D&D 5E Can Objects Be Hidden?

[Ilbranteloth]

Under most circumstances I would say there is no need to do a check to hide an object. The player informs the DM they want to hide the object. The DM asks how carefully they want to hide it and how much time they want to take to do so and sets a DC accordingly. Finding a hidden object is not an opposed check, it is static.

If you are using a special skill to try and make it more difficult to find, such as camouflaging the object then there might be a check on that aspect, which could modify the DC for finding the object.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World

I agree, mostly.

The DC of finding the object generally isn't decided by the person hiding it. It's determined by the hiding place. To put it a different way, whether a player hides something under a rug, or the DM does, the chance for finding it is the same. The DM determines how hard it is to find and sets the DC.

The only time you'd need to use a skill check is if there is a difficulty in hiding the object. I wouldn't use an opposed check when camouflaging something, though. I'd use a skill check to determine if you successfully camouflaged the item. You could assign different DCs for the level of camouflage. But the skill check is to determine if you were successful in camouflaging it, and the Perception/Investigation to find it is set by the DC of finding the item itself.

I get why you might want to use an opposed check - but I think a static object that was hidden at some time prior is very different than a Stealth check when you are actively attempting to remain hidden. That's an opposed check because you are actively attempting to avoid detection by using your skill at stealth. A hidden object, on the other hand, is no longer actively using your skill. The DC is fixed, and is the same as any other object hidden in the same way.

 

[Maxperson]

I agree, mostly.

The DC of finding the object generally isn't decided by the person hiding it. It's determined by the hiding place. To put it a different way, whether a player hides something under a rug, or the DM does, the chance for finding it is the same. The DM determines how hard it is to find and sets the DC.

The only time you'd need to use a skill check is if there is a difficulty in hiding the object. I wouldn't use an opposed check when camouflaging something, though. I'd use a skill check to determine if you successfully camouflaged the item. You could assign different DCs for the level of camouflage. But the skill check is to determine if you were successful in camouflaging it, and the Perception/Investigation to find it is set by the DC of finding the item itself.

I get why you might want to use an opposed check - but I think a static object that was hidden at some time prior is very different than a Stealth check when you are actively attempting to remain hidden. That's an opposed check because you are actively attempting to avoid detection by using your skill at stealth. A hidden object, on the other hand, is no longer actively using your skill. The DC is fixed, and is the same as any other object hidden in the same way.

I can see it being both a roll or fixed DC, depending on circumstances. If a player told me that he was hiding the gem inside the pillowcase on the bed, I'd assign a DC to that. However, no matter how good I am, I'm not generally going to be able to describe every little thing in a room, or think of all of the hiding spots, and neither will the player. However, the 7th level rogue he's playing will likely know ways and places to hide things that neither of us do. I can see the player of the rogue saying, "I hide the gem in the best spot I can find.", and then rolling a stealth(wis) check to see how good a spot was found. Then that roll would be the opposed check for searches.

 

[Caliban]

I can see it being both a roll or fixed DC, depending on circumstances. If a player told me that he was hiding the gem inside the pillowcase on the bed, I'd assign a DC to that. However, no matter how good I am, I'm not generally going to be able to describe every little thing in a room, or think of all of the hiding spots, and neither will the player. However, the 7th level rogue he's playing will likely know ways and places to hide things that neither of us do. I can see the player of the rogue saying, "I hide the gem in the best spot I can find.", and then rolling a stealth(wis) check to see how good a spot was found. Then that roll would be the opposed check for searches.

Whereas if they are trying to hide the gem from the guards during a full body cavity search before they are thrown in prison, that's just a sleight of hands check. And possibly a deception or performance check to walk naturally afterward.

 

[seebs]

1. cast animate object.
2. instruct object to take Hide action.

 

[Harzel]

1. cast animate object.
2. instruct object to take Hide action.

3. Watch as your INT 3 WIS 3 object ducks around the nearest corner so that it is hidden - from you.

 

[Mercule]

I can see it being both a roll or fixed DC, depending on circumstances. If a player told me that he was hiding the gem inside the pillowcase on the bed, I'd assign a DC to that. However, no matter how good I am, I'm not generally going to be able to describe every little thing in a room, or think of all of the hiding spots, and neither will the player. However, the 7th level rogue he's playing will likely know ways and places to hide things that neither of us do. I can see the player of the rogue saying, "I hide the gem in the best spot I can find.", and then rolling a stealth(wis) check to see how good a spot was found. Then that roll would be the opposed check for searches.

