The default behaviour for 5E seems to be "everyone knows where everyone is" and "to hide, you have to hide from everyone."
Turn it around on the players. If an enemy is hidden from character A but not character B, the player of B will generally object, saying something like "I tell A where the enemy is!"
So the game keeps it simple - to be hidden, you have to be hidden from everyone on the other side. One die roll from you, one die roll (or passive check) from everyone on that other side.
Besides, tracking which figures are hidden with respect to all the other figures in the combat is a lot of work at the table.
Could you cite the rule where it indicates that a creature is either hidden from everyone or no one? The groups near where I live don't play that way but perhaps that isn't RAW. As far as I know, it is possible to be "hidden" from some creatures and not others at the same time which appears to be supported by the rules for Surprise.
"The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter."
Surprise is a good example of a stealth check opposed by passive perception. It is clear from this that some creatures can notice the threat and others do not. The fact that team mates can yell "Look out there is someone behind the rock" is irrelevant. The character yelling has seen them but the others may not have and telling them a creature is present does not make them aware of what that creature is doing or what actions it is taking.
Since it is clear that some creatures can notice a hidden creature and others do not in the context of surprise from a stealth check. I don't understand why you think that a creature either hides from everyone or not is how it works in 5e.
One thing to keep in mind is that hidden in 5e just means unseen and unheard. It doesn't mean you have no idea where the creature might be, just that you've lost contact with it for the moment.
If a creature is hidden from you, you may know where you last saw it but you don't know what it is doing now and you won't be able to react quickly when it reappears. On the other hand, if the hide check is failed, the creature remains generally aware of where the creature is currently and can react quickly when it reappears. Maybe the hiding creature makes a noise that the higher passive perception was able to hear but the lower one was not. In either case, I haven't found it stated in the rules that hiding is all or nothing so I was hoping you'd be able to refer me to the appropriate rule.
The default behaviour for 5E seems to be "everyone knows where everyone is" and "to hide, you have to hide from everyone."
Turn it around on the players. If an enemy is hidden from character A but not character B, the player of B will generally object, saying something like "I tell A where the enemy is!"
So the game keeps it simple - to be hidden, you have to be hidden from everyone on the other side. One die roll from you, one die roll (or passive check) from everyone on that other side.
Besides, tracking which figures are hidden with respect to all the other figures in the combat is a lot of work at the table.
If an enemy is hidden from character A but not character B, then character B is free to tell character A where the enemy is, true. However, just being told the location of the enemy does not undo the hidden status.
Let's say the enemy hides in a bush and is camouflaged. Character A lacks the passive perception to see through the camouflage. Character B points at the bush. Character A now knows where the enemy is believed to be, but still doesn't see it (unless it uses the search action and succeeds a perception check). Character A might shoot a crossbow at the bush, but it will do so with disadvantage as per the rules of fighting hidden enemies.
So your players get the satisfaction of using communication to solve a problem (character A is allowed to attack the enemy) but the enemy's successful stealth check against character A wasn't completely invalidated (it still imposes disadvantage).
This also makes it more interesting when roles are reversed: When your rouge hides from enemy A and not enemy B, then it depends on the intelligence of enemy B. If the enemies are two dinosaurs, enemy B will likely not be smart enough to warn enemy A, and the rouge will stay hidden from enemy A. If the enemies are humanoids who know about combat strategy, enemy B will almost certainly make enemy A aware of the rouge's position, allowing enemy A to maneuver accordingly (but still attack with disadvantage if they choose to).
The default behaviour for 5E seems to be "everyone knows where everyone is" and "to hide, you have to hide from everyone."
Turn it around on the players. If an enemy is hidden from character A but not character B, the player of B will generally object, saying something like "I tell A where the enemy is!"
So the game keeps it simple - to be hidden, you have to be hidden from everyone on the other side. One die roll from you, one die roll (or passive check) from everyone on that other side.
Besides, tracking which figures are hidden with respect to all the other figures in the combat is a lot of work at the table.
If an enemy is hidden from character A but not character B, then character B is free to tell character A where the enemy is, true. However, just being told the location of the enemy does not undo the hidden status.
Let's say the enemy hides in a bush and is camouflaged. Character A lacks the passive perception to see through the camouflage. Character B points at the bush. Character A now knows where the enemy is believed to be, but still doesn't see it (unless it uses the search action and succeeds a perception check). Character A might shoot a crossbow at the bush, but it will do so with disadvantage as per the rules of fighting hidden enemies.
So your players get the satisfaction of using communication to solve a problem (character A is allowed to attack the enemy) but the enemy's successful stealth check against character A wasn't completely invalidated (it still imposes disadvantage).
This also makes it more interesting when roles are reversed: When your rouge hides from enemy A and not enemy B, then it depends on the intelligence of enemy B. If the enemies are two dinosaurs, enemy B will likely not be smart enough to warn enemy A, and the rouge will stay hidden from enemy A. If the enemies are humanoids who know about combat strategy, enemy B will almost certainly make enemy A aware of the rouge's position, allowing enemy A to maneuver accordingly (but still attack with disadvantage if they choose to).
I think you hit an important point on the head right there; The intelligence and/or tactical sense of the enemy.
Hobgoblins live in a highly martial society. Fighting is important to them and, as a result, most of them are trained in at least the basics while they're still young. I don't think they go all Spartan on them, but it isn't a stretch to say that Hobgoblins approaching fighting age will have a bit more training than a counterpart from another race with the less military lifestyle.
