Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Noctem" data-source="post: 7090370" data-attributes="member: 6801315">Well that's where passive perception / an active perception check comes in.&nbsp; There's also DM fiat of course involved.&nbsp; But here's another example:<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=83567&amp;stc=1" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />So if you have someone standing in darkness like that, even in 5e I would argue they are visible and not hidden.&nbsp; Especially post errata.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Like in real life.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; No perception check needed there.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; Especially for ranged attacks imo.&nbsp; 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..&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Noctem, post: 7090370, member: 6801315"] 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: [IMG]http://www.enworld.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=83567&stc=1[/IMG] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification