Lots of good thoughts. Thanks, all!
Regarding the Batman scenario, I think that is better covered by expanding the distraction rules rather than trying to add multiple modes to Hide. I'll put that in too.
"If you succeed, the creature doesn’t see or hear you."
Notice that this is the limit of what Stealth can do for you (I'll update the text to call that out explicitly). If you're being pursued by a creature with the nose of a bloodhound, or you just got done fighting an otyugh, no amount of sneakiness will prevent your enemy from smelling you. Likewise, you can't Stealth your way past an alarm spell. You must come up with other means to evade those.
Covering your tracks is in a gray area. I would be inclined to roll normal track-covering into the Hide action; however, if you're walking across a black floor covered in flour--or a clean floor when you just got done fighting an otyugh--you may need to go to lengths not covered by Stealth. That's the sort of thing I feel should be left to the DM's judgement.
I absolutely agree that the Hide action needs to be a defined, specific thing. I thought I had made it so with this sentence: "You can use the Hide action to shelter behind something that impedes vision (a bush, a crowd of people, etc.)." However, re-reading it, I see that could be read as "There is a general-purpose Hide action and this is one specific use of it." I'll rewrite my OP to make that clearer: The Hide action means hiding behind some sort of cover, nothing more, nothing less. Specifically, it means taking cover behind a partial obstruction, such that it is possible an enemy might spot you.I'm not 100% happy with any of these suggestions but I hope that illustrates the idea: instead of saying "I hide", we want the player to say what he's doing to hide ("I hide under the table") to make it easier to adjudicate consequences. Hiding under the table lets you use Stealth to hide, yes, but it also makes you prone, and lets anyone who searches under the table discover you automatically. Hiding is no longer a superpower--there's a physical mechanism required each and every time you hide, and each method of hiding comes with its own built-in failure modes no matter how absurdly high your Stealth skill is.
Regarding the Batman scenario, I think that is better covered by expanding the distraction rules rather than trying to add multiple modes to Hide. I'll put that in too.
Again, this is the intent of the rules; I'll tweak them to clarify. If you're behind cover that completely blocks a creature's vision, then by definition it can't see you and you don't have to hide. Hiding is only relevant if you might be seen.Your Hidden state has the same problem as current 5e. It states that you are "hidden to any creature whose sight of you is impeded" which some will interpret as being completely out of sight. As someone who has hidden successfully from others many times in my life, you can hide from someone and have parts of your body in view, including your head so you can observe them. I agree that there needs to be some sort of concealment/cover method in place to hide behind, however I would argue that unless you are performing some overt action that stealth can occur with parts of the stealthing character in view.
This is more or less the goal. You'll note that becoming hidden does not involve a Stealth check. You only roll when a creature might see or hear you. If you blow the roll, you stop being hidden to that creature (but might remain hidden to other, less perceptive creatures).TL;DR: A Dexterity (Stealth) check doesn't tell us whether are "Hidden" or "Not Hidden"... if the DM has us making a check then it means we *are* hidden, and the number rolled tells everyone else how well we did it.
The danger here is rules creep: Trying to create a system with precise rules for every possible scenario. That way lies madness (or 3E). I decided that the Stealth rules should be limited to sight and hearing, which are the things a Dex-based skill would reasonably affect. Thus:Which means the game requires all three of these "senses" to be blocked in order to hide... but has three separate levels of mechanical and/or narrative complexity to accomplish it. And I think that really screws things up for people. Why are leaving tracks handwaved but getting out of line of sight is not? Why are we told that narratively we have to "be quiet", but we don't have to narratively position ourselves "downwind" of the perceiver?
"If you succeed, the creature doesn’t see or hear you."
Notice that this is the limit of what Stealth can do for you (I'll update the text to call that out explicitly). If you're being pursued by a creature with the nose of a bloodhound, or you just got done fighting an otyugh, no amount of sneakiness will prevent your enemy from smelling you. Likewise, you can't Stealth your way past an alarm spell. You must come up with other means to evade those.
Covering your tracks is in a gray area. I would be inclined to roll normal track-covering into the Hide action; however, if you're walking across a black floor covered in flour--or a clean floor when you just got done fighting an otyugh--you may need to go to lengths not covered by Stealth. That's the sort of thing I feel should be left to the DM's judgement.
Last edited: