I think that’s an interesting topic, but since Hiding didn’t grant the Invisible condition in 2014, it’s not relevant to my post or the post I was replying to.
The point is that hiding in 2024 does grant the Invisible condition, and if you assume that the condition is intended to have the same meaning as it has in 2014, gaining a clear unobstructed view of the character would not reveal them.
I think that’s an interesting topic, but since Hiding didn’t grant the Invisible condition in 2014, it’s not relevant to my post or the post I was replying to.
The point is that hiding in 2024 does grant the Invisible condition, and if you assume that the condition is intended to have the same meaning as it has in 2014, gaining a clear unobstructed view of the character would not reveal them.
The 2014 one specifically states:
An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense.
That language is not present in 2024, so this is a case of taking a minute to read all the rules rather than making assumptions.
That language is not present in 2024, so this is a case of taking a minute to read all the rules rather than making assumptions.
I'm aware of that. It's certainly possible that the invisible condition is intended to work differently in 2024, we would need to see some other examples to know if this is just a mistake (e.g. if the Invisibility spell just applies the Invisible condition without any additional wording) or an intended change. There's enough else that's horrendously worded about the 2024 version (what does 'find' actually mean?) to make me less than confident. Also, completely changing the meaning of invisible seems not very backwards compatible.
So I found this recently posted in reddit, and I think it is useful for the discussion. Below is part of the post:
"Treantmonk's videos only showed part of the Stealth Rules. There actually is another part, a specific rule at the Exploration Section that is called "Hiding", which states DMs could decide does the current circumstances suitable for hiding. So there's no need to worry about the out-of-combat scenarios, DMs still have the call on can a player try to Hide. If the DM feels it okay for players to hide, then that's when the player can take that Hide Action."
The full post goes more in depth, and may provide some answers as to how this is supposed to work. One thing looks clear from the post: Hide does not give magical invisibility, and the DM has the final call on how Hiding works
Edit: Of course there's also the issue of how to interpret the Invisible condition, and this is DM dependent too. If I were a DM, I would not consider Invisible from Hiding as true Invisibility, but invisible to the senses.
"Treantmonk's videos only showed part of the Stealth Rules. There actually is another part, a specific rule at the Exploration Section that is called "Hiding", which states DMs could decide does the current circumstances suitable for hiding. So there's no need to worry about the out-of-combat scenarios, DMs still have the call on can a player try to Hide. If the DM feels it okay for players to hide, then that's when the player can take that Hide Action."
That's (a) missing the point (the conditions in which someone can take the hide action are fine; the problem is the situations that break it) and (b) irrelevant, since it's nonsense even in combat.
Also, completely changing the meaning of invisible seems not very backwards compatible.
Anything that's updated in 2024 is meant to replace the 2014 thing entirely. They've been very clear about this.
Yeah, but if a monster has an action that turns it invisible, having what invisible does suddenly change means the monster works completely differently.
Also, completely changing the meaning of invisible seems not very backwards compatible.
Anything that's updated in 2024 is meant to replace the 2014 thing entirely. They've been very clear about this.
Yeah, but if a monster has an action that turns it invisible, having what invisible does suddenly change means the monster works completely differently.
I mean, it's not hard to work; refer back to the 2014 glossary for a 2014 block and the 2024 glossary for a 2024 one. Presumably relevant language will be updated going forward. People have consistently been pointing out that there will be some bits that stick out if you blend content, this is one of those bits and it's pretty straightforward for a DM to adjudicate so everything functions under RAI.
passive perception is in the glossary, and represents the ability to find things without actively trying. It would apply when the GM think it applies.
Thank you. Do you know what the text 2024 glossary actually says for Passive Perception? Because people are assuming you can only find someone using the Search action, but that was inserted by Treantmonk to denote an active Search by a player. The Hiding rules only say a Perception check, which could be active or passive.
They didn’t mention passive perception because the dm decides whether to use passive perception or not. They are not requiring it be used for stealth, but the dm has the option if they want to save time or hide rolls. Passive perception is defined in the glossary.
I think it’s confusing people, but some rules writers think they increase clarity by saying less, and avoiding redundancy. They removed the chapter that went in depth on abilities and checks or so I hear, I assume it will return in the dmg, but who knows.
They didn’t mention passive perception because the dm decides whether to use passive perception or not. They are not requiring it be used for stealth, but the dm has the option if they want to save time or hide rolls. Passive perception is defined in the glossary.
