D&D 5E Stealth & that big Rock!

[Noctem]

The "usually" is there as a qualifier, in case you are actually invisible or hidden by falling snow or whatever. It basically means "unless there's something stopping it". And popping up from behind the rock is approaching the creature, even if you're still twenty feet away - you're closer than you were when you were behind the rock.

I mean, you could make a case to the contrary, but you'd really have to press it and hope that your DM was inclined to also choose that interpretation. It really seems like a stretch. Both the letter and the intent of the rule seems pretty clear in this case.

You have no grounds to restrict what the text means by usually to only be related to invisibility or other specific scenarios you designate. You simply don't have that authority. It's there to show that the rules for leaving hiding and approaching a target are not absolutes. You are treating them like absolutes. You are incorrect in doing so.

Approaching someone and simply popping your head out to see your target and attacking is not the same thing. That's a ridiculous claim and I'm sure you know it. The rule clearly states "leaving your hiding spot" which implies movement from one point to another outside of that place. In a grid setting that's at least 5 feet of movement. Then once you've done that, if you used movement to move toward a creature or at any time, the creature will usually see you. There's 2 requirements here. Physically leaving your hiding spot and approaching a creature. You need to stop speaking in absolutes and actually read what you're quoting.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The "usually" is there as a qualifier, in case you are actually invisible or hidden by falling snow or whatever. It basically means "unless there's something stopping it". And popping up from behind the rock is approaching the creature, even if you're still twenty feet away - you're closer than you were when you were behind the rock.

I mean, you could make a case to the contrary, but you'd really have to press it and hope that your DM was inclined to also choose that interpretation. It really seems like a stretch. Both the letter and the intent of the rule seems pretty clear in this case.

I have to agree with Noctem. You're making that sentence do way more work that it actually does.

Even going with the sentence (and ignoring the very troublesome 'and' in there), you'd have to 'leave hiding' to be automatically notice. I'm pretty sure that no one's saying that you can waltz out into the open and remain hidden, so there's that covered nicely. People are saying that you can stay in hiding and attack, but not 'leaving hiding' prior to attacking. Maintaining some cover or concealment can easily qualify as 'not clearly seen' by a DM and allow you to remain hidden until you attack. Nothing in your sentence counteracts this. Sticking your nose out from a corner doesn't mean that an orc 50' down the hall in melee with your allies will immediately notice you, but he would if you stepped out fully (whether, I think, you approached or not).

Also, I'm pretty sure that the 'usually' wasn't meant for invisibility only, but rather was put there so that DM's would know that they may be some situations where it wasn't automatic -- and that it was up to them to figure those out.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The rule clearly states "leaving your hiding spot" which implies movement from one point to another outside of that place.

Your hiding spot is "behind the rock"; as soon as you pop your head up, you are no longer behind the rock.

 

[Noctem]

Your hiding spot is "behind the rock"; as soon as you pop your head up, you are no longer behind the rock.

Sure I am. My physical location is still behind the rock. The cover doesn't vanish because I move my head. My body is still behind the rock. The act of lifting my head does not change that fact. Nor does me attacking you. Either way, I am still behind the rock, in my hiding spot. And regardless, even if you are correct and popping my head out represents "leaving my hiding spot" (which btw I find ridiculous to claim but let's go with it for the sake of the discussion) there are mulitple requirements involved with the rule you quoted. You've now made 2 ridiculous claims to try and support what you're saying: 1. moving my head while behind a rock = leaving my hiding spot and 2. moving my head while behind a rock = approaching a creature.

I think it's best to just say agree to disagree at this point.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Sure I am. My physical location is still behind the rock. The act of lifting my head does not change that fact. Nor does me attacking you. Either way, I am still behind the rock, in my hiding spot.

If your head is exposed above the rock, then the whole of you is no longer behind the rock, and if you aren't wholly behind the rock then the orc can clearly see you because it's paying attention during combat.

