The podcast clearly states that you know the position of an invisible creature unless they hide....that is just simply stated.
Yes, of course, even at the bottom of the dungeon, in another city, on another continent and even on a different plane. And no, it's not explicitly stated in particular that way, because it would be ridiculous.
I am not sure how else to state that as its literally a topic of conversation for like 15 mins in there. They say a DM could say that something as part of the environment makes it so they do not have to roll to hide (loud noises covering footsteps, distance, etc...) but otherwise you know where the creature is automatically you can just not see it.
It is RAW as they state the rules from the PHB and its fairly clear once you actually read them.
Actually, it's not that clear from the PH, which is why so many people go to the podcast for the RAI. For example, one things that is not specifically stated in the PH and that always creates controversy is the "passive perception is the bottom floor of perception".
Another that people often miss, including you from the above, is that you can absolutely be within line of sight and still be hidden. There are at least two cases in the podcast, if you listen well, one because it's within line of sight and probably seen, but not seen clearly, and the other one because the target is distracted by something else.
And again, this is both RAW ("You can't hide from a creature that can see you clearly" and "if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the DM might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack roll before you are seen.") and in the RAI in the podcast.
Nothing is definitive here, and certainly not the "certainties" that you throw around.
You are not hidden in combat until you do the hide action or were hidden when combat started. Its just how it goes.
And the DM can absolutely decide, without any roll, that some creatures were hidden at the start at the combat, as they are quiet, have not been seen, and are not seen clearly.
Sneaking/Hiding is just Stealth vs. Passive Perception or Active perception (rolled) if the creature uses the Search action. Its literally that simple.
Again no, it's not. If it was the case do you believe that it would need a one hour podcast to go through it ? It's written in the RAW much more clearly than your sentence above "The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding." and it's said the in the podcast in no uncertain way "So first thing. To to state upfront is we very intentionally in 5th edition have put stealth in the domain of the DM." And i've given you two examples above of areas in the RAW which are deliberately fuzzy.
Outside of combat its the same as in....
Again, no. Just read the RAW, and listen to the podcast. There are clear differences between:the two, read the middle of this post.
you roll stealth and if your roll is lower than the perception of the creature you are not hidden. Thats it.
Nope. Once more, the rule is specific: "When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence." That means that if the creature is not actively looking for you, it has no chance of finding you. And if he is just unaware of even your existence, he will not find you by chance
Wow dude you got literally every point wrong Lyxen...
General reminder - you may not agree with one another, but please ensure you are respectful in your posts/replies. This goes for everyone.
If you cannot articulate your point in a manner that is consistent with our site rules, then do not post. Sometimes its better to walk away and not get involved.
You're for sure not hiding if you are not behind something.
You would actually need to see someone pop out and if you can see them they can see you.
So yeah won't work at all.
To take this bit away from the exact scenario described, if the goblins were in some bushes ready to shoot whoever comes around the bend in the road, they are both hidden and capable of seeing the target. Hiding doesn't mean not being able to see the thing that's looking for you, unless you're fighting a Ravenous Bugblatter beast of Traal (an animal so stupid that if you cover your eyes, it assumes that as you cannot see it, it cannot see you).
You're for sure not hiding if you are not behind something.
You would actually need to see someone pop out and if you can see them they can see you.
So yeah won't work at all.
To take this bit away from the exact scenario described, if the goblins were in some bushes ready to shoot whoever comes around the bend in the road, they are both hidden and capable of seeing the target. Hiding doesn't mean not being able to see the thing that's looking for you, unless you're fighting a Ravenous Bugblatter beast of Traal (an animal so stupid that if you cover your eyes, it assumes that as you cannot see it, it cannot see you).
Yeah they were just hanging out around the corner...they were readying shots (which is not a thing outside of combat as I stated). So they had to be able to see the players to shoot so they were not behind cover of any kind. Only certain creatures (Wood Elvles) can hide while lightly obscured.
I do disagree with Grickle a little bit as there is times you can just be invisible, in darkness, or whatever where you can see someone but they can't see you. This would not be the case though if you are using cover to hide....IMO at least. If you can see people using cover they can see you unless another scenario is out there I am not aware of.
Oh yeah darkness and what not makes sense just not what Lyxen was on about.
If you are using cover to hide.... You have to stay behind cover to hide. Otherwise you are visible to me.
