D&D 5E Rogues are Awesome. Is it the Tasha's Effect?

[Mistwell]

I don't understand what he meant when he said you are still hidden on a roof, I don't think he explained that example very well, but thematically there could be something he was thinking about when he said that, darkness for example.

But he said many, many times exactly what I am saying. When I listen to that interview, my interpretation, with the exception of the roof, is 100% consistent with my interpretaion of the rules and my understanding of the intent. The point that sticks to me and what he says over and over and over is that you have to engage from the place where you are hidden. No going to a place where you are not hidden to shoot. You are picking the one exception which could be construed to be contrary to what he put in writing in his post, in writing in the PHB and said multiple times in the interview.

LOL he gives only four examples and that is two of them (the roof by range, and the corner attack in melee)! He's saying if you can shoot your target without leaving that spot, or hit your target with a melee weapon without leaving your spot, LIKE BY LEANING OUT BRIEFLY TO SEE YOUR TARGET AND SHOOT or like LEANING QUICKLY AROUND THE CORNER TO THRUST YOUR RAPIER, then you can do it. HOWEVER you give away your position whether you miss or hit with the attack (unless you have the skulker feat, in which case you only give it away if you hit).

You are not going to explain away the words: "shooting from cover and running out into the open are not the same thing" or "to really drill into the heart of the rule, if you are hidden and you can make the attack from the place where you are hidden"

I don't need to explain anything away. You're not "running out into the open" if you pop out briefly from cover without leaving your space. Which is what I have said all along. NOBODY in this thread said you run out into the open leaving your spot. We've all said the same thing they talk about in that interview, you pop your head out for a second to shoot. Or, you pop your head around the corner and attack with your melee weapon to someone right around that corner. Both are attacks without leaving the place you are hidden, and both are leaning/popping your head and weapon out from cover to make the attack.

How do you "emerge from the place where you are hidden" while still being "in the place where you are hidden"?

The spot. The 5' square you're in. That's what he is referring to. You're behind a 3' wall, kneeling down to hide so you are not seen or heard and you rolled good enough on your stealth check. You stand up quick and shoot. You never left the space (square) you were hidden in but you retain the benefit of hiding until the attack is resolved (either a hit or miss). That is the kind of situation he is talking about. That's what he means by "split second where they emerge just to make the attack they get that benefit," and it's why he says rogues from range should get this often.

And if we are going to use a grid and spacing, if your space does not have "full cover" (broken LOS to all 4 corners) then the enemy by the rules has line of sight to you if you are in that space. You can not hide in such a space RAW unless you are obscured in some other way and you can't "emerge" while being in a space he can see you in to start with.

You LEAN OUT, or you POP UP from behind the cover, without leaving the space. That's what "emerge" means here. In addition, it gives meaning to the Lightfoot Halfling ability which lets you hide behind an ally, and it gives meaning to the Ranger's hide in nature ability, and it gives meaning to other hide-benefitting abilities. What the heck did you think the lightfoot halfling ability did if you couldn't use it to attack from behind an ally while hidden?

 

[auburn2]

You LEAN OUT, or you POP UP from behind the cover, without leaving the space. That's what "emerge" means here. In addition, it gives meaning to the Lightfoot Halfling ability which lets you hide behind an ally, and it gives meaning to the Ranger's hide in nature ability, and it gives meaning to other hide-benefitting abilities. What the heck did you think the lightfoot halfling ability did if you couldn't use it to attack from behind an ally while hidden?

Like I said earlier. If leaning out or poping out does not make you visible why can't every character do this? Why can't a fighter just run behind a wall where he is unseen and "pop out" every turn to attack with advantage?

If "poping out" does not expose you and make you visible why can't every character do this on every singe turn to get advantage?

The halfling is a specific exception to the rule and the whole reason it is there is so you can be hidden without being completely obscured and it is extremely powerful for a Rogue (as is mask of the wild). If we use your interpretation these racial abilities are largely meaningless because every character can do this.

The Ranger's hide in plain sight again allows hiding with no obscuration at all in the specific conditions referenced. He can be completely in the open and hidden if he took the time to camoflage. He doesn't have to emerge he is already "out".

