D&D 5E Greater Invis and Stealth checks, how do you rule it?

[Flamestrike]

@Helldritch

Lets assume a mano-a-mano between M the Monk (Stealth +7, move 50') and F the Fighter (Perception +5, Passive 15, Alert feat; cant be surprised, no advantage for invisible and hidden).

M is hiding in an enormous wooden floored warehouse (200' long by 50' wide), with sparse crates and pillars around the area. It's daytime outside but dim light inside due to the boarded up windows. Other than the sound of pattering rain from outside, there is no other appreciable noise.

M the monk starts the Combat invisible via greater invisibility and hidden. F is wearing Full Plate, and is walking through the warehouse. He closes to 10' away when the Monk declares he charges F.

The DM calls for initiative at this point, before the charge is resolved.

Initiative results are M 17, F 15. M goes first.

Round 1:

M's turn 1: He moves 10' towards F and Attacks F from hiding. He does not get advantage (due to F's Alert feat). He misses with both attacks. He then moves 40' away (note that F does not get an Opportunity attack even though he is not surprised on account of his feat and can make reactions, because M is invisible, and you cant make OA's against invisible targets) and uses his bonus action to Dash another 50', finishing his turn 90' away from F.

Is M automatically hidden?

 

[Flamestrike]

Also... When attacked, the guard will probably not even pursue. The normal reaction will be to take the dodge action and scream for help (but that is an other debate).

Sigh.

The Monk is invisible. The Dodge action:

When you take the Dodge action, you focus entirely on avoiding attacks. Until the start of your next turn, any Attack roll made against you has disadvantage if you can see the attacker, and you make Dexterity Saving Throws with advantage. You lose this benefit if you are Incapacitated (as explained in Conditions ) or if your speed drops to 0.

Wont help them.

Most 5E abilities and special attacks (attacks of opportunity, spells etc) require a target 'you can see'. This is to represent and reflect that an invisible (but not also Hidden) creatures position is never known with certainty, is incredibly hard to hit, and you cant know with any precision where they are.

 

[Oofta]

You can clearly hear someone running in a crowded supermarket. If they started next to you, and you were blinded, you could hear them for several seconds (enough to squeeze off a few shots in their direction as they were running away, at disadvantage).

...

I got a chuckle out of this one. Sure, if the supermarket is empty and the runner is wearing wooden clogs, maybe. Now do it while someone is talking to you, much less trying to bash your head in with a mace. In my games you generally will know where an invisible person is if they are adjacent and engaged in combat, but a hundred feet away? You may know the direction they took off.

In any case I just popped in because I spent a few minutes last night re-listening to that podcast that you claim "proves" your point. Except it doesn't. In fact Crawford directly contradicts it. You can listen to it here starting at 28:40. My transcript of that section:

"In some cases the DM will decide that an invisible person' location is unknown to combatants [because of] the environment and the character's attentiveness it's really up to the DM ... even though she never bothered to hide ..."​

So the author of the rule directly contradicts you. I mean, run it whatever way you want. Make the assumption that when you run a game you always know where the person is. It's your game. Just stop saying the rules say something they don't.

 

[Helldritch]

Sigh...
Dodge will not help. I know that. But it would be his normal response. Be it by moving away, or by putting his shield between him or the perceived direction of the attack. Probably readying an attack if he is attacked.

@Helldritch

Lets assume a mano-a-mano between M the Monk (Stealth +7, move 50') and F the Fighter (Perception +5, Passive 15, Alert feat; cant be surprised, no advantage for invisible and hidden).

M is hiding in an enormous wooden floored warehouse (200' long by 50' wide), with sparse crates and pillars around the area. It's daytime outside but dim light inside due to the boarded up windows. Other than the sound of pattering rain from outside, there is no other appreciable noise.

M the monk starts the Combat invisible via greater invisibility and hidden. F is wearing Full Plate, and is walking through the warehouse. He closes to 10' away when the Monk declares he charges F.

The DM calls for initiative at this point, before the charge is resolved.

Initiative results are M 17, F 15. M goes first.

Round 1:

M's turn 1: He moves 10' towards F and Attacks F from hiding. He does not get advantage (due to F's Alert feat). He misses with both attacks. He then moves 40' away (note that F does not get an Opportunity attack even though he is not surprised on account of his feat and can make reactions, because M is invisible, and you cant make OA's against invisible targets) and uses his bonus action to Dash another 50', finishing his turn 90' away from F.

Is M automatically hidden?

1) Again, this is not the OP example.
But...
F would require to make a perception check not because M is hidden, but because M is unseen and far away. AND M might be behind a crate or a pillar.
But if you say that by the rule, F knows exactly which square M is, you'd better leave the discussion as this is a rule zero case. The general rule is not adapted to these situations, there are no specific rules so DM's adjudication and logic is required.

Ignore the rule for a moment.
Go outside, ask people what should happen.
Yep, they'd side with logic against the rules.

Here is a case where F (a fighter with no feat whatsoever related to the problem at hand) would be perfectly within reason. M is not a monk, but an arcane trickster.
F wins the initiative but can't do anything.
AT attack F and even use his bonus action to try to land a hit (and thus a sneak attack damage) on F. AT misses on both attacks. Dang! But AT still has 15'.
AT moves 15 feet away from F.
F knows about which square AT is, moves in, and attack AT at disadvantage but hitting twice. F action surge and hit two more times (the lucky bastard...)