I think it’s confusing people, but some rules writers think they increase clarity by saying less, and avoiding redundancy. They removed the chapter that went in depth on abilities and checks or so I hear, I assume it will return in the dmg, but who knows.
It's also the Invisible condition, which is also used for the Invisibility spell. Some are taking this to mean Hiding gives true invisibility (transparency, vanish, optical cloaking a la Predator) and that you can move with impunity in an area--to include moving in broad daylight in front of enemies--and not be seen. The difference here is that Hiding does specifically have a DC Perception check to find you while Invisibility doesn't--which implies they're not the same--but rules lawyers are getting hung up on the Invisible condition like a Red Herring
That language is not present in 2024, so this is a case of taking a minute to read all the rules rather than making assumptions.
I'm aware of that. It's certainly possible that the invisible condition is intended to work differently in 2024, we would need to see some other examples to know if this is just a mistake (e.g. if the Invisibility spell just applies the Invisible condition without any additional wording) or an intended change. There's enough else that's horrendously worded about the 2024 version (what does 'find' actually mean?) to make me less than confident. Also, completely changing the meaning of invisible seems not very backwards compatible.
It is entirely clear the condition is supposed to work differently, since they had hiding give you the invisible condition.
Was it a bad idea not to rename the condition? Oh yes.
Might they have screwed up somewhere else in not correcting for the change? Entirely possible.
But arguing that we can't tell if they meant to change how it worked going forward just doesn't fly.
its actual very likely that someone you are grappling cannot see you, choke hold, full nelson, etc. If some one grabs you from behind, you cant see them.
also note, dnd rules have never been explicit, and if at anytime the DM is uncertain what the result of any action, they can call for additional rolls. They can also just ignore all rules and say what happens, the key is that it should be justified.
few players would be mad if the the DM required a atheltics check to prevent the guard from screaming and alerting others, etc.
Passive Perception is a score that reflects a creature's general awareness of its surroundings. The DM uses this score when determining whether a creature notices something without consciously making a Wisdom (Perception) check. A creature's Passive Perception equals 10 plus the creature's Wisdom (Perception) check bonus. If the creature has Advantage on such checks, increase the score by 5. If the creature has Disadvantage on them, decrease the score by 5. For example, a level 1 character with a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception has a Passive Perception of 14 (10 + 2 + 2). If that character has Advantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks, the score becomes 19.
And yes people are confusing the invisible condition, with the invisible spell.
hiding gives you the invisible condition, with caveats on how it can be removed. It never claims light rays pass through you.
i think the error here is actually in the invisible spell, it should somewhere say that you cannot be seen with the naked eye, you gain the invisible condition.
because the invisible condition has different effects if you are seen, and nothing explicitly states that you cant be seen by normal people when you use the invisble spell.
the hiding rules are fine though.
I do think they should errata the spell, to make it clear that it makes you supernaturally unable to be seen
That's what I thought, but then I realized that the lack of requirement of a Perception check on the Invisibility spell is a telling in and of itself that you're under some sort of magical optic camouflage. Only three things break the Invisiblility spell: an attack roll, dealing damage, or casting a spell.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The point is that hiding in 2024 does grant the Invisible condition, and if you assume that the condition is intended to have the same meaning as it has in 2014, gaining a clear unobstructed view of the character would not reveal them.
The 2014 one specifically states:
That language is not present in 2024, so this is a case of taking a minute to read all the rules rather than making assumptions.
I'm aware of that. It's certainly possible that the invisible condition is intended to work differently in 2024, we would need to see some other examples to know if this is just a mistake (e.g. if the Invisibility spell just applies the Invisible condition without any additional wording) or an intended change. There's enough else that's horrendously worded about the 2024 version (what does 'find' actually mean?) to make me less than confident. Also, completely changing the meaning of invisible seems not very backwards compatible.
So I found this recently posted in reddit, and I think it is useful for the discussion. Below is part of the post:
"Treantmonk's videos only showed part of the Stealth Rules. There actually is another part, a specific rule at the Exploration Section that is called "Hiding", which states DMs could decide does the current circumstances suitable for hiding. So there's no need to worry about the out-of-combat scenarios, DMs still have the call on can a player try to Hide. If the DM feels it okay for players to hide, then that's when the player can take that Hide Action."
