D&D 5E I think I finally get how hiding works

Ilbranteloth · Aug 22, 2014

designbot said:
Can you stick your head out from a rock (or creature) you are hiding behind and attack with advantage?

I would say no. Hiding does not grant advantage—being unseen does—and you are no longer unseen as soon as you pop your head out.

I would say 'Yes, but...'

If you are hidden before coming out to make your attack, I'd say you get advantage.

If you are simply unseen, then I'd say you don't get advantage.

My reasoning is this - The exact location of a Hidden creature is unknown. So the target isn't necessarily looking in the right place for you, and doesn't notice you until it's too late.

If you're not Hidden, then your position is known. In which case the target is expecting that you might be attacking from that position, and will see you when you pop out. Thus your advantage is eliminated.

So then we're back to the hiding in the obvious or same location. I like Mike Mearle's answer in the halfling sniper thread in which additional attempts at hiding are made with disadvantage. If you still manage to Hide (with a capital 'H'), even with disadvantage, then you retain your advantage when attacking.

This still allows characters to attempt heroic actions without breaking the game (or rules).

Randy

Sword of Spirit · Aug 22, 2014

I've decided that RAW are contradictory, and cannot be reconciled. (After 2 or 3 thorough attempts of my own). That said, you do have to decide how to run it as a DM. Let me throw in a little wrench that I haven't seen come up before.

1. Some creatures have abilities (like Stone Camouflage) that give them advantage on Dex (Stealth) checks to hide in certain situations.
2. Some conditions (such as lightly obscured via dim lighting) impose a penalty on Wis (Perception) checks to spot creatures.
3. Detecting a creature hiding with stone camouflage in the dim light should involve both stealth advantage for them and perception disadvantage for you.
4. What about detecting a creature hiding that is completely visually undetectable, like on the other side of a wall and not looking around the corner?*
5. It would seem that being completely visually undetectable should impose as harsh of a penalty as the situation in #3, but there isn't any rule one can use to cause it to do so.

(*In fact, there aren't even rules saying that you get disadvantage on perception to notice heavily obscured creatures, so doing even that is houseruling of the concept that heavy should be at least as good as light.)

Ilbranteloth · Aug 22, 2014

samursus said:
I would challenge this assertion based on this line from the 5B.

If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when
you make an attack, you give away your location when
the attack hits or misses. (Boldface mine)

According to this I would posit that Hidden=unseen+unheard, thereby being hidden by default means being unseen and thereby gaining advantage.

What do you think?

Edit: rereading the OP, I think you recognize this and are merely stating that it's the unseen state that technically provides the advantage. Would you agree that hidden=unseen+unheard? If so maybe that would be a good item item to put in your key points list.

It strikes me as a good way to define the Hide action, as a visual component and an audial component. Cover, obscured, invisible would be the visual requisite and the Stealth skill would be the audial?

The problem I have with the statement that hidden= both unseen and unheard is that it doesn't take into account other senses/abilities. For example, an Owlbear gains advantage on Perception checks due in part to its sense of smell.

So I think that hidden=undetected. This is supported by several other qualifiers like 'your position is given away.'

In other words, when you are Hidden, the other creatures don't know where you are. They may know that you are there somewhere, but you've been able to conceal your precise position.

Randy

KarinsDad · Aug 22, 2014

And now for the quirky part of hiding and stealth.

If you are hiding in a lightly obscured area and someone just walks down the trail and is not actively searching, it's your Stealth DC vs. their Passive Perception, say 12 (+2 Wis) for example. You need to roll 13 or higher on your Stealth.

If you attack them, and then move off a bit and hide again in a lightly obscured area, they get a Disadvantaged Perception roll to spot you. The average roll for a Disadvantaged Perception roll at +2 = 9 (average for normal roll is 10.5, average for disadvantaged roll is 7.175, average for advantaged roll is 13.825).

So now, you typically only need to roll 10 on your Stealth check.

So, it is usually harder to hide from someone who does not know that you are there than it is for you to hide from someone who does know that you are there.

To correct this, one could add a -5 to the Passive Perception resulting in 7 Passive Perception vs. a creature in a lightly obscured area and an 8 is needed on the first Stealth check here. But, then you would have to do this any time the hiding creature is in a lightly obscured area because creatures do not hide out in the open. Is the -5 there in a lightly obscured area, but not when one is hiding behind 3/4s cover or some such?

I hope the DMG has better answers on this.

Li Shenron · Aug 22, 2014

Sword of Spirit said:
I've decided that RAW are contradictory, and cannot be reconciled. (After 2 or 3 thorough attempts of my own). That said, you do have to decide how to run it as a DM. Let me throw in a little wrench that I haven't seen come up before.

Yes, we are on our own. The "rules" are probably better treated as guidelines at this point, with each DM deciding how to use them. If we choose to see them in this light, then not only we can adjudicate each scenario more freely and relaxed, but we are also more empowered to stop possible abuse of corner cases.

Perhaps the original difficulty behind these rules comes from the fact that they are trying to cover different situations, where cover, concealment, illumination, vision, invisibility, scent, noise and even tremorsense all interact for determining the final result.

Melkor · Aug 22, 2014

MerricB said:
Note that Mike Mearls explicitly answered this on twitter: You can hide in the same place. He also said that it's fair for the DM to impose disadvantage on that Stealth check.

I hate how muddy this gets.

Say the Lightfoot Halfling tried to hide again behind his human ally in the same spot...as Mearls wrote it, the DM could impose disadvantage on his check when he tries to hide. Per the Lightfoot Halfling description, he is able to hide when Lightly Obscured by an ally that is one sized larger. So, in order to hide, he has to meet the requirement of being lightly obscured before making the attempt.

So since he has to meet the requirement of being Lightly Obscured by his one-size larger human buddy, does that mean that when he rolls the check to try and hide at disadvantage (based on Mearl's tweet for hiding in the same place) that the opponent who is using Passive Perception to oppose that roll get's disadvantage (-5) to the Passive Perception check because the Lightfoot Halfling is now Lightly Obscured by the Human?

fjw70 · Aug 22, 2014

Li Shenron said:
Yes, we are on our own. The "rules" are probably better treated as guidelines at this point, with each DM deciding how to use them. If we choose to see them in this light, then not only we can adjudicate each scenario more freely and relaxed, but we are also more empowered to stop possible abuse of corner cases.

Perhaps the original difficulty behind these rules comes from the fact that they are trying to cover different situations, where cover, concealment, illumination, vision, invisibility, scent, noise and even tremorsense all interact for determining the final result.

I think we have a winner. The rules provide some very basic and (IMO) very clear guidelines, and leaves the rest to the DM.

You need to be unseen to hide. What does unseen mean? It's up to the DM.

I really hope they don't clutter the DMG up with more specific rules on hiding. What we have is fine.

fjw70 · Aug 22, 2014

Melkor said:
I hate how muddy this gets.

Say the Lightfoot Halfling tried to hide again behind his human ally in the same spot...as Mearls wrote it, the DM could impose disadvantage on his check when he tries to hide. Per the Lightfoot Halfling description, he is able to hide when Lightly Obscured by an ally that is one sized larger. So, in order to hide, he has to meet the requirement of being lightly obscured before making the attempt.

So since he has to meet the requirement of being Lightly Obscured by his one-size larger human buddy, does that mean that when he rolls the check to try and hide at disadvantage (based on Mearl's tweet for hiding in the same place) that the opponent who is using Passive Perception to oppose that roll get's disadvantage (-5) to the Passive Perception check because the Lightfoot Halfling is now Lightly Obscured by the Human?

The halfling ability doesn't say they are lightly obscured. Only that they can hide when obscured by an ally.

Melkor · Aug 22, 2014

fjw70 said:
The halfling ability doesn't say they are lightly obscured. Only that they can hide when obscured by an ally.

Ok. If they are just "obscured by an ally," does that qualify for the person making the Passive Perception Check (or even an Active Perception Check) to have to take disadvantage?

Sir Brennen · Aug 22, 2014

fjw70 said:
The halfling ability doesn't say they are lightly obscured. Only that they can hide when obscured by an ally.

Right. Most posters seem to take this as "obscured" in the colloquial sense, not the game mechanic sense. It's more like they can hide with half-cover from another creature larger than them (there's no rules mentioned for interposing creatures giving any other kind of cover, regardless of size difference.) Again, still rather muddy, but seems to be the common interpretation.

Melkor's example would still apply to an wood elf lightly obscured by bushes, though. However, in that case, it's pretty clear even the Passive Perception check should have disadvantage for the initial Hide attempt. It's just the DM has to remember to do it. If the elf snipes and hides in the same spot, it'd be reasonable to have the disadvantages cancel out - it's harder to see through the bushes, but the target has a pretty good idea where to look. Hide and Perception are both rolled normally.

D&D 5E I think I finally get how hiding works

Ilbranteloth

Explorer

Sword of Spirit

Legend

Ilbranteloth

Explorer

KarinsDad

Adventurer

Li Shenron

Legend

Melkor

Explorer

fjw70

Adventurer

fjw70

Adventurer

Melkor

Explorer

Sir Brennen

Legend

Similar Threads