over a vase near the eastern archway to draw out the enemies. This tells them you are at the location of that vase WHEN YOU KNOCK IT OVER. But then, you continue your movement to move to the western archway, intending to come up behind them when they approach the sound of the fallen vase. It's not like you suddenly are incapable of quietly moving the other direction just because you created a distraction. Since both ways of reading the rule are consistent with the english language and this one makes more sense to me, it's the one I favor, but I have seen good arguments the other way based more on game balance.
The other argument is that "being discovered" which does end the "hidden" condition (I know its not really a condition), is the same as "giving away your location", but that is definitely not clear for the rules. My understanding of "being discovered" is literally being seen.
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
jaelis wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
My problem is that I'd say (in combat at least) that being hidden means that the creature you're hidden from doesn' t know where you are. At least thats what it seems like the rules say to me.
I'm perfectly happy to grant the DM has a lot of lattitude in deciding when and where a creature can hide. But the ranger ability doesn't make sense to me because it seems to say that you're aware of the location of any creature whose location you know.
Noctaem wrote:
What I've always said is that everyone is able to do that within the range of their senses, this ability on the other hand does not have any restriction as to obstacles that might stop you from detecting an invisible creature. If it's invisible and within 30 feet, as long as you're not blind, defeaned and the creature is not hidden, you know where it is. Specific beats general.
The rules state that the only time you gain "creatures don't know where you are" is when you're hidden. IF you're not hidden and within the range of a creatures senses, without other specifics, it knows where you are. If you're on the other side of a rock wall. in another part of the cavern, you can't possibly know where other creatures are if they are outside the range of your senses. However, a ranger at level 18 would be able to "know" exactly where an invisible creature is within 30 feet, regardless of if that wall of rock is there or not so long as the conditions listed aren't met. That's the special part of the rangers bullet point 2, on top of course of the awesome "no disadvantage vs creatures you can't see" note as well that "you can't see" doesn't just limit you to invisible creatures, there's a bunch of other situations where that might be a factor.. Especially for ranged attacks.
Noctaem wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Being hidden is not a condtion, it is a comparative term. (First clue is that it is not listed in Appendix A as a condition) Conditions are things you are regardless of anyone else. You are incapacitated, you are blind, you are exhausted.
Hidden is a comparision between you and someone else. It is like being 'taller'. Taller is not a condition, it has no meaning without something to compare it to. Further, if there are 4 other people, you can be hidden from some and not from others, just like being taller....
Noctaem wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Somehow we are not on the same page here.
Are you arguing that tremorsense picking up a hidden creature, a buddy pointing out a hidden creature, and bumping into a hidden creature don't tell you were the hidden creature is?
jaelis wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
DarkSphinx wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
jaelis wrote:
For the record I absolutely know that being hidden is not a condition found in the PHB section under that heading. I can't believe you people are seriously going to waste post space to point that out /facepalm
Noctaem wrote:
The term "hidden condition" is a relic from the 4e hiding guide which this guide aspires toward. It's also the term I've used for many years. I just didn't think that you guys would point to that in such a pedantic way out of nowhere. My bad >.>
Noctaem wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Me, I'd read pretty much everything as "standard English usage." That's why I don't personally go for the hiding = unseen and unheard interpretation, that seems too technical for the way they introduce it. I think if they had wanted a technical game definition, they would have made it explicit. In most situations I think it makes more sense to interpret hidden as your location not being known.
But I can see how your definitions work too.
jaelis wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
According to the rules hidden means "unseen and unheard". It doesn't necessarily mean people don't know where you are.
It kind of works like a condition, though it isn't one as it only works in comparison to someone else.
Orethalion wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
I'd like to pose a scenario that came up recently in my game that pertains to this topic, along with how I ruled it, and see what you guys think.
the PCs are in a dimly lit hallway. They open a door along the hallway, alerting the monster lurking inside. Most of the PCs jump to right of the doorway and prepare to fight. The Halfling Rouge jumps to the left of the doorway and uses his cloak to hide, attempting to appear as a pile of rags/clothing on the floor. He rolls a hide check and beats the monster's passive perception. Monster emerges from the doorway and attacks the larger group of PCs. The halfling uses his first turn to drink a potion and do something else (can't remember exactly). But in short, doesn't yet attack. On the halfling's next turn, he attacks, and wanted advantage for attacking from hiding. I ruled against it, because I felt that once the monster spent an entire turn in the hallway, it became aware of all the PCs, ruling that you can't hide in plain sight from someone. The players argument was that at the time he took the hide action, he WAS out of sight of the monster, and the interpretation of the rule is that you can't use the hide action if you are in plain sight, but if you've already hidden yourself before being in plain sight, you can remain hidden even when you are. Thoughts?
I snipped the stuff we agree on...
jaelis wrote:
Milehigh wrote:
Milehigh wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
That noise gives away my position doesn't mean that I'm not hidden when I don't make any noise and someone just knows where I am by logic.
If I bump into an invisible (object/person) I know where it is at the moment of contact. Hence "gave away position". That still means attacking with disadvantage at that moment, and presumably you are choosing to attack the right square since there is an object there. However, once that object has the oppotunity to vacate that square, you are once again in not know where it is territory (it is not "discovered"). To really break down the word: DIS COVER. You are still completely undercover.
Creatures that had "scent" as an ability in earlier editions don't rely on normal vision, just as creatures with blindsight don't rely on normal vision, so they discover you whether you are invisible or not.
It matters quite a bit if you are hidden or not, because becoming hidden requires a full action and doesn't work by "just moving away while being invisible". There nothing in the rules about "Discover". Giving away your position is something you actively do, not something that can be done to you.
And there are good reasons why smell isn't included in the rules. If you can't see an enemy, but you can smell it, I'd say, it's still quite reasonable you have disadvantage when attacking, hence you are hidden as the rules for being hidden apply.
1. The stealth check DC of a hidden creature is constantly compared to PASSIVE perception. Not active. The only time a hidden creature's stealth DC is compared to an active check is if someone uses an action to roll an active check.
Noctaem wrote:
As you said to someone else in the surprise thread. If you're going to change the scenario by making the observer far enough away that the hiding creature is not within the range of his senses or have a silence spell cast in the area, then my answer should not be subject to you claiming I didn't factor in those possibilities. I answered the specific scenario given :p
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
lol ;)
What I mean with "constantly" was that the stealth DC stays the same and whenever a creature actively searches for it, it gets compared to that. Going by the rules I say they even allow repeated rolls here (in combat I rule that it consumes an action).
But really my actual point was: If you have a feat that gives you advantage in one of your senses, you don't automatically "unhide" enemy creatures, but you still can use it to your advantage by actively searching for the creature.
