You have entered a well lit room with zero cover and zero obstructions, where not but seconds prior two of your allies have rushed through the door to attack the occupants. At this point, your foes are likely to be weary of more opponents entering through the door. If you have nothing to hide behind or obstruct yourself from their view, what do you hope to accomplish with a high stealth roll? Not being able to roll stealth does not preclude you from positioning yourself behind them into a flanking position. You are contradicting yourself in stating that you did not wish to "hide" but in the same vein implying you wished to enter the room undetected.
The DM ruled that given the room, regardless of the perceived distraction you believe your allies to be causing, no amount of sneaking would allow you enter the room undetected, that is well within their purview; it is not a requirement that you be allowed to roll to do something and that a DC be set for it, it is perfectly reasonable that at times, things are simply not possible, this is one of those cases.
But it IS possible though.
Hide and stealth are not the same. I’m not contradicting myself. I was trying to get into a strategic position without being noticed (stealth), not by hiding. Just like a defensive end pummeling a quarterback, as I said before. He’s not hiding, but the quarterback never noticed him.
In 5e "hide" is achieved by a successful "stealth" check. There is no other use for stealth. (Stealth and hiding in 5e are effectively the same). In 5e you are either noticed or you are not. In the situation you described, a big empty well lit room with no cover, there is NO way (playing by the rules as written) for ANY visible character to cross the room without the opponents being aware of them. In 5e, the quarterback ALWAYS notices them unless there is something for them to hide behind (or the DM decides that some event has been sufficient special distraction - however, combat including attacking and casting spells is NOT sufficient distraction in 5e to, under normal circumstances, allow a creature to move through a well lit room without cover without being noticed - which is why your DM just said no).
That is just how the rules are written.
Also, by definition, every action that a character takes is covered by the rules. The DM adjudicates them. In your case, you wanted to sneak up on opponents by moving through a well lit room with no cover using "the distraction of combat". However, combat is explicitly NOT a distraction in 5e that would make it possible for character to move without being noticed.
You can certainly roleplay moving sneakily but there won't be any mechanical advantage from doing so when everyone in the room can see you clearly.
I wasn't trying to hide. I was still behind the door and hadn't yet entered the room. The enemies were distracted. Shouldn't I have been able to attempt a stealth check, no matter how challenging the roll would have been?
You could be hidden in the hallway. You could make a ranged attack with advantage by stepping out to where you can see your target and shooting. However, as soon as you move into the room and are clearly visible - you are no longer hidden. That is just how 5e works.
During combat, ALL creatures are assumed to be paying attention to their surroundings, looking around (even behind them) - they aren't so focused on the creature right in front of them that they aren't paying attention to the rest of the room. There is no possibility to use the "distraction of battle" to hide because there isn't any unless the characters do something specifically to cause a distraction that the DM might adjudicate as allowing a creature to move without being seen. Usually though, these situations would not occur in combat (like distracting a guard while someone sneaks up behind them). Once you are in combat, everyone is paying attention.
This edition has no "hide in shadows" unless the shadows prevent the target from seeing you (or you are a gloomstalker ranger, or you have the skulker feat - both of which provide additional options).
Also, halflings can hide behind creatures at least one size larger than them in combat.
Here are the rules ...
"HIDING The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. 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. You can't hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase."
"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so 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."
Regular combat is not considered enough of a distraction to allow a character to successfully hide (i.e. use stealth to move without being noticed = hide)
"If you are hidden - both unseen and unheard - when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses."
Again, thank you for copying and pasting rules I already knew.
So nobody can challenge a rule? That’s just not allowed in a role playing game? Nobody can question the DM with a reasonable and thoughtful strategy? A fireball to the face wouldn’t be considered a slight distraction? Enemies are unequivocally astute and aware of their surroundings at all times, even though a battle takes place in time frames that equal seconds?
Hide and Stealth are incontrovertibly two very distinct and separate skills. I was hidden in the doorway. I wanted to use the distraction of battle to sneak my way into the room, trying to avoid detection, and maneuver myself behind the wizard and dread knights as a flanking position. If I failed a roll, they would see me. If I succeeded, I'd be in place to attack.
It sounds like you're trying to make a distinction between sneaking and hiding, when the only difference is whether you're moving or not. They're still handled the same way in game, using the hiding rules which Plaguescarred has already covered.
If your goal is to get into a flanking position, you don't need to be stealthy, just run around them. Why would them seeing you stop you from moving?
