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

[Sir Brennen]

It is special obscurement with no other mechanical benefits other then allowing the halfling to hide. I know this because this is what the power says. RAW you can't read anything else into the power. No lightly or heavily obscured and no total cover.

The halfling still has the half cover anyone would get in that space and gets the benefits of that but that is no connected to his hiding ability.

But it's functionally the same, so it would be clearer to make the ability tied to the cover from the creature, rather than requiring the mental hoop-jumping of "well, it doesn't say if it's heavy or light, so it must be... a special obscurement. Or is it? Maybe they left a word out."

 

[Branduil]

Once again you are missing a key part of this. Once you "peek" from total cover then you can be seen. Again if you can see them then they can see you.

Once you are seen you are no longer hiding and don't get the benefit of hiding.

Human beings(and by extension, monsters) are not perfect reaction robots. It takes a moment to process information. If a player has successfully hidden, and then peeks around the corner to fire, yes, the monster sees them... after the attack has already occurred. This isn't my opinion; it's what the rules explicitly say about attacking while hidden.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

The DM can certainly allow a check if they think there's a chance you could go unnoticed, but nothing in the rules mandates that you can make the check. That's a DM call.

Very true, that.

 

[Joe Liker]

Once again you are missing a key part of this. Once you "peek" from total cover then you can be seen. Again if you can see them then they can see you.

Once you are seen you are no longer hiding and don't get the benefit of hiding.

As noted by Brennen, all the rules say on this is that "if you come out of hiding and approach the creature, it probably sees you." Line of sight is conspicuously absent from the Basic Rules in any context.

So technically, "peeking out" doesn't end your hidden state unless you approach the creature, and then only probably.

You can't attempt to hide again if they can see you, but that's a different thing.

I have a feeling that the designers left this vague so the DM can rule whatever seems logical at the moment, and also to avoid any exploitation by players who like to quote rules. As such, I'm actually somewhat pessimistic about any clarification ever appearing.

In the end, the middle ground is probably the most in following with the spirit of the rules.

 

[TDarien]

Human beings(and by extension, monsters) are not perfect reaction robots. It takes a moment to process information. If a player has successfully hidden, and then peeks around the corner to fire, yes, the monster sees them... after the attack has already occurred. This isn't my opinion; it's what the rules explicitly say about attacking while hidden.

But the rules don't actually support that. Total cover works both ways. If you have total cover can't see your target, and you have to move to a position where you can. This under the stealth rules makes you visible.

so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the Dungeon Master might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack before you are seen.

"Peeking out" of cover to attack would be an example of the DM allowing you to remain hidden as you approach a creature.

 

[Wyckedemus]

Here’s the thing. It is actually quite clear to me that the liberal interpretation of the tactic works, and isn’t a problem. I will attempt to lay it out for everyone, and then show why it isn’t broken or bad.

We all know that lightfoot halflings have a special ability that allows them to attempt to hide behind a larger creature. This is a specific vs. general rule that overrules the normal limitations on attempting to hide. Any argument about “knowing they are behind the fighter or behind that tree” is moot, as that has nothing to with the tactic.

Let’s be clear what this actually means. The lightfoot halfling is using that larger creature to become “hidden” so their intended victim can’t technically see them. Let’s say the lightfoot halfling was successful. We all know that the intended victim just *knows* the lightfoot halfling must be somewhere behind the larger creature, but what really matters is at that moment, they cannot actually see the lightfoot halfling. Once it is true that the intended victim cannot technically see the halfling, we look at the following rule: “When a creature cannot see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it.”

Being able to duck behind the same fighter and attempt to hide again (or ducking behind a large pillar for full cover) is a legitimate tactic, not because the rogue trying to convince people that he's not right behind the fighter or pillar (they can target that space with attacks all they want)... but because he's trained to be able to take advantage of being hidden so that when he does attack from hiding, his enemies can't properly gauge how he's going to attack next. Like a previous poster said, it's like trying to hit a fastball being pitched from darkness.

Done. The only argument against this is that someone doesn’t like it.

But here is why it isn’t broken.

Getting Sneak Attack almost every round is not broken. Rogues don’t get Extra Attack like the “warrior” classes. Sneak Attack is necessary for them to be competitive, damage-wise. They actually get Sneak Attack very easily as long as their victim is also being harassed by another adjacent enemy. Becoming hidden is just another (more traditional) way to get it. It’s also harder to get because it takes an action and a skill check to attempt it.

Getting Advantage is one of the other specialty tools of a rogue. Advantage is not a bad word. Not even for lightfoot halflings who hide behind larger creatures, or for wood elves who hide when they are lightly obscured by natural phenomena. For those who are concerned about rogues getting advantage too often because they have more critical hit opportunities, look at the larger picture.
They actually have 2 paths towards getting 2 attack rolls per round to trigger critical hits. It’s a choice.

They can either use their bonus action to attack with two weapons to have 2 chances to crit, or they can use their bonus action from Cunning Action to make a Dexterity (Stealth) check to try and get advantage, which is also essentially 2 rolls to try and get a crit.

It is all built in, and balanced.

… in my opinion.


[Edit: forgot a word]

 

[Branduil]

But the rules don't actually support that. Total cover works both ways. If you have total cover can't see your target, and you have to move to a position where you can. This under the stealth rules makes you visible.

"Peeking out" of cover to attack would be an example of the DM allowing you to remain hidden as you approach a creature.

Interpreting peeking out of cover as approaching a creature feels like a mangling of the word to me.

 

[fjw70]

But it's functionally the same, so it would be clearer to make the ability tied to the cover from the creature, rather than requiring the mental hoop-jumping of "well, it doesn't say if it's heavy or light, so it must be... a special obscurement. Or is it? Maybe they left a word out."

I think it is fine the way it is written.

 

[Gimul]

The rule and its intent are both clear and straightforward. It can be used every round (potentially, but not in practice) to provide advantage. "Peeking" to attack does not break the hide until after the attack; walking out to attack from melee would break the hide before the attack.

None of this is gamebreaking, or even necessarily optimal (from a dpr perspective). Intelligent NPCS/creatures should largely negate it via sound tactics. Also , while the party may have a halfling or two the setting may well involve thousands.

It is merely one interesting playstyle, out of what will most likely be many. Nerfing it out hand is a gross over-reaction.

 

[fjw70]

Human beings(and by extension, monsters) are not perfect reaction robots. It takes a moment to process information. If a player has successfully hidden, and then peeks around the corner to fire, yes, the monster sees them... after the attack has already occurred. This isn't my opinion; it's what the rules explicitly say about attacking while hidden.

Please cite where the rules say you can reveal yourself by peeking and be able to attack before they notice you (without a DM ruling that the target is distracted).

The rules do not automatically give you X amount of time after revealing yourself to take an action. All it says is that the DM CAN allow you to attack if the target is distracted.