Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I for one hope we don't get "clarification" on many things.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 6377935" data-attributes="member: 6778044"><p>Well, first off I said 'Stealth was very situational,' I did not say that particular sentence was. And I was also referring to stealth in both the real world and conceptually, not that the RAW was situational (although they are too, precisely because they are describing a situational activity).</p><p></p><p>The problem I have with that particular statement, it that it's too absolute when describing a situation that isn't that absolute and is very situational. Thus there are people who will take it too literally (as has already been shown by those who have asked if it means that you can't remain hidden if somebody can see you).</p><p></p><p>So, there's a big difference between a creature that <em>can</em> see you and one that <em>does</em> see you. For example, if a wizard is walking through a hall while reading a scroll, or even just having a deep conversation with another wizard, may not notice the thief that ducks between two statues, but still in plain sight. Yes, he could have made his initial hide check before they could see him, but it's also possible that he moved into position at the last moment and yet still avoided detection (in game terms he may have had disadvantage on his Hide check, but then they may have had disadvantage on their perception check).</p><p></p><p>If you think this doesn't make sense, do a search about how many accidents happen when somebody is walking or driving while looking at their smartphone. Everything they hit, or are hit by, are in plain sight and <em>can</em> be seen, but they aren't.</p><p></p><p>Disregarding even that, the way the rule is written 'You can't hide from a creature that can see you' implies that you don't even get to attempt to hide, and therefore your opponent doesn't have to make a Perception check to oppose your hide check. And yet, under the heading 'What Can You See?' it tells you to reference (being) 'lightly or heavily obscured' but being lightly obscured only gives the creature looking disadvantage on their Perception check. That's useless if the rule "You can't hide from a creature that can see you' means that they don't get to make a Perception check at all.</p><p></p><p>If you want to be bound by the written rule (as many rules lawyers do), then to me you end up with a less than realistic approach, and also fewer options that make for a great story. If it said 'It's much more difficult, if not nearly impossible, to hide from a creature that sees you. This sets a guideline that allows the DM and the players to understand, but isn't too restrictive either.</p><p></p><p>Taking this specific sentence too literally has already been discussed in this thread regarding whether an already hidden character that can now be seen is no longer hidden. In addition, taking rules too literally is what frequently gives birth to unintended loopholes. The so-called triceratops shuffle where a druid shapechanged into a triceratops could charge, trample, and retreat to deal massive damage and avoid taking it. The way the rules were written provided an opportunity to do something that probably wasn't intended, but because that's how the rule is written there are those that say it must be allowed.</p><p></p><p>A real life example that I've seen repeated many times is when a number of employees are chronically late to work. Work imposes a rule that says that if you're more than 5 minutes late, you'll get a warning. If it happens again you'll be written up, etc. What happens? Most of the staff starts showing up 4 minutes late. It's extremely difficult to write bulletproof and exact rules. And it takes a lot more rules to try to get close. And in the end you don't really stray that far from what a more general rule, common sense, and a good DM, and DM and player relationship can take care of with a lot less work. Plus it means you can focus more on the game and less on the rules.</p><p></p><p>There are other discussions, like 'can you stack short rests?' that don't typically occur to people like me because it doesn't make sense to me. But it might if your more focused on maximizing the numbers on your sheet.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I don't particularly have a problem with how the rules are written regarding hiding. Yes, initially I was thinking of limiting some potential actions more than I would now. And these discussions have been great to help come to my own conclusions as to how they make sense to me. I love these types of discussions, but not when playing the game. </p><p></p><p>Randy</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ilbranteloth, post: 6377935, member: 6778044"] Well, first off I said 'Stealth was very situational,' I did not say that particular sentence was. And I was also referring to stealth in both the real world and conceptually, not that the RAW was situational (although they are too, precisely because they are describing a situational activity). The problem I have with that particular statement, it that it's too absolute when describing a situation that isn't that absolute and is very situational. Thus there are people who will take it too literally (as has already been shown by those who have asked if it means that you can't remain hidden if somebody can see you). So, there's a big difference between a creature that [I]can[/I] see you and one that [I]does[/I] see you. For example, if a wizard is walking through a hall while reading a scroll, or even just having a deep conversation with another wizard, may not notice the thief that ducks between two statues, but still in plain sight. Yes, he could have made his initial hide check before they could see him, but it's also possible that he moved into position at the last moment and yet still avoided detection (in game terms he may have had disadvantage on his Hide check, but then they may have had disadvantage on their perception check). If you think this doesn't make sense, do a search about how many accidents happen when somebody is walking or driving while looking at their smartphone. Everything they hit, or are hit by, are in plain sight and [I]can[/I] be seen, but they aren't. Disregarding even that, the way the rule is written 'You can't hide from a creature that can see you' implies that you don't even get to attempt to hide, and therefore your opponent doesn't have to make a Perception check to oppose your hide check. And yet, under the heading 'What Can You See?' it tells you to reference (being) 'lightly or heavily obscured' but being lightly obscured only gives the creature looking disadvantage on their Perception check. That's useless if the rule "You can't hide from a creature that can see you' means that they don't get to make a Perception check at all. If you want to be bound by the written rule (as many rules lawyers do), then to me you end up with a less than realistic approach, and also fewer options that make for a great story. If it said 'It's much more difficult, if not nearly impossible, to hide from a creature that sees you. This sets a guideline that allows the DM and the players to understand, but isn't too restrictive either. Taking this specific sentence too literally has already been discussed in this thread regarding whether an already hidden character that can now be seen is no longer hidden. In addition, taking rules too literally is what frequently gives birth to unintended loopholes. The so-called triceratops shuffle where a druid shapechanged into a triceratops could charge, trample, and retreat to deal massive damage and avoid taking it. The way the rules were written provided an opportunity to do something that probably wasn't intended, but because that's how the rule is written there are those that say it must be allowed. A real life example that I've seen repeated many times is when a number of employees are chronically late to work. Work imposes a rule that says that if you're more than 5 minutes late, you'll get a warning. If it happens again you'll be written up, etc. What happens? Most of the staff starts showing up 4 minutes late. It's extremely difficult to write bulletproof and exact rules. And it takes a lot more rules to try to get close. And in the end you don't really stray that far from what a more general rule, common sense, and a good DM, and DM and player relationship can take care of with a lot less work. Plus it means you can focus more on the game and less on the rules. There are other discussions, like 'can you stack short rests?' that don't typically occur to people like me because it doesn't make sense to me. But it might if your more focused on maximizing the numbers on your sheet. Personally, I don't particularly have a problem with how the rules are written regarding hiding. Yes, initially I was thinking of limiting some potential actions more than I would now. And these discussions have been great to help come to my own conclusions as to how they make sense to me. I love these types of discussions, but not when playing the game. Randy [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I for one hope we don't get "clarification" on many things.
Top