D&D 5E Any further clarification to Hiding in Player's Handbook?

[fjw70]

Liked the article.

I think the DMG should add more clarifications. For example, cover and concealment usually both allow to hide, but they are very different things, e.g.:

- a thick glass pane covers you but doesn't hide you
- a thin opaque curtain hides you but doesn't cover you

Being visible is a different thing than being located by someone: the invisible monster/character can be located (i.e. they know there it is) for instance if it's standing into water or sand, of if it's moving, or if it just turned invisible a moment ago. In some corner case (Mirror Image, displacer beasts) someone can even be visible but its true location unknown.

I think 3e had somewhat clearer description for hiding:

" You need cover or concealment in order to attempt a Hide check. Total cover or total concealment usually (but not always; see Special, below) obviates the need for a Hide check, since nothing can see you anyway.

If people are observing you, even casually, you can’t hide. You can run around a corner or behind cover so that you’re out of sight and then hide, but the others then know at least where you went.

If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check; see below), though, you can attempt to hide. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Hide check if you can get to a hiding place of some kind. (As a general guideline, the hiding place has to be within 1 foot per rank you have in Hide.) This check, however, is made at a -10 penalty because you have to move fast.

Sniping

If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a -20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot. "

---

Generally I have problems with invisible stuff or similarly with blinded characters.

Say you're in total darkness, and you are attacked by someone with darkvision. Probably the attacker still needs a Hide check, because that includes not making noises. But if your Perception wins, you know where it is but you still can't see it! Can we say it's not technically hidden anymore?

But even if it's not hidden, at best you know where it is... but how can you defend normally (dodge, parry) from its attacks, since you don't see the attacks? Shouldn't it still have advantage to attack you?

The attacker would still have advantage on attacks against you since you can't see it. Being unseen and hidden are two different things and you only need to be unseen to get advantage on attacks.

 

[Li Shenron]

The attacker would still have advantage on attacks against you since you can't see it. Being unseen and hidden are two different things and you only need to be unseen to get advantage on attacks.

That's what I would expect, but that paragraph in Basic still mixes up being invisible with being hidden with being in darkness, and being "unseen" with "giving up your location". The text isn't exactly read-friendly especially to non-native English speakers. It would be easier if it had one separated paragraph about locating a creature, and another one about the benefits of unseen/invisible.

 

[fjw70]

That's what I would expect, but that paragraph in Basic still mixes up being invisible with being hidden with being in darkness, and being "unseen" with "giving up your location". The text isn't exactly read-friendly especially to non-native English speakers. It would be easier if it had one separated paragraph about locating a creature, and another one about the benefits of unseen/invisible.

"When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll."


"When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."

Looks pretty straightforward to me. What part of this are you having trouble with?

 

[Li Shenron]

"When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll."


"When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."

Looks pretty straightforward to me. What part of this are you having trouble with?

These 2 are definitely the easiest part.

Some of my problems come from not clearly understanding the difference between hidden and unseen. But now I actually noticed the beginning of the last sentence: "if you are hidden - both unseen and unheard".

So this seems like unseen is a lesser condition that only implies the (dis)advantages you mentioned above.

Instead, hidden seems it means a stronger condition of unseen plus "they don't know your position". So they also have to guess where you are, when targetting. (There is also an even stronger condition you can be, when they don't even know you are there, which requires anyway to be hidden.)

So the Hide action in combat seems to be usable to gain the hidden condition, right? Then if you make an attack (e.g. sniping) you lose the hidden condition, but you are seen/unseen depending on the previous circumstances.

Example: if you are invisible or the target is blinded or you are in darkness/heavy foliage, you are not longer hidden (they know your location) but still unseen (dis-advantages still apply).

Or is there something wrong again?

 

[fjw70]

These 2 are definitely the easiest part.

Some of my problems come from not clearly understanding the difference between hidden and unseen. But now I actually noticed the beginning of the last sentence: "if you are hidden - both unseen and unheard".

So this seems like unseen is a lesser condition that only implies the (dis)advantages you mentioned above.

Instead, hidden seems it means a stronger condition of unseen plus "they don't know your position". So they also have to guess where you are, when targetting. (There is also an even stronger condition you can be, when they don't even know you are there, which requires anyway to be hidden.)

So the Hide action in combat seems to be usable to gain the hidden condition, right? Then if you make an attack (e.g. sniping) you lose the hidden condition, but you are seen/unseen depending on the previous circumstances.

Example: if you are invisible or the target is blinded or you are in darkness/heavy foliage, you are not longer hidden (they know your location) but still unseen (dis-advantages still apply).

Or is there something wrong again?

I think you have it.

 

[Umbran]

G'day, all!

Is there any further clarification to the rules on Hiding in the Player's Handbook? The Basic rules basically only say "You can’t hide from a creature that can see you", and it seems from how a couple of special abilities interact you need Total Cover or to be Heavily Obscured to hide.

I would instead say that Total Cover or Heavily Obscured are sufficient to Hide, but are not strictly necessary. If the party bard does a good job of going, "Hey, look! A distraction!" then maybe the rogue can Hide. If you have Total Cover, but the enemy's pet monkey is clinging to your back shrieking, you can't Hide either. Maybe it makes sense to allow it when they have 3/4 cover and are also lightly obscured?

I think failing to list the exact cases when you can Hide is entirely intentional. They don't *want* a codified list. This is not a game with lots of codified lists of exactly when you can do things, and when you can't. That's the wrong philosophy.

 

[outsider]

I agree - that's very much an area that can be up to DM adjudication. As I recall, earlier editions required movement at half speed to remain stealthy (or otherwise at a penalty), but it's an area for debate.

Cheers!

Nearest thing I can find to it in 5e is the Supreme Sneak feature of the rogue, which actually gives advantage when they stealth at half speed. Which would seem to suggest that they can in fact stealth at full speed.

Otherwise I agree with your analysis. It's pretty similar to what I came up with over on rpg.net.

 

[Mistwell]

This might add something to the debate.

I asked Mike Mearls on Twitter:

A Lightfoot halfling hides behind his ally (using Naturally Stealthy), and attacks a foe with advantage (using a ranged weapon). Can he hide in same spot again, from same foe, after that attack?

He answered:

Yes, though DM should apply common sense as needed. For instance, disadvantage on checks to hide.

And for reference, Naturally Stealthy says, "You can attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you."

 

[outsider]

I also have problems with interpreting hiding. People tend to say that it's very clear, so perhaps it's my English languages skills causing a barrier to me...

It's not your English skills that are the barrier. It's WotC's English skills that are the problem here.

 

[Agamon]

I'm going with this: a PC can hide again after revealing his position, but the foes don't need to search for him, they just need to move around the cover/obscuring element to automatically reveal him.