Like if you hide and ready an action to shoot sometime who runs PAST the thing you are hiding behind I'd buy it.
I would agree with that for the most part...brush might be the exception but I actually might not let someone shoot from a brush if its heavy enough to be completely hidden. I don't want to invalidate the Wood Elf racial ability. I realize they do this in LMoP but honestly that module has a few mistakes of rules (it was a very early adventure).
I would say you need to be concealed in some fashion completely (Darkness, fog, full cover, invisible) to even attempt to hide. Full cover would mean you cannot see either as you have broken LOS with those who are looking for you. So I would agree in that case I would not allow a ready action to fire AND hide behind the pillar because you are breaking cover to actually see who you are shooting at.
The brush thing is a odd medium that I do not like....sets this weird precedent about 3/4 cover being used to hide which I am not fully in agreement with.
No, again, read the rules. I can still shoot at you while being hidden, and lose that status only after I hit or miss. So maybe I don't need to stay hidden after you are dead. :p
Yeah I'm the process of shooting you can come out of cover and shoot. You can't hold a line of sight in an area you are trying to hide from unless you are in darkness or whatever. If you are using cover you have to be able to see the area you want to proc the attack from.
And this is exactly the case with the wizard. The goblins could be hiding behind their wall, and the wizard just enters their field of vision.
That's my point... They aren't hiding but rather the wizard is trying to hide from them.
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. " So dense foliage is sufficient to give you heavy obscurement and allows you to hide behind even if you're not a wood elf.
" In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." This is sufficient for a wood elf to hide behind
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. " So dense foliage is sufficient to give you heavy obscurement and allows you to hide behind even if you're not a wood elf.
" In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." This is sufficient for a wood elf to hide behind
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. " So dense foliage is sufficient to give you heavy obscurement and allows you to hide behind even if you're not a wood elf.
" In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." This is sufficient for a wood elf to hide behind
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
It blocks vision entirely beyond that area. But not if you're in it, at the edge. Have you never hidden in bushes ? Where people could not see you but you could easily see them ? I have done 30+ years of LARPing and have done this countless times. Of course, you need a minimum of stealth, in particular not to rustle the foliage when going in, which is where the stealth check comes in to play. Or you could just have hidden there and wait. And (despite all my wishes) I am not a wood elf.
[REDACTED]
Rules be rules and you even quoted them so if you want to use your homebrew stuff that's cool but it's not how it works in the book.
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. " So dense foliage is sufficient to give you heavy obscurement and allows you to hide behind even if you're not a wood elf.
" In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." This is sufficient for a wood elf to hide behind
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
It blocks vision entirely beyond that area. But not if you're in it, at the edge. Have you never hidden in bushes ? Where people could not see you but you could easily see them ? I have done 30+ years of LARPing and have done this countless times. Of course, you need a minimum of stealth, in particular not to rustle the foliage when going in, which is where the stealth check comes in to play. Or you could just have hidden there and wait. And (despite all my wishes) I am not a wood elf.
Real world experience is not RAW in this case and does not have a bearing on the rules as written. Simply going by the rules what you state is impossible and is contradictory. I would treat it as such as a DM.
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. " So dense foliage is sufficient to give you heavy obscurement and allows you to hide behind even if you're not a wood elf.
" In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." This is sufficient for a wood elf to hide behind
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
It blocks vision entirely beyond that area. But not if you're in it, at the edge. Have you never hidden in bushes ? Where people could not see you but you could easily see them ? I have done 30+ years of LARPing and have done this countless times. Of course, you need a minimum of stealth, in particular not to rustle the foliage when going in, which is where the stealth check comes in to play. Or you could just have hidden there and wait. And (despite all my wishes) I am not a wood elf.
Real world experience is not RAW in this case and does not have a bearing on the rules as written. Simply going by the rules what you state is impossible and is contradictory. I would treat it as such as a DM.
Real world experience is totally simulated by RAW, if you actually read the rules and in particular: "A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something inthat area."
You can treat it differently as a DM, but that would be homebrew.
I mean....you cannot apply real world logic to DnD especially with mechanics. It starts to break down FAST.
Overall we have reached an impasse. I suggest we all move on with our day.
"A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. " So dense foliage is sufficient to give you heavy obscurement and allows you to hide behind even if you're not a wood elf.