This.

Even in the case of the pillowcase, I'd probably go for a roll to see just how well it worked. My 4 year old nephew might stuff it in there on top of the pillow with a nice, gem-shaped outline showing. I know enough to stuff it under the actual pillow. An accomplished Rogue might know a trick or two I don't -- including something like it being just as easy but more effective to jam it between the mattress and box spring.

I heard something on a podcast, the other day, that I think applies here (paraphrasing): "Most disconnects people have with skill systems is because they're trying to narrate the outcome before they roll the dice."

In this context, that means that the player should say "I hide the gem in the bedroom," roll the dice, then (maybe) declare exactly where in the bedroom they hid it. The player might be awesome at hiding things. If the character sucks, though, it doesn't matter how good the player's idea was. The character may not have thought of that location. They may have thought of it and executed it poorly. They may have thought of it but decided (wrongly) decided that something else was a good idea.

So, four PCs say, "I hide the gem in the bed."
- The Rogue with deft hands and a light touch rolls a 25, total. He runs his hand along the edge of the mattress and finds a seam loose enough to fit the gem through and tuck it into the bedding.
- The Sorcerer with a criminal background, but whose hands aren't quite as deft, rolls a 15, shoving the gem into the pocket created by tucking in the sheet at the foot of the bed and hidden by the comforter. Should be good until someone rubs against the bed or the maid comes.
- The agile, but honorable Monk rolls a 10, and slips the gem into the pillowcase. It's hidden from casual inspection, but any real search is going to find it quickly.
- The War Cleric is smart enough to know the Rogue has a good idea, but rolls a 2. His gauntlet gets stuck in the bedding and he's just pulling it out as the enemy shows up (or, leaves an obvious disturbance for the later search).

Is it mandatory that you roll to hide something? Not at all. I remember the fun in AD&D of searching for traps by describing what the characters are doing, rather than just rolling. That's challenging the players and getting them involved. It's a totally valid style of play. Even today, I really hate the "I search the room" style of play where the fact that the vase is covered in contact poison doesn't matter (3E RAW). I'd prefer to have enough information about the scenario that it matters whether the players are paranoid about touching things, potentially exposing themselves to glyphs, etc.

But.... I also like it when a naive player is able to play a cunning/deft character. Conversely, I don't what the clever player with a Barbarian be able to offset dumped skills with his own abilities. Skills represent what the character is capable of. Some are just better at hiding stuff than others.

Also, live by the sword, die by the sword. If you want to fiat the DC for searching, go for it. As a player, though, don't complain when your sadistic DM uses his own creativity to set a crazy high DC for finding the gem the troll you were chasing hid. If your first reaction is "Trolls are stupid, so it shouldn't be able to hide stuff well," I don't disagree. Some PCs are stupid, too.

Even if you do decide to use a skill check, it's not always narratively interesting. You don't have to roll for everything. If it would be boring/uninteresting/whatever to play out the results of the goblin finding (or missing) the hidden gem, don't do it. Just decide, as a GM. That's why we play a game with a GM.

 

[Maxperson]

This.

Even in the case of the pillowcase, I'd probably go for a roll to see just how well it worked. My 4 year old nephew might stuff it in there on top of the pillow with a nice, gem-shaped outline showing. I know enough to stuff it under the actual pillow. An accomplished Rogue might know a trick or two I don't -- including something like it being just as easy but more effective to jam it between the mattress and box spring.

I heard something on a podcast, the other day, that I think applies here (paraphrasing): "Most disconnects people have with skill systems is because they're trying to narrate the outcome before they roll the dice."

In this context, that means that the player should say "I hide the gem in the bedroom," roll the dice, then (maybe) declare exactly where in the bedroom they hid it. The player might be awesome at hiding things. If the character sucks, though, it doesn't matter how good the player's idea was. The character may not have thought of that location. They may have thought of it and executed it poorly. They may have thought of it but decided (wrongly) decided that something else was a good idea.