In this text book case. The rule applies in all its glory. On his turn, AT better try to take a move and then hide to get away because F will kill AT.

Edit: Wow, @Oofta got you there on the Crawford's podcast saying exactly what we've been saying all along. The creator of the rule is on our side.

 

[Helldritch]

I got a chuckle out of this one. Sure, if the supermarket is empty and the runner is wearing wooden clogs, maybe. Now do it while someone is talking to you, much less trying to bash your head in with a mace. In my games you generally will know where an invisible person is if they are adjacent and engaged in combat, but a hundred feet away? You may know the direction they took off.

In any case I just popped in because I spent a few minutes last night re-listening to that podcast that you claim "proves" your point. Except it doesn't. In fact Crawford directly contradicts it. You can listen to it here starting at 28:40. My transcript of that section:

"In some cases the DM will decide that an invisible person' location is unknown to combatants [because of] the environment and the character's attentiveness it's really up to the DM ... even though she never bothered to hide ..."​

So the author of the rule directly contradicts you. I mean, run it whatever way you want. Make the assumption that when you run a game you always know where the person is. It's your game. Just stop saying the rules say something they don't.

Just listened to the pod cast part you said. It could not be clearer than that. It is a DM's call.
No need to argue on a DM's call.

 

[Oofta]

Just listened to the pod cast part you said. It could not be clearer than that. It is a DM's call.
No need to argue on a DM's call.

Kind of goes with the whole theme of stealth rules. If anyone has a problem with how stealth, hiding and hidden is handled I recommend listening to it. They left it up to the DM on purpose to decide when you can hide or, in the case of invisibility, when others may lose track of where you were because they have a barbarian trying to smash their head in.

 

[Flamestrike]

F would require to make a perception check not because M is hidden, but because M is unseen and far away.

Wrong. F hasnt had his turn yet, and M is not hidden.

Back to the example.

F's turn 1. F (a Wood Elf with the Mobile feat) moves 45' and then takes the Dash action moving another 45', ending up adjacent to the invisible but not hidden M. F then Action surges, gaining a second action, using it on the Attack action, attacking M. He misses both times.

End of round 1.

At no stage was M 90' away from F. F was not standing there frozen in time and space for six whole seconds while M attacked F and then ran away, getting 90' away from F. What happened was M attacked F (revealing himself), F was alert enough to block those attacks and respond, and F then followed up M as M ran away, hot on his heels, blindly swinging his sword at M's back as M ran away.

That not only reflects the RAW and the RAW (as clearly expressed by the writers of the rule) it also accurately reflects what both of those two men were doing for the six or so seconds of that combat regardless of the stop/start nature of cyclical turn based action sequencing.

 

[Flamestrike]

So the author of the rule directly contradicts you.

No they dont.

I agree that there CAN be times when a DM can make the call that a creature is Hidden without needing to Hide. Outliers or situations outside of expected DnD combat scenarions. An invisible Faerie hovering 200' away from a raging battle near a waterfall for example.

Im stating that this example I provided above, is not one of them.

It's two combatants, (one invisible) in move and melee range of each other, swinging weapons at each other, with no appreciable distractions or noise, and neither of them making any effort to hide or be quiet.

The general rule stands.

 

[Oofta]

No they dont.

I agree that there CAN be times when a DM can make the call that a creature is Hidden without needing to Hide. Outliers or situations outside of expected DnD combat scenarions. An invisible Faerie hovering 200' away from a raging battle near a waterfall for example.

Im stating that this example I provided above, is not one of them.

It's two combatants, (one invisible) in move and melee range of each other, swinging weapons at each other, with no appreciable distractions or noise, and not bothering to hide.

That's not the OP's scenario of someone who's a hundred feet away and not what you've been arguing. But fine. Change the goalposts to ... I don't know ... a hundred feet away.

I've never said you never know where an invisible creature is, just that it's up to the DM to determine if they can be detected. When it happens is up to the DM and the scenario.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Just listened to the pod cast part you said. It could not be clearer than that. It is a DM's call.
No need to argue on a DM's call.

Kind of goes with the whole theme of stealth rules. If anyone has a problem with how stealth, hiding and hidden is handled I recommend listening to it. They left it up to the DM on purpose to decide when you can hide or, in the case of invisibility, when others may lose track of where you were because they have a barbarian trying to smash their head in.

For anyone that hasn't listened to the podcast, this "slamdunk" that was found was an example where a GM could say that a group of orcs might lose track of an invisible mage in a situation where a barbarian was attacking them while screaming and a rogue had set off some kegs of gunpowder nearby. In other words, absolutely nothing different from what the rest of us have been saying -- in special circumstances, it's a GM's call.

The podcast this goes on to say that it would be perfectly normal and in accordance with the rules to say that creatures know the locations of everyone unless they hide, invisible or not.

I mean, you guy really want to say you've discovered my position (and @iserith's, and @Hriston's) and decided it vindicates you, I guess that this is a successful thread. The normal is you know where an invisible creature is, but special circumstances could arise where a GM might decide differently. Excellent well done.