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Like I said earlier. If leaning out or poping out does not make you visible why can't every character do this? Why can't a fighter just run behind a wall where his is unseen and "pop out" every turn to attack with advantage?

Anyone can do this if they first take the Hide action. Rogue just gets the ability to do that as a bonus action and key sneak attack off it so they are often the focus of the concept.

It's worth noting that the original printing of the PHB didn't include the word "clearly" in the description of hiding, and the extreme argument about being unable to make use of being hidden in any meaningful way resulted. They errataed it in to try to make it more clear that you don't have to be completely invisible to hide, and it resolved the issue for those who were around and aware of the discussions at the time.

 

[nexalis]

To start with he line of sight rules in the DMG talk about this specifically. If a line from one corner of the square you are on has a clear line to a corner of a square the enemy is on then both of you can see each other. If it doesn't then niether of you can see each other. There is no situation with a solid obstacle where only one of the parties has line of sight according to those rules. Now I would not rule that way with a character trying to hide in my game. If the bottom left corner is exposed but the rest are not I would let him say he is scrunched up on the right side of the square ... but in that case he is scrunched up on the right side of the square and he doesn't see the enemy. If lines to all 4 corners are broken he can't see the enemy from that square at all, he needs to move to a different square to get line of sight.

It does not prevent use of the class feature at all. It prevents use of metagaming in a way that was not intended. Being able to hide as a bonus action by itself is huge, with or without the advantage. You can get advantage from it as well, just not in the silly way people here are trying to say you can. You have to shoot from a hidden position, it is that simple.

For example - let's say it one Rogue against 5 orcs. He runs behind a large tree in an otherwise completely open field in broad daylight and takes the hide action. I will agree he is hidden. The Orcs saw him run behind the tree and take ready action and are going to shoot as soon as he sticks his head out. They are staring right at the tree with bows drawn, are you really going to tell me they can't see him when he sticks his head out like the guy in the photo above? If it was your PC playing one of the orcs would you say, "oh yeah he can stick out his head and I won't see him".

Now, how can this Rogue make effective use of his ability? Well instead of sticking his head out he can climb the tree on the backside staying hidden. He could get up on the branches, if there are thick branches and foilage he can sneak out on one of them. He can take the dash action too while hidden and climb/move up to 60' on the tree with climbing counting twice. Now maybe he can make an attack FROM HIDING where he can not be seen by the orcs, being obscured by leaves that do not stop his arrows. Now he can shoot down on one of them. When he does they yell "he is there up in the trees", assuming he didn't dash he can take a bonus action and try to hide again right after the shot, either right where he is or another branch similarly obscured. If successful they don't know where he is in those branches. Is he where he shot from, did he go further down the branch, did he climb back down behind the trunk? The orcs can shoot into the branches, one takes a guess he stayed in the same place and looses an arrow. If he guessed right he rolls with disadvantage. If he guessed wrong it is just a miss. Next turn Rogue does it again .... rinse and repeat.

Now the example I gave above is very difficult situation for the rogue tyring to hide in broad daylight with only one thing to get cover behind. It is not a very favorable setup for the Rogue, but I still gave an example of how he could try to hide AND get advantage. Your Rogue should be looking for these kinds of things to make the most of his abilities, while playing the game RAI.

Another example: You stumble on some orcs in a dungeon. Your Paladin runs forward with the torch in one hand and sword in the other and engages the orcs. You start the turn 25 feet from the orcs. You know they have darkvision and can see in darkness as dim light out to 60 feet. You move 30' backwards and take the dash bonus action to go another 10 feet, putting yourself out of their darkvision range. Now you are in darkness and completely obscured. You can't both hide and attack this turn because you already used your BA. However your enemy can't see you, so you have advantage anyway (you can see them well because they are brightly lit). You shoot with advantage and SA. You are not "hidden" the orcs not fighting the paladin know right where you are and can shoot at you but with disadvantage because they can't "see" you. Next round you shoot again with advantage before hiding, then you take hide, maybe you move to the other side of the hallway or back up another 10 feet, maybe you dont. Now the orcs have to guess where you are to shoot you AND if they guess right they still get disadvantage because they don't see you.

