As i said, you can nornally notice other creatures within the limit of your perception established by the DM so if distance limit your perception somehow, you usually can't perceive tother creatures wether invisible or not. You don't need to look at the entire continent, you normally don't perceive creatures in the very next dungeon rooms!
But in combat, you're usually within perception distance according to rules such as Surprise or Hiding, unless the DM would specifically decide you aren't, in which case being invisible or not is irrelevant.
What is getting glossed over is that there are millions or even billions of creatures in the world. They're not all in the act if taking the hide action. Yet you do not automatically know where they are.
But somehow you argue that is the case?
Why do you keep bringing this up? Of course no one is arguing in favor of this and this argument is irrelevant for almost all situations that come up in a D&D game. As Plaguescarred has already mentioned multiple times now and I have also mentioned that your senses have certain ranges or limits of distance with which they are effective for your perception. There are very few rules and guidelines which specify exactly what these limits are and they can be affected by various environmental factors. Ultimately, the DM has to determine these ranges.
There is one little place in Xanathar's where some relationships between distance, volume level and perception scores are suggested in terms of what might wake up a sleeping creature. There is also a DM screen that exists somewhere that lists various ranges of distances where adversaries are likely to "notice each other", broken down by terrain type. Depending on what else is going on enemies might see each other before they can hear each other or vice versa. These outer range limits are determined by the DM. But once you are within these limits it is the default that you can see an enemy that is in plain sight and you can hear an enemy that is not attempting to be stealthy. In order to become and remain unseen and unheard you need to Hide. That's just how it works in 5e. It is a simplified system that isn't perfect for every situation.
I'm sorry but that's just not true. You can't see an enemy behind a wall or in a different room just because they happen to be within some hypthetical vision/hearing range.
And what exactly is this range? From which page are we pulling this vision/hearing-range-rule?
Look, it is very simple. Your DM determines what you can see or hear. There is no hearing/seeing range rule. And you are absolutely not assumed to have Blindsense nor can pinpoint the exact location of creatures you can't even see.
Not unless your DM determines they made enough noise or left tracks or attack. Then you can know where they are.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
You can't see creatures invisible or beyond walls wether they're within perception distance or not.
Perception distance is determined by DM's ruling or optional rules. In combat thought, you usually are according to various rules mechanics such as Surprise or Hiding that specifically calls for Perception check..
Blindsight let you see, which is different than when you can only detect noise, tracks and location of an invisible creature, because it enable you to use effects targeting a creature you can see.
Using perception distance or blindsight as counter-argument is nonsequetur.
Look, it is very simple. The Invisible condition say such creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves, provided it is within perception distance that is to say. If no one is near enought to perceive you , nobody will hear and see you or your tracks wether you're invisible or visible.
Being silent requires no effort. Objects are typically really silent. Rocks? Not making a whole lot of noise.
No.
As usual, the DM makes common sense ruling for what makes a lot of noise and what doesn't.
If you have a vendetta against the invisibility condition, and you're the DM, you're totally free to say people make an absurd amount of noise while they're invisible. That sonehow being invisible is like having an amplifier for every sound you make.
That is your prerogative.
But if you don't have a vendetta against the invisibility condition, and you're the DM, you're well within your rights to use common sense for how much noise things make. This is the expected behaviour as described within the 5e guidance to DMs.
I agree. A DM makes a ruling. However, your description seems to be saying that invisible creatures are naturally quiet or perhaps everything is naturally quiet which I think is far from true.
Characters in D&D typically carry lots of metal weapons. They have belts, boot buckles, helmets, metal armor, leather armor that likely creaks when the creature moves .. they are typically carrying substantial packs of gear ... 40, 50, 60 pounds if my character sheets are typical :). If a creature/character with all of that sort of stuff moves without putting a lot of effort into being quiet (hide action) then, unless there is a lot of ambient noise, they will be heard.
In my opinion, the default condition of a creature's location being known unless they take an explicit action to hide ... be quiet, not leave obvious tracks, in other words be stealthy ... makes sense since the characters in D&D as well as most of the monsters the characters will encounter are noisy.
However, in a noisy background, or for a creature that is far away, or for a creature that is particularly quiet or unlikely to leave significant traces of its presence (invisible stalker) then it makes sense for a DM to rule that an invisible creature is hidden without taking the hide action because they are unseen and unheard. (though the DM should make that extremely clear to the players since they are likely used to being aware of where creatures are).
Great point Haravikk! I agree with this. If there is a small area behind full cover but no where else to move from there then that situation should fall under this section of the rules for Hiding:
The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding.