The full post goes more in depth, and may provide some answers as to how this is supposed to work. One thing looks clear from the post: Hide does not give magical invisibility, and the DM has the final call on how Hiding works
Edit: Of course there's also the issue of how to interpret the Invisible condition, and this is DM dependent too. If I were a DM, I would not consider Invisible from Hiding as true Invisibility, but invisible to the senses.
That's (a) missing the point (the conditions in which someone can take the hide action are fine; the problem is the situations that break it) and (b) irrelevant, since it's nonsense even in combat.
Anything that's updated in 2024 is meant to replace the 2014 thing entirely. They've been very clear about this.
Yeah, but if a monster has an action that turns it invisible, having what invisible does suddenly change means the monster works completely differently.
passive perception is in the glossary, and represents the ability to find things without actively trying. It would apply when the GM think it applies.
I mean, it's not hard to work; refer back to the 2014 glossary for a 2014 block and the 2024 glossary for a 2024 one. Presumably relevant language will be updated going forward. People have consistently been pointing out that there will be some bits that stick out if you blend content, this is one of those bits and it's pretty straightforward for a DM to adjudicate so everything functions under RAI.
Thank you. Do you know what the text 2024 glossary actually says for Passive Perception? Because people are assuming you can only find someone using the Search action, but that was inserted by Treantmonk to denote an active Search by a player. The Hiding rules only say a Perception check, which could be active or passive.
Someone in another forum posted a screen grab.
i’ll look for the exact link later but it was essentially something like.
passive perception is used to find things unconsciously or without effort,
it’s calculated as your perception =10
advantage adds a bonus, disadvantage adds a decrement.
They didn’t mention passive perception because the dm decides whether to use passive perception or not. They are not requiring it be used for stealth, but the dm has the option if they want to save time or hide rolls. Passive perception is defined in the glossary.
I think it’s confusing people, but some rules writers think they increase clarity by saying less, and avoiding redundancy. They removed the chapter that went in depth on abilities and checks or so I hear, I assume it will return in the dmg, but who knows.
It's also the Invisible condition, which is also used for the Invisibility spell. Some are taking this to mean Hiding gives true invisibility (transparency, vanish, optical cloaking a la Predator) and that you can move with impunity in an area--to include moving in broad daylight in front of enemies--and not be seen. The difference here is that Hiding does specifically have a DC Perception check to find you while Invisibility doesn't--which implies they're not the same--but rules lawyers are getting hung up on the Invisible condition like a Red Herring
It is entirely clear the condition is supposed to work differently, since they had hiding give you the invisible condition.
Was it a bad idea not to rename the condition? Oh yes.
Might they have screwed up somewhere else in not correcting for the change? Entirely possible.
But arguing that we can't tell if they meant to change how it worked going forward just doesn't fly.
Shoves and grapples both require making an attack roll.
The issue is that it doesn't actually do what you'd expect the condition to do (make it so people can't see you).
its actual very likely that someone you are grappling cannot see you, choke hold, full nelson, etc. If some one grabs you from behind, you cant see them.
also note, dnd rules have never been explicit, and if at anytime the DM is uncertain what the result of any action, they can call for additional rolls. They can also just ignore all rules and say what happens, the key is that it should be justified.
few players would be mad if the the DM required a atheltics check to prevent the guard from screaming and alerting others, etc.
Here, this thread has about all the rules consolidated regarding Hiding, Stealth, Invisibility and the topic at large: hiding_in_2024_some_consolidated_thoughts
found the glossary rule from a redditor
Passive Perception, from the Glossary:
And yes people are confusing the invisible condition, with the invisible spell.
hiding gives you the invisible condition, with caveats on how it can be removed. It never claims light rays pass through you.
i think the error here is actually in the invisible spell, it should somewhere say that you cannot be seen with the naked eye, you gain the invisible condition.
because the invisible condition has different effects if you are seen, and nothing explicitly states that you cant be seen by normal people when you use the invisble spell.
the hiding rules are fine though.
I do think they should errata the spell, to make it clear that it makes you supernaturally unable to be seen
That's what I thought, but then I realized that the lack of requirement of a Perception check on the Invisibility spell is a telling in and of itself that you're under some sort of magical optic camouflage. Only three things break the Invisiblility spell: an attack roll, dealing damage, or casting a spell.