That is how a Rogue should be making effective use of his abilities and getting advantage and SA. Further if the Rogue in the 2nd example had skulker he would not have to retreat 40 feet, he could retreat 20' to get out of the 40 foot torchlight radius and take hide inside the orcs darkvision range because he can hide in dim light. This is not as good in this example because he has to succeed in a hide check, and he can get to actual darkness by taking dash instead but if it was someone with longer darkvision, like Drow it would be an effective way to hide.

Given that this is the level of pettifoggery confronting rogue players who just want to be able to hide in combat in order to gain advantage, thank goodness for the new Steady Aim ability! It takes things completely out of the pettifogger DM's hands.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

To add to my above post, the purpose of a Dexterity (Stealth) check is to be hidden in an imperfect situation. If you have perfect stealth conditions it doesn't even make sense.

When you are crouching behind crates, peeking over a roof or around a corner, or otherwise occasionally visible, whether or not you will be noticed by someone is in doubt. This is why you make a check. If you beat their Wisdom (Perception) they don't notice you and you can attack once while you are in peeking mode if you choose (after which you give away your position and are no longer hidden).

Hidden doesn't mean you are impossible to notice--it means that character doesn't know where you are, because they can't hear or clearly see you--both adjudicated by that Dexterity (Stealth) versus their individual (usually passive) Wisdom (Perception).

If their Wisdom (Perception) check beats your Dexterity (Stealth) check, they do notice you when you are peeking out (and because of the way 5e does it, they never lost track of you in the first place)! At that point, even if you completely duck behind that same cover and stop peeking, they know where you are unless you move somewhere else and make the check again. This creates another imperfect situation (technically you don't make the check until you get to the new place, so how could you really hide if they actually knew where you went--but the game says you can) which allows you to again test your Stealth versus their Perception.

Other than as the aftermath of an attack while hidden, you can give away your position by moving out somewhere where you are clearly seen, where no amount of Stealth check would help. While fully leaving an area of cover to go out in the open does this by default, the DM is encouraged to adjudicate even such complete lack of cover based on potential distractions like the opponent mostly having their attention fixed on another area of the battle, despite combatants normally staying alert to the battle in general.

If the DM decides to say there is a potential distraction to allow you to do something like dart 20 feet in the open between one stack of crates or corner to another (potentially remaining hidden after), or sneak up on the distracted opponent and stab at them (automatically revealing your position and losing the hidden state after resolving the attack) then there is doubt as to whether your skill exceeds their distraction, and, you guessed it, that's where your Stealth versus their passive Perception comes in.

Before the changes to the PHB, it seemed like Stealth checks were only about staying quiet when you might be heard, but the revisions removed the ambiguity and made known that the intent was that it is also about being unseen when you might be seen.

 

[Mistwell]

Like I said earlier. If leaning out or poping out does not make you visible why can't every character do this?

They can. Of course they can! They just need to be unseen and unheard, succeed at their stealth action, make their stealth check vs the passive perception of their foes, and then lean out and fire at the target on their turn. They will do it with advantage, just no sneak attack unless they are a rogue.

It's just that, because rogues can hide as a bonus action, and because they use advantage to get sneak attack, it's the most common strategy for the rogue.

Why can't a fighter just run behind a wall where he is unseen and "pop out" every turn to attack with advantage?

If "poping out" does not expose you and make you visible why can't every character do this on every singe turn to get advantage?

They can. But they need to spend an action to use stealth. The rogue can do it as a bonus action. But sure the fighter can do it if they are willing to spend an action doing it. Kinda not worth it though. This is why the true strike cantrip is so unpopular. Not worth advantage to spend an action using stealth. Unless...you're rogue with a bonus action to do it and the expertise in stealth to pull it off.

The halfling is a specific exception to the rule and the whole reason it is there is so you can be hidden without being completely obscured and it is extremely powerful for a Rogue (as is mask of the wild). If we use your interpretation these racial abilities are largely meaningless because every character can do this.

No, none can do it unless they have cover which makes them unseen prior to the attack so they can use stealth. And then of course they need to spend an action to do it.