The DM should simply explain that this rock will provide full cover but that a creature cannot attempt to Hide there during the battle since the creature's location would still be known.
I actually disagree. :)
This is D&D. It is magical fantasy. If you can no longer see or hear the person behind the rock, you no longer know whether they are there or not. Even if that rock is in the middle of an empty field.
The creature could have turned invisible and walked away.
The creature could have used Misty Step
The creature could have used Dimension Door
There could be a tunnel hidden behind the rock which the creature is using to come up behind you.
In all these cases, the rock provides the total cover needed for the creature to become hidden and their actions unknown.
However, a DM that says the creature can't hide behind the rock then they are saying that if the creature turns invisible then they will be heard as they walk away. If the creature enters a tunnel then the other creature can tell they have moved somewhere else. If they cast a spell then the creature is heard somewhere else alerting the observer to the use of the spell. All of these because the DM decides that a creature can't hide behind total cover the way RAW indicates that they can.
Keep in mind that hiding is just unseen and unheard. If you can't be seen and take actions to be unheard then you are hidden. The place you are hiding might be obvious but the observer has lost track of what you are doing or where exactly you might be. They don't notice immediately when you appear from behind the total cover and make a ranged attack because although they might have known that your were still behind the rock, they have to pay attention to what is going on everywhere else and can't stare at the rock waiting to see when or if the creature behind it decides to pop out. On the other hand, if the creature behind the rock is not hidden, then they are heard when they begin to make an attack alerting the observer to take whatever defensive actions might help.
Anyway, that is how I read the rules on being hidden and how they apply to attacks made by a rogue for example using their bonus action to try to hide behind total cover and then pop out to make a ranged attack. If they aren't hidden then they don't benefit from being unseen when they expose themselves to make the attack since if they are visible, they are by definition not unseen.
The creature could have turned invisible and walked away.
Except being invisible explicitly does not make you undetectable, only unseen, so you know they haven't walked away by virtue of not hearing them do that. If they instead go invisible on the other side of the rock and stay there then you can still go over and check if you want to, and attack the empty space if you suspect that they might be invisible.
The method of turning invisible also matters, because the invisibility spell for example has a vocal component meaning the act of turning invisible is audible without the use of Subtle Spell; the number of people who can turn invisible is relatively small, and the number who can do so silently is smaller still, so there's no reason for a creature to assume that unless they already know you can do it.
You could actually make the same argument using a creature standing in the open (no rock required); because they might have cast mislead, should I assume that where they appear to be is where they actually are? The answer is yes; the chances of them having done that are low, and the chance of them doing it without me noticing them doing something (somatic component) are lower still. Yes magic exists in D&D, so strange things can happen, but even though magic is more common doesn't mean that proper spells are an everyday occurrence; even in a dense city like Baldur's Gate or Waterdeep, the amount of magic on display is relatively limited, and more enchantment based than people casting spells all the time.
The creature could have used Misty Step
The creature could have used Dimension Door
Both dimension door and misty step also have vocal components, meaning it makes noise unless they happen to have Subtle Spell, plus dimension door requires the action so only a Goblin or Rogue could have hidden before doing it silently. So again the chances of an enemy being a Rogue with Subtle Spell (or similar) is way too low for a creature to reasonably assume this.
There could be a tunnel hidden behind the rock which the creature is using to come up behind you.
Again you know this isn't the case because you'd have heard them clambering into a tunnel, and through the tunnel etc., because they're not hiding; you need to Hide to reduce the noise you're making, otherwise you will be audible doing anything like this.
A creature not hearing you clamber through a tunnel means one of two things; either you did it silently (because you hid first), or you didn't do it. And since you're talking about moving behind the rock and not hiding, then a creature has a very easy way to check.
In all these cases, the rock provides the total cover needed for the creature to become hidden and their actions unknown.
All it does is mean you don't see them or what they're doing, but unless what they're doing is silent you can still hear them doing things behind the rock. And even if they can't, they still saw and/or heard you go behind the rock, so they know that's where you're most likely to be, and can go look.
If you want your location to be unknown you need break line of sight and then move away silently (which is exactly what the Hide action is for). It's not enough to be behind the rock, you need to disappear behind the rock and then not be behind the rock anymore, without the enemy seeing or hearing you relocate. Only then is your location truly unknown (while the enemy still thinks you're behind the rock).