Hiding is really a difficult topic and I fear we will discuss that forever without ever coming to a conclusion.
Hiding can be very powerful ("If I can hide as bonus action I can always attack at advantage and attacking me will always be at disadvantage every turn") or very useless ("You can never use "Hide" because the enemies always knows your position in combat") depending on how you define it.
It would probably be much cooler to just go through fixed examples and see how everyone would resolve it.
How people play out Goblin Archers for example is pretty interesting. Some DMs just make them attack. I always do:
1. Goblin Archer is hidden before combat (with stealth+6 and the group's highest passive perception at 13, the chance is quite good for that to happen), group doesn't know he is even there.
2. On Goblin Archer's turn, he shoot's an arrow at advantage (2d20b1+4) due to being hidden. This removes his "hidden" status. So he moves back behind a total cover and uses hide as bonus action. With stealth+6 again, good chance for it too succeed (14 or higher needed).
3. Group now has the following options:
a) Directly attack wherever they think the goblin is and roll at disadvantage (2d20w1+5). If they guessed the position right and rolled at least 13, the goblin will be hit and unhidden.
b) Actively search for the goblin, roll perception, if result is higher than what goblin rolled for stealth previously, the goblin is unhidden. If I don't hide the stealth roll, the group can determine if this is a viable option or not, otherwise it might even fail by default (if goblin rolled 23 or higher - though one might argue that a critical success on the perception check is always successful).
c) Move to a location where they think there is a high chance that he goblin is within 5ft (attack range).
d) In situations where a certain PC has the best perception (or advantage in perception), the other PCs could also ready an attack with the condition "I attack once another PC tells me where the goblin is". That way the moment the perception check is successful, you have all the other PCs attacking without disadvantage.
4. Depending on what the group did, my goblin archer will either be still a) fully hidden, b) not hidden but free or c) next to a PC. In that case I do:
a) Go back to 2.
b) Basically same as going back to 2. except my next attack will not be at advantage (I could use hide as bonus action before attacking to still get advantage immediately, but ending my turn hidden seems to be the smarter tactic in the long run).
c) Tricky! I can't directly hide while next to a PC, obviously. If I'm playing on full defense, I will use Disengage as action, then move behind total cover and then use Hide. I won't be able to attack on this turn, but I can end my turn hidden. Obviously this tactic only makes sense if the goblin archer still has allies or wants to flee, since he can't get any attacks in anymore, unless he can move faster than the PC next to him (but then the PC still can use Dash). On offense, the best option is to forget hiding and use disengage to get away from the PC and then attack him. Why not attack directly? Well that would be at disadvantage as my goblin archer has a bow equipped. Unequipping the shortbow and equipping a scimitar would cost me a full turn so that's not an option (I might have been smart and unequipped the bow at the end of my previous turn, though!). There is another more risky option. I could just not use Disengage and risk an opportunity attack. If I survive the attack, however, I'm quite at advantage again because I can attack without disadvantage and run behind a total cover and hide again in that case.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
I actually roll out too if a goblin is hidden or not (before they encounter him). This is a hidden roll, PCs don't know enemies are around (unlike stealth rolls during combat).
If the goblin is behind total cover, which he needed to hide in your scenario, they can't attack him without moving to a spot where he doesn't have total cover anymore. At which point the goblin could very well automatically lose hidden because they can now see him which is specifically called out as making you lose hidden in the rules.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Can you please point out the part of the rules that says all this?
Because I read the rules exactly the opposite way around:
To hide you need to be unseen, yes. But when you successfully hide you are unseen and unheard. Meaning that even if someone goes to a position he could usually see you, because you are hidden, he can't.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
A hiding character could move around at will as long as he hid at some point and even come up and wave his arms in your face. Is that really how you think it works?
I read your posts about it fully and I even agree with them. Just like the rules themselves, they are not saying that you lose hidden when someone moves so that you don't have total cover anymore.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Hi all.
I have question about hiding.
1
Phb says:
"When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."
So, i dont need to hide for advavantage?
2
Skulker: "you can try to hide when you are lighlly obscured from the creature from which you are hiding."
What if creature see me at moment i try to hide with skulker feat?
3
What if i move behind creature (it cant see me, right?), hide with rouge bonus action and attack?
4
How fast i can move when hiding? Can't find this rule.
ps Sorry for my english ^^
Rstmad wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
about 3: No to all those questions because the rules state that creatures, specifically in combat, are paying attention to their surroundings. That is unless they are considered distracted which the DM can decide is the case. Just because a creature doesn't have eyes in the back of its head, doesn't mean they can't see you. You actually need something to stop them from seeing you like the examples I gave you before. That is of course unless you have skulker or are a halfling or elf or whatever. They are special.
about 4: Yes, you can dash while hidden or hide after using the dash action. As long as you aren't seen and don't make noise. Just keep in mind that each time you roll to hide and use the dash action you're using up actions for your turn. Those aren't unlimited.
5. You make too much noise, described in the rules as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase. Doing so gives away your location and you lose hidden.
Orethalion wrote:
Phb says: "When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it." So, i dont need to hide for advavantage?
Rya.Reisender wrote:
I have removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_company_about_codeofconduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the Report Comment button below the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
As I said, it's simply not in the rules. It's rulings you made. But since you are not willing to discuss this, we should just not discuss it, right?
I would be really interested in your answer what you think hide gives you for a benefit if it doesn't persist when there is a "line of sight", though. If you need total cover for hide to work, how do you attack while being hidden?
Anyway, I sent an e-mail to Sage Advice, I really think this needs official clarification, so I hope Jeremy talks about it eventually.
Here's the mail I sent if you are curious:
Hello,
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Okay, but can you answer, what the point of the "Hide" action is then? What's the difference between "I move behind the Stalagmite and use Hide" and "I move behind the Stalagmite" for you? I mean other than one uses an action while the other only uses movement.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
I also have to add that if you're in a bush which provides enough cover to completely stop creatures from seeing you but is not considered total cover the targets of your attacks would gain as much cover from the bush as you do. So if the bush provides 3/4 cover to you while you're in it, targets you attack will ALSO have 3/4 cover.
Note that half cover or 3/4 cover is not enough as per the rules to grant the benefit "creatures can't see you", that's something that is specifically stated as being granted by total cover. What Orethalion is doing is giving you a scenario where the DM can make a ruling and decide that the bush, even though it's not stopping you from attacking like total cover does, would still grant you the ability to not be seen and so allow you to roll stealth to hide. If I was to change Orethalion's scenario *wink* I would say that the person hiding in the bushes is an Elf because they have a racial ability to do exactly what he's ruling is allowed by the rules themselves. It's a racial feature for them. Just like halflings can use allies while other PC races can't.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
I can understand Orethalion's approach. (I really need to check if total cover is really needed to hide or if it's enough that enemies can't see you.)
