• NOW LIVE! -- One-Page Adventures for D&D 5th Edition on Kickstarter! A booklet of colourful one-page adventures for D&D 5th Edition ranging from levels 1-9 and designed for a single session of play.
log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Moving out of concealment to attack - when is stealth broken?

clearstream

Be just and fear not...
Supporter
You cease being hidden as soon as you leave your hiding spot and become visible to a creature (in this case, when you leave the darkness).

Unless the DM rules the monster you're sneaking up on is 'looking the other way'.

Once you make an attack from hiding you reveal yourself (hit or miss) after the attack is resolved, unless you have the Skulker feat and miss.
It's worth also noting that skulkers, and wood elves using Mask of the Wild, can be hidden in circumstances where they can see and target a foe - without having to step out of the hiding (seeing as their "cover" might be rain or dim light). I have found in play that these abilities make it very easy for them to attack from hiding.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

clearstream

Be just and fear not...
Supporter
1) Does starting hidden allow you to stay hidden through your move....or is it the second you leave the darkness you lose the condition.
Unless the creature is distracted, it is as soon as you leave the darkness.

2) Assuming the answer to 1 is yes....once you make an attack, does that drop the condition of hidden....or could I still get the second attack with the benefits of being hidden?
Once you make an attack, that ends the condition of hidden. That includes the first attack of an attack action with extra attack. Some feats and features might change that, like Skulker.
 

Reynard

Legend
Not every round. Disadvantage kills SA outright. All the enemy near the Barbarian/Paladin has to do is dodge, that may or may not be a good choice but it will eliminate SA.

Depending on the initiative order the enemy can also use things like shove, movement or a ready action to kill SA. Again those may or may not be a good decision depending on the specifics.
Sure, but at least the fight becomes tactically interesting while they compete for advantage and disadvantages. At a certain level the tank spending their action to Help and make sure the Rogue gets SA off is probably worth it.
 

6ENow!

The Game Is Over
So the questions I am trying to nail down are:

1) Does starting hidden allow you to stay hidden through your move....or is it the second you leave the darkness you lose the condition.
2) Assuming the answer to 1 is yes....once you make an attack, does that drop the condition of hidden....or could I still get the second attack with the benefits of being hidden?
IIRC,

1. Another check would be required as soon as you move as otherwise movement reveals your location.

2. No, once you attack your position is revealed. The second attack is not from a hidden position either.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
The real solution to all of this is this... if your DM is being stingy on sneaking up on monsters and stabbing them in the back... avoid making ANY melee rogues at all and just continually have ranged rogues firing bows out from behind cover, gaining Advantage and Sneak Attack often. You keep doing this over and over to the point where your DM gets so bored of that character concept that they end up coming on places like EN World to make the same tired "We need to nerf X because all my tables use X and it's so boring!" threads. (See the Great Weapon Master feat.) Then at THAT point you go to your DM and say "Look, if you want us to stop just using bow-firing rogues... then stop making it so hard for melee rogues to sneak up on monsters to stab them with Advantage and Sneak Attack just because you don't think it's 'realistic' to come out of the darkness and remain hidden!"

A "bored" DM is the best one to get changes made in your game. If they are going to be anal-retentive sticklers on what they think is the "right" way to play... then just play their way so hard and so often that they realize their "right" way to play can get very old very fast. :)
 

auburn2

Explorer
The real solution to all of this is this... if your DM is being stingy on sneaking up on monsters and stabbing them in the back... avoid making ANY melee rogues at all and just continually have ranged rogues firing bows out from behind cover, gaining Advantage and Sneak Attack often.
I don't know if stingy is the right word. I would say the Rogue needs to do more than say "I sneak up on him". D&D is a story, if you are doing something that is not technically ok by the rules, tell me why it should be ok in this case.
 


Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
The real solution to all of this is this... if your DM is being stingy on sneaking up on monsters and stabbing them in the back... avoid making ANY melee rogues at all and just continually have ranged rogues firing bows out from behind cover, gaining Advantage and Sneak Attack often. You keep doing this over and over to the point where your DM gets so bored of that character concept that they end up coming on places like EN World to make the same tired "We need to nerf X because all my tables use X and it's so boring!" threads. (See the Great Weapon Master feat.) Then at THAT point you go to your DM and say "Look, if you want us to stop just using bow-firing rogues... then stop making it so hard for melee rogues to sneak up on monsters to stab them with Advantage and Sneak Attack just because you don't think it's 'realistic' to come out of the darkness and remain hidden!"

A "bored" DM is the best one to get changes made in your game. If they are going to be anal-retentive sticklers on what they think is the "right" way to play... then just play their way so hard and so often that they realize their "right" way to play can get very old very fast. :)
Or just, you know, dual wield.
 

Rogues don't need advantage to sneak attack. I don't understand why making them work for advantage is considered a bad thing.

Because it's time consuming having the Rogue roll Stealth each round and tracking which monsters he is actually hidden from, relative to the result.

It's why I love Tashas Aim action. No movement, bonus action, advantage on your next attack.

Quick, simple and deals with all these problems elegantly.
 

Reynard

Legend
Because it's time consuming having the Rogue roll Stealth each round and tracking which monsters he is actually hidden from, relative to the result.

It's why I love Tashas Aim action. No movement, bonus action, advantage on your next attack.

Quick, simple and deals with all these problems elegantly.
Advantage isn't intended to be that easy. Extra sneak attack damage is. If you combine them the rogue is significantly over powered.
 


tommybahama

Adventurer
Advantage isn't intended to be that easy. Extra sneak attack damage is. If you combine them the rogue is significantly over powered.

Those that have done the math like Treantmonk have said that even a rogue getting sneak attack every round does not compare to a GWM or PAM fighter in terms of damage. Or compare a sneak attack from a 5th level rogue versus a wizard at the same level casting fireball.
 

6ENow!

The Game Is Over
Rogues are expected to get sneak attack damage virtually every single round.
Sure, which is insanely easy if they attack the same target as one of their allies---which IME happens 90% of the time or better. Advantage isn't needed except the other 10%.

Those that have done the math like Treantmonk have said that even a rogue getting sneak attack every round does not compare to a GWM or PAM fighter in terms of damage. Or compare a sneak attack from a 5th level rogue versus a wizard at the same level casting fireball.
Rogue always have sneak attack, GWM and PAM fighters require feats, which not all tables use (about 65-75% do though IIRC), and fireball is a whammy effect with limited applications per adventuring day--sneak attack is virtually at will. Not things you should bother comparing IMO. 🤷‍♂️
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Could be both.

PHB page 177: "You can't hide from a creature that can see you....In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you." It follows that "under certain circumstances" the DM might allow you to stay hidden if the creature is "distracted," thus allowing your 1st attack to have advantage.
The problem is that the game both says that a creature is constantly looking out for danger in combat, and then doesn't register that combat is very distracting which could allow it. If someone is constantly looking around just in case a Halfling comes out from the bushes behind him or something, he's already had his face smashed in by the guy with the mace who is fighting him. Staying alive and winning a life and death struggle requires focus.

On the other hand, combat also isn't two guys sitting in same space in the same 5 foot squares, either. It's more fluid and facings can and do change, so it's possible that the Halfling might be seen. It just shouldn't be automatic like the game makes it.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Those that have done the math like Treantmonk have said that even a rogue getting sneak attack every round does not compare to a GWM or PAM fighter in terms of damage. Or compare a sneak attack from a 5th level rogue versus a wizard at the same level casting fireball.

In a whiteroom spreadsheet with the GWM or PAM fighter having things lined up in their favor. Then again I've seen a lot of people say things "don't compare" based on a subset of levels and 1-2 DPR per round. It's nothing you actually notice in gameplay.

