SpellObjectEnthusiast
Adventurer
1975.When did playing hide and seek get so hard?

1975.When did playing hide and seek get so hard?
The surprising part to me was that it is "medium" difficulty to hide when you're already hidden from sight. It's like, after eating breakfast, having a significant chance of failing to break your fast.DM: As you secure your position, you step on a twig, which snaps with a loud sound. The dragon's head whips around to your direction. It moves five feet, sees you and breathes fire all over your face. . .
Sure, this is how I would interpret it. Besides the DC, it's not bad. There's the weird logical contradiction though, that to get Invisible, you must have concealment and make a check. Failing the check means you don't get the Invisible condition, nor the "Concealed" effect of it - which seems to negate your prior concealment.Or, and hear me out on this, failure doesn't mean anything other than the PC doesn't get the benefits of the invisible condition.
Look, I know what invisible means. It’s not my fault Jeremy Crawford spent years droning on about the specific way he was writing the rules to make things as “clear as can be.”Invisible = the invisible condition. The condition is what you look up to see what invisible means.
Except now, for I think the first time, the rules say you can tell if someone sees you if you can see them.The key thing to keep in mind as that we only ever THINK were hiding.![]()
I think there are some special forces operators who would disagree with this.Except now, for I think the first time, the rules say you can tell if someone sees you if you can see them.
I maintain that JC should not have been put as design lead for d&d24. His obsession with RAW minutia per the sage advice twitter pushed 5e away from its design intent and made the system worse. Now d&d24 is written with RAW minutia in mind - and still has significant problems and things that don't work.Look, I know what invisible means. It’s not my fault Jeremy Crawford spent years droning on about the specific way he was writing the rules to make things as “clear as can be.”
No, becase the invisible condition ends when you can 'somehow' be seen. In the case of the Hide Action in combat (different than trying to sneak past guards in exploration in which the DM would set a DC for your stealth to beat), the minute you step out of cover, if the monster is looking your direction, they will be able to see you and the condition ends.Wow, this semms really really bad. So someone can step into the bushes and "hide", then walk in broad daylight with zero cover from anything and stroll past 100 people undetected. They can't even notice the rogue, because you need to choose to make a perception action to attempt to detect them? Why would you randomly make a perception check to look for something invisible?
What a design fail
Having a condition called "invisible" that does not include, as part of its effects, being invisible, is a pretty big design failure.No, becase the invisible condition ends when you can 'somehow' be seen. In the case of the Hide Action in combat (different than trying to sneak past guards in exploration in which the DM would set a DC for your stealth to beat), the minute you step out of cover, if the monster is looking your direction, they will be able to see you and the condition ends.
What's actually happened with this rule is that Hiding in combat is now almost entirely a defensive action, preventing the PC from being targeted by attacks or spells from the other side.