It's pretty simple: Step 1) Move to where you are unseen and unheard which will usually be full cover unless you're a lightfoot halfling who can do this behind a medium or large ally, 2) Use stealth, as an action if you're a non-rogue or as a bonus action with cunning action if you are a rogue, 3) beat your target's passive perception with your stealth check, which means you hopefully have a good dex and are trained in stealth (and maybe have expertise in it), 4) on your next turn pop/lean out from cover and fire, with advantage, which ends your stealth after you resolve if you have hit or miss with the attack, 5) see step 1.

Most rogue players have been doing this, for years and years now. Particularly the lightfoot halfing ones. It's how most of those ranged rogues get sneak attack. It's not broken, it works fine, it's how it was intended to be used, and it's why Steady Aim was added to the game so DMs who don't want to deal with all that can just give their PCs a blanket option to achieve the same thing easier.

 

[auburn2]

Anyone can do this if they first take the Hide action. Rogue just gets the ability to do that as a bonus action and key sneak attack off it so they are often the focus of the concept.

Why do they need to take the hide action? There is no rule that says or implies that. Any unseen character has advantage. If a Rogue sticking his head out into clear view of the enemy is still unseen for long enough to make an attack then so is a fighter.

Where in the rules does it say unseen attackers don't have advantage unless they have taken the hide action first?

It makes absolutely no sense that one character can stick his head out into clear view and be seen while another character can't be seen, when they are doing the exact same thing in the exact same lighting against the exact same enemy. Taking the hide action does not make the player invisible.

It's worth noting that the original printing of the PHB didn't include the word "clearly" in the description of hiding, and the extreme argument about being unable to make use of being hidden in any meaningful way resulted. They errataed it in to try to make it more clear that you don't have to be completely invisible to hide, and it resolved the issue for those who were around and aware of the discussions at the time.

In games I am DM and player in Rogues use hide effectively all the time. The idea that a Rogue can not use hide unless he is allowed to attack with advantage from places the enemy can clearly see him is just plain false.

No one said you have to be completely invisible to hide (although that is one way). You just need to be obscured, invisibility is one of many ways to get that.

 

[auburn2]

To add to my above post, the purpose of a Dexterity (Stealth) check is to be hidden in an imperfect situation. If you have perfect stealth conditions it doesn't even make sense.

Stealth is used for a lot of different things besides hiding, chief among them surprise and when you use stealth to hide and are successful it means you are "unseen and unheard".

 

[auburn2]

They can. Of course they can! They just need to be unseen and unheard, succeed at their stealth action, make their stealth check vs the passive perception of their foes, and then lean out and fire at the target on their turn. They will do it with advantage, just no sneak attack unless they are a rogue.

Why do they need to take the hide action (I assume you meant hide action, not stealth action)? What difference does that make? Unseen attackers get advantage whether they are hidden or not. I will point out Crawford said this in the video = specifically he said if you are invisible and screaming at the top of your lungs you are still unseen.

Why does the fighter need to take the hide action when the enemy can't see him at the start of the turn and he does the same thing as the Rogue?

Where in the rules does it say they will see the fighter when he leans out around the corner if he did not take the hide action?

 

[Mistwell]

Why do they need to take the hide action (I assume you meant hide action, not stealth action)?

It's a Dexterity (Stealth) check, which requires an action. There isn't really a "hide action".

What difference does that make? Unseen attackers get advantage whether they are hidden or not. I will point out Crawford said this in the video = specifically he said if you are invisible and screaming at the top of your lungs you are still unseen.

An unseen attacker is technically "unseen and unheard". Without a Dexterity (Stealth) check, you don't have all the benefits of being concealed, though you do have some benefits like a benefit to AC from the cover. Unlike invisibility, a condition which carries advantage automatically associated with that condition, getting yourself completely concealed behind the kind of cover where you can pop out and attack with advantage requires a skill check. The rules say, "Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies."

Why does the fighter need to take the hide action when the enemy can't see him at the start of the turn and he does the same thing as the Rogue?

Where in the rules does it say they will see the fighter when he leans out around the corner if he did not take the hide action?

There is no hide action. But if you're attempting to conceal yourself from enemies enough to gain the benefit of advantage on an attack, you will need to make a Dexterity (Stealth) check to conceal yourself that way.