Versus a fireball casting wizard? In the encounters where the wizard has fireball and the targets fail their save and they catch multiple enemies without collateral damage, sure. They should.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
The problem is that the game both says that a creature is constantly looking out for danger in combat, and then doesn't register that combat is very distracting which could allow it. If someone is constantly looking around just in case a Halfling comes out from the bushes behind him or something, he's already had his face smashed in by the guy with the mace who is fighting him. Staying alive and winning a life and death struggle requires focus.

On the other hand, combat also isn't two guys sitting in same space in the same 5 foot squares, either. It's more fluid and facings can and do change, so it's possible that the Halfling might be seen. It just shouldn't be automatic like the game makes it.
But is it really a "problem"?

The game knows that every DM has their own particular way of running stealth, especially stealth in combat. Even if they made concrete rules for one particular way of doing it... a huge number of DMs would say "I don't like that at all!" and put in their own house rules for it. And since the designers of D&D knew that to be the case (they're not dumb... they've seen the thousands of threads that have been made on D&D forums such at this for decades)... they just said "We'll make the rules more open for interpretation and let the DMs do what they were going to do anyway."

The only people this annoys are those players whose brains are so focused and stuck on what is written down in the pages of a book that the idea of choosing an interpretation is an anathema. Yes, some people are that ingrained in following letters of the law that if they don't have it they can't handle it. But since they are in the minority here I think... I believe WotC for 5E just shrugged their shoulders and said "Yeah, we know you'd like concrete rules that you can run without any thinking about them whatsoever... but thinking is and always has been a part of the game. So we're going to default to letting people think and make their own decisions rather than choose one single way and piss the other 90% of the gaming populace off. Sorry."
 

Asisreo

Archdevil's Advocate
In a whiteroom spreadsheet with the GWM or PAM fighter having things lined up in their favor. Then again I've seen a lot of people say things "don't compare" based on a subset of levels and 1-2 DPR per round. It's nothing you actually notice in gameplay.

Versus a fireball casting wizard? In the encounters where the wizard has fireball and the targets fail their save and they catch multiple enemies without collateral damage, sure. They should.
Yeah. Its weird.

The PAM fighter sacrifices a good portion of other utility via other feats or ability score improvement and racial features only to get this big damage. But they need to be in a very specific situation to use it: always in melee distance.

If a creature doesn't want to be in melee of the creatures, say, a goblin, then the PAM/GWM fighter is going to have a hard time pinning them down when they're being kited. Every turn lost dashing is that much more damage not applied when they could have just used a ranged attack to fill the void. And if you were going to be doing a ton of ranged attacks, you'd probably be better taking the other feats like Xbow expert or Sharpshooter or just taking the Ability Scores and Features from other races.
 

auburn2

Explorer
In a whiteroom spreadsheet with the GWM or PAM fighter having things lined up in their favor. Then again I've seen a lot of people say things "don't compare" based on a subset of levels and 1-2 DPR per round. It's nothing you actually notice in gameplay.
No kidding, DPR should be retnamed DPRWYTAA - Damage Per Round When You Take Attack Action ... and even then it assumes you are not shoving, grappling, throwing a dagger at a foe you can't get to etc.

Realitically how often are you doing a weapon attack in combat with your "favored" weapon (i.e. the poelarm for PAM/GWM or the longbow for your Ranger sharpshooter). Realistically it is probably about 70% of the time for most melee optimized characters. For a Ranged martial character or melee Rogue or Monk it is probably more like 80%. For a ranged Rogue probably about 90%, but all of them, even the ranged Rogue will do other things in combat pretty regularly.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Popping out of hiding and shooting is way different than popping out of hiding and moving 10’ across the battle area towards your target and making a melee attack. The creature is in combat and looking out for danger, which includes PCs approaching it. If the creature is not otherwise distracted, as determined by the DM, they are going to have a chance to notice someone approaching in the light.
The whole idea that combatants are aware in a 360 degree field of vision at all times is just...so backward and terrible.

I don’t want facing rules, but I draw the line at pretending that the completely absurd notion that an engaged combatant is hard to sneak up on makes any sense.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top