D&D 5E Crawford on Stealth

[Hriston]

This is the text for the Hide Action In Combat:-

"When you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check in an attempt to hide, following the rule in chapter 7 for hiding. If you succeed, you gain certain benefits, as described in the “Unseen Attackers and Targets” section later in this chapter"

If you succeed, you gain the benefits. You didn't have them before, because you were not hidden before.

Before you took the Hide action and/or rolled your DEX (Stealth) check? Of course not! Neither I nor anyone else has said you did. You seem to be confusing a creature's attempt to hide with the contest that ensues when and if someone tries to find it. You also seem to be saying that a creature can't be hidden unless someone is looking for it.

If you were already hidden, you wouldn't take the Hide action to try to gain what you already have!

If you weren't already hidden, no one would bother trying to find you!

Upshot, you try to hide in combat because you are not currently hidden! On a tied Perception/Stealth contest, the situation remains unchanged. In this case it means you remain un-hidden.

You're supposed to actually look at chapter 7, where it says, "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." If a creature succeeds in its search and notices you, you don't "remain un-hidden." In fact, you remain hidden to all other creatures who have either failed in their own search or haven't bothered to search for you in the first place.

Besides, it's widely acknowledged that a creature's WIS (Perception) score sets the DC for your DEX (Stealth) check to go unnoticed by it, and not the other way around.

 

[Arial Black]

Before you took the Hide action and/or rolled your DEX (Stealth) check? Of course not! Neither I nor anyone else has said you did. You seem to be confusing a creature's attempt to hide with the contest that ensues when and if someone tries to find it. You also seem to be saying that a creature can't be hidden unless someone is looking for it.

The situation in question is when a rogue (probably) is in combat, un-hidden, decides to take the Hide Action In Combat to become Hidden. He starts off un-hidden!

The very section you quoted states that when he tries to do this (change from being 'un-hidden' to 'hidden') he has to make a Stealth check, and since in combat everyone is assumed to be paying attention to their surroundings and especially the creatures in it, then those creatures are looking at him as he tries. Therefore, his hide attempt is a contest between his Stealth and their Perception.

As JC made clear, being invisible does not make you hidden. You can't even attempt to hide while observed. The sequence is not visible and un-hidden->hide->turn invisible because you cannot attempt to hide without the invisibility making you un-observed. The sequence is visible and un-hidden->turn invisible (you remain un-hidden)->hide. Since you are not hidden while you are invisible but un-hidden, trying to hide at that point means you are trying to change fron 'un-hidden' to 'hidden'. If the opposed Stealth/Perception check is tied then the situation remains un-changed, meaning that you remain un-hidden.

If you weren't already hidden, no one would bother trying to find you!

If you were already hidden then you wouldn't be trying to hide!

Besides, it's widely acknowledged that a creature's WIS (Perception) score sets the DC for your DEX (Stealth) check to go unnoticed by it, and not the other way around.

Actually, it's widely acknowledged that the Stealth check sets the DC for the Perception check. But it turns out that this is a holdover from previous editions and is not part of 5E; neither is it the other way round. The normal 5E rules for tied contests (situation remains unchanged) is the only rule that applies. Neither skill has precedence over the other.

 

[Flamestrike]

Utilizing PP in this manner is entirely more interesting and engaging than "just telling the plays to roll".

In a way thats a good ting.

In the old days, the Player would tell you what they were doing. "Ill walk down the corridor slowly, with my back to the wall, probing ahead of me with a 10' pole and scanning the roof for any more piercers. When I get to the door, Ill peer through the keyhole looking for light or movement, then spend a few moment listening quietly at the door'

All too often in skill bases games, this becomes 'Ill roll perception for the hallway with the door'.

The disadvantages of the old system was it was gated behind a player decision. If the player didn't say he was specifically looking at X then he didnt find Y. In a skill based system, Y is often gated behind a roll based off the characters abilities (specifically his perception score).

Old school favors player skill. Modern games favor character skill.

The current system is a blend of those two methods, where specifically looking for something in the right area either auto succeeds, or grants advantage on the check, or permits a perception check to find Y.

