S_Dalsgaard
First Post
It is no different than giving a fighter swinging from a chandelier disadvantage on his attacks. While you may be a master with your weapon, circumstances can make their use less than ideal.
D&D 5E Can a Reach Weapon stop someone attacking you?
- Thread starter Lord Vangarel
- Start date
lumenbeing
Explorer
Yeah, somehow I knew you would argue that too. But it's been well established by now that you can NOT hide when a creature can see you. The way the halfling rule works is you can hide behind your friend before the enemy sees you. It doesn't give you the super power of turning your opponent into a slack jawed idiot stammering "where did he go George?" He knows where you are. He doesn't need to make a check. You are behind your friend. Thus you are not hiding from him.
What "Naturally Stealthy" actually says is that you can "ATTEMPT to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you". Attempting to hide and being hidden are not the same thing. PHB p.177 "You can't hide from a creature that can see you."
You are breaking RAW by making your determination based on facing. RAW states that creatures have 360 degree awareness. If a monster has line of sight on you and you are not obscured, then sorry, but no hiding behind your friend.
Apologies to the OP for getting off topic.
What "Naturally Stealthy" actually says is that you can "ATTEMPT to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you". Attempting to hide and being hidden are not the same thing. PHB p.177 "You can't hide from a creature that can see you."
You are breaking RAW by making your determination based on facing. RAW states that creatures have 360 degree awareness. If a monster has line of sight on you and you are not obscured, then sorry, but no hiding behind your friend.
Apologies to the OP for getting off topic.
Incorrect. The fact that the ally you are hiding behind is one size larger makes it implicit that the creature loses line of sight. By 'attempting' to hide, it means you can roll a hide check, but it is not guaranteed to succeed. Situation will dictate advantage or disadvantage on any relevent checks. Actions after a successful hide check can result in the halfling once again being spotted (i.e. moving out from behind your ally into an open brightly lit room).
You are on a slippery slope where you are injecting your own beliefs into what should, and should not, be allowed in game, regardless of the rules. Are there times where interpretation is needed? Sure, but not nearly as often as you seem to be invoking it.
It is far different. Swinging from a chandelier is a situational modifier. In this case, the DM has made a blanket ruling that negates a main feature of the character. If the designers had thought that making a butt spike bonus attack from the second rank was impossible, don't you think they would have included that in the rules? I would think so. When the player made their character, they were probably anticipating being able to take that bonus attack. A chandelier swinging fighter can just stop swinging on chandeliers and it doesn't change their character much (unless they planned on adventuring with a storm giant who held a chandelier every combat lol)
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
"Attempt to hide" means your character is engaging in the fictional act of hiding through some stated approach. It does not mean you are entitled to an ability check. The DM decides, based on your goal and approach relative to the fictional context of the situation, if you succeed, fail, or if the outcome is uncertain and warrants an ability check.
lumenbeing
Explorer
I'm not on a slippery slope friend. I'm not disregarding the rules. I'm reading them correctly and interpreting what they mean to the game. You are interpreting them too, albeit incorrectly. Read page 177 in you players handbook.
My players are never going to make the false assumption that they can do things your way because I make it clear to them what I will and will not allow at character creation.
My players are never going to make the false assumption that they can do things your way because I make it clear to them what I will and will not allow at character creation.
Ok, so just to be clear. You have no problem with people throwing balls of fire from their fingertips, raising long dead corpses from the dead, but you draw the line at hitting someone with the butt end of a weapon from over 5 feet away. Got it.
lumenbeing
Explorer
I have no problem with trying to hit someone with the butt end of a pole arm from 10'. One on one, no problem. It a powerful feature. The problem comes from the specific situation of trying to do it when there is a creature standing between attacker and target. Now if the attacker and target are both human, and the guy I between is a halfling, THEN I might allow them to use the feature.
As iserith so eloquently put it, it all depends on the fiction as to what is an auto hit, auto fail or a possibility. We are talking about fiction, not the real world, but the rules are there to guide us through adjudicating that fictional world. The application of advantage or disadvantage give you even more range to do so.
Your view of "a feature works in every situation no matter what" is quite frankly, dull and boring.
As iserith so eloquently put it, it all depends on the fiction as to what is an auto hit, auto fail or a possibility. We are talking about fiction, not the real world, but the rules are there to guide us through adjudicating that fictional world. The application of advantage or disadvantage give you even more range to do so.
Your view of "a feature works in every situation no matter what" is quite frankly, dull and boring.
And with this DM, it appears you can only hide when no one can see you. Even when the rules say that a halfling can attempt to hide when obscured by a creature one size larger. The ruling is 'attempt to hide' = you fail because even though you are obscured, the creature can still see you.
Now we have degenrated into what 'attempt to hide' means. It pretty clearly means that the character can make some sort of check. It is also pretty clear that a halfling who has Naturally Stealthy is obscured and can make a check. Advantage/disadvantage may apply and the creature may be able to use active rather than passive perception in some instances.
You may not remain hidden, but you are allowed to hide behind an ally in this case. If it is clear you are hiding behind an ally, a creature could still target the space but cover could apply.
http://community.wizards.com/forum/rules-questions/threads/4148631
Part 1 Hiding:
When you want to hide, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. This check is against the Passive Perception (determined by each creature's Wisdom score, more on this below) of creatures around you. Several factors revolve around becoming and remaining hidden. Sight and Noise being the most common.
What does hiding get me in general?:
-Advantage on attack rolls against creatures you are hiding from.
-If you manage to beat a creature's Passive Perception score, you are considered hidden from it. Creature's who can't see you have disadvantage on attack rolls against you. This is true weither the attacker is guessing the target's location or if it the attacker is targeting a creature it can hear but not see (an invisible one for example). If the hiding creature is not in the location that is targeted by the attack, the attack automatically misses.
-There are many more benefits possible depending on your class, race, etc... Monsters also have many unique abilities and features that player characters cannot access easily if at all.
S_Dalsgaard
First Post
Attacking from second rank isn't really covered much in the rules, so as with everything else, the designers probably wanted us to figure it out for ourselves. My issue is, that when we talk fighting in multiple ranks, historically it was done with piercing weapons and in that case (with for example a pike), I wouldn't give the second rank fighter disadvantage, but I still can't see how he can get his weapon butt to bear (although from a balance point of view it doesn't make that much difference, so if a player really wanted to do this, it wouldn't be worth the argument and I would just let them do it).
As for the hiding behind an ally, I actually agree with you AriochQ. Particularly with the new errata, I think it is obvious that a halfling don't have to be completely unseen behind his ally, to attempt to hide.