Otherwise they'll just go "well they're probably still behind the rock, so I'll go over there and look", at which point they'll just confirm they knew where you were all along, since you'll be there. Because the difference between just going behind the rock, and going behind the rock and doing something to relocate, is that you didn't relocate so you're still exactly where they know you to be.
Another way of thinking about is that unless a creature is given a good reason to think otherwise, it always thinks it knows where you are; the purpose of hiding is to make them wrong about it. 😉
That's not to say there aren't other reasonable ways you could confound a creature with illusions, distractions etc. but these all require extra steps, and your DM might still choose to resolve them as a hiding attempt.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
You can't see creatures invisible or beyond walls wether they're within perception distance or not.
Perception distance is determined by DM's ruling or optional rules. In combat thought, you usually are according to various rules mechanics such as Surprise or Hiding that specifically calls for Perception check..
Blindsight let you see, which is different than when you can only detect noise, tracks and location of an invisible creature, because it enable you to use effects targeting a creature you can see.
Using perception distance or blindsight as counter-argument is nonsequetur.
Look, it is very simple. The Invisible condition say such creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves, provided it is within perception distance that is to say. If no one is near enought to perceive you , nobody will hear and see you or your tracks wether you're invisible or visible.
No... Blindsense.
BlindSENSE.
You guys keep claiming that everyone has blindsense.
Actually, you keep claiming everyone has a superbuffed version of blindsense with no range.
"Blindsense
Starting at 14th level, if you are able to hear, you are aware of the location of any hidden or invisible creature within 10 feet of you."
The 14th level Rogue ability. You keep saying everyone has this, the invisibility half, and simply by default with no range while in combat.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
There is also an 18th Ranger ability called Feral Senses that does what you claim everyone can do by default...
"You are also aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened."
The rules do not support your interpretation.
Instead, the rules are clear, your DM is the arbiter. He decides when you might or might not detect the location of an invisible creature. If it makes enough noise this can happen. If it leaves tracks this can happen. If it attacks this happens automatically.
The DM determines these things.
And hey, if you get to level 18 in Ranger, or 14th in Rogue, then and only then do you automatically know the location of invisible creatures. And even then only within 30 or 10 feet respectively.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
David42, you've changed my mind on the rock thing. You're right, there's no reason for a DM to prevent a creature from trying to hide behind a rock.
At some point I'm hoping we can discuss this other idea further which you've mentioned in other threads -- I might consider starting a new thread about it:
Anyway, that is how I read the rules on being hidden and how they apply to attacks made by a rogue for example using their bonus action to try to hide behind total cover and then pop out to make a ranged attack. If they aren't hidden then they don't benefit from being unseen when they expose themselves to make the attack since if they are visible, they are by definition not unseen.
Right now I'm not convinced that this is what the rules actually say with respect to "popping out" to make a ranged attack, but I kind of like it. But maybe we can take this to another thread at some point.
There is also an 18th Ranger ability called Feral Senses that does what you claim everyone can do by default...
"You are also aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened."
You guys keep claiming that everyone has blindsense.
Actually, you keep claiming everyone has a superbuffed version of blindsense with no range.
"Blindsense
Starting at 14th level, if you are able to hear, you are aware of the location of any hidden or invisible creature within 10 feet of you."
The 14th level Rogue ability. You keep saying everyone has this, the invisibility half, and simply by default with no range while in combat.
They don't.
They don't. Blindsense ability let you hear and know the location of an invisible or hidden creature within range automatically, this without even a Wisdom (Perception) check so that's not what has been said here.
I'm not only saying that, the Devs have repeatedly said that in multiple places.
Rulewise, Being hidden is the by-the-book way to conceal your location and become unseen and unheard, not invisible. The DM can always make a ruling that an invisible creature is also unheard due to silence, loud ambiant noise or distraction but that be exception, not the norm.
If I’m invisible and I become visible when I shoot an arrow at a target, does hiding again require an action? Without a special ability, hiding in combat requires the Hide action.
Jeremy Crawford: When you're in invisible it doesn't mean your silent. If you really want to make sure people don't know where you are, you need to hide, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check and you're hoping that they are not only not gonna notice any visual traces of where you are but they are not gonna hear you
There is also an 18th Ranger ability called Feral Senses that does what you claim everyone can do by default...
"You are also aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened."
The rules do not support your interpretation.
Instead, the rules are clear, your DM is the arbiter. He decides when you might or might not detect the location of an invisible creature. If it makes enough noise this can happen. If it leaves tracks this can happen. If it attacks this happens automatically.
The DM determines these things.
And hey, if you get to level 18 in Ranger, or 14th in Rogue, then and only then do you automatically know the location of invisible creatures. And even then only within 30 or 10 feet respectively.
When the Dev was asked about Feral Sense ability it basically came down to being effortless, so even with loud noise or distraction no effort or check i assume would be required. This ability has always seen as very weak, and not an exemple of rule design. I certainly wouldn't use such feature as counter argument to general rules.
@Plaguescarred Is Feral Sense pointless?
@JeremyECrawford Feral Senses lets you detect an invisible creature within 30 feet of you that isn't hidden—no effort required.
But there is rule support for this interpretation from Unseen Attackers and Targets and the invisible condition.
So the DM can make any ruling despite what the rules or the Dev say, but it doesn't change the fact that these aspects are written or spoken.
So to resume an invisible creature is not impossible to see, hear and leaving no tracks, it's rather impossible to see but still make noise and leave tracks unless also hiding or other circumstances determined by the DM.
Invisible Condition: The creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.
Unseen Attackers and Targets: If you are hidden--both unseen and unheard--when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
I think it's safe to say that Feral Senses is a terrible feature; the 1st-level spell faerie fire does everything that feature does but better, because it's usable in more situations and can benefit the entire party, Swarmkeeper Rangers even get it for free, others need a feat or multiclass iirc.
Classes having features that are bad shouldn't be used to warp reality around other rules that are clear in how they function; all Feral Senses is evidence of is that bad feature are bad.
This is why in UA Playtest 6 Rangers just straight up get 30 foot blindsight instead, because that does the same thing but much, much better, and is applicable in far more situations, including ones you can cause on purpose so you can actually choose to capitalise on the feature.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The creature could have turned invisible and walked away.
Except being invisible explicitly does not make you undetectable, only unseen, so you know they haven't walked away by virtue of not hearing them do that. If they instead go invisible on the other side of the rock and stay there then you can still go over and check if you want to, and attack the empty space if you suspect that they might be invisible.
The method of turning invisible also matters, because the invisibility spell for example has a vocal component meaning the act of turning invisible is audible without the use of Subtle Spell; the number of people who can turn invisible is relatively small, and the number who can do so silently is smaller still, so there's no reason for a creature to assume that unless they already know you can do it.
You could actually make the same argument using a creature standing in the open (no rock required); because they might have cast mislead, should I assume that where they appear to be is where they actually are? The answer is yes; the chances of them having done that are low, and the chance of them doing it without me noticing them doing something (somatic component) are lower still. Yes magic exists in D&D, so strange things can happen, but even though magic is more common doesn't mean that proper spells are an everyday occurrence; even in a dense city like Baldur's Gate or Waterdeep, the amount of magic on display is relatively limited, and more enchantment based than people casting spells all the time.
The creature could have used Misty Step
The creature could have used Dimension Door
Both dimension door and misty step also have vocal components, meaning it makes noise unless they happen to have Subtle Spell, plus dimension door requires the action so only a Goblin or Rogue could have hidden before doing it silently. So again the chances of an enemy being a Rogue with Subtle Spell (or similar) is way too low for a creature to reasonably assume this.
There could be a tunnel hidden behind the rock which the creature is using to come up behind you.
Again you know this isn't the case because you'd have heard them clambering into a tunnel, and through the tunnel etc., because they're not hiding; you need to Hide to reduce the noise you're making, otherwise you will be audible doing anything like this.
A creature not hearing you clamber through a tunnel means one of two things; either you did it silently (because you hid first), or you didn't do it. And since you're talking about moving behind the rock and not hiding, then a creature has a very easy way to check.
In all these cases, the rock provides the total cover needed for the creature to become hidden and their actions unknown.
All it does is mean you don't see them or what they're doing, but unless what they're doing is silent you can still hear them doing things behind the rock. And even if they can't, they still saw and/or heard you go behind the rock, so they know that's where you're most likely to be, and can go look.
If you want your location to be unknown you need break line of sight and then move away silently (which is exactly what the Hide action is for). It's not enough to be behind the rock, you need to disappear behind the rock and then not be behind the rock anymore, without the enemy seeing or hearing you relocate. Only then is your location truly unknown (while the enemy still thinks you're behind the rock).
Otherwise they'll just go "well they're probably still behind the rock, so I'll go over there and look", at which point they'll just confirm they knew where you were all along, since you'll be there. Because the difference between just going behind the rock, and going behind the rock and doing something to relocate, is that you didn't relocate so you're still exactly where they know you to be.