If someone has managed to hide from one Hobgoblin in a patrol but not the other, it only makes sense that the more alert one will not only signal the danger to his companion but that he'll also do it in a more effective way. I might even go so far as to ask the Rogue in question to make a Perception check of their own to realize that not only did one of the targets spot them, but they were giving silent hand signals to their partner.
If two Trolls are strolling by and one happens to make their Perception (somehow...), they might try to indicate potential danger and fail utterly. "Ugh...what dat?" (points to shrub where the Rogue is hiding). "It bush...so what?" (from the other Troll).
As a DM I would look at such encounters as potential ways to make what might be an otherwise boring scene more interesting. If the Rogue in question attacked the imperceptive enemy, I would certainly give them whatever advantage that Surprise would grant them under those circumstances, even if the other target saw them.
IMHO this would be a great scenario for newer players who often get tangled up in the mechanics of what's going on and forget about simply playing the game. I will often tell new players to try and forget the numbers and simply do, or try to do, whatever they think their character would do in the moment. Then we walk through the numbers together to give them a chance to see if their idea was good, bad, or somewhere in the middle. Can this be a little tedious for veteran players? Sure it can, but if we want to continue to have another generation of players then we're going to have to remember that we were all newbs at some point.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Could you cite the rule where it indicates that a creature is either hidden from everyone or no one? The groups near where I live don't play that way but perhaps that isn't RAW. As far as I know, it is possible to be "hidden" from some creatures and not others at the same time which appears to be supported by the rules for Surprise.
"The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter."
Surprise is a good example of a stealth check opposed by passive perception. It is clear from this that some creatures can notice the threat and others do not. The fact that team mates can yell "Look out there is someone behind the rock" is irrelevant. The character yelling has seen them but the others may not have and telling them a creature is present does not make them aware of what that creature is doing or what actions it is taking.
Since it is clear that some creatures can notice a hidden creature and others do not in the context of surprise from a stealth check. I don't understand why you think that a creature either hides from everyone or not is how it works in 5e.
One thing to keep in mind is that hidden in 5e just means unseen and unheard. It doesn't mean you have no idea where the creature might be, just that you've lost contact with it for the moment.
If a creature is hidden from you, you may know where you last saw it but you don't know what it is doing now and you won't be able to react quickly when it reappears. On the other hand, if the hide check is failed, the creature remains generally aware of where the creature is currently and can react quickly when it reappears. Maybe the hiding creature makes a noise that the higher passive perception was able to hear but the lower one was not. In either case, I haven't found it stated in the rules that hiding is all or nothing so I was hoping you'd be able to refer me to the appropriate rule.
I have enough to track in combat without maintaining which enemies can and can't see the target, so I just tell them.
If an enemy is hidden from character A but not character B, then character B is free to tell character A where the enemy is, true. However, just being told the location of the enemy does not undo the hidden status.
Let's say the enemy hides in a bush and is camouflaged. Character A lacks the passive perception to see through the camouflage. Character B points at the bush. Character A now knows where the enemy is believed to be, but still doesn't see it (unless it uses the search action and succeeds a perception check). Character A might shoot a crossbow at the bush, but it will do so with disadvantage as per the rules of fighting hidden enemies.
So your players get the satisfaction of using communication to solve a problem (character A is allowed to attack the enemy) but the enemy's successful stealth check against character A wasn't completely invalidated (it still imposes disadvantage).
This also makes it more interesting when roles are reversed: When your rouge hides from enemy A and not enemy B, then it depends on the intelligence of enemy B. If the enemies are two dinosaurs, enemy B will likely not be smart enough to warn enemy A, and the rouge will stay hidden from enemy A. If the enemies are humanoids who know about combat strategy, enemy B will almost certainly make enemy A aware of the rouge's position, allowing enemy A to maneuver accordingly (but still attack with disadvantage if they choose to).
I think you hit an important point on the head right there; The intelligence and/or tactical sense of the enemy.
Hobgoblins live in a highly martial society. Fighting is important to them and, as a result, most of them are trained in at least the basics while they're still young. I don't think they go all Spartan on them, but it isn't a stretch to say that Hobgoblins approaching fighting age will have a bit more training than a counterpart from another race with the less military lifestyle.
If someone has managed to hide from one Hobgoblin in a patrol but not the other, it only makes sense that the more alert one will not only signal the danger to his companion but that he'll also do it in a more effective way. I might even go so far as to ask the Rogue in question to make a Perception check of their own to realize that not only did one of the targets spot them, but they were giving silent hand signals to their partner.
If two Trolls are strolling by and one happens to make their Perception (somehow...), they might try to indicate potential danger and fail utterly. "Ugh...what dat?" (points to shrub where the Rogue is hiding). "It bush...so what?" (from the other Troll).
As a DM I would look at such encounters as potential ways to make what might be an otherwise boring scene more interesting. If the Rogue in question attacked the imperceptive enemy, I would certainly give them whatever advantage that Surprise would grant them under those circumstances, even if the other target saw them.
IMHO this would be a great scenario for newer players who often get tangled up in the mechanics of what's going on and forget about simply playing the game. I will often tell new players to try and forget the numbers and simply do, or try to do, whatever they think their character would do in the moment. Then we walk through the numbers together to give them a chance to see if their idea was good, bad, or somewhere in the middle. Can this be a little tedious for veteran players? Sure it can, but if we want to continue to have another generation of players then we're going to have to remember that we were all newbs at some point.