D&D 5E Do you know a creatures location if they are in heavy concealment but not actively hiding and other location questions

[Yaarel]

Even an invisible target breathes audibly, scrapes footing, maybe even stinks.

Even if located, and invisible target still deserves the disadvantage to attacks against it, because the attacker cant quite see how the target is dodging or blocking or so on.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

You are assumed to constantly be shouting your exact position to everyone nearby, unless you take an Action to stop yourself.

At least, that's what the rules seem to be saying. The DM is encouraged to figure out something that makes more sense.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

The rules for being aware of a target's position when the target is not hidden only applies to combat anyway.

If there's is an invisible guy a mile away, you are not in combat with him, unless he has any means to attack you. So it might as well be that you don't know his position or his presence at all.
Otherwise you'd automatically know all the monsters and their locations somewhere in the dungeon when they are not hidden, that would be silly.

 

[Li Shenron]

Say there is a group of monsters in heavy concealment that you are looking into. The creatures are not actively hiding.

Do you know the precise location of them because although they are unseen they are not unheard.

Basically I'm wondering if you always know the location of a creature that isn't actively hiding.

If you try to follow the RAW strictly you'll just open a can of worm each time.

Think about what the monsters are doing, and rule something that makes sense. The monsters might be totally invisible but making a lot of noise moving and gruffing around, hence revealing their location. Or they might be peacefully sleeping (not snoring) and hence be totally undetected.

Just yesterday I went to pick up a child of mine from post-school class, and totally failed to notice the teacher who was merely sitting behind a computer, more than half her body being in plain sight. I have no sight impairment, she was at best with half-cover, she wasn't tried to hide... but I failed to notice her presence until she started speaking. It freaked me out a bit, and made me immediately think of our discussions about the hiding rules (which then freaked me out more, since it proves I'm thinking about D&D too much). I should have told her that she cannot do that to me, it's against the RAW!

The RAW is a model, and just as every model, it often fails at representing reality. Reality on the other hand is just reality, and doesn't fail. So stick to your reality (even when it's fantasy!) rather than sticking to the RAW

 

[Plaguescarred]

Say there is a group of monsters in heavy concealment that you are looking into. The creatures are not actively hiding.

Do you know the precise location of them because although they are unseen they are not unheard.

Basically I'm wondering if you always know the location of a creature that isn't actively hiding.

Yes its implied you do, mainly for being invisible. But if you can't be seen because you're otherwise heavily obscured or that enemies are blinded, it should essentially be the same. If not hiding rules are somewhat devalued since you normally already have advantage (and others disadvantage) and all it entails to not be seen in order to even try to hide, making your location unknown is about the only real benefit hiding normally grant.


Hiding: An invisible creature can’t be seen, so it can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, however, and it still has to stay quiet.

Invisible: The creature’s location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.

 

[Jester David]

This is correct, but I've never liked it, to be honest. I assume it was done as a concession to theater-of-the-mind players, because it's too difficult to telegraph an invisible opponent's general location and then determine if the player is swinging at the right spot without a grid. Whereas with a battle-map, you can very easily say, "You hear the wizard's footsteps move a few paces to your right," and the player can point at the exact square that they are attacking.

The only time I would handle it differently is in terrain where a person's footsteps leave very obvious impressions: snow, mud, etc.

I think it has more to do with keeping rogues viable.

If cover/concealment or invisibility acted like stealth without requiring the skill, there'd be no point in training in Stealth. The wizard just casts invisibility and they're sneakier than the high dexterity rogue.
By making invisibility just make you unseen but not undetected, stealth still matters.

Plus, it's easier for the players. Just out of Pathfinder and RAW, detecting an invisible creature is hard, if not impossible. You can't know the square unless you get lucky, which is frustrating.

 

[Oofta]

Being hidden means that people do not know where you are. That does not mean that if you are not hidden everyone knows exactly where you are any more than saying that since squares are rectangles all rectangles are squares.

At least that's the way I run it in my game. If I'm missing a sentence in the book, feel free to point it out.

When I run creatures in a heavily obscured area I'll give a general idea that "there's something out there" and determine a DC to pinpoint the location based on the exact situation, how stealthy the creatures would be if they were trying to be stealthy, are the creatures even trying to be quiet (or are their eerie howls echoing in the fog making it difficult to pinpoint), size of the creature, environmental factors and most importantly what scene am I trying to describe.

The rules are there to support our story telling, and some things are left vague so that the DM has the freedom to tell the story they want to tell. I use common sense to decide how some of this works. Close your eyes and have someone walk around you while you're in a parking lot. Up close, you probably have a really good idea where they are but further away? You're guessing even if you do hear them.

 

[Plaguescarred]

Close your eyes and have someone walk around you while you're in a parking lot. Up close, you probably have a really good idea where they are but further away? You're guessing even if you do hear them.

D&D rules don't mimic reality very well. Have someone hit you a few times with an axe while you're in a parking lot and see if the damage taken will be all gone by the next morning Or go in that parking lot and take a 150 lbs load and see if you'll move as fast ?

 

[Oofta]

D&D rules don't mimic reality very well. Have someone hit you a few times with an axe while you're in a parking lot and see if the damage taken will be all gone by the next morning Or go in that parking lot and take a 150 lbs load and see if you'll move as fast ?

I fail to see the point ... maybe I'm just dense. Wouldn't be the first time.

As far as I know, nothing in the 5E rules states that everyone knows exactly where you are unless you are successfully hiding. Therefore it's up to the DM to make a call. In the absence of specific rules, I assume the game world works more-or-less like the real world.

Yes, you can detect someone that's invisible (or otherwise unseen). That does not mean that you do detect that person. If someone is talking 10 feet away from me in a quiet room, I probably have a good idea of where they are whether or not I can see them. If they're 50 feet away from me during a heavy downpour at night? Not so much.

All I'm saying is make a ruling that makes sense to you. There's a lot of wiggle room in 5E, which personally I think is a good thing. I don't run my games with binary computer like logic for things that are not covered by the rules.

 

[Plaguescarred]

And yet making such ruling emplower not being seen and devalue hiding. If not seen can get the same benefit that hiding normally grant, why would someone not seen ever takes an action to hide then if it's is sole benefit not not just requirement to instead try it?