Another way of thinking about is that unless a creature is given a good reason to think otherwise, it always thinks it knows where you are; the purpose of hiding is to make them wrong about it. 😉
That's not to say there aren't other reasonable ways you could confound a creature with illusions, distractions etc. but these all require extra steps, and your DM might still choose to resolve them as a hiding attempt.
I think missed the point a bit. I also think we interpret hiding a little differently.
1) First the point :
If a DM says that it isn't possible to hide behind a rock even though the creature has total cover ...
then if there happens to be a tunnel there that you are unaware of then you do hear the character entering the tunnel because they weren't allowed to hide because the DM said so. On the other hand, if they were allowed to hide, the creature could enter the tunnel and you would continue to be unaware that a tunnel was there.
In terms of the various spells ...
How loud the verbal component of a spell needs to be and whether it can be heard and at what distance is entirely a DM call. Most folks agree that the verbal component is not a whisper and not a shout. However, something quietly spoken, in the midst of a battle, from behind a rock 30' away becomes entirely a DM call as to whether the spellcasting components are perceptible or sufficiently loud to cast a spell. In addition, casting spells from magic items allows them to be cast without any components.
DMG: "The spell is cast at the lowest possible spell and caster level, doesn’t expend any of the user’s spell slots, and requires no components unless the item’s description says otherwise."
No components includes verbal ones.
There are many reasons why a spell might be perceived. However, if the DM doesn't allow the creature to hide behind total cover then the location of a creature that turns invisible (say a rogue or goblin) remains known as they move from behind the rock.
Basically, all of the scenarios I mentioned are not strawmen - they are actual situations that could arise in which a character moves behind total cover and if they can't hide then their location remains known whether they turn invisible and walk away or duck into a hidden tunnel that the observer is unaware of ... I consider both of those to unrealistic rulings so I see no reason why a creature can't hide behind any total cover even if there is no obvious way to leave it.
2) The difference in how we interpret hiding ... "the purpose of hiding is to make them wrong about it. 😉" vs "the purpose of hiding is to make them unsure about it".
In your example, a creature that hides but doesn't move can't be hidden because they are still where the creature thought that they were so they won't be wrong.
But from a rules perspective ...
What is Hidden? Hidden is explicitly, in the rules, nothing more than being unseen and unheard. It does not mean that you couldn't make a reasonable guess about where a creature might be hiding based on where it was last seen. However, since it is unseen and unheard you are unable to determine where the creature might move to or have any indication of what action it might be taking. Being hidden in D&D does NOT mean - "Wow, they disappeared, they could be anywhere in the whole wide world" - in 5e Hidden means "I can't see or hear the creature. I don't KNOW where or what it might be doing. I can only guess." There might be a very good chance the creature is where you last saw it but that doesn't change the fact that the creature is unseen and unheard and thus IS hidden.
So, can you hide behind a rock in the middle of a field? RAW, yes. The rock makes you unseen and the stealth check ensures that you are unheard.
However, the DM might say the situation doesn't allow hiding if the creature looking had X-ray vision for example. Or perhaps you try and hide behind a table but haven't noticed the mirrors on the ceiling of the room that prevent you from being unseen. Or maybe the acoustics of the room are such that the smallest noise is amplified making it impossible (or almost impossible) to be silent. There are many circumstances in which a DM might rule that hiding isn't possible based on the circumstances. In my opinion though, taking an action to hide behind a rock in an open field to make yourself unseen and unheard and thus hidden (by the definition used in 5e) isn't one of them.
As i said, you can nornally notice other creatures within the limit of your perception established by the DM so if distance limit your perception somehow, you usually can't perceive tother creatures wether invisible or not. You don't need to look at the entire continent, you normally don't perceive creatures in the very next dungeon rooms!
But in combat, you're usually within perception distance according to rules such as Surprise or Hiding, unless the DM would specifically decide you aren't, in which case being invisible or not is irrelevant.
Why do you keep bringing this up? Of course no one is arguing in favor of this and this argument is irrelevant for almost all situations that come up in a D&D game. As Plaguescarred has already mentioned multiple times now and I have also mentioned that your senses have certain ranges or limits of distance with which they are effective for your perception. There are very few rules and guidelines which specify exactly what these limits are and they can be affected by various environmental factors. Ultimately, the DM has to determine these ranges.
