Search results

1: No, N would have to find heavy obscurement or total cover to Hide from C. 2: (I'm assuming N has successfully hidden) I would make C roll a Perception check with advantage, because C is directly observing that area, and the result would determine if N is still hidden. 3: If C fails their...

Some friends are amazing people, and still cause trouble at the gaming table. That doesn't make them bad friends, just not right for your table. It's okay to ask your friend to leave. It's okay if that hurts their feelings a bit. Real friends can forgive each other over time, and a bit of bumpiness.

Sure. I do feel dissed. I do require invisible characters to take the Hide action to become hidden. If they do not, others will know their square.

The only cheesecake anybody needs.

Alternatively, I am and simply disagree with you?

The condition to end hidden is being clearly seen. If you rule that dim light is clearly seen, then who am I to say otherwise?

Goblin. Because you get a bonus action Hide, and you can sing goblin songs in the dark of the night.

It's because the conditions to Hide require heavy obscurement or total cover. The exception being the previously mentioned Mask of the Wild, Lightfoot, Skulker, DM interpretation, etc.

Yeah, you're properly ascribing rulings (and thank you for being civil). Regarding 1, I'm not sure what you mean by inconsistency. I'm randomly speculating, but maybe it's a gaming background that makes me parse things like Hide and Hidden as two different things. Like Hide is the action you...

Yeah, adding the world clearly was an intentional choice. We don't know exactly why it was added, but it creates emphasis that seeing clearly is important and distinct from other forms of seeing. My version would definitely be wrong prior to the errata. The errata is what solidified my belief in...

Light obscurement is not being seen clearly. It's both in the definition of obscurement, and literally gives you disadvantage on seeing. Skulker, Mask of the Wild, and Lightfoot allow someone to hide in light obscurement, which is otherwise not possible. Dim light is not enough to hide in, but...

The condition for ending Hidden is being clearly seen. Being obscured means not being clearly seen. Hence, a Wisdom (Perception) check comes into play to determine if you are seen regardless of not being clearly seen. We're laying out our points so current and future readers can come to their...

I think that's a fair assessment. You're right, it doesn't seem contradictory when I look at it that way.

The playtest packets (which are kindly archived here) actually contradict themselves. I've researched each one, and the contradiction stays consistent from Packet 1 to Packet 10. "A creature can attempt a Dexterity (Stealth) check to sneak around, moving quietly and using cover and heavily...

By default, you need to be in Total Cover / Heavy Obscurement to Hide. Things like Mark of the Wild, Lightfoot, and Skulker allow the character to Hide in Light Obscurement (which they otherwise could not). So those abilities have merit. A DM can always rule that you CAN Hide in Partial Cover /...

Yes, obscurement means you cannot be seen clearly. No, Mask of the Wild, Lightfoots, and Skulkers can take the Hide action in light obscurement. Other people cannot. A person cannot Hide in partial cover / light obscurement (exceptions not included), but they can remain hidden if they move from...

Yep! You got it. Not that it's necessary, but it also passes the Rules check (do any rules conflict) and the RL check (does it support how things work in RL). I know the game designers decided to gut the hiding system and leave much of it up to interpretation, and I completely support people...

The condition for ending the Hidden state is being seen clearly. Partial Cover / Light Obscurement is not being seen clearly by definition (it's obscured sight).