D&D 5E How does the errata on hiding affect the mask of the wild ability of the wood elf?

[ShadowSeeker]

I personally don't see any real change. On the 'see you clearly' issue... the errata mentions "when you are hiding", not "when you attempt to hide". So I take that to mean that requirements for attempting to hide have not changed-- you have to be out of line of sight or Heavily Obscured. Which means Mark of the Wild still has a purpose-- Wood Elves can attempt to hide when only Lightly Obscured by natural outdoor terrain.

It's only now when you *are* hidden and are attempting to do stuff that they changed the language a little..

Interesting interpretation. But the errata doesn't say "when you are hidden".

To be honest I really haven't a clue what the purpose of the hiding errata is. A rule change (my interpretation) or a simple clarification (your interpretation).

I'm really surprised how the designers failed to make clear and simple rules for stealth. After all, hiding wasn't a problem in former editions.

 

[DEFCON 1]

No,it says "when you are hiding" which means they same thing.

It means you have already accomplished the requirements for hiding. You are out of line of sight, you are being quiet, and you have made a DEX check that is higher than anyone's Passive Perception.

"Are hiding"... "Are hidden"... No difference in meaning as far as I'm concerned.

 

[DEFCON 1]

And the reason they haven't made 'clear and simple rules' is because you can't. With the amount of spells, corner cases, and actions that every player and table makes, there is no one size fits all rule that has ever worked.

So they do the only thing they can... give a set of general rules and tell every DM to make rulings off of them that makes sense in their opinion.

 

[transtemporal]

I think you are mistaking 'clearly' with 'crystal clearly'. The implied wording (IMO) is they must be able to see you clearly 'enough'. ENough is a relative term, it is different for a wood elf than a human.

I think "clearly" describes it ok. Basically the enemy needs to be able see you for long enough to unambiguously identify you as an enemy. I'm not sure that precludes normal folk from hiding in lightly obscured and/or dimly lit squares though. I guess it's up to the individual DM.

 

[Mistwell]

After all, hiding wasn't a problem in former editions.

Lolwut? Are you saying that seriously, or sarcastically?

 

[Hriston]

I don't think the errata were targeting Mask of the Wild. If they had wanted to get rid of MotW, or extend its benefits to everyone, then it would have been easier to issue errata to that effect. Across the board, however, the errata are not changing any of the existing rules, but are merely clarifying the intent with which they were written. They should be interpreted in light of existing rules and not in contradiction to them.

The addition of the word "clearly" should be understood as part and parcel of the emphasis which has now been placed on DM adjudication of the environmental conditions for hiding. This has always been the case. The errata are an attempt to make it more clear for those who felt that line-of-sight was a straight-jacket that prevented DM's from allowing characters to hide when there was even a possibility that they could be seen. This assumption was making hiding too difficult in situations, for example, where characters are sneaking-up on an opponent, or are sneaking from tree to tree in a dense forest. The errata are meant to make it more clear that for any of this to work, the DM must determine whether an opponent is sufficiently distracted, or whether the trees are close enough together to warrant successful sneaking. To those who already understood this, as with the rest of the errata, it is nothing new.

 

[Flamestrike]

Hiding (p. 177). The DM decides when
circumstances are appropriate for hiding.
Also, the question isn’t whether a creature
can see you when you’re hiding. The question
is whether it can see you clearly.

Looks like it's now possible to attempt the Hide action while being observed (which was previously impossible).

This doesnt change the Halfling or WE ability at all (both abilities only change what you can hide behind; neither ability changes the restriction of not being able to hide while being observed).

So you can how hide when a creature 'cant see you clearly' instead of only being able to hide when you cant be seen at all.

With this errata its much more likely that 'in combat' hiding is now a thing. Any time you can convince the DM (or he otherwise rules) that the other creatures in combat 'cant see you clearly' you can use your action (or bonus action for Rogues) to attempt the Hide action.

WE and Halflings simply gain the advantage that (assuming the DM agree's that they 'cant be seen clearly') WE's and Halflings can then attempt to hide behind natural concealment and medium creatures respectively; things that other races cant Hide behind at all.

Hiding goes:

• Step 1: Ask DM if you can be clearly seen from the creature or creatures you want to be hidden from. If the answer is 'No' proceed to step 2.
• Step 2: Is there cover around for you to hide behind? For most creatures that's actual cover (or total concealment). For Wood elves you can add in light natural concealment, and for Halflings you can add any Medium and larger creatures nearby. For peeps with the Skulker feat, you can add any light concealment.
• Step 3: Move to cover (remaining being unable to be seen clearly as you move - i.e. not moving in the open) and make a Stealth check to Hide once you reach your eligible cover or concealment as either an action (or if you are a Rogue 2) a bonus action. The DC is the passive perception of people that couldnt see you clearly at the start of your turn.

Looks pretty straightforward. Whats the issue?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I do believe that the change aims at following reasoning:

when you try to sneak around someone in darkness, that person can see you at least theoretically. So you can never hide at all.
Now you can sneak at someone.

Mask of the wild allows you to hide from someone looking at you directly. Other people need to be out of line of sight to hide.
The intend is crystal clear. Elves can hide in rain or light fog. Human have a much more difficult time hiding in light obscurement.

 

[Celtavian]

Lolwut? Are you saying that seriously, or sarcastically?

I'm wondering that myself. 3E/Pathfinder both sparked numerous threads on stealth. Pathfinder tried to rewrite the rules a few times to make it clearer. Still didn't work. Reality is the DM just needs to know the benefits of not being seen. He decides if the circumstances seem reasonable to use stealth or hiding. No other way really works.

 

[jgsugden]

Stealth is always hard and in most games devolves into a series of DM calls that sets expectations for the group. 5e just makes that a bit more explicit. Just ask the dm if it looks like you can try to hi de and go on from there... less debate and more gaming.