" In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight." This is sufficient for a wood elf to hide behind
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
It blocks vision entirely beyond that area. But not if you're in it, at the edge. Have you never hidden in bushes ? Where people could not see you but you could easily see them ? I have done 30+ years of LARPing and have done this countless times. Of course, you need a minimum of stealth, in particular not to rustle the foliage when going in, which is where the stealth check comes in to play. Or you could just have hidden there and wait. And (despite all my wishes) I am not a wood elf.
Real world experience is not RAW in this case and does not have a bearing on the rules as written. Simply going by the rules what you state is impossible and is contradictory. I would treat it as such as a DM.
Real world experience is totally simulated by RAW, if you actually read the rules and in particular: "A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something inthat area."
You can treat it differently as a DM, but that would be homebrew.
I mean....you cannot apply real world logic to DnD especially with mechanics. It starts to break down FAST.
It depends which area of the game. Of course, if we are speaking magic, or high level, or hit points, for sure. But things like skills are actually modelling fantasy books and ultimately reality fairly well. Moreover, in this case, the RAW is extremely precise and clear, and models hiding well, which is a relief for the DM because he can rely on his real world experience to make it seem real to his player as part of the experience.
And I have been roleplaying and LARPing for a very, very long time, and they each have created a huge positive impact on each other. My TT games are much more vivid and relatable to my players, and my LARPs are also more imaginative because there are tons of things that you can simulate really well using player goodwill and a few special effects. And this even includes heroic hit points and resistance, for example, or special powers.
Overall we have reached an impasse. I suggest we all move on with our day.
Up to you, mate, but you might learn something from the diagram and the explanation that I posted above. In terms of RAW, obviously, but it also models real life quite well in this particular case.
I doubt I will learn much as I do not agree with any of your premise so I will move on.
First of all, thanks so much for all your comments. Second, I learned a lot about things not necessarily related to my post - or maybe tangentially. Third, all of your comments brings it home to me, as a new DM, that there are always extenuating circumstances and possibilities that you're free to choose from. I think the key is to be consistent, regardless which path you adhere to.
Okay, a couple of things. I ruled in my PbP game that as soon as an intention to harm was made, initiative must be rolled. I did this because neither part was surprised. Sure, you could argue the PC and their familiar should have been, but they knew something was there and were on their toes. The goblins knew something was coming and were waiting. Actually, some of the players heard the gobbers arguing and one even saw a goblin dragging their comrade back to cover.
Anyways, I realized that regardless of how I felt about it, which was that the shots should have went off like a readied action. Regardless of that, I asked for initiatives because the players need to have that opportunity to have their dexterity (through initiative) matter. The goblins were ready, the PC was cautious; PC couldn't hide they were trying to be stealthy. The gobs knew there was someone coming. So in that moment they raise their bows and draw. The PCs and gobs have 3/4 cover and with this ruling, only one goblin rolled higher initiative. In my game, this meant they did loose the arrows but the PC snapped back at the last second and the other goblin was just too slow, in spite of him waiting for an enemy to come around the corner.
The person who posted about the readied actions - I think that's a pretty neat idea and it does happen a lot in PbP and you would need to be clear that you can't just have a series of "unlesses" and "ifs" to make it really work.
Here is the map from the battle, if you're interested.
First of all, thanks so much for all your comments. Second, I learned a lot about things not necessarily related to my post - or maybe tangentially. Third, all of your comments brings it home to me, as a new DM, that there are always extenuating circumstances and possibilities that you're free to choose from. I think the key is to be consistent, regardless which path you adhere to.
Okay, a couple of things. I ruled in my PbP game that as soon as an intention to harm was made, initiative must be rolled. I did this because neither part was surprised. Sure, you could argue the PC and their familiar should have been, but they knew something was there and were on their toes. The goblins knew something was coming and were waiting. Actually, some of the players heard the gobbers arguing and one even saw a goblin dragging their comrade back to cover.
Anyways, I realized that regardless of how I felt about it, which was that the shots should have went off like a readied action. Regardless of that, I asked for initiatives because the players need to have that opportunity to have their dexterity (through initiative) matter. The goblins were ready, the PC was cautious; PC couldn't hide they were trying to be stealthy. The gobs knew there was someone coming. So in that moment they raise their bows and draw. The PCs and gobs have 3/4 cover and with this ruling, only one goblin rolled higher initiative. In my game, this meant they did loose the arrows but the PC snapped back at the last second and the other goblin was just too slow, in spite of him waiting for an enemy to come around the corner.
