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

[Flamestrike]

Lets go back to my example. You walk towards a pillar. I lean out from behind the pillar and point a bow at you.

If you do anything else other than attack as you lean out, you reveal yourself.

I have revealed myself whether I attack or not.

No, you haven't. Specific overrides general. If you attack, you don't reveal yourself UNTIL AFTER THE ATTACK IS RESOLVED.

If you don't attack, and just lean out and start a friendly conversation with me, after startling the crap out of me, the opportunity is lost, and we then engage in a happy chat.

No rule allows you to have a simultaneous reveal and attack.

YES IT DOES!

The rules are clear that when you attack from hiding, you only reveal yourself after the attack is resolved. The leaning out and attacking is done as the one action. You remain hidden until after the attack is resolved.

If you're popping out to do something else from hiding (like a friendly chat, or a handstand, or origami folding, or to juggle, or to do anything else) you cant avail yourself of this rule.

Crawford confirms this. Mearls confirms this. The RAW says as much. Common sense tells you this is the case.

Why am I still arguing this with you? This is madness.

 

[iserith]

The 'popping out' and the attack are happening at the same time. You retain the benefit of being hidden long enough to gain advantage on an attack. One resolved, you're no longer hidden.

Its a different case if you have to move 30' from your position of hiding to your target, giving him enough time to notice you running at him, recover his senses and defend normally.

Imagine a PC hiding behind a pillar in the middle of a large room, keeping tabs on that room by peeking around the pillar. An Ogre walks into the room. The DM compares the Stealth check result of the PC to the Ogres passive perception. If the Ogre wins it sees the PC peeking around the corner (and maybe quickly ducking his head back around!) or notices the PCs shadow or hears him or whatever. If it fails, it doesn't notice him and remains completely unaware the PC is there.

Assuming the PC remains hidden and the Ogre fails to notice him, and the PC then wants to attack the Ogre, he can do so (in this case obtaining surprise). Initiative is rolled for the PC and the Ogre, and combat begins in turn order. On the first round, the Ogre misses his 1st turn (he's surprised) regardless of if he wins initiative or not. On the PCs first turn he gets to shoot the Ogre from behind the pillar, gaining advantage on the attack roll. After that attack is resolved (hit or miss) the PC is no longer hidden.

Its up to the DM now if the PC can attempt to duck back around the pillar and Hide. In this case I would rule he couldn't (its just him and the Ogre, the latter of whom is aware of him and watching him now, foiling any attempt to Hide behind the one pillar in the room).

If the PC had the Skulker feat and missed on that 1st turn, its simply narrated as a crossbow bolt whizzing past the ear of a very startled and confused Ogre.

In this case, you can bet the Ogre is going to start sniffing the air and looking around for whomever fired that crossbow bolt at him (take the Search action).

I don't agree. I think my interpretation fits the rules better. But, as always, feel free to rule how you want.

 

[ammulder]

Lets go back to my example. You walk towards a pillar. I lean out from behind the pillar and point a bow at you. I have revealed myself whether I attack or not. I am not hidden any longer. No rule allows you to have a simultaneous reveal and attack. Now if I attack (same round) I am no longer attacking from a hidden position.

I wouldn't consider the "lean" and the "attack" to be two different things. It's not like you stick your bow out, wink twice, yawn, and then draw the sucker and fire. I'd say you "make an attack from hiding", namely, lean out and fire as a single, smooth, stealthy, action. Without enough elapsed time for the target to react, thereby preserving your advantage in attacking from hiding.

But having made the attack (assuming you hit or don't have Skulker), you'd give away your location.

 

[Flamestrike]

I agree that that's RAW. And it's a reasonable interpretation, but to me it's more situation-dependent. If a normal person walks into a normal, lit room with 4 or 5 pillars and thunk, a crossbow bolt lands in his shield, I have a hard time believing he wouldn't notice someone who fired from behind one of those pillars. But put the victim in melee, and it's completely plausible.

This isn't just 'anyone' here mate - its a PC with the Skulker feat. Hes literally a fart in the wind.

You can walk past this dude in a shadowy hallway (light obscurement) and not notice him.

I would still have given the hiding rogue advantage on the shot from behind the pillar; I just question whether the attack is too obvious to "skulk" (stay hidden after a missed shot). Maybe the right mechanic is to give the victim advantage on his perception roll if he walks into an otherwise empty and well-lit room, so the rogue has to be really on top of her game to be hidden in the first place (vs. no advantage if he walks into a room and a general combat breaks out or whatever)? But assuming the rogue is that well hidden (and has Skulker), then she gets advantage and doesn't reveal herself on a miss. That seems more like RAW all the way around.

If its obvious where the Rogue is (there is one pillar in the room and not 5) then you could just make a lucky guess and walk up to the pillar and see the Rogue (no search action required).

Its like searching for a hidden thing (DC 15 Perception) in a wardrobe. If its hidden in a shoe-box inside the cupboard and the PC states he opens the shoe-box and upends it sifting though whats in there, he just finds it, no Perception roll needed.

 

[fjw70]

If you do anything else other than attack as you lean out, you reveal yourself.



No, you haven't. Specific overrides general. If you attack, you don't reveal yourself UNTIL AFTER THE ATTACK IS RESOLVED.

If you don't attack, and just lean out and start a friendly conversation with me, after startling the crap out of me, the opportunity is lost, and we then engage in a happy chat.



YES IT DOES!

The rules are clear that when you attack from hiding, you only reveal yourself after the attack is resolved. The leaning out and attacking is done as the one action. You remain hidden until after the attack is resolved.