There is one little place in Xanathar's where some relationships between distance, volume level and perception scores are suggested in terms of what might wake up a sleeping creature. There is also a DM screen that exists somewhere that lists various ranges of distances where adversaries are likely to "notice each other", broken down by terrain type. Depending on what else is going on enemies might see each other before they can hear each other or vice versa. These outer range limits are determined by the DM. But once you are within these limits it is the default that you can see an enemy that is in plain sight and you can hear an enemy that is not attempting to be stealthy. In order to become and remain unseen and unheard you need to Hide. That's just how it works in 5e. It is a simplified system that isn't perfect for every situation.
I'm sorry but that's just not true. You can't see an enemy behind a wall or in a different room just because they happen to be within some hypthetical vision/hearing range.
And what exactly is this range? From which page are we pulling this vision/hearing-range-rule?
Look, it is very simple. Your DM determines what you can see or hear. There is no hearing/seeing range rule. And you are absolutely not assumed to have Blindsense nor can pinpoint the exact location of creatures you can't even see.
Not unless your DM determines they made enough noise or left tracks or attack. Then you can know where they are.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
You can't see creatures invisible or beyond walls wether they're within perception distance or not.
Perception distance is determined by DM's ruling or optional rules. In combat thought, you usually are according to various rules mechanics such as Surprise or Hiding that specifically calls for Perception check..
Blindsight let you see, which is different than when you can only detect noise, tracks and location of an invisible creature, because it enable you to use effects targeting a creature you can see.
Using perception distance or blindsight as counter-argument is nonsequetur.
Look, it is very simple. The Invisible condition say such creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves, provided it is within perception distance that is to say. If no one is near enought to perceive you , nobody will hear and see you or your tracks wether you're invisible or visible.
I agree. A DM makes a ruling. However, your description seems to be saying that invisible creatures are naturally quiet or perhaps everything is naturally quiet which I think is far from true.
Characters in D&D typically carry lots of metal weapons. They have belts, boot buckles, helmets, metal armor, leather armor that likely creaks when the creature moves .. they are typically carrying substantial packs of gear ... 40, 50, 60 pounds if my character sheets are typical :). If a creature/character with all of that sort of stuff moves without putting a lot of effort into being quiet (hide action) then, unless there is a lot of ambient noise, they will be heard.
In my opinion, the default condition of a creature's location being known unless they take an explicit action to hide ... be quiet, not leave obvious tracks, in other words be stealthy ... makes sense since the characters in D&D as well as most of the monsters the characters will encounter are noisy.
However, in a noisy background, or for a creature that is far away, or for a creature that is particularly quiet or unlikely to leave significant traces of its presence (invisible stalker) then it makes sense for a DM to rule that an invisible creature is hidden without taking the hide action because they are unseen and unheard. (though the DM should make that extremely clear to the players since they are likely used to being aware of where creatures are).
I actually disagree. :)
This is D&D. It is magical fantasy. If you can no longer see or hear the person behind the rock, you no longer know whether they are there or not. Even if that rock is in the middle of an empty field.
The creature could have turned invisible and walked away.
The creature could have used Misty Step
The creature could have used Dimension Door
There could be a tunnel hidden behind the rock which the creature is using to come up behind you.
In all these cases, the rock provides the total cover needed for the creature to become hidden and their actions unknown.
However, a DM that says the creature can't hide behind the rock then they are saying that if the creature turns invisible then they will be heard as they walk away. If the creature enters a tunnel then the other creature can tell they have moved somewhere else. If they cast a spell then the creature is heard somewhere else alerting the observer to the use of the spell. All of these because the DM decides that a creature can't hide behind total cover the way RAW indicates that they can.
Keep in mind that hiding is just unseen and unheard. If you can't be seen and take actions to be unheard then you are hidden. The place you are hiding might be obvious but the observer has lost track of what you are doing or where exactly you might be. They don't notice immediately when you appear from behind the total cover and make a ranged attack because although they might have known that your were still behind the rock, they have to pay attention to what is going on everywhere else and can't stare at the rock waiting to see when or if the creature behind it decides to pop out. On the other hand, if the creature behind the rock is not hidden, then they are heard when they begin to make an attack alerting the observer to take whatever defensive actions might help.
Anyway, that is how I read the rules on being hidden and how they apply to attacks made by a rogue for example using their bonus action to try to hide behind total cover and then pop out to make a ranged attack. If they aren't hidden then they don't benefit from being unseen when they expose themselves to make the attack since if they are visible, they are by definition not unseen.
Except being invisible explicitly does not make you undetectable, only unseen, so you know they haven't walked away by virtue of not hearing them do that. If they instead go invisible on the other side of the rock and stay there then you can still go over and check if you want to, and attack the empty space if you suspect that they might be invisible.
The method of turning invisible also matters, because the invisibility spell for example has a vocal component meaning the act of turning invisible is audible without the use of Subtle Spell; the number of people who can turn invisible is relatively small, and the number who can do so silently is smaller still, so there's no reason for a creature to assume that unless they already know you can do it.
You could actually make the same argument using a creature standing in the open (no rock required); because they might have cast mislead, should I assume that where they appear to be is where they actually are? The answer is yes; the chances of them having done that are low, and the chance of them doing it without me noticing them doing something (somatic component) are lower still. Yes magic exists in D&D, so strange things can happen, but even though magic is more common doesn't mean that proper spells are an everyday occurrence; even in a dense city like Baldur's Gate or Waterdeep, the amount of magic on display is relatively limited, and more enchantment based than people casting spells all the time.
Both dimension door and misty step also have vocal components, meaning it makes noise unless they happen to have Subtle Spell, plus dimension door requires the action so only a Goblin or Rogue could have hidden before doing it silently. So again the chances of an enemy being a Rogue with Subtle Spell (or similar) is way too low for a creature to reasonably assume this.
Again you know this isn't the case because you'd have heard them clambering into a tunnel, and through the tunnel etc., because they're not hiding; you need to Hide to reduce the noise you're making, otherwise you will be audible doing anything like this.
A creature not hearing you clamber through a tunnel means one of two things; either you did it silently (because you hid first), or you didn't do it. And since you're talking about moving behind the rock and not hiding, then a creature has a very easy way to check.
All it does is mean you don't see them or what they're doing, but unless what they're doing is silent you can still hear them doing things behind the rock. And even if they can't, they still saw and/or heard you go behind the rock, so they know that's where you're most likely to be, and can go look.
If you want your location to be unknown you need break line of sight and then move away silently (which is exactly what the Hide action is for). It's not enough to be behind the rock, you need to disappear behind the rock and then not be behind the rock anymore, without the enemy seeing or hearing you relocate. Only then is your location truly unknown (while the enemy still thinks you're behind the rock).
Otherwise they'll just go "well they're probably still behind the rock, so I'll go over there and look", at which point they'll just confirm they knew where you were all along, since you'll be there. Because the difference between just going behind the rock, and going behind the rock and doing something to relocate, is that you didn't relocate so you're still exactly where they know you to be.
Another way of thinking about is that unless a creature is given a good reason to think otherwise, it always thinks it knows where you are; the purpose of hiding is to make them wrong about it. 😉
That's not to say there aren't other reasonable ways you could confound a creature with illusions, distractions etc. but these all require extra steps, and your DM might still choose to resolve them as a hiding attempt.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
No... Blindsense.
BlindSENSE.
You guys keep claiming that everyone has blindsense.
Actually, you keep claiming everyone has a superbuffed version of blindsense with no range.
"Blindsense
Starting at 14th level, if you are able to hear, you are aware of the location of any hidden or invisible creature within 10 feet of you."
The 14th level Rogue ability. You keep saying everyone has this, the invisibility half, and simply by default with no range while in combat.
They don't.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
There is also an 18th Ranger ability called Feral Senses that does what you claim everyone can do by default...
"You are also aware of the location of any invisible creature within 30 feet of you, provided that the creature isn’t hidden from you and you aren’t blinded or deafened."
The rules do not support your interpretation.
Instead, the rules are clear, your DM is the arbiter. He decides when you might or might not detect the location of an invisible creature. If it makes enough noise this can happen. If it leaves tracks this can happen. If it attacks this happens automatically.
The DM determines these things.
And hey, if you get to level 18 in Ranger, or 14th in Rogue, then and only then do you automatically know the location of invisible creatures. And even then only within 30 or 10 feet respectively.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
David42, you've changed my mind on the rock thing. You're right, there's no reason for a DM to prevent a creature from trying to hide behind a rock.
At some point I'm hoping we can discuss this other idea further which you've mentioned in other threads -- I might consider starting a new thread about it:
Right now I'm not convinced that this is what the rules actually say with respect to "popping out" to make a ranged attack, but I kind of like it. But maybe we can take this to another thread at some point.
Yeah . . . no one has claimed any such thing.
Nope. No one has claimed this either. Sorry.
They don't. Blindsense ability let you hear and know the location of an invisible or hidden creature within range automatically, this without even a Wisdom (Perception) check so that's not what has been said here.
I'm not only saying that, the Devs have repeatedly said that in multiple places.
Rulewise, Being hidden is the by-the-book way to conceal your location and become unseen and unheard, not invisible. The DM can always make a ruling that an invisible creature is also unheard due to silence, loud ambiant noise or distraction but that be exception, not the norm.
When the Dev was asked about Feral Sense ability it basically came down to being effortless, so even with loud noise or distraction no effort or check i assume would be required. This ability has always seen as very weak, and not an exemple of rule design. I certainly wouldn't use such feature as counter argument to general rules.
But there is rule support for this interpretation from Unseen Attackers and Targets and the invisible condition.
So the DM can make any ruling despite what the rules or the Dev say, but it doesn't change the fact that these aspects are written or spoken.
So to resume an invisible creature is not impossible to see, hear and leaving no tracks, it's rather impossible to see but still make noise and leave tracks unless also hiding or other circumstances determined by the DM.
I think it's safe to say that Feral Senses is a terrible feature; the 1st-level spell faerie fire does everything that feature does but better, because it's usable in more situations and can benefit the entire party, Swarmkeeper Rangers even get it for free, others need a feat or multiclass iirc.
Classes having features that are bad shouldn't be used to warp reality around other rules that are clear in how they function; all Feral Senses is evidence of is that bad feature are bad.
This is why in UA Playtest 6 Rangers just straight up get 30 foot blindsight instead, because that does the same thing but much, much better, and is applicable in far more situations, including ones you can cause on purpose so you can actually choose to capitalise on the feature.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I think missed the point a bit. I also think we interpret hiding a little differently.
1) First the point :
If a DM says that it isn't possible to hide behind a rock even though the creature has total cover ...
then if there happens to be a tunnel there that you are unaware of then you do hear the character entering the tunnel because they weren't allowed to hide because the DM said so. On the other hand, if they were allowed to hide, the creature could enter the tunnel and you would continue to be unaware that a tunnel was there.
In terms of the various spells ...
How loud the verbal component of a spell needs to be and whether it can be heard and at what distance is entirely a DM call. Most folks agree that the verbal component is not a whisper and not a shout. However, something quietly spoken, in the midst of a battle, from behind a rock 30' away becomes entirely a DM call as to whether the spellcasting components are perceptible or sufficiently loud to cast a spell. In addition, casting spells from magic items allows them to be cast without any components.
DMG: "The spell is cast at the lowest possible spell and caster level, doesn’t expend any of the user’s spell slots, and requires no components unless the item’s description says otherwise."
No components includes verbal ones.
There are many reasons why a spell might be perceived. However, if the DM doesn't allow the creature to hide behind total cover then the location of a creature that turns invisible (say a rogue or goblin) remains known as they move from behind the rock.
Basically, all of the scenarios I mentioned are not strawmen - they are actual situations that could arise in which a character moves behind total cover and if they can't hide then their location remains known whether they turn invisible and walk away or duck into a hidden tunnel that the observer is unaware of ... I consider both of those to unrealistic rulings so I see no reason why a creature can't hide behind any total cover even if there is no obvious way to leave it.
2) The difference in how we interpret hiding ... "the purpose of hiding is to make them wrong about it. 😉" vs "the purpose of hiding is to make them unsure about it".
In your example, a creature that hides but doesn't move can't be hidden because they are still where the creature thought that they were so they won't be wrong.
But from a rules perspective ...
What is Hidden? Hidden is explicitly, in the rules, nothing more than being unseen and unheard. It does not mean that you couldn't make a reasonable guess about where a creature might be hiding based on where it was last seen. However, since it is unseen and unheard you are unable to determine where the creature might move to or have any indication of what action it might be taking. Being hidden in D&D does NOT mean - "Wow, they disappeared, they could be anywhere in the whole wide world" - in 5e Hidden means "I can't see or hear the creature. I don't KNOW where or what it might be doing. I can only guess." There might be a very good chance the creature is where you last saw it but that doesn't change the fact that the creature is unseen and unheard and thus IS hidden.
So, can you hide behind a rock in the middle of a field? RAW, yes. The rock makes you unseen and the stealth check ensures that you are unheard.
However, the DM might say the situation doesn't allow hiding if the creature looking had X-ray vision for example. Or perhaps you try and hide behind a table but haven't noticed the mirrors on the ceiling of the room that prevent you from being unseen. Or maybe the acoustics of the room are such that the smallest noise is amplified making it impossible (or almost impossible) to be silent. There are many circumstances in which a DM might rule that hiding isn't possible based on the circumstances. In my opinion though, taking an action to hide behind a rock in an open field to make yourself unseen and unheard and thus hidden (by the definition used in 5e) isn't one of them.