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

[AaronOfBarbaria]

The rules apply equally to everyone, though. A typical peasant will still notice an invisible orc in the darkness, unless it takes an action to hide. Or that's what the rules say, at least. The only difference between an adventurer and anyone else, as far as these particular rules are concerned, is that adventurers tend to have a better chance of detecting an orc who is actively hiding.

The rules apply only when the DM feels they are appropriate, actually - so a typical peasant will or won't notice an invisible orc in the darkness as determined by the DM.

Yes, the DM can choose, as you appear to do, to have the rules apply equally to everyone - but that is not a requirement made by the game. It's not even a suggestion made by the game.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Okay, let's say that we buy that running is as loud as shouting.

It doesn't have to be as loud as shouting because the rule says "make noise" and provides a couple of examples, it does not say "make noise as loud as" or set a specific decibel threshold to determine what does or does not count.

When is a character running?

When the player declaring the actions of that character says they are.

 

[Shiroiken]

I'm pretty sure that most of the objections come down to it requiring an action to hide. When someone drops a smoke-bomb, they should get a chance to be quiet immediately instead of being perfectly located until they get a chance to hide six seconds later. (This, of course, ignoring the fact that rogues can hide as a bonus action.)

It's roughly as weird as a ranger requiring their entire action to command a pet to attack someone, which was clearly done as a sort of game balance issue rather than because it makes particular sense within the game world.

It's not roughly; it is the exact same thing. If you (as a DM) don't require an Action to Hide you upset the "Balance" of the game. If this is something that isn't a concern to you (as the DM), then you are supposed to change it fit your game. The same thing is true with the pet attack and a host of other things. That's the beauty of 5E! However, the RAW and RAI are that you need to spend an action.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Yes, the DM can choose, as you appear to do, to have the rules apply equally to everyone - but that is not a requirement made by the game. It's not even a suggestion made by the game.

The idea that the DM would apply these rules differently between PCs and NPCs is so ludicrous as to not merit consideration.

If you want to say that none of the rules apply to NPCs, because the DM can just fiat anything they feel like, then there are no arguments that could possibly be made. That's the trivial solution, though. If we are to discuss the matter in any form whatsoever, then it must be under the conditions that the rules (whatever they may be) are actually being applied.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It doesn't have to be as loud as shouting because the rule says "make noise" and provides a couple of examples, it does not say "make noise as loud as" or set a specific decibel threshold to determine what does or does not count.

Then it's impossible to hide unless you make no noise at all? Interesting.

Also, the two examples are of very loud things. Odd that if they also meant quiet things that they not take the opportunity to call out a few, no?

When the player declaring the actions of that character says they are.

Oh, good, so as long as I don't use the word "running" or its conjugates, I'm good to go with my triple dashing rogue.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

The idea that the DM would apply these rules differently between PCs and NPCs is so ludicrous as to not merit consideration.

If you want to say that none of the rules apply to NPCs, because the DM can just fiat anything they feel like, then there are no arguments that could possibly be made. That's the trivial solution, though. If we are to discuss the matter in any form whatsoever, then it must be under the conditions that the rules (whatever they may be) are actually being applied.

I think you misunderstand me.

I'm not saying that none of the rules ever apply to any NPCs - I am saying that the determination of something like whether one NPC (an orc) sneaked through the forest unnoticed by another NPC (a peasant) is not inherently required to have the DM determine a full array of relevant game traits for each, decide their specific actions in the scenario, and then roll out every action that the rules mention a roll for.

The DM can, and is actually encouraged to, just decide on that being what did or did not happen, reserving dice rolls and the rules behind them for those moments when they can only enhance the game experience - like when determining whether that one NPC (an orc) sneaked through the forest unnoticed by a PC or NPC cohort/henchman/hireling there-of (even if a peasant, which is usually not the case).

Also, I am fairly certain that calling my differing DM style "so ludicrous as to not merit consideration." as you have done is against the rules of this forum, so please refrain from doing so again.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

It's not roughly; it is the exact same thing. If you (as a DM) don't require an Action to Hide you upset the "Balance" of the game. If this is something that isn't a concern to you (as the DM), then you are supposed to change it fit your game. The same thing is true with the pet attack and a host of other things.

It's similar, but that's not the only factor. Everyone can hide in 5E, but only the ranger really has a pet. If you change the rule about having your pet attack, that only really affects the ranger. If you let anyone hide for free after dropping a smoke bomb, then you make the rogue and goblin abilities (that let you hide as a bonus action) significantly less impressive.

If everyone can use a smoke bomb and gain the major benefit of it, then rogues and goblins are relatively less cool since they could do that anyway.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I'm not saying that none of the rules ever apply to any NPCs - I am saying that the determination of something like whether one NPC (an orc) sneaked through the forest unnoticed by another NPC (a peasant) is not inherently required to have the DM determine a full array of relevant game traits for each, decide their specific actions in the scenario, and then roll out every action that the rules mention a roll for.

But whatever the DM does decide happens without rolling, it should still conform to the limitations of the ruleset. If you have someone pull of a trick that couldn't possibly have worked under the rules, but which works because you fiat past it, then that's some sort of shenanigans.

Also, I am fairly certain that calling my differing DM style "so ludicrous as to not merit consideration." as you have done is against the rules of this forum, so please refrain from doing so again.

Nah, I'll just block you. I'm pretty sure that I had you blocked before, but it got lost in the re-boot.

I didn't say that you were wrong to play how you play; only that it's not worth consideration. If you're going to ignore whatever rules you feel like and just make stuff up, then that's fine if your players are okay with it, but it still doesn't leave us with anything to talk about.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Then it's impossible to hide unless you make no noise at all? Interesting.

Just because one extreme isn't the case does not mean that the opposite extreme is - and I'll thank you to not misrepresent my statements in the future.

Also, the two examples are of very loud things. Odd that if they also meant quiet things that they not take the opportunity to call out a few, no?

Odd? No. Irrelevant? Almost entirely.

Examples will never cover every possibility - if they did, they'd be an exhaustive list, not examples.

Oh, good, so as long as I don't use the word "running" or its conjugates, I'm good to go with my triple dashing rogue.

It's worth noting that "I dash with both my action and as a bonus action" can be interpreted as synonymous with running, much like other phrases not strictly limited to "running" and its conjugates could be, such as (but not limited to) "beat feet" or "haul balls".

 

[Hriston]

This plays hell with narrative conventions, though. A fleeing rogue drops a smoke-bomb. An invisible man eavesdrops on a private conversation. A blinded monster struggles to locate its prey. These scenarios are found across multiple genres, and not only do players buy into them, they expect to experience them through roleplay. Turning them into ordinary encounters with a few attack-roll penalties thrown into the mix doesn't do them justice.

That's what the hiding rules are for. Why not use them?