If you're popping out to do something else from hiding (like a friendly chat, or a handstand, or origami folding, or to juggle, or to do anything else) you cant avail yourself of this rule.

Crawford confirms this. Mearls confirms this. The RAW says as much. Common sense tells you this is the case.

Why am I still arguing this with you? This is madness.

i guess we will agree to disagree. Maybe leaning out and attacking is RAI. I have no idea. I only know what is written and the rules say nothing about revealing and attacking being simultaneous.

 

[Flamestrike]

I don't agree. I think my interpretation fits the rules better. But, as always, feel free to rule how you want.

You know I respect you mate, but Mearls and Crawford both give RAI answers that conform to my interpretation and contradict yours.

Id be pretty pissed if I couldnt snipe someone in your games while hiding and in cover because the instant before I fired, I ceased being hidden, despite the rules clearly saying I don't actually reveal myself in this specific situation until after the attack is resolved.

 

[iserith]

You know I respect you mate, but Mearls and Crawford both give RAI answers that conform to my interpretation and contradict yours.

Id be pretty pissed if I couldnt snipe someone in your games while hiding and in cover because the instant before I fired, I ceased being hidden, despite the rules clearly saying I don't actually reveal myself in this specific situation until after the attack is resolved.

The Tweets appear to be in conflict and are thus not a particularly good source in my view. I made a post to this effect upthread. I think that the rules you are referring to are in reference to areas of heavy obscurement, not to cover. You'd be free to snipe to your hearts content in my games in heavy obscurement (provided it didn't also affect your vision).

 

[Flamestrike]

i guess we will agree to disagree. Maybe leaning out and attacking is RAI. I have no idea. I only know what is written and the rules say nothing about revealing and attacking being simultaneous.

How else can you you attack from hiding without revealing yourself at the same time?

The rules allow for a hidden creature sniping you from a hiding spot (with advantage) however it is explicitly the attack that reveals them, not the 'popping out'.

If the creature didn't snipe you from hiding, and instead stood up and waved, then walked over to you while juggling and bemoaning his marital problems at home (after you were momentarily startled) he ceases being hidden.

You're placing all these artificial parsing and convoluted exceptions into a general rule that's intended to be applied by the DM using common sense.

Here is how I interpret the rules for Hiding to work, taking into account the RAW, RAI and Sage advice tweets on the topic:

1. Can I (in full view of the Ogre, who is observing me closely and not otherwise distracted) move behind a pillar in a room (obtaining total cover in the process) and Hide? No. The Ogre knows where you are, saw you go into your little hiding spot, and accordingly you cant take the Hide action relative to the Ogre.

2. Can I do it while the Ogre is distracted (maybe by my Half Orc Barbarian friend trying to carve him a new smile with a 20lb flaming axe) and not watching me carefully? Probably, but with disadvantage.

3. Can I do it before the Ogre enters the room, when he is unaware of me, or while he is not observing me at all such as by having his back to me? Yes.

4. Assuming I'm hidden from the Ogre behind the pillar, can I snipe him from the pillar? Yes, but you reveal your location the instant the attack is resolved (hit or miss).

5. If I am hidden relative to the Ogre, how can the Ogre find me? Either by taking the Search action and rolling higher that your Stealth result on a Perception check, or occasionally by virtue of a lucky (or educated) guess.

6. What if I'm a halfling or wood elf? Does this change anything? Yes, in addition to the pillars in the room, you can also attempt to hide behind a Medium or larger sized creature (halfling) or any light natural obscurement present in the room (elf). All the other restrictions on hiding remain the same (you cant attempt to Hide while you're being directly observed etc).

7. What about if I have the Skulker feat? Firstly this feat enables you to Hide in light obscurement (shadows and so forth) similar to the wood elf ability (all other restrictions on hiding still apply, and you still cant attempt to Hide while under direct observation). Secondly, you don't automatically reveal your position when you snipe from a hidden spot unless you actually hit your target. The shot might tip them off to your presence however (if they weren't already aware of it) and they might come looking for you (via the Search action, or a lucky guess).

Its not rocket science. Its just common sense.

 

[Flamestrike]

The Tweets appear to be in conflict and are thus not a particularly good source in my view. I made a post to this effect upthread. I think that the rules you are referring to are in reference to areas of heavy obscurement, not to cover. You'd be free to snipe to your hearts content in my games in heavy obscurement (provided it didn't also affect your vision).

No, both tweets specifically refer to sniping while hidden behind a tree. Both say 'advantage'. Mearls and Crawford.

You're adding/ reading into the text a [popping out] extra step to attacking from hiding. From a rules perspective, the 'popping out' and the attack happen at the same time. Or more correctly, your opponent remains startled long enough after you pop out for you to get in just the one attack at advantage before you reveal yourself (regardless of if you hit or miss with that one attack).

Its the [popping out and attacking] that reveals your location, not just [the popping out].

If you 'pop out' and do anything other than make an immediate attack from your hiding spot, you miss your opportunity, reveal yourself and get no advantage.

 

[iserith]

No, both tweets specifically refer to sniping while hidden behind a tree. Both say 'advantage'. Mearls and Crawford.

You're adding/ reading into the text a [popping out] extra step to attacking from hiding. From a rules perspective, the 'popping out' and the attack happen at the same time. Or more correctly, your opponent remains startled long enough after you pop out for you to get in just the one attack at advantage before you reveal yourself (regardless of if you hit or miss with that one attack).

Its the [popping out and attacking] that reveals your location, not just [the popping out].

If you 'pop out' and do anything other than make an immediate attack from your hiding spot, you miss your opportunity, reveal yourself and get no advantage.

Yeah, I get your position. I just don't agree with it. The great thing about rulings is that neither of us are wrong.