I just don't understand your approach, Noctaem, because many things still don't make sense to me:
So if the bush provides 3/4 cover to you while you're in it, targets you attack will ALSO have 3/4 cover.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
I'm really not knowing where you get all those rules from that are supposedly all in the PHB .
In my book, the section "Cover" says nothing about total cover making you "unseen". It also doesn't say that the cover has to be of the same degree in both directions.
Why would someone in a watchtower have a cover disadvantage when attacking through an arrow slit? He can fully see all his targets (if they are in an area you can see through the arrow slit), whereas his target's probably can't even see him or only his eyes. You can also be unseen and have no cover. Think about camouflage for example.
But anyway, I see how you two work with hiding now. Orethalion makes it so that hiding gives the benefit that you can attack at advantage with half and 3/4 cover. You make it so that hiding makes your position unknown. You play monsters as if they didn't know the hiding player's location (and probably go after other players instead) and expect your players to play properly according to this too. Okay.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
I have updated the guide with some minor tweaks and a section to discuss surprise and how it works with some examples.
Noctaem wrote:
Further, the rules *never* say you need full cover/heavy obscurement/etc to hide. Similarly, they do not say you can only hide if they are physically incapable of seeing you
The rules say you can't hide if they can see you. Which sounds similar, but has a very important distinction.
When your friend tells you to grab his keys, and you look around but don't see them you yell back "I can't see them". Then your friend walks over and points to them sitting right where he said they were.
Same for those Where's Waldo pictures. "Can you see Waldo?", "Nope".... then Waldo can hide, eventhough technically there is line of sight between you and Waldo, you can't see him.
While there is more than one definition....so it could have more than one interpretation.....using "Can" in the english language can mean "Does" or it can mean "Is capable of"..... IMO the hiding rules make much more sense, and work much better, using the 'does' definition.
As for the Bush and Cover.... there is absolutely nothing in the rules, nor real life, that requires cover to apply to both sides equally.
Coredump00 wrote:
Well if I hide behind a tree in real life and a person is passing by, I can manage to stay hidden by slowly moving around the tree as the person passes by.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Seems that this guide is a little harsh on hiding leaving out key words such as " In combat most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature. it see you. PHB says usually see's you and then referrences passive perception one paragraph below giving context to why or why not the creature could or could not see you .
reading this mini guide makes people believe that once you hide you cant move from light/dark concealment or everyone on the battle field notices you and or sees you and that is just plain wrong.
Cromatic wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
which is why the person is hiding, not doing jumping jacks, counting them out loud
also your comment about You can't. An attack pulls you out of hiding. Attacks are noisy and involve coming out of hiding to do. The Unseen Attacks section also explicitly says that you give away your location when you attack. is wrong .. it says you give away your location when the attack hits or misses. so that after the attack
Cromatic wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
danyc wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Im just not a fan of people bypassing certain skill check/ ablity score/ class features because they dont like it as per orethalions example of the barrel and hiding.
I will never, under any circumstances, requires a roll for someone walking around the other side of a tree and seeing the person hiding there. Ever. It's stupid to even contemplate allowing the person to remain hidden. No cover. No hide.
this skips all skill checks, profec check, dex modifiers, feats, class feats and lighting becuase he doesnt like how hiding works.
what you can and cant see is clearly noted in the perception part of the PHB.
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Just as a reminder, that's why I said you could for example consider "slowly moving around the obstacle to stay hidden" as part of the hide action to reason why you are not discovered.
@ Noctaem
you wrote
Part 2 How Passive Perception works:
Passive perception is already on monster stat blocks. However to determine the passive perception of a character, you simply use the following formulae:
10+Wisdom Modifier. So if you have a 14 Wisdom on a 1st level character, your Passive Perception score is 12 (10 base + 2 from Wisdom). If you have proficiency in Perception, you gain your proficiency bonus. Your score then becomes 14 (10 base +2 from Wisdom + 2 Proficiency).
If you have a negative Wisdom Modifier, you simply deduct your score. So with 9 Wisdom, you have a -1 modifier. If we use the same character as above, your Passive Perception is now 11 (10 - 1 from Wisdom + 2 Proficiency).
When you roll a Dexterity (Stealth) check you compare it to the Passive Perception of creatures around you. So if you roll 15 Stealth and a creature has 14 Passive Perception, as long as you meet the criteria to become hidden (see Part 1) you are now hidden from that creature.
Finding hidden creatures the hard way:
You can use your action to make a Wisdom (Perception) check via the Search Action to try to find a hidden creature or creatures. The result of the check is compared to the Dexterity (Stealth) check of the hidden creature(s). If you tie or beat the Stealth check, that creature or creatures are no longer hidden, though you may not be able to see them in the case of an invisible creature for instance.
*I would like to point out that the hide is a action so you roll a dexterity stealth check on that action to hide< then if you have movement or anyother actions left on that turn its based off your passive stealth not the action check. the same way as if you use your action to search then move 30 ft.. at the start of the turn you use actoin search at the end of turn after movement your percep is based on passive .*
this is a key point in understanding how you can hide and get off a attack in combat while not in total cover.. rogue is hidden behind a wall and a goblin is moving on his turn in combat from point a to b . now some think there is a auto detect feature that would take place somewhere in the movement on the goblins turn. I would like to know where in the rules this is stated.
(end) gob a (pp 14)
^
|
|
|
| (rogue) pass stealth 20
| -----------------------------------------
| |
| |
| | wall
(start) gob a (pp) 14 |
|
|
(gob a walking from starting point to ending point.)
Orethalion wrote:
People often make this mistake due to Equivocation ( ill use this since some used strawman) . if a sign says "Fine for parking here"
some might say ok its ok to park there, then later wonder why they got a ticket.
Cromatic wrote:
jaelis wrote:
jaelis wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Ill say this to maybe clear up confusion hide is a action.
Cromatic wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Edit: Nevermind, I'm slow. 
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
your more than welcome to try
jaelis wrote:
My example wasn't from the game. You seemed to claim that I was mistaking different meanings of 'hide.' I was just giving you a common example where my definition is used in a similar language context.
thanks for clearing that up.. what im saying is people often make this mistake when talking about the game ...
which is why earlier i said
People often make this mistake due to Equivocation ( ill use this since some used strawman) . if a sign says "Fine for parking here"
some might say ok its ok to park there, then later wonder why they got a ticket.
