D&D 5E "when circumstances are appropriate for hiding"

[Oofta]

It is NOT down to DM adjudication whether you can hide or not. If you think it is, you not playing 5e. Sorry but you are just completely wrong about that. The RAW says you CAN DO the HIDE action; as long as you have something to hide behind. This is RAI as well, as you can easily confirm.

Can a rogue hide in such a way that opponents cannot see nor hear them on a regular basis? Assuming that the environment is one that supports it by having appropriate cover, of course a rogue can attempt a stealth check.

That does not mean the enemies forget the rogue is there. That does not mean that the rogue can "peak out and attack" while remaining unseen. Line of sight is usually a two way street. In most cases if the rogue can see their target, the target is also capable of seeing the rogue.

I'm pretty generous when it comes to stealth in combat, but tossing around meaningless phrases like "RAW" to justify how you run the game doesn't mean anything.

How stealth is handled is going to vary from DM to DM.

 

[Rodney Mulraney]

We take it on its face -- the DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. I'm pretty confident this wasn't a hidden riddle that the prize for deciphering is a hard and fast set of clean rules for hiding.

That cannot be done, since the rule book is not written in formal logic, you will interpret what you think the meaning/intent is with each sentence. So no matter you calling it "on its face" you are actually using one of the three intrepretations I listed. Even if you think you are reading formal logic you are not in reality.

 

[Rodney Mulraney]

Can a rogue hide in such a way that opponents cannot see nor hear them on a regular basis? Assuming that the environment is one that supports it by having appropriate cover, of course a rogue can attempt a stealth check.

That does not mean the enemies forget the rogue is there. That does not mean that the rogue can "peak out and attack" while remaining unseen. Line of sight is usually a two way street. In most cases if the rogue can see their target, the target is also capable of seeing the rogue.

I'm pretty generous when it comes to stealth in combat, but tossing around meaningless phrases like "RAW" to justify how you run the game doesn't mean anything.

How stealth is handled is going to vary from DM to DM.

Yeah a rogue or any PC can do that. It is RAW, and if you care to confirm it, also RAI.
How stealth is handled is going to vary from DM to DM, sure; that is not the issue, the issue is how SHOULD stealth/hiding be handled, by default.

Again hiding and stealth are different things, you need visual concealment to hide, but not to stealth. If an NPC readies attack on some foe popping out up from hide place to shoot, sure, they can do a number of things to deal with PCs in hiding.

 

[Oofta]

Yeah a rogue or any PC can do that. It is RAW, and if you care to confirm it, also RAI.
How stealth is handled is going to vary from DM to DM, sure; that is not the issue, the issue is how SHOULD stealth/hiding be handled, by default.

You're assuming that there is, or should be, one true way of handling stealth and hiding. I disagree.

Different DMs have different styles, from "it's just like my favorite anime cartoon" to "get your fantasy tropes out of my game, this is a gritty realism campaign". Personally I do a high fantasy sort-of-gritty campaign. The fact that there is no one true way is explicitly spelled out in the PHB.

Again hiding and stealth are different things, you need visual concealment to hide, but not to stealth. If an NPC readies attack on some foe popping out up from hide place to shoot, sure, they can do a number of things to deal with PCs in hiding.

I'm not sure I'm following. The only thing a stealth check buys is that the creatures that lose the skill contest do not see or hear you until something changes. Move out from behind cover (even just far enough to shoot an arrow) and the situation has changed. It's up to the DM to decide whether the enemy notices you. No "readied action" is involved, the character that was hiding does not automatically remain undetected.

 

[Mistwell]

It is NOT down to DM adjudication whether you can hide or not. If you think it is, you not playing 5e. Sorry but you are just completely wrong about that. The RAW says you CAN DO the HIDE action; as long as you have something to hide behind. This is RAI as well, as you can easily confirm.

From the podcast YOU linked to earlier, which you argued was authoritative in nature, interviewing Jeremy Crawford on the Stealth rules: "We very intentionally in 5th edition have put stealth in the domain of the DM…but this is actually a rare case where we right up front…we tell you the DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding."

