D&D 5E DM Help! My rogue always spams Hide as a bonus action, and i cant target him!

[pemerton]

That's because you take it out of context to debate it.

''Normally, you can’t hide from someone if you’re in full view. A lightfoot halfling, though, can try to vanish behind a creature''

The whole sentence follow the words IN PLAIN VIEW and add the conjonction THOUGH relating to it, which means despite the fact or altough, basically meaning that despite the fact that you normally can't hide in plain view, a halfling can try to vanish behind a creature. This is natural english language 101 and i would assume native speakers would understand that.


Though, conj
Despite the fact that; although

Oxford https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/though

But in [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION]'s view a person behind a creature is in full view and hence can't vanish. The issue here in this thread is not a semantic one. It's about the mechanics of the game and the logic of the fiction; it can't be resolved by focusing ever-more minutely on the meaning of Crawford's words.

 

[pemerton]

The word "though" is a problem for this interpretation.

<snip>

I think he assumed readers would perceive that the word "though" between two claims is intended to contrast those claims, and he contrasted "can't hide while being observed" with "can hide while being observed if you have one of these two abilities which have no purpose but to allow you to transition from unhidden to hidden while being observed".

The problem is, your "ambiguity" relies on never, ever, looking at the whole claim at once.

I don't agree at all. [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] has provided a gloss; so have I.

I'll do it again:

[indentThe lightfoot halfling and wood elf traits—Naturally Stealthy and Mask of the Wild—do allow members of those subraces to try to remain unnoticed in their special circumstances even when watchers are nearby. Normally, you can’t hide from someone if you’re in full view. A lightfoot halfling, though, can try to slip, unnoticed, behind a creature that is at least one size larger, and a wood elf can try to remain unnoticed simply by being in heavy rain, mist, falling snow, foliage, or similar natural phenomena. It’s as if nature itself cloaks a wood elf from prying eyes—even eyes staring right at the elf! Both subraces are capable of being unnoticed in situations unavailable to most other creatures, but neither subrace’s attempt to remain unnoticed is assured of success; a Dexterity (Stealth) check is required as normal, and an observant foe might later spot a hidden halfling or elf: “I see you behind that guard, you tricksy halfling!”[/indent]

You'll notice that I've glossed "vanish behind" as "slip, unnoticed, behind" - which is along the same lines as the usage that [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] noted, "She vanished into the crowd."

You'll also notice that I'm taking it for granted that someone behind someone else is in full view. Given that the general requirement for hiding is to not be clearly seen, and that unless you're a halfling being behind someone doesn't allow you to hide, I take it that someone who is behind another is sufficiently clearly seen, ie (for present purposes) in full view. (Maybe you can't see the ring on their finger, but the hiding rules don't seem to get into that degree of minutiae, about what body parts are or are not visible - they seem to work with a fairly simple idea that either a person is knowingly observing another person or is not.)

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I must lodge a protest, the torture of the English language that's going on in this thread violates the Geneva convention!

 

[Maxperson]

Yes they do. The say you cant hide from a creature that can see you clearly enough.

If I saw you go into your hiding spot behind your tree, I clearly saw you go into hiding. Ergo, you cant [take the hide action] relative to me once you get behind the tree. I saw you go into hiding.

Once out of sight, you no longer know where the creature is exactly. Is it behind the rock, or did it sneak further away to another rock while keeping out of your vision? You don't know. Why don't you know? Because you can't see the creature at all, let alone clearly enough to prevent hiding.

 

[Maxperson]

It isn't being used as a conjunction, though. It's being used as an adverb indicating that the halfling's ability qualifies or imposes a restriction on the normal situation that being in full view is a circumstance inappropriate for hiding. The qualification, as I see it, is that as long as the halfling is behind an appropriately sized creature, she can hide in a circumstance where there is no restriction on vision that would make hiding possible. That doesn't mean she can do it while under the observation of the person from whom she's hiding, i.e. it's only a partial qualification.

It is being used as a conjunction. It's in the middle of the sentence conjoining two parts, not at the end of the sentence as the though adverb is used.

Examples from the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries of though being used as an adverb.

Our team lost. It was a good game though.

‘Have you ever been to Australia?’ ‘No. I'd like to, though.’

Okay, I'll come to the party - I'm not staying late though.