Guess my point is it's not a fallacy if the statement is genuinely ambiguous.
jaelis wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
also reading one paragraph from one chapter is a good way to get confused...
Cromatic wrote:
[quote="OoftaMeg"]
Cromatic wrote:
[quote="Cromatic"]
OoftaMeg wrote:
I prolly should of said the PHB. but again pg 177 "What can you See?. one the of main factors in determing whether you can find a hidden creature or object is how well you can see in a area, which might be lghty or heavily obscure, as explained in chapter 8. "
chapter 8 vison and light-
"a give area might be lightly or heavily obscurd, in a lightly obscured are, such as DIM LIGHT, pathy for, or maderate foilage, creatures have disadvantage on wisdom perception checks that rely on sight."
passive stealth comes from page 175 of PHB under passive checks. it says the rules on hiding rely on passive checks.
Cromatic wrote:
yes, now im confused as to what we were talking about .
OoftaMeg wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
yes to hide in combat you take the action hide, you make a dex check to hide. then it says you follow the rules in chapter 7 for hiding.. <---------- why is this important, because on pg 175 it says hiding is a passive dex check .... we can argue but im not the one mistaken.
Orethalion wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
The corner scenario is really the DM case, caused by the abstraction of combat.
Obviously, people hide behind corners and ambush people as they come around them. People do this without magic IRL, and it's a pretty classic assassin/ninja/etc sort of move, so it's somthing the game should probably support, especially if you have an assassin player or similar, because that's probably part of why they're playing the character.
That said, most people probably feel that just sitting there, hiding in total plain sight of another person is silly, because it breaks versimilitude if you don't have something special to help you do it (magic, camouflage, etc).
So, I doubt in an out of combat scenario anyone would have a problem with 'I hide behind the corner and wait until the guard passes, then slit his throat', even though it's physically the same situation as the combat on with the goblin. The problem tends to be the round-based nature of combat breaking the situation into steps. Out of combat, it's a single narrative element where you gut the guy AS he comes into view, but in combat it's two different steps, the goblin coming into position to see you PAUSE and then various other actions possibly passing, and then you moving out to attack.
Of course, the game also provides the solution to the DM with the distraction text, and this is one of the scenarios where I imagine it's supposed to apply. If the goblin is passing the corner on the way to attack another PC, or flee, or reach some objective - well he's passing the corner but probably not paying attention. Stealth sounds ok to me. If he's coming around looking for his next opponent, then maybe he spots you right away. And yes, this means the DM can meta play their creatures to always spot you, but that's just jerk DMing and comes with the usual advice of 'find a new DM', especially one who doesn't think there's a reason to make the stealth rules super harsh and punish you just for playing a rogue (I tend to view this as another example of martial character discrimination; no one ever is so nitpicky about invisibility, but the second a rogue is getting away with ... doing what it's designed to do, it's 'omg that's way too powerful').
OoftaMeg wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
danyc wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
This whole thread made me think of ninjas ... http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0003.html
mrpopstar wrote:
so why does the action search check not stand.
Cromatic wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Hide When you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check in an attempt to hide, this is the roll for succes of the action.
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
danyc wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
ok so this is a variant rule, maybe its why i cant see keeping the roll for hide
Contests and Checks Whenever an NPC or monster would normally make an ability check, roll initiative, or take part in a contest, neither you nor the players roll the d20. Instead, use the rules for passive checks to determine the result. See chapter 7, “Using Ability Scores,” of the Player’s Handbook for more information on passive checks.
I just want to chime in..... there is nothing in the rules that states that the *only* way to actively search for someone is to use the Search Action. Using your allowable action for the Search Action will usually allow you a perception or Investigation check. Just like using the Attack Action will usually allow you to attack. But there is no rule saying this is the *only* way to actively search nor to attack.
(PCs are 75' away from bad guys holding a hostage)
DM: The trail goes through a light forest, you see about 3 bandits with the woman, one is aiming a bow at you.
PC: I move 30' towards them and prepare to toss a javelin at the Bow-guy. I want to keep an eye on the left side for an ambush.
DM: You move up, give me a Perception check.
PC: 21
DM: you do notice two more bandits on the left about 20' away.
PC: I throw the javelin at one of them instead.
Perfectly within the rules.... PCs are continually perceiving their surroundings, it does not take an action to look at your environment. A perception check just shows how well you notice things. There is no requirement for taking an action just to use a skill. Perception, History, Insight, Intimidation, Slight of Hand..... An action is not required to use a skill.... some uses may take that long, or longer, or take that much effort, or more..... but it is not the only way.
You're describing a scenario outside of combat, more specifically the events before combat begins. You're right that there's no need for actions for that specific scenario since actions are used specifically in combat. You could have just said that instead and stated that a DM can rule that what a player wants to do doesn't require an action, even in combat, outside of Adventure League. Or that DM's can make rulings.. Much simpler to get the same point across.
I would also add that the DM asking for a perception check wasn't actually required, since passive perception could have handled the situation just fine. It's what passive perception is designed and intended to do. The only reason to ask for a roll would be if the passive perception score of the character is not high enough to detect the bandits automatically and even then, unless the player actually states they are actively looking for a hidden danger, instead of attacking someone while somehow keeping an eye on another location entirely, a DM doesn't have to make the player roll anything. Again the DM can make rulings.
In combat however, the system is designed to require actions to do things. Including an Action to roll stealth, to make an active perception check, etc... If the DM wants to houserule that no action is required that's fine, but it shouldn't be assumed by players that they can do skill checks and take actions in combat without needing to use the associated action.
again i wanna just say i was wrong and was using a variant that had me confused sorry 
Cromatic wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Cromatic wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
The term "moving stealthily" is used by the PHB to represent stealth and hiding. If you decide to use it to represent not needing an action to use those game elements, that's a ruling on your part and is not a representation of what the rules say.
You're comparing defined actions in the game that use an Action (hiding, active perception, shove, etc.. ) to skill checks used in conversation which don't (intimidate, deception, insight) to claim that because the latter doesn't use actions, the former doesn't either. This is nonsense. The PHB clearly defines those actions as requiring, at least in combat, an action investment.
And yes, there is. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Coredump00 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Ilse wrote:
I don't think the rules state clearly that every ability check inside combat requires to use an action.
But I usually read sentences that are structured like "If you want to accomplish A, you do B" as "B is the only way to accomplish A" and not as "B is one possible way to accomplish A".
