Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7219039" data-attributes="member: 6795602">[MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION]I think we end up in the same place.&nbsp; It's simply that you view the standard hiding rules in combat as starting off very lenient and allowing the DM to tighten things up at his discretion.&nbsp; I view them the opposite.&nbsp; I view the standard hiding rules as being very tight and I view the rules as explicitly being given the latitude to make hiding easy.&nbsp; The only difference in our opinions is whether the standard in the rules begins as lenient or difficult for hiding in combat.&nbsp; Your evidence of course revolves around the rogues ability and the halflings ability and the wood-elfs etc.&nbsp; If I may paraphrase it basically boils down to those abilities being existing and the fact they would be nearly useless in a game with as strict of hiding rules as I propose.&nbsp; I get the logic and reasoning.My evidence is the hiding rules tell me a monsters demeanor in combat is generally that the monster is alert for signs of danger all around.&nbsp; The rules themselves list the DM allowing you to &quot;come out of hiding&quot; and approach a creature while still remaining &quot;hidden&quot; as an exception to the general norm.&nbsp; So can we maybe agree that a creature stops being hidden when it comes out of hiding?&nbsp; Can we also agree that the rules never define what it means for a creature &quot;comes out of hiding&quot;.&nbsp; Basically from where I am sitting it looks like the DM is free to rule almost whatever he wants to be defined as coming out of hiding as the book gives no real guidance on that.&nbsp; This actually makes me want to change my position.&nbsp; I don't believe the rules have any default position on hiding in combat because I don't believe the rules specify what it takes to come out of hiding.&nbsp; Maybe we can agree there?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 7219039, member: 6795602"] [MENTION=16814]Ovinomancer[/MENTION] I think we end up in the same place. It's simply that you view the standard hiding rules in combat as starting off very lenient and allowing the DM to tighten things up at his discretion. I view them the opposite. I view the standard hiding rules as being very tight and I view the rules as explicitly being given the latitude to make hiding easy. The only difference in our opinions is whether the standard in the rules begins as lenient or difficult for hiding in combat. Your evidence of course revolves around the rogues ability and the halflings ability and the wood-elfs etc. If I may paraphrase it basically boils down to those abilities being existing and the fact they would be nearly useless in a game with as strict of hiding rules as I propose. I get the logic and reasoning. My evidence is the hiding rules tell me a monsters demeanor in combat is generally that the monster is alert for signs of danger all around. The rules themselves list the DM allowing you to "come out of hiding" and approach a creature while still remaining "hidden" as an exception to the general norm. So can we maybe agree that a creature stops being hidden when it comes out of hiding? Can we also agree that the rules never define what it means for a creature "comes out of hiding". Basically from where I am sitting it looks like the DM is free to rule almost whatever he wants to be defined as coming out of hiding as the book gives no real guidance on that. This actually makes me want to change my position. I don't believe the rules have any default position on hiding in combat because I don't believe the rules specify what it takes to come out of hiding. Maybe we can agree there? [/QUOTE]

Verification