D&D 5E Cloak of Elvenkind - Advantage to Stealth AND -5 to passive perception?

[Flamestrike]

For the sake of argument, let's go with that - hiding and remaining hidden are two different things. The RAW we're interested in is "You can't hide from a creature that can see you clearly...".

If I revise that in the simplest way to draw the implication, it's "You can hide from a creature that can't see you clearly..." so I am curious about your arriving at ""You can remain hidden from a creature that can't see you clearly...". Why do you resist the former and embrace the latter?

He agrees you cant hide in dim light under direct observation (barring a special ability that allows you to do so).

But in the same breath he also asserts you can remain hidden in dim light, even while under direct observation.

I think he's trying to turn his house ruled 'perception check as a reaction to the creature entering dim light' into the 'direct observation' bit. Or in his mind, a successful perception check translates to 'you observe the now formerly hidden creature'.

Which is putting the cart before the horse. If you can directly observe the creature (which you can do in dim light or light rain or snow just fine) you dont need to make a perception check at all.

 

[Iry]

If I revise that in the simplest way to draw the implication, it's "You can hide from a creature that can't see you clearly..." so I am curious about your arriving at ""You can remain hidden from a creature that can't see you clearly...". Why do you resist the former and embrace the latter?

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.

 

[jgsugden]

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.

Also, if you are not observed, you can hide in light obscurement or partial cover.

The circumstances in which someone is not observed is generally going to be up to the DM (under the heading of distracted viewers, mostly), but there are some spells (enthrall, for example) and other monster abilities that indicate distraction on the part of an impacted target, that should give players the capability to make a good case that hiding is possible. However it is up to the DM.

 

[Flamestrike]

Also, if you are not observed, you can hide in light obscurement or partial cover.

If you're not being observed , you can hide in the open (sneaking up behind someone). As soon as they turn their head to look at you the jig is up though.

It's because the conditions to Hide require heavy obscurement or total cover.

Exactly.

And as soon as you break those conditions (enter a well lit area, or one of dim light), you are no longer hidden (unless its dim light and you're a Skulker).

In this example:

As soon as N leaves the magically darkened room he is hiding in, and starts moving down the dimly lit hallway towards C (a hallway that C is staring straight down), N is no longer hidden from C anymore.

There is no perception check required by C, just as if N knocked over a vase, or started screaming, or made an attack. The movement itself automatically reveals N's presence to C (as N lacks any special ability to be hidden in low light under direct observation, C now sees N moving down the empty hallway).

That is the case whether the hallway is brightly lit, or dimly lit (unless N was a Skulker, Shadow demon or had a similar ability letting them Hide in low light).

 

[Iry]

And as soon as you break those conditions (enter a well lit area, or one of dim light), you are no longer hidden (unless its dim light and you're a Skulker).

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?

 

[Flamestrike]

The condition to end hidden is being clearly seen.

No, you're not reading the rules as a whole.

The rule is you must be unable to be seen clearly in order to Hide. That's why you generally need total cover or total obscurement in order to Hide (unless you're a Skulker, Halfing or Wood Elf etc and you have a special rule that lets you), or to remain hidden.

Light obscurement does not count as 'not being seen clearly' (unless you have a special rule that lets it count) otherwise those special rules that let you hide and remain hidden in light obscurement such as Skulker or Mask of the Wild are redundant and superfluous.

And the rule is if you leave your hiding spot/ something you can Hide behind (total cover or total obscurement, unless you have a special rule that lets you hide behind something else) you are automatically noticed as creatures are assumed to be aware of their surroundings.

If you're hiding behind a crate in a dimly lit 30' hallway (a hallway which is under direct observation by a creature at the end of the hallway) you are automatically noticed by that creature as soon as you walk around from behind the crate.

If you rule that dim light is clearly seen, then who am I to say otherwise?

It's not a ruling, its the rule. Otherwise Skulker (which contains a rule that lets you hide in such circumstances) does nothing.

You can see someone 'clearly' in dim light, light rain or light snow. They are standing there right in front of you and you can clearly see them, shadows obscuring fine details, snow falling on their hair, or wet from the rain or whatever. You can see them clearly enough to thwart their attempts at hiding from you in that light obscurement UNLESS the hiding creature has a special rule that specifically lets them hide in such conditions.

 

[fearsomepirate]

No, you're not reading the rules as a whole.

The rule is you must be unable to be seen clearly in order to Hide.

No, the rule is that it's DM's discretion when you can hide, with the caveat that you can always hide if you are totally concealed. If an orc is at the position marked by a green circle, a DM may allow a rogue to hide at A. He must allow the rogue to hide at B. On a similar note, a character in Fog Cloud, or Invisible, or Darkness can always hide.

 

[Flamestrike]

The rule is that it's DM's discretion when you can hide

I agree. A DM can rule a PC can Hide while in the open (no cover or concealment at all) if he rules the Monster is looking the other way, or distracted.

As in your example, where the Rogue does NOT have cover vs A.

But as a general rule, if all you have is partial cover or light obscurement, you cant Hide unless you have a special rule that lets you.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree. A DM can rule a PC can Hide while in the open (no cover or concealment at all) if he rules the Monster is looking the other way, or distracted.

As in your example, where the Rogue does NOT have cover vs A.

But as a general rule, if all you have is partial cover or light obscurement, you cant Hide unless you have a special rule that lets you.

I have a special rule that let's me. It's the rule that the DM make judge that you can hide, even if it's just dim light.

 

[Flamestrike]

I have a special rule that let's me. It's the rule that the DM make judge that you can hide, even if it's just dim light.

You dont even need dim light with a DM ruling. You could have a guard in a brightly lit room, and [hide] and sneak up behind him staying hidden the whole way.

But generally (sans DM ruling, or a special ability that lets you hide in other circumstances) you need total cover or heavy obscurement to hide, and if you leave either, you are generally noticed the instant you do so.