D&D 5E So.... hide?

[cthulhu42]

In the case of the Halfling his ability provides an exception to the requirement of not being seen before you can attempt to hide.

Why? How does it provide that exception? Reading the single sentence on page 28, PHB,

Naturally Stealthy: You can attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you.

Where in that sentence does it allow the halfling to hide from a foe who already sees him? I'm not trying to be obtuse, and I'm not trying to nerf this rogue. I'm just trying to maintain minimum believability.

It's much like the box trick someone cited above. To allow that strains my ability to suspend disbelief. Yes, I know that wizards can bend the fabric of reality, and yes, I know that a halfling rogue should be super ultra slick fast stealthy, but come on!

Another example I've used is, what if you and I were standing in a parking lot in full view of each other. I walk over to a car and duck down behind it. Am I out of sight? Yes. Do I get cover? Yes. Am I hidden? No.

Furthermore, in that sidebar on page 177 (thanks again for the correction), there's that sentence concerning invisibility.

An invisible creature can't be seen, so it can always try to hide.

That, to me, implies that you must be unseen in the first place in order to make a hide attempt.

I've read some good arguments pro and con in this thread, as well as some compromises. It sounds like I'll just have to DM rule it. I'll probably err on the side of the player, but I sure wish there was some official ruling on this that we could just cite and move on one way or the other.

 

[Flamestrike]

The rules don't allow the rogue to pop out of the box (thus revealing himself) and then attacking as though he was hidden.

Yes they do. The hidden creature isn't revealed until it makes its attack. See the section on attacking from hiding in the PHB.

Once the attack is made THEN the hidden creature is resolved (hit or miss). If the hidden creature had the skulker feat, and it misses, it isn't noticed and can attempt to hide again.

 

[Flamestrike]

In the case of the Halfling his ability provides an exception to the requirement of not being seen before you can attempt to hide.

No it doesn't. The halfling ability allows them to hide behind a Medium sized creature. It doesn't say anything about allowing a halfling to hide while being watched.

Your party is in the dungeon standing outside a closed door. You (the halfling) hide behind Bob the fighter. You make your stealth check and the DM notes the result. Bob then opens the door, revealing 3 angry Orcs. They make a perception check (or simply use their passive perception scores) to notice you. If they fail, you are hidden from them. Bob tries for a few rounds to talk to the Orcs before hostilities erupt. You remain hidden until you pop out on your initiative count and attack (with advantage and sneak attack). Now (unless you have the Skulker feat, and missed with your attack) you are revealed. The gig is up and the Orcs are observing you. You can't pop back behind Bob and attempt to hide as they know exactly where you are.

That's how it is supposed to work. its got me weirded out that people keep getting confused by the rules on this.

Hidden is not just not being seen. Otherwise you would automatically be hidden when you are invisible. You're not. It clearly means what it means in real life like 'hide and seek' - if I know exactly where you are (I saw you hide there for example) you are not hidden. Unable to be seen perhaps. But not hidden.

 

[pemerton]

In the case of the Halfling his ability provides an exception to the requirement of not being seen before you can attempt to hide.

I think it would be helpful if the rules stated that unambiguously.

Page 17 of the Basic PDF says "You can attempt to hide even when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you." The word "obscured" itself doesn't have a technical meaning independent of being lightly or heavily obscured - neither of which includes being behind another person! (Basic PDF p 65.)

I'm not arguing that you're wrong. I'm arguing that, if you're right, there were clearer ways to write the rules. Although 5e is ostensibly written in non-technical language, I think the reason the halfling rule doesn't use the word "behind" is because the game doesn't have facing rules - ie technical considerations have led to a contorted way of expressing the halfling's ability.

Here's one suggestions: "You can attempt to hide even though all that is between you and a potential observer is a creature at least one size larger than you." Or, if it is helpful to use the word "obscured", "You can attempt to hide even though all that obscures you from a potential observer is a creature at least one size larger than you."

 

[pemerton]

Hidden is not just not being seen. Otherwise you would automatically be hidden when you are invisible.

No one is denying this. Everyone accepts that the halfling has to make a DEX (Stealth) check, opposed by the Perception of potential observers. The question is whether a halfling can do so when behind a taller friend.

That's how it is supposed to work.

