D&D (2024) Stealth Errata

[BruceWright]

I think this is a result of some core design decision to not invent a new "Hidden" condition, and someone really confident they could just fold it into the Invisible condition. I wish there was at least some discussion of Rules as Intended. But alas the legaleze writing of RAW is incredibly loophole-y. The designers described ending "mother may I?" for hide... but I don't know ANYONE outside the design team who agrees they have.

 

[Epic Meepo]

WotC has had no shortage of opportunities now to just write into the rules that you can stop being hidden if the DM decides your position is obvious, and they still haven’t done it.

Don't the rules say exactly that, though?

"The Dungeon Master decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding," and, per the errata, when you use the Hide action "you have the Invisible condition while hidden."

If the DM decides circumstances aren't appropriate for hiding, you can't be hidden. (This follows from natural language definitions of "hiding" and "hidden," neither of which is identified as a keyword with a specific game mechanical meaning.) But the Hide action only gives you the Invisible condition while you are hidden. So the Hide action provides no benefit whatsoever under circumstances the DM decides aren't appropriate for hiding.

 

[MerricB]

I think this is a result of some core design decision to not invent a new "Hidden" condition, and someone really confident they could just fold it into the Invisible condition. I wish there was at least some discussion of Rules as Intended. But alas the legaleze writing of RAW is incredibly loophole-y. The designers described ending "mother may I?" for hide... but I don't know ANYONE outside the design team who agrees they have.

Their success was in clearly stating the requirements to become hidden using the Hide action.

Everything else has been an unmitigated disaster, making hiding actually less clear than it was before! (And ruining the invisibility spell to boot).

 

[MerricB]

Don't the rules say exactly that, though?

I wish they were so clear.

Because of how they've broken up the rules, what was grouped together in 2014 got split apart in 2024. The DM decides part is in Chapter 1. All the actual details of the hide action (which exclude that pesky little detail) are in the Rules Glossary.

It's very hard to have "the DM decides" with "we've taken the guesswork out of adjudicating hiding!" Which is what the 2024 rules lean far more before.

For comparison:
2014: (Chapter 7, Hiding sidebar)
"The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. "
and
"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."

2024: (Chapter 1)
"Adventurers and monsters often hide, whether to spy on one another, sneak past a guardian, or set an ambush. The Dungeon Master decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, you take the Hide action."

 

[Charlaquin]

Don't the rules say exactly that, though?

"The Dungeon Master decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding," and, per the errata, when you use the Hide action "you have the Invisible condition while hidden."

If the DM decides circumstances aren't appropriate for hiding, you can't be hidden. (This follows from natural language definitions of "hiding" and "hidden," neither of which is identified as a keyword with a specific game mechanical meaning.) But the Hide action only gives you the Invisible condition while you are hidden. So the Hide action provides no benefit whatsoever under circumstances the DM decides aren't appropriate for hiding.

Hiding and remaining hidden are not strictly synonymous. Yours is a possible interpretation of the text, but it is not an unambiguous interpretation, hence the failure of this as a pice of game rules text.

 

[dave2008]

I wish they were so clear.

Because of how they've broken up the rules, what was grouped together in 2014 got split apart in 2024. The DM decides part is in Chapter 1. All the actual details of the hide action (which exclude that pesky little detail) are in the Rules Glossary.

It's very hard to have "the DM decides" with "we've taken the guesswork out of adjudicating hiding!" Which is what the 2024 rules lean far more before.

For comparison:
2014: (Chapter 7, Hiding sidebar)
"The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. "
and
"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."

2024: (Chapter 1)
"Adventurers and monsters often hide, whether to spy on one another, sneak past a guardian, or set an ambush. The Dungeon Master decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, you take the Hide action."

I don't find those substantively different myself. But I see how others could be tripped up.

 

[dave2008]

Hiding and remaining hidden are not strictly synonymous. Yours is a possible interpretation of the text, but it is not an unambiguous interpretation, hence the failure of this as a pice of game rules text.

While that may, or may not be true, I am fine with, and sometime prefer, when game rules are a touch ambiguous.

I have no really opinion on the hiding rules as we never really use them (as far as I know). Hiding is pretty much PC request and DM adjudication at our table.

 

[Mistwell]

I would think so. If you couldn't be seen while being "visible," they wouldn't have needed to include the invisible condition portion.

Halfing is in a fog cloud and had used the Hide action while there due to the Heavy Obscurement qualifying them for the Hide action. Foes 1, 2 and 3 have no ability to see in a fog cloud, but just triggered See Invisibility on themselves which allows them to see a creature that had the Invisible condition as if they are visible. Can the halfling be seen by the foes? His body is visible, but foes normally cannot see the Halfling due to the Heavily Obscured area regardless of having used the Hide action, though they could hear him.

 

[mearls]

Honestly?
Really honestly?

I feel you (and others) have been over-thinking this since the beginning, and continue to do so.

I like arguing about rules on forums so that I don't have to argue about them at the table.

 

[Kinematics]

Halfing is in a fog cloud and had used the Hide action while there due to the Heavy Obscurement qualifying them for the Hide action. Foes 1, 2 and 3 have no ability to see in a fog cloud, but just triggered See Invisibility on themselves which allows them to see a creature that had the Invisible condition as if they are visible. Can the halfling be seen by the foes? His body is visible, but foes normally cannot see the Halfling due to the Heavily Obscured area regardless of having used the Hide action, though they could hear him.

No, the foes cannot see him. Being Invisible is moot because another factor is already preventing him from being seen, so them having See Invisible makes no difference.

Now, it might make a difference if he were to sneak off to the left, to get past foe #1 to that hallway over there. If they did not have See Invisible, you could make a case that he could slip by the foe without being seen. With See Invisible, it's reasonable to ask whether the foe automatically "finds" him when he moves out of the fog, due to him no longer benefiting from the Invisible condition.

The problem seems to stem from how the Invisible condition is applied. With the Hide action rules, you have Invisible while hidden. See Invisible negates the Invisible condition. Does it negate the hidden pseudo-condition? The Invisible condition depends on the hidden condition, not the other way around (A → B, B ⌿> A), so negating the Invisible condition does not have a single valid answer on whether the hidden condition is still in effect.