 

[Maxperson]

But in [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION]'s view a person behind a creature is in full view and hence can't vanish. The issue here in this thread is not a semantic one. It's about the mechanics of the game and the logic of the fiction; it can't be resolved by focusing ever-more minutely on the meaning of Crawford's words.

The whole point of the halfling vanish ability is that they are small enough to not only leave full view behind someone, but leave 100% of view and become hidden. Also, Even a giant wouldn't be in full view behind a human. Yes, you'd see it, but it would be impossible without x-ray vision or some other magic to see it fully. Some part would be blocked by the human.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

Unless the human stands between its legs.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't agree at all. @Hriston has provided a gloss; so have I.

I'll do it again:

The lightfoot halfling and wood elf traits—Naturally Stealthy and Mask of the Wild—do allow members of those subraces to try to remain unnoticed in their special circumstances even when watchers are nearby. Normally, you can’t hide from someone if you’re in full view. A lightfoot halfling, though, can try to slip, unnoticed, behind a creature that is at least one size larger, and a wood elf can try to remain unnoticed simply by being in heavy rain, mist, falling snow, foliage, or similar natural phenomena. It’s as if nature itself cloaks a wood elf from prying eyes—even eyes staring right at the elf! Both subraces are capable of being unnoticed in situations unavailable to most other creatures, but neither subrace’s attempt to remain unnoticed is assured of success; a Dexterity (Stealth) check is required as normal, and an observant foe might later spot a hidden halfling or elf: “I see you behind that guard, you tricksy halfling!”​

You'll notice that I've glossed "vanish behind" as "slip, unnoticed, behind" - which is along the same lines as the usage that @Hriston noted, "She vanished into the crowd."

I'm sure we could all re-write it so that it said something other than what the designers said. You've changed the meaning of the words they chose, and even if the change still makes sense, it's not what they wrote.

You'll also notice that I'm taking it for granted that someone behind someone else is in full view. Given that the general requirement for hiding is to not be clearly seen, and that unless you're a halfling being behind someone doesn't allow you to hide, I take it that someone who is behind another is sufficiently clearly seen, ie (for present purposes) in full view. (Maybe you can't see the ring on their finger, but the hiding rules don't seem to get into that degree of minutiae, about what body parts are or are not visible - they seem to work with a fairly simple idea that either a person is knowingly observing another person or is not.)

I creature behind another creature is generally in view, but it's impossible to be in full view because a portion of it is blocked. It's also impossible to see it clearly, since the best you can do is see portions clearly. The bolded portion does not exist in the rules. There is no requirement to be "sufficiently clearly seen", it's clearly seen which is an absolute. If you cannot see the entire creature 100% clearly, it is not clearly seen. The same with full view. If you cannot see the creature 100% fully, it's not in full view.

Your requirement is reasonable as a house rule, but it's not what RAW says is required for hiding.

 

[Maxperson]

Unless the human stands between its legs.

Fairly hard to do exactly right. Both would have to be still so that the human could line up perfectly. If the giant was making any attempt to stay behind the human, some part would be obscured.

 

[pemerton]

I'm sure we could all re-write it so that it said something other than what the designers said. You've changed the meaning of the words they chose

No. I've substituted synonyms for what they said which better illustrate my interpretation. I'm sure you could substitute different synonys that would better illustrate your reading of it.

The fact that the words they used admit of multiple readings is a point that I and [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] have been making for some dozens of posts now.

I creature behind another creature is generally in view, but it's impossible to be in full view because a portion of it is blocked. It's also impossible to see it clearly, since the best you can do is see portions clearly.

Even a giant wouldn't be in full view behind a human. Yes, you'd see it, but it would be impossible without x-ray vision or some other magic to see it fully. Some part would be blocked by the human.

If you use this meaning of "full view" or "seen clearly", does that imply that I can hide by putting my hand and forearm behind my back? By putting boots over my feet? By standing behind a waist-high table? And what about the fact that you can only see one side of me (unless you have eyes on independent stalks and examine both sides of me simultaneously)?

The Jackie Chan movie Police Story actually gets a court room gag out of this, when the defence lawyer refutes the claim that the bus was in full view by pointing out that only one side of it was visible. I don't think the 5e rules intend to make this joke an important part of adjudicating hiding.