 

[Mistwell]

Hiding and stealth are totally different things.

Again hiding and stealth are different things, you need visual concealment to hide, but not to stealth. If an NPC readies attack on some foe popping out up from hide place to shoot, sure, they can do a number of things to deal with PCs in hiding.

True. Hiding is a check you can make in 4th edition and 3rd edition. Stealth is a check you can make in 5th edition. There is no hide rule in 5e separate from stealth. When you take the Hide action, you follow the rules in chapter 7, which specifies you make a stealth check. All "trying to be undetected" rules are adjudicated using the stealth rules. The DM determines if something can see you, your shadow, smell you, hear you, feel your vibrations in the earth, etc. all using the stealth rules. Even if you are completely behind total cover, something may know exactly where you are because their perception check (passive if they were not actively looking for you, active if they were) beat your stealth check. They may have smelled you, or spotted a shadow cast by you being there, or heard a scuff of your food back there, or any number of things. But bottom line, there is no separation of rules between "hide" and "stealth". There is no rule about needing a visual component to hide.

 

[Hriston]

Ding Ding Ding we have a winning answer to all the hiding questions.

Sure, but since it's the DM's job to establish the circumstances prevailing in a given situation (or to decide to run a prewritten scenario that contains those circumstances), shouldn't there be some consistency in what circumstances a particular DM considers appropriate for hiding? Or do the players need to check with the DM every time they travel through a dense forest, for example, to see if it's still appropriate to move stealthily through a dense forest?

 

[nswanson27]

So yeah - seen tons of these kinda threads. Boils down to this:
1. DM arbitration over rules - everyone agrees here, and pragmatically this is the only thing that matters. For whether the DM is consciously houseruling or sincerely believes RAW/RAI is in line with their ruling, it's the same outcome. All you have to is to stop assuming there's an issue, and then *poof*... there isn't one.

2. What RAW/RAI really means. Varying opinions here, both sincerely (two people who genuinely interpret the rules differently) and disingenuously (veiled crusades to get other side to change how they play the game because... reasons). A lot less important, and basically of no value in the latter case, unless you enjoy it for sport.

 

[Rodney Mulraney]

You're assuming that there is, or should be, one true way of handling stealth and hiding. I disagree.

Different DMs have different styles, from "it's just like my favorite anime cartoon" to "get your fantasy tropes out of my game, this is a gritty realism campaign". Personally I do a high fantasy sort-of-gritty campaign. The fact that there is no one true way is explicitly spelled out in the PHB.



I'm not sure I'm following. The only thing a stealth check buys is that the creatures that lose the skill contest do not see or hear you until something changes. Move out from behind cover (even just far enough to shoot an arrow) and the situation has changed. It's up to the DM to decide whether the enemy notices you. No "readied action" is involved, the character that was hiding does not automatically remain undetected.

Well yeah there are lots of option variant rules etc.. and the DM and players can adjust things however they want; that is 5e for you, its very open to that kind of thing.

Preforming the HIDE action, gets you a stealth check, and you always keep your stealth check score until you say otherwise, or do something that breaks it etc... Moving does not remove your stealth status.

However in combat, if you move out from your hide location; you usually lose your stealth status; since creatures are "alert".

Of course you can rule whatever you want, but standard RAI/W as confirmed in the podcast I linked earlier is what I am talking about here.

 

[Rodney Mulraney]

Mistwell:

Yeah I did, when linking to the podcast mention that about hiding/stealth and DM power; I then spoke about how after Crawford says that he outlines all the RAI mechanics of how stealth / hiding works.

Stealth and Hiding are part of 5e and different things. You HIDE behind something, and roll stealth check, or you can just roll stealth check - out of combat. Being in stealth is that you are moving / positioning in such a way that you leave a small perceptual footprint. Preforming a HIDE action is something you do when you are concealed to enable you to be in stealth.