The person who posted about the readied actions - I think that's a pretty neat idea and it does happen a lot in PbP and you would need to be clear that you can't just have a series of "unlesses" and "ifs" to make it really work.
Here is the map from the battle, if you're interested.
Seems like we might be getting into some unpleasantness and moderation. I love hearing you all talk about what you do in your games and such, but let's keep it civil. We all have different interpretations and it's nice to read them all. Thanks to everyone who has posted (and who will post!)
- i determined that the intent to fire began when they decide to shoot, and maybe that's a gray area. i remember hearing mike mearls (maybe that was the one) talk about initiative and i agree with the idea that at the threshold of the action, that's the intent, so then initiative should be rolled. i went this way because it seemed to be clear to me, though i am open to different methods (like your homebrew, for example). i thought it best to have a simple, consistent rule. i'm new so maybe in the future i can implement something like readied actions. - the language i got from my player also included perception rolls, so for me it was clear they were doing more than passively taking in their surroundings. i suppose i should have also put that in the OP. - the goblin near the wizard was dragged there by one of the other goblins before running back to the barricade in the north. this goblin was seen by another PC before it went back into cover (the other corridor). off camera, the goblin just checked to see if his comrade was alive, stole his arrows and bow, and took what it could before running back to the other goblin and the hobgoblin lieutenant.
Wow dude you got literally every point wrong Lyxen...
You pretty much got it completely backwards.
General reminder - you may not agree with one another, but please ensure you are respectful in your posts/replies. This goes for everyone.
If you cannot articulate your point in a manner that is consistent with our site rules, then do not post. Sometimes its better to walk away and not get involved.
Site Rules & Guidelines || How to Tooltip || Contact Support || Changelog || Pricing FAQ || Homebrew FAQ
If you have questions/concerns, please Private Message me or another moderator.
Wary the wizard who focuses on homebrew, for he can create nightmares that you wouldn't even dream of
100% sure you can't ready a shot and hide. You would need to maintain sight on your target which means you are not behind cover....
So yeah that won't work.
You're for sure not hiding if you are not behind something.
You would actually need to see someone pop out and if you can see them they can see you.
So yeah won't work at all.
To take this bit away from the exact scenario described, if the goblins were in some bushes ready to shoot whoever comes around the bend in the road, they are both hidden and capable of seeing the target. Hiding doesn't mean not being able to see the thing that's looking for you, unless you're fighting a Ravenous Bugblatter beast of Traal (an animal so stupid that if you cover your eyes, it assumes that as you cannot see it, it cannot see you).
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Yeah they were just hanging out around the corner...they were readying shots (which is not a thing outside of combat as I stated). So they had to be able to see the players to shoot so they were not behind cover of any kind. Only certain creatures (Wood Elvles) can hide while lightly obscured.
I do disagree with Grickle a little bit as there is times you can just be invisible, in darkness, or whatever where you can see someone but they can't see you. This would not be the case though if you are using cover to hide....IMO at least. If you can see people using cover they can see you unless another scenario is out there I am not aware of.
Oh yeah darkness and what not makes sense just not what Lyxen was on about.
If you are using cover to hide.... You have to stay behind cover to hide. Otherwise you are visible to me.
Like if you hide and ready an action to shoot sometime who runs PAST the thing you are hiding behind I'd buy it.
I would agree with that for the most part...brush might be the exception but I actually might not let someone shoot from a brush if its heavy enough to be completely hidden. I don't want to invalidate the Wood Elf racial ability. I realize they do this in LMoP but honestly that module has a few mistakes of rules (it was a very early adventure).
I would say you need to be concealed in some fashion completely (Darkness, fog, full cover, invisible) to even attempt to hide. Full cover would mean you cannot see either as you have broken LOS with those who are looking for you. So I would agree in that case I would not allow a ready action to fire AND hide behind the pillar because you are breaking cover to actually see who you are shooting at.
The brush thing is a odd medium that I do not like....sets this weird precedent about 3/4 cover being used to hide which I am not fully in agreement with.
Bruh that's what he's saying....
The wood elf thing says you can hide while light obscured. If anyone could do that why call that out in an ability? Answer is you wouldn't need to.
