D&D 5E Any further clarification to Hiding in Player's Handbook?

[MerricB]

All you have to do is move to a spot where you can see him,

It's probably worth pointing out a major point here: the rules actually don't give this as a condition of losing the hidden status.

The actual example of stopping hiding (not from Perception) is really, really interesting:
"...if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you..."

It's not just "you come out of hiding", no - you have to approach as well!

The tricky bit is "You can't hide from a creature that can see you." However, my reading of this is that it only applies to the active action of "hiding", not "remaining hidden", especially as (given what is later in the sidebar) there are all these examples of characters trying to find hidden creatures in only light obscurement!

Now, I think it's quite reasonable to rule that if you hide around a corner and your opponent comes around the corner actually looking for you, they'll find you pretty quickly. However, if you hide around a corner from someone who never knows you're there... they could walk right past you, as we've seen in countless films and tv shows.

Cheers!

 

[Umbran]

Now, I think it's quite reasonable to rule that if you hide around a corner and your opponent comes around the corner actually looking for you, they'll find you pretty quickly. However, if you hide around a corner from someone who never knows you're there... they could walk right past you, as we've seen in countless films and tv shows.

Another obvious one is the distraction. You ran around the corner - the bad guy is fighting or someone is actively trying to distract them whie you pop back around the corner.

Spoiler for Guardians of the Galaxy:

Spoiler

RONAN THE ACCUSER: What are you doing?
STARLORD: (getting his groove on) Distracting you!
ROCKET & DRAX: BOOM!

I mean, it is a classic - "Yoohoo! Beastie! Look over here so my buddies can get the shot off that'll kill you!"

 

[TDarien]

It's probably worth pointing out a major point here: the rules actually don't give this as a condition of losing the hidden status.

The actual example of stopping hiding (not from Perception) is really, really interesting:
"...if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you..."

It's not just "you come out of hiding", no - you have to approach as well!

The tricky bit is "You can't hide from a creature that can see you." However, my reading of this is that it only applies to the active action of "hiding", not "remaining hidden", especially as (given what is later in the sidebar) there are all these examples of characters trying to find hidden creatures in only light obscurement!

Now, I think it's quite reasonable to rule that if you hide around a corner and your opponent comes around the corner actually looking for you, they'll find you pretty quickly. However, if you hide around a corner from someone who never knows you're there... they could walk right past you, as we've seen in countless films and tv shows.

Cheers!

Well it also says "Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check’s total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence."

I would think that moving to a position where a creature no longer meets the requirements to hide from you would constitute discovery, but you raise an interesting point.

 

[Prism]

I don't agree at all, because if you're not hidden, the enemy knows where you are already, even if it can't see you. So by your rationale, you could *never* hide from a creature who is aware of you.

I walk behind a pillar while you are watching me. You can't see me and I can't see you. I am not hidden so you can hear me. You know where I am

I roll a stealth, beat your passive perception and hide. You still can't see me and I can't see you. You can't hear me either as I am hidden. You know where I am.

I move out to attack you. Maybe I 'peak', maybe I 'lean', maybe I 'step' - it doesn't really matter since you know where I am and you are possibly still looking in my direction. I am no longer hidden since I need total cover to hide and I no longer have it. I now attack

DM 1 rules that you didn't notice me step out. I get advantage on my attack roll
DM 2 rules that that you were still watching the pillar, see me step out and I get no advantage
DM 3 rules that while leaning out I am still hidden without cover and I get advantage even if you are looking at the pillar

Both DM's 1 and 2 are correct by the rules. I don't believe DM 3 is. I am more like DM 2... I think you are more like DM 1 if I understand your argument. That's why I think we both generally agree but differ on how easy this is to achieve in combat.

A rogue could do this every round with their bonus hide

You can't move undetected without hiding first. It was different in previous editions where you could uses stealth as a part of your movement, but in 5e, hiding is it's own action.

I know but I think the movement is an essential part to the hiding when trying to make use of just cover. Being heavily obscured is a different argument because your opponent typically can't see you while you can see them. You don't even need to hide

If a creature hides from you behind a tree, it's really easy to go find him. All you have to do is move to a spot where you can see him, ready an action to attach him when he becomes visible, or blast him with a fireball. And Mearls specifically tweeted that it should be allowed, likely with disadvantage if you hide in the same place over an over again.

Mike Mearls was referring to an example of a Halfling hiding behind a party member by using the hide skill and the obscurement rules not total cover. The Halfling can see the opponent, the opponent cannot see them. The Halfling does not need to step out, move or in any way reveal themselves to shoot. They simply shoot from where they are with no chance for the enemy to see them assuming they hid well.

 

[Psikerlord#]

It's cleverly hidden in the sidebar on Hiding, where it says, "However under certain circumstances, the Dungeon Master might..." And then of course we likely will have something in the Dungeon Masters Guide. Which has rules. For Dungeon Masters. To guide them.

That whole sidebar is far from clear, inc when the DM ought to use his/her discretion. As all the confusion in this thread indicates. Iagree and hope the dmg has a big paragraph espousing the "intrepret the rules in a way that best works for your table" approach.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I was active in the other thread and this is my take on it.