Stealth is so much more than just hiding. Hiding is dependent on stealth, yes, but using stealth to its fullest does not require hiding. I wanted to sneak my way behind them to flank because that's what Malfecto would do. Were he simply a fighter, I'm sure he'd rush into the fray without abandon, but placing himself strategically on the field of battle is the option he's going to take every time. That's the way I roleplay him. That's his entire being to its core.
If your goal is to stealth in a narrative sense with no mechanical benefit, you have to tell the DM that or they will assume you're trying to get a mechanical benefit.
So nobody can challenge a rule? That’s just not allowed in a role playing game? Nobody can question the DM with a reasonable and thoughtful strategy?
No one said that. Obviously you did ask your DM. They said 'no'. That's where it ends unless they are mistaken on the rules -- which they are not in this case.
A fireball to the face wouldn’t be considered a slight distraction? Enemies are unequivocally astute and aware of their surroundings at all times, even though a battle takes place in time frames that equal seconds?
Hide and Stealth are incontrovertibly two very distinct and separate skills. I was hidden in the doorway. I wanted to use the distraction of battle to sneak my way into the room, trying to avoid detection, and maneuver myself behind the wizard and dread knights as a flanking position. If I failed a roll, they would see me. If I succeeded, I'd be in place to attack.
It sounds like you're trying to make a distinction between sneaking and hiding, when the only difference is whether you're moving or not. They're still handled the same way in game, using the hiding rules which Plaguescarred has already covered.
If your goal is to get into a flanking position, you don't need to be stealthy, just run around them. Why would them seeing you stop you from moving?
Stealth is so much more than just hiding. Hiding is dependent on stealth, yes, but using stealth to its fullest does not require hiding. I wanted to sneak my way behind them to flank because that's what Malfecto would do. Were he simply a fighter, I'm sure he'd rush into the fray without abandon, but placing himself strategically on the field of battle is the option he's going to take every time. That's the way I roleplay him. That's his entire being to its core.
If your goal is to stealth in a narrative sense with no mechanical benefit, you have to tell the DM that or they will assume you're trying to get a mechanical benefit.
Pretty much this.
My interpretation of the circumstances had me thinking you were trying to use the Stealth skill to move unseen into an advantageous position for a Sneak Attack with Advantage due to being "unnoticed by the enemy".
If all you were trying to do was slip behind the enemy as part of the narrative but with no mechanical advantage to it then that needs to be made clear otherwise it's very easily misunderstood.
In 5e "hide" is achieved by a successful "stealth" check. There is no other use for stealth. (Stealth and hiding in 5e are effectively the same). In 5e you are either noticed or you are not. In the situation you described, a big empty well lit room with no cover, there is NO way (playing by the rules as written) for ANY visible character to cross the room without the opponents being aware of them. In 5e, the quarterback ALWAYS notices them unless there is something for them to hide behind (or the DM decides that some event has been sufficient special distraction - however, combat including attacking and casting spells is NOT sufficient distraction in 5e to, under normal circumstances, allow a creature to move through a well lit room without cover without being noticed - which is why your DM just said no).
That is just how the rules are written.
Also, by definition, every action that a character takes is covered by the rules. The DM adjudicates them. In your case, you wanted to sneak up on opponents by moving through a well lit room with no cover using "the distraction of combat". However, combat is explicitly NOT a distraction in 5e that would make it possible for character to move without being noticed.
You can certainly roleplay moving sneakily but there won't be any mechanical advantage from doing so when everyone in the room can see you clearly.
Again, thank you for copying and pasting rules I already knew.
So nobody can challenge a rule? That’s just not allowed in a role playing game? Nobody can question the DM with a reasonable and thoughtful strategy? A fireball to the face wouldn’t be considered a slight distraction? Enemies are unequivocally astute and aware of their surroundings at all times, even though a battle takes place in time frames that equal seconds?
---
If your goal is to stealth in a narrative sense with no mechanical benefit, you have to tell the DM that or they will assume you're trying to get a mechanical benefit.
No one said that. Obviously you did ask your DM. They said 'no'. That's where it ends unless they are mistaken on the rules -- which they are not in this case.
In combat, generally, yes -- that is correct.
Pretty much this.
My interpretation of the circumstances had me thinking you were trying to use the Stealth skill to move unseen into an advantageous position for a Sneak Attack with Advantage due to being "unnoticed by the enemy".
If all you were trying to do was slip behind the enemy as part of the narrative but with no mechanical advantage to it then that needs to be made clear otherwise it's very easily misunderstood.