Anyway, I think whether a ability check requires the usage of an action or not should depend on how long it takes. If it takes a significate portion of the 6 second time frame, I'd say it uses an action. Actively searching for a hidden enemy for example takes quite some time and effort, so I'd rule that you can't attack on the same turn (unless you can do more than one action). In most cases those 6 seconds are needed, so basically almost all ability checks should take an action.
There are exceptions, however, where I would say it's worth an ability check to determine something, but it's nothing that would actually take any time or can be done while doing other stuff. Most stuff to do that doesn't even take one second is probably so trivial that you shouldn't need an ability check in the first place, though.
Coredump00 wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Especially since the Hide Action, Active Perception and others specifically explain that they require an Action to use by default. You can make a case for those that don't specifically state a required action outside of stuff like Jaelis linked above, but not for those that do. That's a houserule.
Hide action says it uses an action, but does active perception? I mean I make it use an action, but I don't think it's in the rules.
Coredump00 wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
Ilse wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
There is a specific action for Searching, and there is a specific action for Hiding.
That does not mean it *requires* an action to use the Stealth, Perception, or Investigate skills.
Ilse, you are already on record asserting that it takes a full action just to *remember* something.... so I am not sure if there is any point to discussing beyond that.
Huh ... looks like this is going to need some rewrites. Basically it's up to the DM whether or not you can hide http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/ph_errata
Hiding (p. 177). The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. Also, the question isn’t whether a creature can see you when you’re hiding. The question is whether it can see you clearly.
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Ilse wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Ilse wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Okay, so help me out here. In Hoard of the Dragon Queen, there is a vampire hiding in mists. A sorceror wanders into the mist, so the vampire whispers its charm in that characters ears and says, "come hide over here with me. We can make out while your friends wander about like idiots." The wizard wanders into the mists and makes an active perception check to locate the vampire, and succeeds. He says, "hey, there's a damn vampire right over here."
Is the vampire no longer "hidden" from everyone? From just the wizard?
Using a lair action, and completely obscured by the mists, the vampire grabs the sorceror.
The sorceror, being charmed, is cool with this, quickens an invisibility and makes a Hide check as a standard action.
The rest of the PCs are now pretty well stumped. How can they find thier friend, and the vampire? Granted, two of them have a passive perception of 20, so the Hide of the vampire is not an "automatic" success, but it's still pretty likely.
If the sorceror is totally okay with the getting his blood sucked, does the vampire doing so end the vampire's Hide action? Does it give away his location without making him unseen/unheard?
Basically, I have no idea what the right rules are to follow in this environment.
I don't want to make it a murder fest (okay it should be a murder fest), but as near as I can figure it, they can only locate his position when he makes the bite attack, once each round. Otherwise they aren't able to target him (ie they must use reading actions and attack with disadvantage because they cant see him even if they know his position).
OoftaMeg wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
danyc wrote:
If you want to be the person who continues carrying on the old argument even after pretty obvious errata, you're welcome to it.
But trying to spin that a new text clarification that uses no specific rules terminology is actually referring to one specific piece of rules terminology and not another is pretty impressive. I wish you well in your windmill hunting.
danyc wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Rya.Reisender wrote:
jaelis wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
PC: I'll tear you limb from limb
Dm thinks that sounds intimidating to the peasent. The peasent runs away
Dm thinks that sounds like a challenge to the knight. The knight stands and fights
Dm thinks that sounds possibly intimidating to the squire. Roll an intimidate check to determine if the squire flees.
In all three instances the same thing was said. The first scenario no action required. The second scenario no action required. The third an action is required? How the heck does that work?
Next example:
PC: I'm going to attack the one I think is the leader
Dm: It's obvious which one is the leader
Dm: It's impossible to tell which is the leader
Dm: You may can tell. Roll a perception check to determine which is the leader.
In all 3 instances the same thing was attempted. The first 2 cases required no action. The third required an action? How the heck does that make sense?
Maybe if you guys want to continue this whole no action use for stuff, it might be best to make your own thread. I would like to begin the conversation regarding the errata that was just released before I update the guide.
First, the errata:
Hiding (p. 177). The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. Also, the question isn’t whether a creature can see you when you’re hiding. The question is whether it can see you clearly.
First I would like to discuss the fact that it says "when you're hiding", implying that you've already rolled for stealth and successfully managed to hide. So does the errata only affect when you lose hidden? OR is it implied to be an errata of hiding in general, how you being seen is no longer a problem as long as you're not "clearly" seen. This is important because if the rules for the act of hiding don't change, then the errata is still good because it makes it much easier to remain hidden. Either way it's good really.
Second, what constitutes not being able to be "clearly" seen? The errata begins with the all powerful cop out of "the DM decides" but still, we should be able to create a baseline in the guide for how certain mechanical effects are resolved when it comes to hiding. Namely:
Light obscurement
Heavy obscurement
half cover
3/4 cover
By definition, if you're lightly obscured you're not clearly visible (I'm ignoring Darkvision and the like for a moment) so does that mean anyone can hide in light obscurement post errata? If that's true, what happens to the main benefit of the Skulker feat? It becomes redundant..
Total cover states that a creature has this benefit if an obstacle completely obscures a target. So does that mean that half and 3/4 cover is a form of obscurement as well and so someone is not clearly seen as a result?
Discuss
Noctaem wrote:
Unless I'm missing something I don't see lightly obscured being related to being "not clearly visible" in the rules.
However, it seems implicit that the types of environments it mentions for being lightly obscured are environments where one would not typically be clearly seen. As such I'd say the woodelf racial trait and skulker feat both add minimal benefits to stealth now. I'll explain below.
So while creatures typically cannot be seen clearly in lightly obscured areas this doesn't mean that an enemy is required to never clearly see a PC in such an environment. As such the DM without using a houserule can simply say that the orc sees you clearly even though you are in light obscurement so you cannot attempt to hide.
So in my mind the benefit of the skulker feat is that it always allows you to hide in light obscurment regardless of anything else. So it avoids the situation where the DM says a creature clearly sees you while you are in light obscurment and thus cannot hide.
The woodelf ability would function the same way except it would only works with natural phenomenon like always.
That's my take anyways.
Here's the full revised text from the basic rules
Hiding
The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check’s total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.
You can’t hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase. 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.
jaelis wrote:
It's just up to the DM now. If your DM lets anyone hide when they are lightly obscured, then skulker and MotW are not very useful. If the DM normally requires heavy obscurement, then they are useful still.
Myself I'd say that given the existance of skulker, MotW, and similar abilities, it makes more sense to be a little stingy on hiding when lightly obscurred/partially covered. But its up to the individual DM.
This is a tough one for a guide.
I don't believe the intent is to nerf wood elves or people with the skulker feat. So it should be easier for some builds to hide (or remain hidden) in light cover for those characters.