What Crawford said re your passive score being the floor for Perception result, only applies when it comes to locating hidden creatures (where your passive perception score often doesnt matter, seeing as in order to become hidden, the creature must have first rolled higher than that number anyway on a Stealth check, thus setting a DC higher than your passive perception score and invalidating it).

What he was saying was if PC with a Passive perception of 20 walks into a room containing a hidden (Stealth check 15) creature, the PC automatically notices that hidden creature (no roll needed). In order for that hidden creature to hide from that PC during the ensuing combat, it must roll higher than 21 on its Stealth check (that PCs passive perception). Once they do so, they become hidden relative to that PC, and remain so until revealing themselves or the PC rolls higher than the Stealth check of the hidden creature (which is 21+).

From that point the 'perception floor' is irrelevant seeing as 'treating a Perception check as less than 20 as the floor of 20' means that perception check fails and the creature is still hidden (because it needed to roll higher than the floor number to be successful in the first place).

 

[Flamestrike]

Actually, it's widely acknowledged that the Stealth check sets the DC for the Perception check.

Its both.

To hide from you I need to become unseen, and then crack a number higher than your passive Perception score on my Stealth check (via the Hide action).

The reason its higher than (and not = to or higher than) is due to the wording of chapter 7 (the DM compares the Perception scores of critters to your stealth check result to see if you're hidden). Even though you're the one rolling Stealth, its the other creatures that are applying their ability score +10 to your check result. If the contest is a tie, then (according to the rules for skill Contests) the situation remains unchanged.

So when hiding from a dude with Passive perception 20, you need to crack a 21 or or higher on your Stealth check. Rolling a 20 means the situation remains unchanged and you dont become hidden.

Presuming you roll higher than his Passive perception score, then your Stealth check result sets the Perception DC for him to find you in subsequent turns via the Search action. Note that when he uses his action to Search, he also has to roll higher than your Stealth check result to find you (if he equals your Stealth check result the situation remains unchanged, and you remain hidden).

Once you become hidden relative to a creature, 'passive perception as the floor' ceases to matter. You've already had to roll higher than that number to become hidden in the first place, so your opponent defaulting to his passive perception score means he defaults to a check result of 'failure'.

 

[Hriston]

The situation in question is when a rogue (probably) is in combat, un-hidden, decides to take the Hide Action In Combat to become Hidden. He starts off un-hidden!

Yeah, so?

The very section you quoted states that when he tries to do this (change from being 'un-hidden' to 'hidden') he has to make a Stealth check, and since in combat everyone is assumed to be paying attention to their surroundings and especially the creatures in it, then those creatures are looking at him as he tries.

No, they aren't. You can't hide with creatures looking at you, unless you're invisible. He needs to be unseen before he can try to hide.

Therefore, his hide attempt is a contest between his Stealth and their Perception.

This is where you go wrong. His attempt to hide is his DEX (Stealth) check. That's only half of the contest. The other half of the contest involves someone trying to find him, and the contest resolves whether someone does.

As JC made clear, being invisible does not make you hidden. You can't even attempt to hide while observed. The sequence is not visible and un-hidden->hide->turn invisible because you cannot attempt to hide without the invisibility making you un-observed. The sequence is visible and un-hidden->turn invisible (you remain un-hidden)->hide. Since you are not hidden while you are invisible but un-hidden, trying to hide at that point means you are trying to change fron 'un-hidden' to 'hidden'.

This is all correct, but the thing that makes you hidden at that point is not how high you roll on your DEX (Stealth) check. The thing that makes you hidden is the DM's determination that circumstances are appropriate for hiding and your action declaration to stay out of sight and stay quiet. The result of your DEX (Stealth) check then determines whether you are noticed or not, when compared to a creature's WIS (Perception) check.

If the opposed Stealth/Perception check is tied then the situation remains un-changed, meaning that you remain un-hidden.

No, it means you remain unnoticed.

If you were already hidden then you wouldn't be trying to hide!