• You can only hide from a creature that is unable to see you. This usually means total cover or heavy obscurement unless you have a special ability that lets you hide under different circumstances.
• You can attack while hidden, if you could normally attack from that position.
• If you're hidden behind total cover, you're unable to attack your target without first moving to a position where you can see your target (as total cover works both ways). Peeking around cover is not supported by the rules. This also means that you can also be seen by your target, which would remove the advantage of being hidden.
• In most circumstances, DMs should allow creatures hiding this way to gain advantage on their attacks anyway. A good example of a situation where you wouldn't gain advantage would be if an enemy readied an action to attack when you became visible.
• Creatures that can hide in other circumstances (Wood Elves, Lightfoot Halflings) aren't faced with this restriction because when they hide in those special circumstances are in a situation where they can see their target, but the target cannot see them (because they're hidden), and therefore do not have to move in order to attack.
• Once your discovered, you can hide again in the same position, possibly at disadvantage if your target it being observant.

I basically agree

 

[Psikerlord#]

It's because it's not part of the active check.

The rationale is that most of the time you're not actively searching for hidden opponents. In fact, the only time you are is during your turn when you declare the "Search" action.

At all other times you're not actively looking for hidden opponents. At that point, by the Hide sidebar, you use your Passive Perception score. This is further mentioned in the section on Noticing Threats in Chapter 8. "Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat." and the section on Surprise in Chapter 9. "the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side."

Interestingly, score is specifically defined in the rules: "The game refers to a passive ability check as a score" (Chapter 7). So, that last reference should really have a "passive" there to make it clearer.

From this, I take it that if the character attempting to hide rolls lower than the Passive Perception scores of the opponents, he fails to hide.

That's the reasoning, at least.

Cheers!

Course anytime a pc is in adangerous place, like a du geon, or wilderness, hou can expect they will always be on alert. So passive wont apply most of the time anyway, e en if you choose to use it.

 

[MerricB]

Course anytime a pc is in adangerous place, like a du geon, or wilderness, hou can expect they will always be on alert. So passive wont apply most of the time anyway, e en if you choose to use it.

Actually, "passive perception" is what we use for when they're on alert. An active check represents a much higher level of concentration. Instead of attacking or casting a spell, they're devoting their energy to actively looking around.

Cheers!

 

[Psikerlord#]

Actually, "passive perception" is what we use for when they're on alert. An active check represents a much higher level of concentration. Instead of attacking or casting a spell, they're devoting their energy to actively looking around.

Cheers!

On alert does = looking around, it doesnt necessarily require you to use an action, eg mid combat hiding, stealth check vs perception check, not passive perception.

 

[TDarien]

I walk behind a pillar while you are watching me. You can't see me and I can't see you. I am not hidden so you can hear me. You know where I am

I roll a stealth, beat your passive perception and hide. You still can't see me and I can't see you. You can't hear me either as I am hidden. You know where I am.

I move out to attack you. Maybe I 'peak', maybe I 'lean', maybe I 'step' - it doesn't really matter since you know where I am and you are possibly still looking in my direction. I am no longer hidden since I need total cover to hide and I no longer have it. I now attack

DM 1 rules that you didn't notice me step out. I get advantage on my attack roll
DM 2 rules that that you were still watching the pillar, see me step out and I get no advantage
DM 3 rules that while leaning out I am still hidden without cover and I get advantage even if you are looking at the pillar

Both DM's 1 and 2 are correct by the rules. I don't believe DM 3 is. I am more like DM 2... I think you are more like DM 1 if I understand your argument. That's why I think we both generally agree but differ on how easy this is to achieve in combat.

A rogue could do this every round with their bonus hide

I pretty much agree with this. I would rule as DM 1, unless I had a good reason to rule as DM 2. Hiding several turns i a row would be one, so would a creature spending an action to search, but failing, so would readying an action to attack if you appeared.

I know but I think the movement is an essential part to the hiding when trying to make use of just cover. Being heavily obscured is a different argument because your opponent typically can't see you while you can see them. You don't even need to hide

I get where your coming from, but I'm not sure that that's entirely accurate. I think the *possibility* of movement is important. If I hide behind a pillar, you have a pretty good idea of where I am, but you can't be positive, because I could be somewhere else. Perhaps I teleported, or there was a secret door behind the pillar, or I climbed up it. Because I'm hidden, you don't know for sure if I'm still there or not. You have to check. If I wasn't hidden, you would know if I did any of those things, because you could hear me.

Granted, you could (correctly) assume that I can't do any of those things, so you can be pretty confident of where I am, but you have no direct evidence of me being there because I'm hidden. (i.e. you couldn't prove to anyone else that I was there who didn't also see me hide there). And in that situation, if you were watching for me, I certainly don't think I would get advantage on an attack.

Mike Mearls was referring to an example of a Halfling hiding behind a party member by using the hide skill and the obscurement rules not total cover. The Halfling can see the opponent, the opponent cannot see them. The Halfling does not need to step out, move or in any way reveal themselves to shoot. They simply shoot from where they are with no chance for the enemy to see them assuming they hid well.

True, but I think that the situation applies to a creature hiding behind a tree round after round. The only difference being that in the pillar situation, the rogue would need to make herself visible before the attack and not a consequence of it.