Not a hard-and-fast rule, but I'd say that distance will probably factor into whether I rule whether someone is clearly seen when only hiding behind light cover. Someone lightly obscured by the bushes next to me? I'm going to see them unless they're a skulker or wood elf. Someone a hundred feet away lightly obscured by brush? I'd allow a hide check.
Same thing with 1/2 or 3/4 cover ... close up it's not going to work but far enough away it might.
Which is a really fuzzy answer which I'm not 100% happy with myself. Kind of falls into the definition of pornography that "you know it when you see it" which will vary quite a bit from DM to DM.
It probably also allows for hiding in a crowd - the "where's Waldo" scenario.
The errata clarification changes nothing. The Dungeon Master has always been the eyes and ears of the adventurers, and the DM has always decided when circumstances were appropriate for hiding.
It has never occurred to me that you were unable to wear camouflage and be "seen" without being noticed. Perception and distraction remain key considerations.
FrogReaver wrote:
Ignored my reply again as usual!
Noctaem wrote:
I don't think responding to your posts is beneficial to the discussion basically. So I'm choosing not to. They have thus far fallen into the "you're wrong and I'm right" basket and revolve around either making strawmen out of what I post, distorting what's actually in the guide, making inflamatory or bait statements and so on. You have a nice day.
Ilse wrote:
Regarding the "clearly", I would simply recommend asking your players. Like if there is a situation where you are not sure if a monster will detect the hidden rogue, ask him how he wants to approach "Hiding". If you think his explanation is a reasonable explanation for why he wouldn't be seen clearly, then he stays hidden.
Don't use cover. You can have no cover and still not be seen out of other reasons (camouflage, distraction, etc.). You can also have 3/4 cover and still be seen. Like when you are looking through an arrow slit while a creature on the other sides looks at the arrow slit to spot if there's someone behind it.
Updated the guide to include the recent Errata for hiding.
Noctaem wrote:
arnwolf666 wrote:
A question regarding being obscured and hiding. I may be overanalysing things here, so thanks in advance for reading the question. Anyway:
When someone is trying to hide, you compare their stealth check to the other party’s passive perception or a perception roll, based on the situation. Perception is the skill that allows you to notice things, through sight or hearing, for example. Which leads to my actual question: using sight to perceive objects that are lightly or heavily obscured both imparts a penalty. You get disadvantage on perception checks that rely on sight for the former and you can’t use any skills that rely on sight for the latter, as you’re effectively blinded when looking into a heavily obscured area. Does this mean that a character that’s stealthed, heavily obscured and stationary, always succeeds on his stealth check? Since he’s not moving, he’s not making any sound, so only sight would come into play, and sight-based checks automatically fail. Similarly, when trying to perceive a character that’s lightly obscured and not moving, you would get disadvantage on your perception roll? However, when these hidden characters start moving, these penalties would then get dropped, as there is a chance the character makes a sound, which may be noticed through perception. If this is how you handle it, would you call for a new stealth and perception roll when the character starts moving after remaining stationary for a while?
KangaxxTheLich wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
KangaxxTheLich wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Another quick question: Under which conditions are stealth checks ever rerolled? For example, A lvl 9 rogue (Thief) has advantage on a Dexterity (Stealth) check if he moves no more than half his speed on the same turn. Does this mean that a thief needs to reroll his stealth check every turn depending on how far he moves? Or do you just detract 5 from the stealth check he previously rolled with advantage when he suddenly decides to start moving full speed?
KangaxxTheLich wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting/personal attacks are violations of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
No one here has stated the real problem with stealth in 5e:
"It's up to the GM to decide."
The problem with that is that it is very difficult for many GM's to decide! If it's up to the GM to decide, then it's up to the GM to fully grasp the environment the characters are in, and whether or not to allow details into that environment in which characters may hide -- or NOT to add those details! With everything else that can be happening around characters in any given situation, having to suddenly wrack your brains for imaginary environmental details can be pretty rough for a lot of folks. This is why so many people are searching so hard for some hard and fast rules they can simply follow with regards to stealth under most circumstances.
Let's all face it, though... it's up to the GM to decide whether there are huge crates, trees, dense fog, etc, etc, etc for a character to hide by. If a character asks, "Do a see some place I think I could hide?" -- it's going to come down to one question in the GM's mind, and that is, "do I want to allow this character to hide, or not?"
Whichever answer he comes up with, one thing will eventually dawn on all but the densest players, and that is: "The GM decides whether I hide or not... not me."
And it sucks. It just sucks.
Guest1888013255 wrote:
Guest1888013255 wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
I apologize if you already have and I'm just missing something, but have you updated the guide to account for this bit of errata? "Vision and Light (p. 183). A heavily obscured area doesn’t blind you, but you are effectively blinded when you try to see something obscured by it." I'd really appreciate some clarification on it, since I'm a little confused how this works, thanks!
Coolossus2123 wrote:
Coolossus2123 wrote:
Thank you!
I wanted to get people's opinions on this. Recently a DM entered into a situation where three rogues were unbeatable and he stated so. Essentially we were in the woods. He would have the rogues attack from hidden, (action), do their full move away (move), and then do another hide check (rogue bonus).
It was basically stated that we could never catch them.. because they would just move away and reroll another hide if we spotted one. They were separated from one another, so if we were lucky enough to see one with a perception check (our action) we couldnt get close enough because that rogue would just double move and hide again. It seemed to me that them constantly being able to rehide and be virtually undetectable after taking an action and a move, was unfair. I know rogues CAN do that - but I am wondering if they can hide so easily when we can already see them. Thoughts?
Bdarnell73 wrote:
Well if you are in woods, I'm sure there is always a large enough tree around to hide.
Ways to stop "attack, run and hide tactics":
- Stealth check may fail against passive perception which allows you to:
- Use dash and move next to a rogue. Even though that means you can't attack this turn, it forces him to use disengage.
- Use ranged attacks at the rogue that at least have the same range than his attack.
- Completely surround the rogue (to hide he must be near an obstacle, so you don't actually need 8 people for a complete surround usually).
- Use something that prevents the rogue from moving (spell, grapple, prone).
- Increase your speed (items, spells).
If he's hidden:
- Simply guess the rogue's position based on where you last saw him. If guessed correctly, you can roll at disadvantage and hit the rogue even though he's hidden.
- Guess the rogue's position and move next to it.
- Make first party members actively search for the rogue to unhide him. After success, the remaining party members can use the tactics above.
