D&D 5E Halfling rogue sniping from the the second rank

[fjw70]

Cover and obscurement are different things, however unless your cover is a glass wall or similarly translucent barrier, it will grant obscurement as well. Also, see above for an example of how being obscured still allows for the possibility of being seen (short of total).

Also not that if totally obscured,while unseen, out also would not be able to see (short of magic, blindsight, darkvision, etc.

If A is unseen by B because of obscurement then B may or may not be able to see A.

If A has total cover from B then B has total cover from A. Neither can see the other.

 

[Bumamgar]

You are being very literal with the definition of 'pop out'. It is quite possible to fire an arrow from behind a tree without the defender seeing anything, even when stating at the tree. Requires the attacker to maintain cover while firing, but certainly posdible

 

[Branduil]

The rules say you must be unseen to be hidden. If you are hidden with obscurement or invisibility then you don't have to reveal yourself to attack.

If you are peeking around a corner to see the target you are visible to him as well, unless the DM rules otherwise.

If you are totally obscured or invisible you don't even need to hide to get advantage on your attack.

The rules also explicitly state that if you attack while hidden, the attack gives away your position, and if you approach a creature from hiding, that usually gives away your position. The inference being that you can immediately attack from a hidden position and gain advantage, but if you move out of hiding and approach, it will only work in specific circumstances. And by RAW, moving around in your own square to make an attack as part of your action would effectively be happening simultaneously.

Furthermore, if your interpretation is correct, that means the halfling's Naturally Stealthy ability to hide behind another creature is mechanically meaningless, and WotC just wrote it in for funsies.

 

[FadedC]

Well the argument has evolved a lot since the original post, but I think the key question at the heart of everything is whether the Halfling naturally stealthy ability overrides the requirement that you can't become hidden against an enemy who can currently see you.

Please help me draft a very concise, terse, but complete-enough question to ask Mike Mearls in twitter about this issue.

I know from experience here at EW going back to 2000 that his answer won't convince everyone, but it will help some people, so I think it's time we just asked him what he thinks.

 

[TDarien]

Please cite the "peeking is not allowed"

The preview article clearly stated attacking from range using naturally stealthy is allowed. The article continues to cap the power of the ability buy stating the obvious; that the power doesn't grant invisibility and you can't just walk up to someone and maintain stealth with zero cover or concealment.

A target with total cover can’t be targeted directly by an attack or a spell

If you have total cover from a creature, it also has total cover from you, so you can't target it.
You can not see it from your current position, as it's obscured by the cover, so you must move in order to see it (at least a little bit). The rules of hiding don't let you get around this.
Once you can see it, it can also see you, and if it can see you you lose the benefit of hiding.

Now, as I said before under most circumstances I will allow a creature to retain the benefits of hiding for an attack like this(ie. advantage from being unable to be seen). But in certain situations, I would not. For instance if a creature was specifically looking for you to come out.

If you don't like the naturally stealthy ability, just say you dislike it and house rule. The absurd attempt at rules lawyering some are attempting would prevent all rogues from attacking from stealth basically ever (or at least without a pet mage or powerful magic item).

Naturally Stealthy works differently because the halfling is in a unique situation where it can see it's target, but the target can't see it, because it's hidden. For that reason the halfling doesn't have to "pop out" of cover in order to see it's target, because it already can(granted, the target also has half cover from the halfing). They're tricky little buggers.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Please help me draft a very concise, terse, but complete-enough question to ask Mike Mearls in twitter about this issue.

I know from experience here at EW going back to 2000 that his answer won't convince everyone, but it will help some people, so I think it's time we just asked him what he thinks.

This in itself could take a while...

To me, the issue in question is when you lose your advantage to attack when Hiding. While the rules specifically state hidden = both unseen and unheard, the making a successful Perception check to negate a Hide attempt does not require you to see or hear the individual attempting to hide.

For example, if the character is lying prone behind a low wall with total cover, and under the effects of a silence spell, it's possible to still win the Perception check. One possibility would be noticing a shadow, or perhaps the hiding character's ally glances in their direction as a signal to be ready. In other words, your attempt to Hide is foiled by the Perception of the opponent, not that they directly heard or saw you.

Other statements that I think support that knowing the location of the individual attempting to hide foils the attempt to Hide are noted in bold below.

Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.

You can't hide from a creature that can see you, and if you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase, you give away your position.

If you are hidden - both unseen and unheard - when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
​

The implication is that you are no longer Hidden in game terms. You may still be hidden from view.

Now it's true that being Hidden (in game terms) doesn't grant you advantage to attack rolls, being unseen and unheard does. But if that's how being Hidden is defined (as quoted above), it doesn't take into account that many creatures have senses other than sight or sound that improve their ability to detect Hidden creatures. For example, an Owlbear has advantage on their Perception check because of their sight and smell. Again, if a creature is behind total cover and can't be seen, the Owlbear still has advantage on their Perception roll, and if successful would know the Hiding individual is there.

Yet with the way the rules are written, that individual still has advantage on their attack roll.


Actually, now that I think about it, I do have a concise form of the question:

If a character attempts to Hide, but fails (for whatever reason) they may still be unseen. Do they still gain advantage on their attack roll?

Second question:
If a Hidden character is discovered (by whatever means), and circumstances don't change, can they attempt to Hide again?

I think that the way the rules are currently written, the answer is yes for both. I'm just curious if that's the intention of the rules because while in some circumstances these make sense to me, there are many in which they don't.

Randy

 

[Gimul]

If A is unseen by B because of obscurement then B may or may not be able to see A.

If A has total cover from B then B has total cover from A. Neither can see the other.

Your logic is incomplete; as is your understanding of its implications.

If A is unseen by B because of obscurement...

It is due to either a lack of awareness ( A's stealth > B's awareness); which means it is possible for B to see A, but has simply failed to do so. Or it is because the obscure was total, and B lacks the magical or supernatural means to defeat the specific type of total obscurement granted in that instance.

If A is unable to see B due to total cover...

It is because the form of total cover also grants total concealment, and B lacks the magical or supernatural means to defeat in that instance.

Note, bulletproof glass provides total cover, and no concealment. One can see whats on the other side of it.

Also note that unless their relative perception vs stealth rolls, type and level of vision and hide/invisibility/etc statuses are exactly the same; whether or not A can see B, and B can see A are not related (mathematically).

 

[Ilbranteloth]

One last question was asked earlier and also might be a good place to start:

What's the benefit of being Hidden?

The implication is that you gain advantage on your attack. The only statement to that effect under Hiding is:

"However, under certain circumstances, the Dungeon Master might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack before you are seen."

Under Unseen Attackers and Targets it states:
"When you are hidden - both unseen and unheard - when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses."

It does state that "when a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it." But this isn't Hidden, it's just unseen.

So what's the advantage to being Hidden?

Randy

 

[Mistwell]

This in itself could take a while...

To me, the issue in question is when you lose your advantage to attack when Hiding. While the rules specifically state hidden = both unseen and unheard, the making a successful Perception check to negate a Hide attempt does not require you to see or hear the individual attempting to hide.

For example, if the character is lying prone behind a low wall with total cover, and under the effects of a silence spell, it's possible to still win the Perception check. One possibility would be noticing a shadow, or perhaps the hiding character's ally glances in their direction as a signal to be ready. In other words, your attempt to Hide is foiled by the Perception of the opponent, not that they directly heard or saw you.

Other statements that I think support that knowing the location of the individual attempting to hide foils the attempt to Hide are noted in bold below.

Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.

You can't hide from a creature that can see you, and if you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase, you give away your position.

If you are hidden - both unseen and unheard - when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
​

The implication is that you are no longer Hidden in game terms. You may still be hidden from view.

Now it's true that being Hidden (in game terms) doesn't grant you advantage to attack rolls, being unseen and unheard does. But if that's how being Hidden is defined (as quoted above), it doesn't take into account that many creatures have senses other than sight or sound that improve their ability to detect Hidden creatures. For example, an Owlbear has advantage on their Perception check because of their sight and smell. Again, if a creature is behind total cover and can't be seen, the Owlbear still has advantage on their Perception roll, and if successful would know the Hiding individual is there.

Yet with the way the rules are written, that individual still has advantage on their attack roll.


Actually, now that I think about it, I do have a concise form of the question:

If a character attempts to Hide, but fails (for whatever reason) they may still be unseen. Do they still gain advantage on their attack roll?

Second question:
If a Hidden character is discovered (by whatever means), and circumstances don't change, can they attempt to Hide again?

I think that the way the rules are currently written, the answer is yes for both. I'm just curious if that's the intention of the rules because while in some circumstances these make sense to me, there are many in which they don't.

Randy

I am trying to particularize this to the halfling ability. I think a broader discussion of hide is asking too much.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

OK, specifically regarding the Naturally Stealthy ability:

Once the halfling has attacked (thus no longer Hiding) using the Naturally Stealthy ability, can he attempt to hide again by simply moving behind an ally again?

Randy