D&D 5E Halfling rogue sniping from the the second rank

[mach1.9pants]

It is spelled out in the basic PDF, towards the start I think. YOu only re roll one. The example give a roll of 1 and 13, obviously you would re roll the 1

 

[Li Shenron]

As usual, even in this edition the hiding rules aren't fully clear... Personally the part that bothers my common sense is that they let a sniper keep attacking with advantage even after the first shoot. I don't think a ranged attack from hidden position and a melee attack unseen are exactly the same thing. It doesn't feel right that a hidden archer gets to shoot you as easily as the first time, once his position is revealed, because then you know where the arrow is coming from (even if you can't see the person who is shooting it). Maybe the designers were thinking too much about a modern sniper with a firearm, the bullet of which obviously travels much faster and is much harder to understand the direction it's coming from (and anyway firearms are another matter entirely). OTOH if you are unseen in melee this usually mean either truly invisible (because of a spell, because of darkness or the target's blinded) - in which case by the RAW attacking reveals your position but you are still invisible thus with advantage - or because the target didn't notice you, in which case now it probably does.

All in all, I'd probably allow this tactic for melee attacks: the Halfling is hiding behind the Fighter, and then pops out from the right or the left or from between the Fighter's legs... if the monster failed his Perception check, he's having a hard time defending from both the Fighter's and Halfling's melee attacks.

But I won't probably allow it for ranged attacks. And that's because more generally, I won't allow anybody to have advantage every round just because they're hiding behind cover > popping out > shoot an arrow > duck back. Once their position is revealed with the first shot, everyone knows that arrows are coming from there and that's enough for the sniper not to have advantage anymore.* The sniper still gets the defensive benefit of cover, so it's still a valid (and powerful) tactic without infinite advantage on attacks.

OTOH if the Halflings is changing cover (i.e. ally) each round, I may allow that. But he still has to make a Dexterity(Stealth) check every time of course.

This is the way I like it work. I won't let incomplete and inconsistent RAW have any authority on my games. I see this Naturally Stealthy ability as primarily defensive. For me it would be nicer to allow the Halfling to use this ability for something like keep hiding/ducking behind the Fighter for many rounds, while the Fighter fights and moves around the battlefield. But as soon as the Fighter moves 5ft away, I seriously doubt that the RAW lets the Halfling follow him (unless readying a move or something) instead the Halfling stays there, loses cover and is no longer hidden.

*edit: and I'd rule the same even if the sniper is truly invisible. If he's standing still and always shooting from the same direction, advantage only until his position is revealed. That's because projectiles and thrown weapons travel straight towards the target, and take some time to reach you. If he changes position, then he gets advantage again. I'd rule it differently if the projectile itself was invisible. In melee, an invisible attacker presumably also has an invisible weapon, so I'll let it have advantage at every attack.

 

[jadrax]

It is spelled out in the basic PDF, towards the start I think. YOu only re roll one. The example give a roll of 1 and 13, obviously you would re roll the 1

Page 57 in the 0.1 Basic

When you have advantage or disadvantage and something in the game, such as the halfling’s Lucky trait, lets you reroll the d20, you can reroll only one of the dice. You choose which one. For example, if a halfling has advantage on an ability check and rolls a 1 and a 13, the halfling could use the Lucky trait to reroll the 1.

 

[jadrax]

As usual, even in this edition the hiding rules aren't fully clear... Personally the part that bothers my common sense is that they let a sniper keep attacking with advantage even after the first shoot. I don't think a ranged attack from hidden position and a melee attack unseen are exactly the same thing. It doesn't feel right that a hidden archer gets to shoot you as easily as the first time, once his position is revealed, because then you know where the arrow is coming from (even if you can't see the person who is shooting it).

To be fair, the target can actually do thing's in response to getting shot at. Getting into cover would be smart, or even just going prone will negate the sniper's Advantage.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I expect there will be no lightfoot halflings in our game. That peek a boo sh*t is awful, and being able to do it from behind the tank is extra lame. No thank you sir. If someone really wants to play a lightfoot, I will negotiate an acceptable replacement ability, probably adv on stealth checks. Still a very powerful trait, without the silliness.

 

[Joe Liker]

I think everyone needs to take a step back and think about how easy it is for a rogue to get advantage anyway, even if he's not a halfling. I get the impression that they are basically always supposed to get sneak attack if they are playing well and are generally supposed to be able to get advantage if they put some effort into it. But personal impressions aside, here are the facts that back up my position:

In the hiding rule, "until discovered" applies only to the current instance of being hidden. Nowhere does it say you are prevented from hiding again.

Look where it says "an invisible creature can't be seen, so it can always try to hide." Not "it can always try to hide unless someone knows it's there." This proves that discovery does not prevent future attempts to hide. Even if you find a hidden invisible creature, it can try to hide again as long as it remains invisible.

In fact, the only thing that can prevent you from trying to hide is if the enemy can see you. Knowledge and awareness have nothing to do with anything.

Therefore, the wording of Naturally Stealthy ("when you are obscured only by a creature etc., etc.") must be intended to trump the sight caveat; otherwise it is meaningless.

I understand the inclination to want to keep player characters in check, and any DM is certainly within his rights to houserule this feature. But I think the spirit and letter of the rule are very clear: There is nothing to prevent a lightfoot halfling from re-hiding behind a larger creature every single round.

Bear in mind, a halfling can never gain advantage with certain weapons. Is it such a terrible thing to allow him more opportunities to gain advantage with the ones he can use?

 

[transtemporal]

As usual, even in this edition the hiding rules aren't fully clear... <snip>

The rules seem pretty clear to me. The ability specifically says "You can attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you."

If you want to change the ability, then change the ability. It seems punitive to let someone take the ability only to have you tell them "I'm changing the way it works".

 

[Joe Liker]

The rules seem pretty clear to me. The ability specifically says "You can attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you."

If you want to change the ability, then change the ability. It seems punitive to let someone take the ability only to have you tell them "I'm changing the way it works".

Exactly. Threads like these do tend to show which DMs fail to understand that D&D is supposed to be about fun.

Here's a tip for DMs who love to houserule everything: Your players are probably not impressed.

 

[Evenglare]

Exactly. Threads like these do tend to show which DMs fail to understand that D&D is supposed to be about fun.

Here's a tip for DMs who love to houserule everything: Your players are probably not impressed.

I would imagine that you are completely wrong about why DMs house rule. More often than not it's because the game is broken in some aspect which immediately makes the people who don't have access to that broken ability objectively better than the rest of the party, as such the rest of the party is not having fun so that's when a house rule comes about. So I assume you trying to implicate that players want to play by the rules as written because its more fun to optimize and make your other players feel worthless? If you consider one person overshadowing the whole party as fun then I guess you are right, I always thought fun meant in D&D meant when everyone in the party can contribute to the group, again, apparently I was wrong.

 

[transtemporal]

Here's a tip for DMs who love to houserule everything: Your players are probably not impressed.

I don't mind houserules but if the DM is overriding a rules legal option, it should be because its not fun for the group, not because the DM takes a personal exception to it.