D&D (2024) Current Stealth Rule Actually Works As Is. If Moving Out of Cover After Hiding Makes Enemies Immediately "Finds You", Hide Would Be Totally UNUSABLE.

[Plaguescarred]

Yes but the problem is you can't even get an attack with advantage through Hide, if you rule like that.

You can attack while you Hide if you can make ranged attacks from where you Hide, or melee attacks from elsewhere if an enemy doesn't find you before and the DM determines the circumstances are appropriate for Hiding, for exemple because the target is heavily distracted.

 

[Belen]

Yes but the problem is you can't even get an attack with advantage through Hide, if you rule like that. This is also stated in the post. You have to walk out of the cover in order to make the attack. Hiding behinde a 3/4 Cover will not be working at all, since 3/4 Cover won't be blocking your enemies sight completely, which makes you spotted instantly after you took the Hide.

I think this kind of ruling is just overinterpretation which makes the rule total useless. I don't think designers would want Melee Attack after Hiding impossible. This is much more absurd and counterintuitive designing that leads to scenarios even more unrealistic.

This is why they should not have killed surprise round. If you can get to them with your move, then they should be surprised and the rogue should get a free action.

I would never rule that you hide, get the invisible condition, then get to walk around in the open as invisible.

The new stealth rules are just dumb.

 

[Cadence]

Made me think of...




And about passive perception in general...

 

[deadman1204]

The OP wrote alot of words to ignore things like:
Example 1: a group of 10 cloud giants rolls stealth outside of town. Then they step over the walls and walk into the middle of town. Literally no one is aware of them because they are "hidden". They are taller than buildings, but until they do something to be noticed, its impossible to see them.
Example 2: I send a squad of well trained soldiers. They roll stealth, then climb the walls and waltz into important positions undetected in broad daylight. They are "hidden". Then they all attack at once and decapitate the defenses. If only there was a way anyone could've seen me send 100 soldiers into the fort. They sneakily climbed the walls in the noonday sun. However they were "hidden" and thus undetectable.

Theres alot of twisting and bending to defend the rules, but the raw rules directly allow both of these situations, as rediculous as they are. Requiring RAI is a failure, because now its the whims of the dm.

 

[Pauln6]

The OP wrote alot of words to ignore things like:
Example 1: a group of 10 cloud giants rolls stealth outside of town. Then they step over the walls and walk into the middle of town. Literally no one is aware of them because they are "hidden". They are taller than buildings, but until they do something to be noticed, its impossible to see them.
Example 2: I send a squad of well trained soldiers. They roll stealth, then climb the walls and waltz into important positions undetected in broad daylight. They are "hidden". Then they all attack at once and decapitate the defenses. If only there was a way anyone could've seen me send 100 soldiers into the fort. They sneakily climbed the walls in the noonday sun. However they were "hidden" and thus undetectable.

Theres alot of twisting and bending to defend the rules, but the raw rules directly allow both of these situations, as rediculous as they are. Requiring RAI is a failure, because now its the whims of the dm.

I don't see how ruling that cloud giants can be seen automatically after breaking cover in broad daylight should be deemed a whim of the DM. You admit that it is ridiculous to rule otherwise and therefore common sense, not a whim, that this should not be the case. A huge chunk of the game is already at the whim of the DM from setting DCs to deciding monster hp.

Those same cloud giants doing that same thing under cover of darkness in a human settlement on the other hand - they would just have to beat the passive perception of the guards - likely a roll of 7 or more would suffice since humans cannot see in the dark (-5) so the cloud giants win as long as they stay out of torchlight. If the town is alert to giant attacks then the guards would be rolling perception checks and readying their interact with object to sound an alarm bell.

 

[p_johnston]

So the thing that i always disliked about rogues hide spaming in combat wasnt the semi-permenant advantage. Thats fine, let them get sneak attack, let them hit so they dont just waste a turn. My problem with spam hiding was it can easily turn into "the rouge is invincible because no one can see them or target them" especially with expertise and reliable talent.The new rule just seems to make this much worse.

 

[Maxperson]

Rolls are only called for if the outcome is in doubt. If I hide behind cover and then stroll right up to a guards face, there is no doubt about the outcome, they see you. Same as if I walk up to an unlocked door and open it. If I as a player, instead say that I'm trying to time my sprint past the guard for when they're not looking, that's where passive perception (with advantage in bright light) would come into play.

The roll has already happened and there is no new test when the PC sneaks out into the open. The test has already happened and the DC has been set. So there's nothing to adjudicate as not being in doubt. That's the issue.

Now it's reasonable to just say that the guard sees you, but that's not how RAW is at the moment.

And that's exactly how I would discuss the situation with a player who believed that the original Hide gave them invisibility, and then they described trying to walk past 6 guards at a gate in broad daylight. I'd say, okay they guards see you and tell you to stop, drawing their weapons. If the player said, but I was hiding, I'd confirm that they aren't just trying to waltz by them as if invisible, and then resolve the uncertainty. Because you're not actually invisible, you just have the invisible condition, which assumes a different scene and a different approach by the PCs.

And again, that's reasonable, but not RAW.

 

[Xeviat]

The roll has already happened and there is no new test when the PC sneaks out into the open. The test has already happened and the DC has been set. So there's nothing to adjudicate as not being in doubt. That's the issue.

Now it's reasonable to just say that the guard sees you, but that's not how RAW is at the moment.

And again, that's reasonable, but not RAW.

So the rogue rolls bad on the first stealth check when they're hiding in an empty room to prepare, and now they go "welp, guess I can't hide"?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

So the rogue rolls bad on the first stealth check when they're hiding in an empty room to prepare, and now they go "welp, guess I can't hide"?

I mean it is either that or let the player keep rolling until they get 20.

 

[Xeviat]

I mean it is either that or let the player keep rolling until they get 20.

The other is to call for a roll for each "action". Hide behind a wall, that's an action. Sneaking from cover to another bit of cover, that's an action. Trying to move silently down a hall, that's an action.