At the very least you can get to the situation where the rogue needs to use all his actions and bonus actions just to disengage and hide and he will never be able to attack. That means basically stalemate. But well, someone is bound to run out of stamina eventually. You might reach the end of the forest. Or a cliff.
Thanks, the rogues started at a distance so we could never really get close. In order to perceive which direction they were in we would need to spend an action to make a perception check. The rogues would just move, hide and attack, or double move and hide. It was very frustrating.
Apparently, they either had such high bonuses or the DM was rolling incredibly high.. the lowest stealth that we could beat during the entire encounter was 21. No one had passive anywhere near that.
He does similar things with invisible creatures... they are undetectable.. if you think you might know where they are he just has them move. Oh well.
Thanks for your inputs guys.
Bdarnell73 wrote:
Bdarnell73 wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Yep, if someone is just invisible, the players will still know his location, if he didn't use the hide action. So they can at least attack him with disadvantage without having to guess.
Rogues can have quite high stealth modifiers, so yeah, it can be that the rogues don't fail their rolls ever (even a level 1 rogue can already have +7 on stealth), but if they do fail it, you'd know where they are. Change to detect them with passive perception are probably only 20%, though if there are three rogues that's already 3 times 20%.
Also if some rogues really want to run away (not attack) it's hard to do something against that, better just dash into the other direction so they will never find you again and be done with it. If they want to attack however, you will have means to catch up (see above), unless your whole group is just melee attackers that all have equal or lower speed than the rogues.
Is that how it is done? In a situation where multiple creatures are hiding, a single Perception check can be made against all the creatures, not just one? How is this so? Besides that, the DM was supposed to roll every time for each rogue tries to hide right?
Coolossus2123 wrote:
Thanks for the help Rya! And thank you Noctaem, you've been a huge help and i'm really glad this guide exists. It's helped me alot. That did a perfect job of clearing things up. Now I thought about it for a little bit, and I did come across two more questions that I thought you could help me out with:
First, a question on the relationship of invisibilty granted by different things and parts of spellcasting. Mainly the first question is, for things that grant you invisibility and specifies that it ends when you cast a spell (such as the "Invisibility" spell), do you stay invisible when you take the ready action for a spell? The problem to me is that on one hand, if you count “casting a spell” as when it is literally cast i.e. completed, you stay invisible until you complete all the steps for casting a spell and the spell is set off (the reaction) when a trigger occurs, which is then when you lose invisibility. On the other, if you count “cast a spell” as beginning the process of concentrating and preparing and all the stuff before it is effectively set off, you wouldn’t be invisible while readying a spell. I think the latter is correct, as those spells and such I was talking about that grant invisibility on that condition, are not referring to the ready action at all and still do not specify that it is when the spell is actually completed that you lose invisibility, just the whole "cast a spell" process.
Secondly, In the same situation above (granted invisibility specifies no casting spells) what about being invisible when using a ritual for spells? Is it treated the same as casting them?
Third, there was a recent thread i'd like your take on, It was about if a creature could take cover using an illusion. The majority of answerers said no. There seemed to be a few different ways it could be handled, but almost all of them were based around the idea it would be treated as concealment rather then cover (to which I agree). The issue I have is no matter what way it is handled, as long as it is treated differently then regular cover, it will break player immerision. It's fine when players use illusionary cover while fighting creatures, as DM controlled creatures wont pick up that out-of-game they are attacking something with stats being handled differently then they would if they players had real cover. However, real-life players who know they rules will pick up eventually that whenever cover is handled differently then usual, it's because its an illusion. Then it breaks down into how it could become tedious for when the players know its an illusion but their PCs dont, then a good thing. Perhaps this is more of a non-issue, where the solution is just roleplay and having to act like their characters still dont know, and I'm also taking into account that the DM controls these creatures and could just never have them use illusions for cover. But even if the DM rules "No creature can use illusions for cover" the same thing will apply because it means the creatures can't even stand behind the illusion because when the players attack, they will notice they dont have an AC bonus, and they will be alerted it's an illusion. Any suggestions? If it helps, here's a link to the thread: http://community.wizards.com/forum/dungeon-master-help/threads/4245401
Fourth, the topic of hiding, specifically moving while hiding and how the stealth checks work. Can you run or move at a fast pace while being hidden? How do you manage moving while hiding over long distances? Also, if one creature notices you, are you no longer considered hidden in general, or just to that creature? I understand that the creature who finds you could easily alert everyone else that is hostile to you of your location. But it would make sense that one creature might notice you while others in the area would not. The only problem with this that I could see, is that it would be complicated or tedious to handle out of game. For example: There's a group of hostile goblins after a player, and the player makes a stealth check to hide, and does so successfully. A werewolf precedes to enter the area, and either has a higher passive perception then the player's check, or actively searches for the player and succeeds. The player then runs behind some barrels away from the werewolf and hides again. Wouldn't the DM have to continuously track and compare the results of the old check the player made if the goblins start actively searching (as it obiviously beat their passive perception), and the new check for the werewolf if it starts searching again? And finally, with stealth checks, theres never a situation where you have to keep rolling for stealth while hidden, even if you attempt other actions while being hidden right? The only reason you'd have to make another stealth check to be hidden, is either if a creature detects you and you must do this to become hidden again, or you actively decide to stop hiding,and to do it again you must make another check?
And last but not least, what is the difference between moving stealthily (detailed in the PHB on page 183) and hiding? Maybe it was just referring to hiding by this, which it would touch on later, and they're one and the same. I know moving stealthily specifies you must travel at a slow pace but, if it is in fact different, does it grant you anything mechanically?
I'd say the ready action thing is up to the DM to decide really. You could look at ready as the "easier alternative" to delay your action which no longer exists, in that case I'd simply say you stay invisible until the spell comes off. This not covered by the rules, however.
On the other hand the rules DO state:
When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy
Coolossus2123 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
Most of these things aren't clear in the rules, for example whether "when casting a spell" refers to begin of cast or end of cast and whether "you give away your position" means that you become unhidden for everyone or only unhidden from the creature that the paragraph is referring to.
Making being hidden something that just can be "on" or "off" makes playing and keeping track a lot easier, though. So even if it's not what the rules intend, I'd still say this is the recommended practice.
Nobody official posts to these boards so take anything written on any of these threads (especially anything written by me) with a grain of salt.
OoftaMeg wrote:
JohnnyBlaise wrote:
ezrider23 wrote:
It's possible to run it that way sure.
OoftaMeg wrote:
I'm not entirely aware of you example but...
The DM only needs to keep track of the intial stealth rolls that were called for. Then the hidden condition is broken either via a passive perception, an active perception, you breaking the hidden condition or a a NPC/Monster stumbling upon you and therefore breaking your hidden condition by seeing you.