So, four PCs say, "I hide the gem in the bed."
- The Rogue with deft hands and a light touch rolls a 25, total. He runs his hand along the edge of the mattress and finds a seam loose enough to fit the gem through and tuck it into the bedding.
- The Sorcerer with a criminal background, but whose hands aren't quite as deft, rolls a 15, shoving the gem into the pocket created by tucking in the sheet at the foot of the bed and hidden by the comforter. Should be good until someone rubs against the bed or the maid comes.
- The agile, but honorable Monk rolls a 10, and slips the gem into the pillowcase. It's hidden from casual inspection, but any real search is going to find it quickly.
- The War Cleric is smart enough to know the Rogue has a good idea, but rolls a 2. His gauntlet gets stuck in the bedding and he's just pulling it out as the enemy shows up (or, leaves an obvious disturbance for the later search).

Is it mandatory that you roll to hide something? Not at all. I remember the fun in AD&D of searching for traps by describing what the characters are doing, rather than just rolling. That's challenging the players and getting them involved. It's a totally valid style of play. Even today, I really hate the "I search the room" style of play where the fact that the vase is covered in contact poison doesn't matter (3E RAW). I'd prefer to have enough information about the scenario that it matters whether the players are paranoid about touching things, potentially exposing themselves to glyphs, etc.

But.... I also like it when a naive player is able to play a cunning/deft character. Conversely, I don't what the clever player with a Barbarian be able to offset dumped skills with his own abilities. Skills represent what the character is capable of. Some are just better at hiding stuff than others.

Also, live by the sword, die by the sword. If you want to fiat the DC for searching, go for it. As a player, though, don't complain when your sadistic DM uses his own creativity to set a crazy high DC for finding the gem the troll you were chasing hid. If your first reaction is "Trolls are stupid, so it shouldn't be able to hide stuff well," I don't disagree. Some PCs are stupid, too.

Even if you do decide to use a skill check, it's not always narratively interesting. You don't have to roll for everything. If it would be boring/uninteresting/whatever to play out the results of the goblin finding (or missing) the hidden gem, don't do it. Just decide, as a GM. That's why we play a game with a GM.

When my players are describing something, they generally get pretty specific about it. They are going to tell me, "I hid the gem in the pillow case on the bottom." or "I take out the pill, cut a small slit in it and shove the gem inside. Then I put it back in the pillowcase and return it to the bed.". I don't need a roll for how well they do that, especially since I assume a certain level of competence from heroes, even low level ones.

Where I will use a roll is when the player says to me that his PC would know better than he would about the issue, in this case hiding spots. At that point I'll have a roll happen to see how well he does and narrate an appropriate action.

 

[Blue]

It lets you look for hidden objects, but there are no rules for hiding them.

At most, you are saying that the PCs don't have a mechanic to hide objects. But the poll is can objects be hidden, and since there are explicit references to hidden objects in the rule, the answer must be yes.

 

[Blue]

How? Show the rule. I mean, clearly you can hide an object, but the game doesn't provide any way to do so. A DM has to come up with his own rules for it.

Okay, the rule is on page 6 of the PHB. It's a general rule, covering a lot of cases.

Under how to play, you have:

2. The players describe what they want to do. Some­ times one player speaks for the whole party, saying, “We’ll take the east door,” for example.
...
Sometimes, resolving a task is easy. If an adventurer wants to walk across a room and open a door, the DM might just say that the door opens and describe what lies beyond. But the door might be locked, the floor might hide a deadly trap, or some other circumstance might make it challenging for an adventurer to complete a task. In those cases, the DM decides what happens, often relying on the roll of a die to determine the results of an action."

Just as there is no specific rule for "open the east door", there doesn't happen to be a specific rule for general hiding of objects. There's also no rule for lots of common sense interactions, such as locking a door which presumably happened for the DM to describe a locked door, but that also can be done.

So, are you unfamiliar with the general concept of roleplaying games and DMs, where part of the DM's role is to make these calls so the rulebooks don't bloat up trying to think of every single common sense interaction, or are you familiar that DMs do that yet decided to argue anyway?

 

[Maxperson]

Okay, the rule is on page 6 of the PHB. It's a general rule, covering a lot of cases.

Hmm. I don't see any rules there. I do see a general outline of how play goes in the introduction section, though.