So the sniper in this picture is obviously unable to hide because his enemies can, theoretically, see him?
He is obscured. It's the DM's call if the obsurement is enough to hide.
D&D 5E So.... hide?
- Thread starter cthulhu42
- Start date
He is obscured. It's the DM's call if the obsurement is enough to hide.
So it appears that there is no real agreed upon answer for this. Despite some opinions to the contrary, it looks as though even some of the designers are using house rules to temper the halfling hide trick. I've read this thread until my head hurts, as well as a couple of other threads on different forums, and it just doesn't look like there's a clear consensus.
I really don't want to nerf my player; the hide trick is probably one of the reasons he wanted to play the character in the first place. But I do think we're veering towards eye rolling cheese, so I want to find a middle ground that we can both agree on.
So here's what I propose: First off, I'm thinking more and more that some of the ability to find someone who is hiding from you stems from intelligence. You could potentially pull off the jack-in-the-box trick against an animal, but it'd be a lot harder against a human. I know that wisdom is already the real factor, given the perception check vs the hiders stealth, but my idea would bring intelligence into it as well.
So... if the halfling is trying to hide from a beast with animal intelligence or below, he gets to hide wherever he wants, and he can do it again and again. If he wants to hide behind the wizard and pop off sneak attacks and the re-hide behind the same wizard, then have at it.
However, if the opponent has higher than animal intelligence AND is not distracted, the halfling can only hide behind the wizard once and get a normal hide check. If he pops out for an SA and attempts to hide behind the same bit of cover for a second time from a foe that is not engaged in melee or otherwise distracted, he does so at disadvantage (or maybe the foe gets advantage on his perception check. Whatever). If the halfling attempts his 2nd hide behind a DIFFERENT bit of cover, then he gets a normal check again. And also, if the foe is in melee, the halfling can hide behind the same wizard with a normal check.
This feels, to me, like a pretty fair compromise. I foresee very few circumstances where he won't be able to hide wherever he wants at a normal check, but there will be those few instances where he'll have to suck it up and deal with disadvantage. I feel like his worst case scenario will be to have to mix up his hiding spots from time to time.
Thoughts?
I really don't want to nerf my player; the hide trick is probably one of the reasons he wanted to play the character in the first place. But I do think we're veering towards eye rolling cheese, so I want to find a middle ground that we can both agree on.
So here's what I propose: First off, I'm thinking more and more that some of the ability to find someone who is hiding from you stems from intelligence. You could potentially pull off the jack-in-the-box trick against an animal, but it'd be a lot harder against a human. I know that wisdom is already the real factor, given the perception check vs the hiders stealth, but my idea would bring intelligence into it as well.
So... if the halfling is trying to hide from a beast with animal intelligence or below, he gets to hide wherever he wants, and he can do it again and again. If he wants to hide behind the wizard and pop off sneak attacks and the re-hide behind the same wizard, then have at it.
However, if the opponent has higher than animal intelligence AND is not distracted, the halfling can only hide behind the wizard once and get a normal hide check. If he pops out for an SA and attempts to hide behind the same bit of cover for a second time from a foe that is not engaged in melee or otherwise distracted, he does so at disadvantage (or maybe the foe gets advantage on his perception check. Whatever). If the halfling attempts his 2nd hide behind a DIFFERENT bit of cover, then he gets a normal check again. And also, if the foe is in melee, the halfling can hide behind the same wizard with a normal check.
This feels, to me, like a pretty fair compromise. I foresee very few circumstances where he won't be able to hide wherever he wants at a normal check, but there will be those few instances where he'll have to suck it up and deal with disadvantage. I feel like his worst case scenario will be to have to mix up his hiding spots from time to time.
Thoughts?
This is how 4e handles it, except with a bit more formality around "reasonable cover" (defined as concealment or cover) and "reasonable speed" (moving more than a couple of squares imposes a penalty to your check).
I was kind of staying out of this thread, but this is a good compromise.
My take is that hiding means that the foe does not know where you are and that you either are obscured, or cannot be seen.
Just being not seen (like invisible) does not mean that one is hiding. Hiding is the state of the foes not knowing where you are and not seeing you, not just not seeing you. IMO. So, bottom line, a Halfling can pull this trick before he encounter foes, but not once the foes know where he is.
The very definition of hiding states that if the hiding creature makes noise, he gives away his position. Trying to hide behind someone while being observed is automatically giving away your position. Giving one's position away is no different than being invisible and not trying to hide in the first place.
Uller
Adventurer
I dont think you need the animal caveat. Most animals understand that just because an object is no longer visible doesnt mean it isn't there. Certainly giving disadvantage on the stealth check or advantage on perception when someone knows you are there is warranted. If someone is actively observing the hider then hiding should be difficult or impossible.
Also consider RP solutions...if the halfling SAs a giant and hides behind the wizard...a thrown boulder at the wizard makes a lot of sense.