 

[Noctem]

If your head is exposed above the rock, then the whole of you is no longer behind the rock, and if you aren't wholly behind the rock then the orc can clearly see you because it's paying attention during combat.

So you're ignoring half cover, 3/4 cover, partial concealment and so on as representative of being "unclearly seen". So in your game, you can only hide if you have total cover and full concealment which are explicit as you being "unseen". And if you hide using total cover you can then never attack because the moment you attempt to attack you lose hidden because you're automatically seen as you just explained. So in your game "unclearly seen" = "unseen" and there's nothing between those 2 and being seen. So being "unclearly seen" per the errata doesn't exist because there's no difference. Essentially, you're ignoring the errata in favor of having things work like it did prior to its release. That's fine and all but it certainly not what is intended. Errata is official changes to how rules function. You're also now not even following the rule you quoted! You're saying that the orc would notice someone hiding even though that hiding creature did not leave it's physical hiding spot nor physically approach the orc. Well I guess that's the end of the discussion?

 

[slaughterj]

If your head is exposed above the rock, then the whole of you is no longer behind the rock, and if you aren't wholly behind the rock then the orc can clearly see you because it's paying attention during combat.

That's a ludicrous interpretation, look at my analysis above with Noctem's comments and be clear where your issue is there. If you take your point to that extreme, you will see how unreasonable that interpretation is, and certainly is not within the interpretation of the designers or vast majority of gamers. Taken to your extreme, then basically there is no way to attack at range and get sneak attack (other than with an adjacent ally to the foe).

 

[Kalshane]

I think the Stealth rules were intentionally left vague so the DM could adjudicate based on a given situation. I think either declaring that any creature that isn't completely behind cover/concealment is automatically spotted or declaring that rogues can essentially enter "video game stealth mode" and walk down the middle of a well-lit hall without being discovered are both taking ridiculous extremes.

My interpretation of the RAW is to prevent the latter extreme, not to enforce the former.

While I realize LARPing is in no way real combat, and a bunch of geeks swinging foam weapons aren't trained warriors, my experience in such situations is that people are frequently struck down from behind because they lost track of one or more opponents in a large melee. While you can learn to increase your chances of avoiding this (teaching yourself stay aware of your surroundings and not just your opponent, reading shifts in your opponent's body-language/fighting style that indicate they noticed an ally coming up behind you, moving yourself to avoid getting flanked, etc) those who frequently ally with those who take a more sneaky approach to combat can also learn to aid those allies( drawing or forcing their opponent to a more favorable position, pressing the attack or otherwise drawing their attention while the ally is moving into position, etc). In the end, no one can see in all directions every moment, and if someone is good at moving quickly and quietly (which Stealth incorporates on top of being able to hide from view) the chance of them getting the drop on someone increases, even if they're actively alert for threats.

My interpretation of the Stealth skill is it not only incorporates the ability to blend into your surroundings and move quietly, but also the ability to time your movement through unobscured areas so as to take advantage of holes in their opponents' awareness. If we were to interpret the Stealth rules to mean that "any time you are not completely obscured, you're automatically spotted" then no one could ever sneak from tree-to-tree in a forest or through an occupied castle with guards patrolling the corridors.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Taken to your extreme, then basically there is no way to attack at range and get sneak attack (other than with an adjacent ally to the foe).

You can attack a creature which is unaware of you, during your surprise round, gaining both Advantage and Sneak Attack. You just can't benefit from trying to hide against a creature that knows you are there while it can see you.

Unless your DM decides otherwise, of course. There's nothing wrong with house rules, and I guess it's vague enough that your DM can try to interpret it as not actually requiring a house rules, if they really want to argue that hiding behind a rock for a couple of seconds is enough to catch someone completely off guard. Repeatedly.

 

[Psikerlord#]

In hindsight I believe giving the rogue the ability to bonus action hide was a big design flaw.