D&D (2024) Reworking the 2024 Hiding rules

[Horwath]

one solution for moving between covers or moving towards target in the open:

You can move a number of feet in the open equal to your "passive Stealth" or "take 10" score.
that is, if you have +5 to stealth, you can move 15ft in the open.
When you move in the open, you take disadvantage on your Stealth check

at the end of your turn, if you are still in the open, you automatically lose your Hidden/invisible condition.

 

[KYRON45]

The main problem with hiding are the facing rules or lack thereof.
If an opponent can be facing any direction at all times, then the moment you break cover they are going to be looking at you unless the DM decides otherwise. This is why you don't have to be "behind" an opponent to "backstab" them.

 

[aco175]

How does the new Supreme Sneak rules for rogues add into the discussion.

Level 9: Supreme Sneak​

You gain the following Cunning Strike option.
Stealth Attack (Cost: 1d6). If you have the Hide action’s Invisible condition, this attack doesn’t end that condition on you if you end the turn behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover.

It seems to me that you get to move, attack, and run behind a curtain (or just 3/4 cover) before determining if you not longer have the invisible condition. Is it something with the opponent has not taken his turn yet, so he has not used some sort of action to see you. Which I find rather silly, but I'm also on the side of allowing you to move out of hiding and get to sneak attack with the advantage.

I saw the old 5e version just allowed you to gain advantage to stealth of you only moved 1/2 speed. It seems the new rules cover both visual and audible stealth in one roll.

 

[Retros_x]

I would add, creatures who you can only see with darkvision can hide from you without needing any cover.
this would add another reason to carry lights even if you have darkvision.

Oh nice, darkvision makes me invisible now?

I am joking, I know what you mean, you can hide in darkness. But that is actually already possible RAW. There is no line of sight in total darkness for creatures without darkvision. Obviously they don't see much themselves - but a creature with darkvision can navigate the space without much problems. I don't see a need to add more to the already confusing wording to underline a situation that is already implicated.

 

[Retros_x]

The main problem with hiding are the facing rules or lack thereof.
If an opponent can be facing any direction at all times, then the moment you break cover they are going to be looking at you unless the DM decides otherwise. This is why you don't have to be "behind" an opponent to "backstab" them.

There is no problem. The facing is irrelevant as you say. The moment you step into line of sight you are not hidden anymore.

I sometimes do rulings based on facing outside of combat. Like guards that are facing only one direction. In combat I use the rules and rationalize them by assuming a creature in combat tries to keep their surroundings always in check and 6 seconds are enough to do so. When players try to distract creatures or have other ideas to sneak up on them, I'll improvise checks and rulings accordingly like any sensitive DM who doesn't need a rules paragraph for every specific situation.

 

[Retros_x]

I don't think it is that complex. Also, I don't think "invisible" is a good condition for this.

[...]

I don't think it needs to be more complicated than that.

Absolutely agree. The wording is unnecessary complex and I am surprised to see the authors and designers fail so hard. With your phrasing the effect of invisibility on hiding is also clear: It doesnt make you automatically hidden (because you make sounds), but you basically can attempt to do the hide action everywhere without need to search cover or obscure sight.

I think I will copy and paste your text and give this exactly like this to my players and tell them to ignore the PHB in this regard. I would only add the following:

Invisibility: You are always heavily obscured for creatures without tremorsense or magical means to see invisibility or make it visible.

 

[MerricB]

How does the new Supreme Sneak rules for rogues add into the discussion.

Level 9: Supreme Sneak​

You gain the following Cunning Strike option.
Stealth Attack (Cost: 1d6). If you have the Hide action’s Invisible condition, this attack doesn’t end that condition on you if you end the turn behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover.

It seems to me that you get to move, attack, and run behind a curtain (or just 3/4 cover) before determining if you not longer have the invisible condition. Is it something with the opponent has not taken his turn yet, so he has not used some sort of action to see you. Which I find rather silly, but I'm also on the side of allowing you to move out of hiding and get to sneak attack with the advantage.

I saw the old 5e version just allowed you to gain advantage to stealth of you only moved 1/2 speed. It seems the new rules cover both visual and audible stealth in one roll.

Normally, the attack will stop the invisible condition, as written in the Hide action. So, from behind 3/4 cover, you make a ranged attack, and it ends. With this, as long as you end up behind 3/4 or total cover, it doesn't end. (But if you're just completely in darkness and they can't see you, it ends! ARGH!)

The "can you move out of cover and stay hidden" is one of the DM judgment calls. It was in 5E, and I presume it is in 2024.

Cheers!

 

[Retros_x]

If they're aware, they can use their actions to look for you, otherwise, roll against Passive Perception.

This implies that being aware can make you worse at searching for someone than when not being aware because you always can roll subaverage.

 

[MerricB]

The main problem with hiding are the facing rules or lack thereof.
If an opponent can be facing any direction at all times, then the moment you break cover they are going to be looking at you unless the DM decides otherwise. This is why you don't have to be "behind" an opponent to "backstab" them.

The 2014 rules explictly cover this. They say monsters are normally looking around in combat, but the DM can make an exception.

"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the DM might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack roll before you are seen." (Chapter 7, Using Ability Scores, HIDING sidebar).

It's part of the text that got removed and make the 2024 rules so much worse.

Cheers!

 

[KYRON45]

There is no problem. The facing is irrelevant as you say. The moment you step into line of sight you are not hidden anymore.

I sometimes do rulings based on facing outside of combat. Like guards that are facing only one direction. In combat I use the rules and rationalize them by assuming a creature in combat tries to keep their surroundings always in check and 6 seconds are enough to do so. When players try to distract creatures or have other ideas to sneak up on them, I'll improvise checks and rulings accordingly like any sensitive DM who doesn't need a rules paragraph for every specific situation.

I mean problem in the sense that this issue seems to take up a lot of real state on the boards.
When I’m DMing I just look at the map and make decisions. I’m never going to messer square corners and diagonals etc and debate game theory.