Says you. But you haven't actually provided any better account of what the text means than [MENTION=80924]fjw70[/MENTION]. The text is consistent with either interpretation - that's one reason why it is a mess.

 

[Flamestrike]

No one is denying this. Everyone accepts that the halfling has to make a DEX (Stealth) check, opposed by the Perception of potential observers. The question is whether a halfling can do so when behind a taller friend.

Says you. But you haven't actually provided any better account of what the text means than [MENTION=80924]fjw70[/MENTION]. The text is consistent with either interpretation - that's one reason why it is a mess.

Yes the halfling can hide behind Bob the medium sized fighter.

As long as no one he wants to hide from sees him duck behind Bob. He can't hide from those people at all.

It's not ambiguous at all. You're confusing being 'hidden' with 'not being visible'.

They're not the same thing.

 

[Uller]

People make this harder than it needs to be. Of course you can attempt to rehide after being revealed. You dont have to be a halfling to do it. It is up to the DM to look at the specifics of the situation and make a ruling that makes sense. Bill the halfling is hiding behind Bob the fighter. There is nowhere else to hide within 100' and one Ogre in front of Bob. Bill steps out makes a sneak attack on the ogre. Can he attempt to rehide? I'd say no. Or at least disadvantage the first time then no after that. When my players tey stuff like this and I say something like "the ogre is on to you. You're going to have to somehow fool him or move to hide again" they accept it.

Now add three more PCs all near Bob. Can Bill rehide behind Bob? Sure but disadvantage. Behind another character? Sure. No disadvantage. Next round Bill does his thing again. Can he rehide behind on random PC? Sure but the ogre is on to him so disadvantage. At some point I'll say the ogre has it figured out and you have to change it up. Very rarely is this an issue for more than a round or two anyway.

Using the stealth in combat to gain advantage on attacks is nothing at all like hide and seek. Its about momentarily making your enemy unaware of exactly where you are and what you are doing enough to make it so they can't properly defend themselves.

You duck into an alley full
of crates, hide and ready a crossbow attack on your pursuer. If you beat his perception check do you get advantage? Absolutely. Now make it an empty alley. No. What about if there is only one crate? Maybe. I could accept disadvantage here but only once.

 

[pemerton]

It's not ambiguous at all. You're confusing being 'hidden' with 'not being visible'.

No I'm not. Being hidden requires a stat/skill check. Being non-visible does not.

Yes the halfling can hide behind Bob the medium sized fighter.

As long as no one he wants to hide from sees him duck behind Bob. He can't hide from those people at all.

Where are you getting this rule from? The notion of "duck behind" doesn't appear anywhere in the rules. The rules say you can't hide if you're seen when you want to make the attempt. They don't say you can't hide if you're seen moving behind the cover/concealment that you want to use to hide.

 

[Flamestrike]

No I'm not. Being hidden requires a stat/skill check. Being non-visible does not.

Where are you getting this rule from? The notion of "duck behind" doesn't appear anywhere in the rules. The rules say you can't hide if you're seen when you want to make the attempt. They don't say you can't hide if you're seen moving behind the cover/concealment that you want to use to hide.

You're narrowly constraining the phrase 'you can't hide when you are being watched'

Simply walking behind full cover (while being watched) does not allow you yo hide once you get behind it and out of sight.

The phrase 'you can't hide when belng observed' means what it does in the plain English meaning of the phrase, not in a DnD game mechanic sense.

As in: if you and I were in a room together and I watch you climb into a box, you are not (and can not) be hidden from me. I know exactly where you are.

You're using an interpretation of that phrase to mean 'as soon as LOS is broken by climbing into a box, I can attempt to hide, despite you watching me go into my hiding spot'. And it's this literalist interlretaion that's confusing you.

Use ser common sense. Hidden means 'don't know you're there' not 'can't see you'

 

[Flamestrike]

Like; if it's me Bob the fighter and Bill the halfling in a room, Bill can't walk behind Bob and hide in full view of me, even if Bob completely obscures my vision of Bill once he leaps behind him.

I watched him go there. Ergo any Stealth checks automatically fail.

It's a different story if Bill hid behind Bob while I was out of the room though. Assuming I failed my perception check when I walked into the room (opposed by Bills stealth check) Bill could attack me with advantage and sneak attack if he wanted to. In this case I have no idea where Bill is when I enter the room as I didn't see him go into hiding.