D&D 5E [GUIDE] Stealth, Hiding and You!

[Noctem]

I was talking about natural darkness and not spells or magic in general. Those have rules of their own which are usually detailed in the spell entry itself. However, you have it reversed. Someone standing in darkness, magical or not, can see out of it fine unless the darkness/spell/magic in question has some special rule about it, which does in fact happen. That's precisely what the errata fixed. However, someone looking into the darkness, can't see what's inside of it, they are considered blinded for the purposes of seeing into the darkness unless they have a special sense like Yunru pointed out. Just like in real life basically. Here's a visual example to help:



As you can see, there are patches of darkness and light going down the hallway. According to the rules pre-errata, you wouldn't be able to see the hallway beyond the first patch of darkness because you're considered blinded. However, post errata, you would be able to see the rest of the hallway. That said, if you were trying to see something inside a patch of darkness, you're now considered blinded. When someone inside darkness tries to see out, they used to be considered blinded. Post errata they are not, unless they try to see something in the darkness. This was an important change to make. Hope this makes it more clear (har har)

 

[Yunru]

I kinda get what he was saying though. Even if we exaggerate the above scene a figure stood in the darkness would be silhouetted by the light behind him.

 

[Noctem]

Well that's where passive perception / an active perception check comes in. There's also DM fiat of course involved. But here's another example:

So if you have someone standing in darkness like that, even in 5e I would argue they are visible and not hidden. Especially post errata. That's because to me, the observer isn't trying to see them so much as they are standing in the way of the observer seeing through the darkness at whatever lies beyond it. Like in real life. The person in the darkness is obscured in the sense that you can't see their face, details about their clothing, what they are holding, etc.. BUT you can see them in general. No perception check needed there. A DM could rule that the person standing in darkness might have advantage on an attack, even though they are visible in general, because the observer can't see what they are really doing per se. Especially for ranged attacks imo. A perception check or an opposed stealth vs passive perception could be needed to figure out that the person standing in darkness is holding a throwing knife, or making arcane gestures with their hands to cast a spell, holding a hand crossbow, etc.. Again, DM fiat but I think it's reasonable.

However, you put that same person to the left or the right in the image, and then we get into the observer being considered blinded. So to get back to my first image in the hallway, if a person is hugging the walls on the left or right, they might simply not be visible and you would then get into the blinded stuff and being hidden if stealth is involved.

 

[schnee]

Yeah, you understood exactly the point I'm making.

(Perfect image, too.)

That means that where light sources are in relation to the darkness has a big effect on how people outside deal with it.

Let's say a Halfling (party member) and an Ogre (enemy monster) are in a patch of darkness.

If it's in the end of a hallway, or in a corner against the wall, with no light sources behind it, then that's effectively blinded - there's no way you could target the Ogre because the silhouette blends into the darkness being cast on the wall behind. I'd treat that as 'blinded' as far as, say, being able to target someone for a spell.

BUT

If it's in a long hallway, lit from behind, exactly like the image, then people outside can make out the silhouettes. Wouldn't that enable a spellcaster to possibly target the correct silhouette with a spell?

 

[Yunru]

But then again, isn't that why it's normally disadvantage instead of hidden?

Someone actively hiding in the darkness is avoiding casting a silhouette, whereas otherwise it's just hard to see where they are or what they're doing.

 

[Noctem]

@schnee

I would say that targeting is not a problem if the target is standing like in the second image. But that falls under DM fiat and the circumstances of the situation. I can't give you a 100% yes every time kind of thing. But this should looked at with natural darkness in mind. Magic and spell based darkness is different and should be treated as such when making DM rulings.

@Yunru

A character standing like in the second image has, imo, given up on hiding. So even if a character was hidden, then moved to that position, they would lose hidden. An argument can be made that if a hidden character on the left of the hallway standing in darkness darts from one side to the other it would not cause them to lose hidden if they stay in darkness and their stealth roll to hide is higher than passive perception anyway without the blinded penalty. That's how I would do it in my game anyway. And yes, someone hiding should be assumed to be actively avoiding casting a silhouette, making noise, moving, etc..

 

[schnee]

Thanks, this is useful. I'm getting back in after a long break and I want to make sure I'm adjudicating thoughtfully.

 

[Yunru]

Perhaps such pictures can be included in the OP? The visualisation really helps.

 

[Noctem]

I put a direct link in the OP's Light and Darkness section 5 which leads to the top of this page so that people can see the images and explanations associated.