Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8377270" data-attributes="member: 16814">No, the hiding PC gets advantage on 1 attack.&nbsp; If you have two in a round, it only applies to the first, because making the attack automatically reveals you, so you can't get it on a followup.&nbsp; Also, the PC has to move to an appropriate place, spend some action economy, and make a check.&nbsp; Now, I'll grant that, at a fairly early point, the result of that check for a rogue is pretty one-sided, but that's what rogues are meant to do.&nbsp; And, honestly, the opponents don't get disadvantage, unless they can guess a square, which is contraindicated if the PC is hiding behind full cover due to line of effect.The difference really is that the hiding PC is extremely vulnerable to maneuver -- move to remove the cover/concealment and the rogue is not hiding from you anymore.&nbsp; It's not really at all like functional invisibility, it just shares a few traits.The argument is that if the rogue has advantage on every attack, they do not break anything.&nbsp; They almost catch up to champion fighters.&nbsp; It's not that they deserve to get advantage, it's that getting it isn't something that makes rogues break the game.&nbsp; If you just gave it to them outright, every round, it still wouldn't break the game.&nbsp; So, we have a regime where the upper end of getting advantage is &quot;always&quot; and we have a low end of never getting advantage being a pretty big suck.&nbsp; In between, we have rules that say you can hide in combat, and rules that say what that means, and rules that some PCs have a much easier time finding places to hide.&nbsp; So, in regards to those PCs, and considering the rules, there's nothing that breaks the game if they get lots of advantage - if anything, getting it makes the rogue somewhat competitive in damage to the fighters which, honestly, is not a high bar for 5e.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8377270, member: 16814"] No, the hiding PC gets advantage on 1 attack. If you have two in a round, it only applies to the first, because making the attack automatically reveals you, so you can't get it on a followup. Also, the PC has to move to an appropriate place, spend some action economy, and make a check. Now, I'll grant that, at a fairly early point, the result of that check for a rogue is pretty one-sided, but that's what rogues are meant to do. And, honestly, the opponents don't get disadvantage, unless they can guess a square, which is contraindicated if the PC is hiding behind full cover due to line of effect. The difference really is that the hiding PC is extremely vulnerable to maneuver -- move to remove the cover/concealment and the rogue is not hiding from you anymore. It's not really at all like functional invisibility, it just shares a few traits. The argument is that if the rogue has advantage on every attack, they do not break anything. They almost catch up to champion fighters. It's not that they deserve to get advantage, it's that getting it isn't something that makes rogues break the game. If you just gave it to them outright, every round, it still wouldn't break the game. So, we have a regime where the upper end of getting advantage is "always" and we have a low end of never getting advantage being a pretty big suck. In between, we have rules that say you can hide in combat, and rules that say what that means, and rules that some PCs have a much easier time finding places to hide. So, in regards to those PCs, and considering the rules, there's nothing that breaks the game if they get lots of advantage - if anything, getting it makes the rogue somewhat competitive in damage to the fighters which, honestly, is not a high bar for 5e. [/QUOTE]

Verification