D&D 5E A Treatise on Hiding

[WhosAChaoticGoodBoy]

Why are you rolling a check at the point of declaration? What's the DC? Against who?

The DC of your Dexterity (Stealth) check is the Passive Perception of those you’re hiding from. Creatures with advantage or disadvantage to perceive you gain +5 or -5 to their Passive Perception, respectively. If a creature searches for signs of your presence, your check is contested by that creature's Wisdom (Perception) check


I wouldn't force my players to roll a DEX (Stealth) check if nobody was around to hide from, but at the same time, my players don't attempt to hide if they're convinced they're alone. In practice, if they roll to see if they successfully hide and nobody is around, I say they're successfully hidden.

 

[Shiroiken]

The DC of your Dexterity (Stealth) check is the Passive Perception of those you’re hiding from. Creatures with advantage or disadvantage to perceive you gain +5 or -5 to their Passive Perception, respectively. If a creature searches for signs of your presence, your check is contested by that creature's Wisdom (Perception) check


I wouldn't force my players to roll a DEX (Stealth) check if nobody was around to hide from, but at the same time, my players don't attempt to hide if they're convinced they're alone. In practice, if they roll to see if they successfully hide and nobody is around, I say they're successfully hidden.

Out of combat, I don't require a roll until someone would react to seeing them. This prevents anyone from adjusting their play based on the roll (which many players will do sub-consciously, if not deliberately). Since my players know this, they don't know if they are being observed or not (because no check is called for). In combat, I have the roll made at the end of the Turn (unless something needs to react, such as if a Rogue is going to attack after hiding).

As for hiding in a place where people know where you are, I use Mike Mearl's suggestion: observers gain Advantage on their Perception against Stealth. This limits the use of hiding behind something repeatedly in combat, but doesn't eliminate it.

 

[S'mon]

Thanks.

However, is it just me that takes a step back and asks: why do we even use this clusterfrack of a rule?

It's not that there aren't thousands of other rpgs out there that have perfectly adequate stealth & hide rules...

Have to agree; I think the 5e 'rules' are occasionally applicable in combat, but in most contexts are best ignored.

 

[The Old Crow]

Thanks.

However, is it just me that takes a step back and asks: why do we even use this clusterfrack of a rule?

It's not that there aren't thousands of other rpgs out there that have perfectly adequate stealth & hide rules...

Out of curiosity, what RPGs do you find have good stealth and hide rules, and why? I mostly have just played D&D for years, so I have no idea.

 

[merwins]

This is an extremely timely thread.

Let's say a party is traveling through the hills. The rogue is wandering off and being stealthy. Rolled a stealth check and everything. But they can't actually see anyone to hide from. Are they still sneaky enough to stay hidden?

Rules seem exceptionally hand-wavey. I'm okay with that, but I just want to be sure I'm not overlooking anything.

Seems to me you can hide from something you can't see, but you can't hide from something that can see you.

(EDIT: LORDY, I missed reading an entire section of posts. Feel free to ignore the above unless you feel compelled to respond.)

I have ruled at my table that you can hide only if your opponent cannot be sure of your location at the time you attempt to hide. This prevents rogues from taking a step behind any available cover and hiding immediately after making an attack. Regardless of whether I can't see you because you're obscured, I know EXACTLY where you are. If I'm even remotely paying attention, I KNOW you're behind that rock. I can target it with a ready action and plink you when you pop out to make your "sneak" attack. I know this isn't necessarily by the book, but for my sanity, I've had to do it. My halfling Sharpshooter-enabled rogue with Crossbow Expert would otherwise be insanely powerful, using his Bonus action to Hide every round (for advantage on attacks) no matter what, with ridiculous sneak attack bonuses EVERY round from allies next to opponents. There's some additional DM-management around this rule, but it seems to slow down the abuse from every round to every other round, which is at least more manageable.

Is there any circumstance under which an attack does NOT reveal a hidden attacker?

 

[Caliban]

Is there any circumstance under which an attack does NOT reveal a hidden attacker?

If you have the Skulker feat, if you miss with a ranged attack you are still hidden.

If you are attacking from beyond the range of their vision (i.e. you have 120' darkvision and they have 60' darkvision, and you are attacking from 100' away) - they'll know the direction the attack came from, but you still won't be visible to them. This may or may not mean you are still hidden (see previous discussions on the difference between unseen/invisible and hidden).