Again, you're confusing a creature's attempt to hide with the contest that determines if someone finds the hidden creature.

Actually, it's widely acknowledged that the Stealth check sets the DC for the Perception check. But it turns out that this is a holdover from previous editions and is not part of 5E; neither is it the other way round. The normal 5E rules for tied contests (situation remains unchanged) is the only rule that applies. Neither skill has precedence over the other.

From the Sage himself: "When hiding, you want to meet or exceed another creature's passive Perception score." Jeremy Crawford tweeted that reply on 22 August, 2016, clarifying that Stealth wins by default on a tie. A creature's passive Perception score sets the DC. If you hit it, you remain hidden from that creature.

 

[Satyrn]

From the Sage himself: "When hiding, you want to meet or exceed another creature's passive Perception score." Jeremy Crawford tweeted that reply on 22 August, 2016, clarifying that Stealth wins a tie.

That seems odd to me.

 

[Hriston]

That seems odd to me.

It's only odd if you're expecting it to work how it does in some other edition. I've never played that edition, so I don't have anything to unlearn when it comes to the hiding rules.

 

[Satyrn]

It's only odd if you're expecting it to work how it does in some other edition. I've never played that edition, so I don't have anything to unlearn when it comes to the hiding rules.

I don't know what edition you refer to. I'm not even sure I remember the hiding rules from any of them, and if I did, it'd be a jumble of 3e and 4e.

But then, I also don't really know the hiding rules of this edition (don't tell the people in that other thread!) because I find them so small to not bother with (How did I get mired in that other thread? ) and I don't even use Passive Perception when DMing (They're discussing rules I ignore! ).

It just seems counter intuitive. I picture the Stealth check as setting the DC for the Perception check, not the other way around. (Although really, they're arguing about invisibility, not the hiding rules, so I'm not trolling! )

So now I'm wondering, which edition am I thinking of?

(Ignore the stuff in parentheses, please)

 

[Lanliss]

I don't know what edition you refer to. I'm not even sure I remember the hiding rules from any of them, and if I did, it'd be a jumble of 3e and 4e.

But then, I also don't really know the hiding rules of this edition (don't tell the people in that other thread!) because I find them so small to not bother with (How did I get mired in that other thread? ) and I don't even use Passive Perception when DMing (They're discussing rules I ignore! ).

It just seems counter intuitive. I picture the Stealth check as setting the DC for the Perception check, not the other way around. (Although really, they're arguing about invisibility, not the hiding rules, so I'm not trolling! )

So now I'm wondering, which edition am I thinking of?

(Ignore the stuff in parentheses, please)

Since I am ignoring that last bit in parentheses, I am not ignoring any of the stuff in parentheses. But that means I am not ignoring that last part, which means I am ignoring things in parentheses, which means I'm not, which means I am...

More seriously, the other possibility is that you just interpret the rules differently, and it has nothing to do with another edition. I get that all the time. "stop turning 5E into 2e.", "This isn't meant to be like that edition, stop trying to change it.", yet I never played any other edition. I just manage to make up rules for my stuff that fits the older editions themes really well I guess.

 

[Hriston]

I don't know what edition you refer to. I'm not even sure I remember the hiding rules from any of them, and if I did, it'd be a jumble of 3e and 4e.

But then, I also don't really know the hiding rules of this edition (don't tell the people in that other thread!) because I find them so small to not bother with (How did I get mired in that other thread? ) and I don't even use Passive Perception when DMing (They're discussing rules I ignore! ).

It just seems counter intuitive. I picture the Stealth check as setting the DC for the Perception check, not the other way around. (Although really, they're arguing about invisibility, not the hiding rules, so I'm not trolling! )

So now I'm wondering, which edition am I thinking of?

(Ignore the stuff in parentheses, please)

I don't know. It may be an edition of D&D you imagined or made up yourself, but it isn't 5e. Maybe you wouldn't find the 5e hiding rules so odd if you were more familiar with them. I'm not sure why there's a need for some to comment on things with which they're unfamiliar, but it's a phenomena I encounter all too frequently.