Therefore you have to be heavily obscured to hide
That means you can't see from behind it as you stated.
Exactly....even your own example states that:
So most people need at least heavy obscured to hide. Which "blocks vision entirely" which means that you are completely breaking LOS.
Exactly...
Seems pretty simple to me.
Yeah heavily obscured means you are breaking LOS as Optimus stated... Which by your own definition means you cannot see through it.
So yeah if you are going the cover route you can't see.
So yeah won't work.
[REDACTED]
Rules be rules and you even quoted them so if you want to use your homebrew stuff that's cool but it's not how it works in the book.
Real world experience is not RAW in this case and does not have a bearing on the rules as written. Simply going by the rules what you state is impossible and is contradictory. I would treat it as such as a DM.
I mean....you cannot apply real world logic to DnD especially with mechanics. It starts to break down FAST.
Overall we have reached an impasse. I suggest we all move on with our day.
I doubt I will learn much as I do not agree with any of your premise so I will move on.
First of all, thanks so much for all your comments. Second, I learned a lot about things not necessarily related to my post - or maybe tangentially. Third, all of your comments brings it home to me, as a new DM, that there are always extenuating circumstances and possibilities that you're free to choose from. I think the key is to be consistent, regardless which path you adhere to.
Okay, a couple of things. I ruled in my PbP game that as soon as an intention to harm was made, initiative must be rolled. I did this because neither part was surprised. Sure, you could argue the PC and their familiar should have been, but they knew something was there and were on their toes. The goblins knew something was coming and were waiting. Actually, some of the players heard the gobbers arguing and one even saw a goblin dragging their comrade back to cover.
Anyways, I realized that regardless of how I felt about it, which was that the shots should have went off like a readied action. Regardless of that, I asked for initiatives because the players need to have that opportunity to have their dexterity (through initiative) matter. The goblins were ready, the PC was cautious; PC couldn't hide they were trying to be stealthy. The gobs knew there was someone coming. So in that moment they raise their bows and draw. The PCs and gobs have 3/4 cover and with this ruling, only one goblin rolled higher initiative. In my game, this meant they did loose the arrows but the PC snapped back at the last second and the other goblin was just too slow, in spite of him waiting for an enemy to come around the corner.
The person who posted about the readied actions - I think that's a pretty neat idea and it does happen a lot in PbP and you would need to be clear that you can't just have a series of "unlesses" and "ifs" to make it really work.
Here is the map from the battle, if you're interested.
DM - And In The Darkness, Rot: The Sunless Citadel
DM - Our Little Lives Kept In Equipoise: Curse of Strahd
DM - Misprize Thou Not These Shadows That Belong: The Lost Mines of Phandelver
PC - Azzure - Tyranny of Dragons
Seems like we might be getting into some unpleasantness and moderation.
I love hearing you all talk about what you do in your games and such, but let's keep it civil.
We all have different interpretations and it's nice to read them all.
Thanks to everyone who has posted (and who will post!)
DM - And In The Darkness, Rot: The Sunless Citadel
DM - Our Little Lives Kept In Equipoise: Curse of Strahd
DM - Misprize Thou Not These Shadows That Belong: The Lost Mines of Phandelver
PC - Azzure - Tyranny of Dragons
good questions.
- i determined that the intent to fire began when they decide to shoot, and maybe that's a gray area. i remember hearing mike mearls (maybe that was the one) talk about initiative and i agree with the idea that at the threshold of the action, that's the intent, so then initiative should be rolled. i went this way because it seemed to be clear to me, though i am open to different methods (like your homebrew, for example). i thought it best to have a simple, consistent rule. i'm new so maybe in the future i can implement something like readied actions.
- the language i got from my player also included perception rolls, so for me it was clear they were doing more than passively taking in their surroundings. i suppose i should have also put that in the OP.
- the goblin near the wizard was dragged there by one of the other goblins before running back to the barricade in the north. this goblin was seen by another PC before it went back into cover (the other corridor). off camera, the goblin just checked to see if his comrade was alive, stole his arrows and bow, and took what it could before running back to the other goblin and the hobgoblin lieutenant.
DM - And In The Darkness, Rot: The Sunless Citadel
DM - Our Little Lives Kept In Equipoise: Curse of Strahd
DM - Misprize Thou Not These Shadows That Belong: The Lost Mines of Phandelver
PC - Azzure - Tyranny of Dragons