D&D 5E (2014) Can Objects Be Hidden?

[Seramus]

Hmm. I don't see any rules there. I do see a general outline of how play goes in the introduction section, though.

Those are known as 'Rules'.

 

[Maxperson]

Those are known as 'Rules'.

Outlines are not rules and never have been. In any case, those wouldn't be rules on hiding objects. The player describes that he wants his PC to hide an object, and the DM narrates what happens, but needs to have rules to do so. Either he makes up a rule, or he looks up a rule, but an instruction to simply "narrate" is not a rule.

 

[Seramus]

Outlines are not rules and never have been.

It's a set of principals governing conduct within a particular activity or sphere. So, literally the definition of rules.

 

[ccs]

If you're having a debate about this there's something wrong with at least one of the participants.....

 

[Maxperson]

It's a set of principals governing conduct within a particular activity or sphere. So, literally the definition of rules.

Aaaaaand that irrelevant. Even if you want to believe that those are rules, they still aren't rules for hiding. The thing you are overlooking is what takes place between the player declaring an action for his PC and the DM narrating what happens.

If the player wants his PC to do something having nothing whatsoever to do with rules, there are no intermediary steps. An example would a player declaring his PC walks up to the bar. The DM narrates that the PC walks up to the bar with nothing in-between. However, for each and every declaration that uses a rule for the action, there are intermediary steps that have to be taken before the DM can narrate the outcome. If the player wants the PC to ambush some orcs, the DM narrates the outcome using the surprise rules. If the player wants the PC to open a locked door, the DM narrates the outcome based on the rules for opening locks. If the player wants the PC to hide an item, the DM narrates the outcome based on the rules for hiding objects. Oh, wait. There aren't any.

That means that either the PC can't hide an object, which is absurd, or the DM has to create rules for hiding objects BEFORE he can narrate the outcome.

There, now I've caught you up to where everyone else in the thread has been at for ages now. You can actually join the discussion if you like, or keep arguing the nonsense about page 6 being the rules for hiding. Up to you, but you aren't really going to be effective if you refuse to join the rest of us.

 

[Seramus]

Oh, wait. There aren't any.

Page 6 and the rules for Sleight of Hand cover the issue more than adequately. There have also been several excellent suggestions on which skills could be used, including your own Wisdom + Stealth, which is supported by the rules on Page 6.

There, now I've caught you up to where everyone else in the thread has been at for ages now. You can actually join the discussion if you like, or keep arguing the nonsense about page 6 being the rules for hiding. Up to you, but you aren't really going to be effective if you refuse to join the rest of us.

I'm asking you politely to please refrain from argumentum ad populum and condescension.

 

[Maxperson]

Page 6 and the rules for Sleight of Hand cover the issue more than adequately. There have also been several excellent suggestions on which skills could be used, including your own Wisdom + Stealth, which is supported by the rules on Page 6.

Using the sleight of hand rules works as a house rule if you want to do that, sure. They aren't the rules for hiding objects, though. So yes, page 6 plus creating(modifying an existing rule) a rule for hiding works, just as I said.

 

[Seramus]

Using the sleight of hand rules works as a house rule if you want to do that, sure. They aren't the rules for hiding objects, though. So yes, page 6 plus creating(modifying an existing rule) a rule for hiding works, just as I said.

From my perspective, the sleight of hand rules cover hiding objects. Telling me they are not the rules for hiding objects is like telling me humans don't need air to stay alive. Not that there is anything wrong with house rules, of course. But I literally cannot see how they are not the rules for hiding objects.

Other combinations of attribute and skill can also work, since this edition focuses on rulings instead of rules, but the rules for hiding objects are right there.

 

[Maxperson]

From my perspective, the sleight of hand rules cover hiding objects. Telling me they are not the rules for hiding objects is like telling me humans don't need air to stay alive.

Then you can quote me where it says anything about hiding an object in a bed. Also, do you know what sleight of hand means? It's card tricks, rolling pennies across your knuckles, making a very small object disappear up your sleeve. Neither the name, nor the written rules come close saying anything about hiding an object in a bed or other location.

Not that there is anything wrong with house rules, of course. But I literally cannot see how they are not the rules for hiding objects.

I'll bold it for you.

"Whenever you attempt an act of legerdemain or manual trickery, such as planting something on someone else or concealing an object on your person, make a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check."

There are no rules for simply hiding an object. Using sleight of hand to hide an object in a bed is a house rule.

 

[Mercule]

When my players are describing something, they generally get pretty specific about it. They are going to tell me, "I hid the gem in the pillow case on the bottom." or "I take out the pill, cut a small slit in it and shove the gem inside. Then I put it back in the pillowcase and return it to the bed.". I don't need a roll for how well they do that, especially since I assume a certain level of competence from heroes, even low level ones.

Where I will use a roll is when the player says to me that his PC would know better than he would about the issue, in this case hiding spots. At that point I'll have a roll happen to see how well he does and narrate an appropriate action.

That's a totally valid way to play it. As I indicated, it was pretty much the norm for AD&D. I was really making two points:

1) If the folks at the table are making rolls for something, and find themselves with a mismatch between what the players narrated and what the dice say, it's more than likely because the players are narrating specific outcomes, rather than relying on the dice. In the running example of hiding a gem, if the player narrates that they jam it in the pillowcase then rolls a 1, it creates a cognitive mismatch. The solution to that is to say, "I hide the gem... {rolls the die for a modified 15} ...in the pillowcase." If you don't want to roll dice, move on with life. This conversation doesn't apply to you.

2) If you're playing a game with skills that are appropriate to a task and habitually ignore them (could be social, could be sneak/deception), then you're implicitly making any points sunk into those skills worth less than points put into another skill. Again, this is a valid play style. Hero (as of 5th edition, which is what's on my shelf) doesn't have the same gamut of social skills as D&D. It's part of the role play aspect. That means that a smooth-talking player will always be at an advantage in social role play over a less eloquent one. It also means that a player who is a bit naive will never have the opportunity to play an effective "face". If the group is cool with this, more power to you -- that was, again, more or less the default for AD&D. It does run counter to the ability to play "not what I am in life" enjoyed by, say, the kid with cerebral palsy who plays the dwarven warrior with a 19 strength.