As to the large castle and wraiths. You would be hidden from those wraiths until they find you. The Duegar has found you and can then point you out if he so choses thus helping the Wraiths. Otherwise at this point you are still hidden from the Wraiths. When you break cover to move and rehide you are no longer hidden from anyone that can see you.
Sorry if that's confusing.
If I understand your scenario, the person trying to hide makes one stealth check opposed by every creature that could reasonably see them, not multiple.
There's not always one simple answer though, stealth is very fuzzy and situation dependant. How often to ask for another check is one of those things.
I'm not saying noctaem is wrong, there are certain situations where one creature seeing you effectively reveals your location to everyone they tell because of the way hiding works and the whole "not clearly seen" text they added. In many cases the guard points an tells "there he is" and you're now clearly seen. Other cases they may just have a general idea because you're hiding behind some baskets.
So how's that for a squishy answer?
OoftaMeg wrote:
You dont need to "keep track of multiple stealth checks." If you are hiding from everyone behind a sofa, and Jobber A sees you behind the sofa, so you roll across the floor to the chair, you then roll a new Stealth check, replacing your old "I'm hiding behind the sofa" result with your, "I'm hiding behind the chair" result. Not really complicated at all.
Now, what about the wood elf who wears this? http://g01.a.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1xAX4IVXXXXb9aXXXq6xXFXXXy/3D-realtree-leaves-camouflage-ghillie-suit-camouflage-hunting-suit-birdwatch-airsoft-paintball-fishing-photography-use-purpose.jpg
" You can attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist, and other natural phenomena."
Yeah, well, as I said earlier I wouldn't make hidden per person just like Noctaem because it's annoying to track, but if you really wanted to do that I'd do it like JohnnyBlaise. Basically using the hide action again includes coming out of hiding first, so the old stealth roll result is completely dropped. No need to remember that.
Thank you guys so much, you've all really helped me with this! Noctaem and Rya, thank you for taking the time to respond to all my questions, it gave me a much better understanding of how things work, and I very much appreciate it.
I'm still debating on which method I'm going to use, as I can see the up and downsides for both. I think I am leaning to just having the hidden status being taken away as soon as one creature notices you for the sake of ease. But heres a question that did come up for using the method JohnnyBlaise said, going off the view that just because one creature notices you, doesn't mean you're not hidden to others. Would combat start the moment that creature notices you? And if so, it doesn't really affect things one way or the other (like it wouldn't force you to stop hiding, it just makes you unhidden to that creature until you hide again, which would replace your stealth check with the new stealth check) as you can still be hiding during combat? You just wouldn't be able to attack because that would make your hiding stop completely to everyone?
I guess my final question on stealth for now (which is mostly for Noctaem but also for anyone who knows), which JohnnyBlaise reminded me of through his picture, is my confusion on what the Wood Elf trait "Mask of the Wild" does for you. In this guide it says:
Wood Elf Hiding: Just like the halfling, a Wood Elf is capable of attacking from hiding and then hide once again without having to move or make any other check so long as the Wood Elf is within the required environment as detailed in the feature itself. The recent errata to hiding and vision has made the wood elf trait even more sensical when it comes to the general rules.
I assume that this is in fact referring to "Mask of the Wild" which states "You can attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist, and other natural phenomena." First off, where does it say you can do this without checks? To me this seemed like it was made at first with the thought that you must be heavily obscured to hide, and gave them the ability to attempt to hide being only lightly obscured, not to attack and keep hiding without making another stealth check (though I may just be misintepreting this). Second, why hasn't there been any errata on what the wood elf trait does, as isn't it a little unfair that one of the main traits it gets is something everyone can do already as the rules now state "The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. Also, the question isn’t whether a creature can see you when you’re hiding. The question is whether it can see you clearly"? To me this seems like it is unnecessary like the skulker feat.
For the whole what happens when one opponent notices you, I would just run it as having the other opponents that don't notice you be surprised and begin combat like that.
Sorry, the wood elf text you quoted is not clear, I've updated it. The "without other check" part was a result of a very long and tedious discussion many months ago on these boards with people who believed that it was overpowered and stated there should be more checks required on top of just rolling stealth and beating passive perception as normal. Basically things like requiring that the character moves to a new location and so on. Anyway I've updated the post to make it more clear. You need to roll stealth to hide everything you attempt to become hidden. And yes, the recent errata to stealth and hiding has made a number of other game elements seemingly very lackluster. These could possibly include (based on DM fiat) but are not limited to the Skulker feat, wood elf racial, hafling racial, etc.. I expect we might see some updates on this point eventually from WOTC. Maybe to clarify that cover doesn't count toward being "unclearly seen" or changing these game elements to keep them relevant.
So to answer your question, depending on your DM, the various racial traits mentioned above might allow you to hide in scenarios where you would otherwise not be able to or they might be completely useless because you can already do so by default post errata.
If you have any further questions don't hesitate to ask
Thank you!
Would combat start the moment that creature notices you?
Not to keep harping but even if that enemy who notices you shouts "enemies" it does not change your hidden condition from the others whose passive perception was beat. Now the DM could perhaps make active perception checks to spot you, with or without advantage via the aid. None the less even for sake of ease it shouldn't change who can and cannot see whom. Now if combat should occur the hidden PC should have surprise vs any who did not notice them but not against the one who spotted them. After this the PC can chose to attempt at rehiring from all parties based on meeting the hide criteria.
That's how I'd handle that situation.
ezrider23 wrote:
ezrider23 wrote:
Coolossus2123 wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
But hidden means that the person doesn't know where you are, so if someone tells his allies where you are, wouldn't that end hidden in any case? And even if not, say someone is hiding behind a pillar. One enemy sees him and tells the others "he's behind that pillar", but they can't see him from their position. That still means they know where he is. So now, let's just say he still counts as hidden from them. Then they move right next to him to attack him melee. Would you still say they have disadvantage on their attack roll? Obviously they are standing right next to him and he's not invisible.
The point is, there doesn't seem to be many situations where it's really worth keeping track of "hidden" per character. It's just extra effort with no benefit.
Rya.Reisender wrote:
So these are the most incompetent guards in the entire realm?
For your scenario I would have combat start once the guard noticed the threat (as in found the hiding rogue) and yelled "he's over here!" Then have everyone involved roll initiative. I'm not sure if I would have the other guards be surprised considering that they are aware there's a rogue hiding around and are actively looking for him. So yeah no surprise awarded, unless the rogue didn't notice the guard approaching him and just suddenly hears "He's over here!". I would say the rogue is surprised if that's the case.
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote: