Once again, nobody is telling me what I am doing behind cover that makes the enemy forget that I am there. You just say if I go behind a column, the enemy knows I'm there. If I go behind a column and Hide, the enemy doesn't know I'm there. What am I doing to wipe their memory?
For the "hiding is an ongoing activity" claim, wouldn't popping out of cover end my "hiding" (not a term used anywhere in the PHB or DMG, only "Hide" and "hidden"), making my attacks normal now? Because now I'm attacking, I'm not hiding. Are there other homebrew things that end the Hidden condition not spelled out in the rules? Because all it says is: making loud noise, attacking, casting a V component spell, or being found (which you say only happens if an enemy takes the Search Action to pass a perception check or has a passive perception above your Stealth roll). Can you give me a rule on what else constitutes "being found"? Because you're saying: stepping out of cover to move end hiding, but stepping out of cover to attack doesn't; and these two just doing mesh.
I don't understand. Have you read my past several posts which each answer this question directly? Why would you say that no one is answering your question at this point? That's just false. You can attack while you are hiding. Although your hiding effort is ongoing, it does not consume your action on every turn to make this effort.
It's impossible for an enemy to "forget" where you are because knowing where you are has nothing to do with memory. It has to do with currently detecting their presense by using one or more of your senses.
If you locate yourself behind a column in a position that provides you with full cover but without hiding, the enemy continues to know where you are by currently tracking you with their senses. In general, they can still hear where you are. But they might also continue to visually detect your presence if you are casting a shadow that they can see or you are kicking up dust and so on.
If instead you locate yourself behind a column in a position that provides you with full cover but you ARE hiding, the enemy does not know where you are because they cannot currently detect any sign of your presence at any particular location by using its senses. In this case, there is at least some chance that you are not actually there -- you might have fallen into a hole or teleported away, for example.
If you accept the recent Sage Advice explanation that the phrase "Line of Sight" in this context is not actual line of sight but is just some sort of scenario where you can see an enemy but they do not currently see you, then popping out to three-quarters cover does not end your hiding effort (unless the DM decides that this particular scenario is "not appropriate" for hiding). However, stepping out to half-cover or no cover will end your hiding effort simply because you are no longer hiding.
The four things that you mentioned which cause you to "stop being hidden immediately" apply "while hidden". Explicitly, the benefits of hiding only apply "while hidden". If you stop hiding then you are no longer hidden. None of these four things even matter at that point because you are just already not hidden. Nothing is actually stopping you from being hidden in this case. You have already stopped.
So, taking the Hide action means I no longer cast a shadow? And that the dust I kicked up from moving just disappears? If I'm not moving, how am I making sound for them to hear me? And why does taking this action make my body invisible to watchful enemies when I pop out to 3/4 cover, but completely visible if I pop out to 1/2 cover?
You are once again homebrewing a rule about "no longer hiding". Nowhere in the rule does it say it is an ongoing action, nowhere does it list "stop hiding" as something that stops the Hidden condition. It gives an explicit list. That would be like you saying that you are no longer on the ground because you just stopped being Prone. "It doesn't cost half of my movement, I just stopped being Prone." When the game spells out explicit things that end a condition, you can't just willy nilly add things that you like or think would make sense and call it RAW. Just like if someone cast Invisibility on you, you can't just choose to stop being Invisible. The duration has to run out, their concertation has to end, or you make an attack/deal damage/cast a spell.
PHB: "These are the things that stop you from being Hidden" You: "Well what if I just stop being Hidden?" PHB: "Did you do one of these explicit things?" You: "No, I just stopped." PHB: "..."
And if you're argument is " 'Line of Sight' is not actually line of sight" then you have given up any argument of natural language, and that Line of Sight must be an undefined game term that is not what natural language line of sight is.
I honestly wonder if contentious rules like this would benefit from the designers giving us a pure "intention" and then letting the community crowd source the actual rules language that would facilitate that intent.
I don't know that 'intention' is needed so much as a consistent and relevant answer.
Consider this question: "If I’m hidden and a creature with Blindsight or Truesight sees me, am I still hidden?". This is a question no one cares about. Everyone agrees that Blindsight or Truesight allow you to see through Invisible, including the Invisible from Hide. The actual question that needs answering is "Do abilities like Blindsight and Truesight allow a creature to skip Search checks they'd otherwise need to make?".
The Sage Advice is riddled with these sort of vague non-answers. Consider "How do I tell if something in the game is magical?". The answer they give merely restates rules no one is debating. The question people want answered isn't just a restatement of rules everyone agrees on - it's how to deal with the inconsistent and unreliable labeling of effects as 'magical'.
For example, consider Wild Shape. The base Wild Shape doesn't use the word 'magical' at all. However, the Circle of the Moon Wild Shape does. Does this mean that regular Druids can use Wild Shape in an anti-magic field... but Circle of the Moon Druids can't? (Note: Please don't use this as a jumping off point for an unrelated rules debate about Wild Shape - if you really want to argue about Wild Shape, start a new thread - here I'm just using it as an example of how these Sage Advice answers are maddeningly vague.)
I honestly wonder if contentious rules like this would benefit from the designers giving us a pure "intention" and then letting the community crowd source the actual rules language that would facilitate that intent.
That process would likely be a trainwreck. Mostly, what it calls for is someone who actually specializes in writing rules (which is a species of technical writing).
I don't know if this is what they intended, but here's one example of more clearly written:
With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you’re Heavily Obscured, behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover from all enemies, or otherwise out of sight of all enemies. If you can see an enemy, you can discern whether you are able to hide from it.
On a successful check, you are hidden. While hidden, you are invisible and inaudible. Make a note of the DC, which is the DC for a creature to find you with an search (perception) test, or with passive perception (no action required).
You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you, you make an attack roll, you cast a spell with a Verbal component, you lose any of the prerequisites for the hide action, or you take any other action that would obviously make you noticed.
I honestly wonder if contentious rules like this would benefit from the designers giving us a pure "intention" and then letting the community crowd source the actual rules language that would facilitate that intent.
That process would likely be a trainwreck. Mostly, what it calls for is someone who actually specializes in writing rules (which is a species of technical writing).
I don't know if this is what they intended, but here's one example of more clearly written:
With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you’re Heavily Obscured, behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover from all enemies, or otherwise out of sight of all enemies. If you can see an enemy, you can discern whether you are able to hide from it.
On a successful check, you are hidden. While hidden, you are invisible and inaudible. Make a note of the DC, which is the DC for a creature to find you with an search (perception) test, or with passive perception (no action required).
You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you, you make an attack roll, you cast a spell with a Verbal component, you lose any of the prerequisites for the hide action, or you take any other action that would obviously make you noticed.
I agree that the initial conversation around it would have a large amount of contrary and unusable text, but there are technical writers out there and like I said, this would only be for rules where they tried, and failed, to make it clear what you could and couldn't do. This is one of them.
That there is a debate about whether the Hide rules allow you to ever make a sneak attack (or hide at all behind 3/4 cover), as written, is a problem with the written rules.
I imagined it something like this:
1. We want you to be able to hide and remain hidden as long as you are obscured by 3/4 cover or better. 2. We want you to be able to start a turn hidden and use that state to apply sneak attack for rogues (ranged only? melee? movement allowed?). 3. We want the hidden state to only apply if you are hidden from... (one foe? all foes? all creatures? something else?). 4. We want the hidden state to drop when you move in such a way that you could be easily found. 5. Etc.
Then, we would workshop the language that would actually accomplish this. I imagine the majority of people that would actually enjoy this sort of thing would actually be somewhat proficient in it.
Bear in mind that this is a dev team that has never understood that there's a difference between darkness (transparent, obscures vision into it but does not affect seeing through or out) and dense fog (opaque, obscures vision into, through, or out of it).
The biggest problem with hiding is the entire thing is built on some faulty ground. The all or nothing approach of being hidden, vs not being hidden. As a trait of yours.
Instead, whether or not you are detected should be a condition of the observer. They're the ones who are changing: Either aware or not aware of your location/presence.
All the problems are an extension of this incorrect starting point.
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.
Then, we would workshop the language that would actually accomplish this. I imagine the majority of people that would actually enjoy this sort of thing would actually be somewhat proficient in it.
LOL it would turn into a 100 page argument with no resolution. Just look at the ranger discussion posts when people offer up their version of the ranger.
With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you’re Heavily Obscured, behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover from all enemies, or otherwise out of sight of all enemies. If you can see an enemy, you can discern whether you are able to hide from it.
On a successful check, you are hidden. While hidden, you are invisible and inaudible. Make a note of the DC, which is the DC for a creature to find you with an search (perception) test, or with passive perception (no action required).
You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you, you make an attack roll, you cast a spell with a Verbal component, you lose any of the prerequisites for the hide action, or you take any other action that would obviously make you noticed.
This is even worse than what we have, now there are three clauses that are undefined for people to argue over: "an enemy finds you" - see every thread about the current stealth rules. "that would obviously make you noticed" - Does grappling obviously make you noticed? Does throwing caltrops on the group obviously make you noticed? "otherwise out of sight of all enemies" - same problem with 3/4 cover is that out of sight or no? what about if I throw a sheet over myself? I'm out of sight aren't I? What about if I'm underwater? What about if put up an illusion between me and the enemies?
Plus there's the whole issue of Wall of Force providing Total Cover but being transparent - by your rules someone could hide even if there was nothing between them and the enemies other than an invisible Wall of Force...
With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you’re Heavily Obscured, behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover from all enemies, or otherwise out of sight of all enemies. If you can see an enemy, you can discern whether you are able to hide from it.
On a successful check, you are Hidden. While Hidden, you gain the invisible condition and inaudible. Make a note of the DC, which is the DC for a creature to find you with an search (perception) test, or with passive perception (no action required). Advantage or Disadvantage should be applied to this roll (or as bonuses to Passive checks) as appropriate for the conditions.
You stop being Hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you, an enemy succeeds in their Search check, you make an attack roll, you cast a spell with a Verbal component, you lose any of the prerequisites for the hide action, or you take any other action that would obviously make you noticed.
You'll notice I've subtracted all the vague and subjective language in favor of talking about specific game mechanics.
You'll notice I've subtracted all the vague and subjective language in favor of talking about specific game mechanics.
Of the things you point out
or otherwise out of sight of all enemies -- that's a specific 'DM discretion' clause. Unless the word count is greatly exploded, something of the sort is needed.
and inaudible -- that's for "unseen and unheard". It could be changed to 'unheard'.
you make a sound louder than a whisper -- another 'DM discretion' clause.
an enemy finds you -- as reworded, this does in fact mean find as described in the previous paragraph.
you take any other action that would obviously make you noticed -- another 'DM discretion' clause.
"DM Discretion" clauses are part of the problem. DM discretion is assumed by general rule. Mentioning it specifically is both unnecessary and confusing. The one time my version called "DM Discretion", it was only to clarify rules that exist elsewhere about Advantage/Disadvantage.
So, taking the Hide action means I no longer cast a shadow? And that the dust I kicked up from moving just disappears?
In a manner of speaking, yes. The Hide action is abstracting a deliberate process that you are taking to make sure that such things are not easily noticeable to an enemy. It is more than simply positioning yourself behind some sort of cover. It is persistently taking an active (not passive) approach to continuously take the steps that are necessary to prevent your enemies from automatically finding you. So, if you roll well, you might realize that a particular posture behind the column is casting a visible shadow and you then contort your body in such a way that this shadow is eliminated or blends in with other shadows or doesn't look so much like a humanoid shadow or whatever. Same with taking some actual steps to ensure that the various buckles on your armor do not jingle together when a slight gust of wind blows through, and so on and so forth. You are actively doing something called "hiding" on an ongoing basis which is more than just existing someplace with no additional effort.
If I'm not moving, how am I making sound for them to hear me?
There are all sorts of ways and reasons why you might be making a sound. The buckles on your armor might jingle together when a soft breeze blows through the area. You might subconsciously shift your weight from one foot to the other while wearing squeaky shoes. If we are talking about situations where you are not hiding then you might be having a conversation with someone or singing in the shower or coughing or laughing. If you are attempting to Hide, then you are probably making a deliberate effort to not do such obvious things, but the value of your die roll will determine how successful you are at muting the less obvious things. The sound of your breathing. The rustling of your clothes in the wind. Maybe another creature's passive perception is so high that it can hear your heart beating from a mile away and you'll never be able to roll a high enough Stealth value to be able to do anything about that. The possibilities are endless and in fact coming up with a creative reason why you were not quiet enough when you rolled terribly on your Stealth check might be part of the fun for some people.
And why does taking this action make my body invisible to watchful enemies when I pop out to 3/4 cover, but completely visible if I pop out to 1/2 cover?
The simple answer to this is because that's what the rules say. Plus, it appears that the intention was to correct a technical oversight that existed within the 2014 rules whereby it was never really technically possible to hide behind total cover and then actually attack anyone with advantage even though most people played that way and the rules in other places seemed to be written with the assumption that this was possible.
But to expand on this, I believe that the idea is that this is supposed to represent someone lurking behind a dense bush and then peering at you from a small slit between the branches and foliage, or an archer who is sneaking around on the battlements of a castle and he could pop out to fire from beside any one of dozens of obstacles, and so on.
In my opinion, the actual usefulness to an attacker in such a situation is meant to be adjudicated by the DM on a case-by-case basis by using the general rule for being able to hide under "appropriate circumstances". In your column example, if the enemy is 10 feet away and watching the column intently then it is perfectly reasonable for the DM to simply declare that this situation is not appropriate for hiding. You are still unseen, and you still have whichever level of cover is dictated by the rules for cover, but you wouldn't be able to hide due to DM fiat.
You are once again homebrewing a rule about "no longer hiding". Nowhere in the rule does it say it is an ongoing action, nowhere does it list "stop hiding" as something that stops the Hidden condition. It gives an explicit list. That would be like you saying that you are no longer on the ground because you just stopped being Prone. "It doesn't cost half of my movement, I just stopped being Prone." When the game spells out explicit things that end a condition, you can't just willy nilly add things that you like or think would make sense and call it RAW. Just like if someone cast Invisibility on you, you can't just choose to stop being Invisible. The duration has to run out, their concertation has to end, or you make an attack/deal damage/cast a spell.
PHB: "These are the things that stop you from being Hidden" You: "Well what if I just stop being Hidden?" PHB: "Did you do one of these explicit things?" You: "No, I just stopped." PHB: "..."
And if you're argument is " 'Line of Sight' is not actually line of sight" then you have given up any argument of natural language, and that Line of Sight must be an undefined game term that is not what natural language line of sight is.
First of all, very importantly, being "hidden" is not a Condition. This appears to be a deliberate design decision. Even Sage Advice makes a point to avoid using the term "condition", but instead it is a "game state":
If I’m hidden and a creature with Blindsight or Truesight sees me, am I still hidden?
No. Being hidden is a game state that gives you the Invisible condition. If a creature finds you, you’re no longer hidden and lose that condition, as explained in the Hide action
As such, we cannot apply the rules for how conditions are applied to creatures and the rules for their removal.
Likewise, being Hidden is not a spell effect. As such, we cannot apply the rules for durations of spells or other methods of ending spell effects.
The "Prone" example is not comparable at all. Becoming Prone and continuing to remain Prone are passive activities. It requires no resources at all to transition from standing normally to dropping Prone -- you just declare that you are doing it. However, by explicit rules text, it requires half of your movement to transition from being Prone back into a normal standing position. That requires actual, tangible effort. Standing up is an active activity. Remaining Prone is a passive one. This is the opposite of the activity of Hiding, which requires an ongoing active effort.
The reason why you won't find such details in the rule book is because before the rules are even written at all we all must begin with a general framework of common sense about how the real world works and then we apply those details to our storytelling throughout the game. We must all be on the same page about what words mean in the common English language so that when such words are used in the rules, we at least have a starting point.
On that note, I believe that the authors are acting under the assumption that we all know what the activity of "hiding" or "concealing yourself" means in the real world, at least in general. They probably assume that we have all played or are at least aware of the game of Hide-and-Seek or perhaps some other real-world scenario where hiding is involved. In the game of Hide-and-Seek, when someone else is looking for you, you must actively attempt to Hide. Once hidden, you must actively continue to hide. This is an ongoing activity that requires ongoing effort. Now, when mom rings the dinner bell and all of the kids who were playing the game run into the house and sit around the dinner table, then all of those kids are no longer hiding. They are no longer actively participating in the activity of hiding. If one of the players who is playing the role of one of those kids tries to claim that the rest of the kids around the table cannot see him because he still has an active and high Stealth roll value . . . that's just not going to fly. That Stealth roll which was made earlier is no longer valid. It is no longer valid because that kid is no longer hiding. His presence is currently obvious to the other kids around the table and no Search action is necessary for them to be able to find this kid since there is currently no active Stealth value to attempt to beat.
And that leads us to two other important points on the topic:
First, the Search action, by definition, is an attempt "to discern something that isn’t obvious". If something is obvious, then this action is not required. By extension, we should be able to realize that the point of the Hide action is to make your presence less obvious. When successful, you cross over the threshold from your location being obvious to not obvious and this is why the Search action becomes necessary in order to find you.
The second point is perhaps the most important of all. The 2024 DMG makes a deliberate point in an almost berating manner to potential "problem" players and Dungeon Masters that the rules of the game should not be intentionally twisted or interpreted in such a way that deliberately defies the intent or the spirit of the rule and/or goes against common sense or fun for the group. I don't have the exact wording in front of me so I'm paraphrasing, but everyone here should know to what I am referring here. It is part of our commonsense framework to assume that if you are actively performing some sort of activity and then you stop doing so, then you are no longer performing that activity. This applies to all manner of activities which require ongoing effort such as running, climbing, swimming, concentrating, speaking, and on and on and on. We do not need any rule to tell us this. Nor do we want our rule book to be filled up with so much unnecessary nonsense.
As mentioned earlier, there are events which "stop you" from hiding. If you stop hiding, that really is not something that "stops you" from hiding, so this really doesn't belong on that list. As per the above explanation, this really doesn't belong on any list. It's just common sense.
The problem with hide/hidden is it’s a skill challenge that DM’s hate to deal with.
Any time you attempt to Hide[Action] make a Dexterity[Stealth] roll. Compare this result to the passive Perception of any enemy creature not actively using the Search[Action]. Any creature actively using the Search[Action] makes a Perception(Wisdom) check. The higher of ether the creatures passive or active Perception[Search] total is used to determine if a creature can be seen.
Any creature wanting to remain hidden must make a Dexterity[Stealth] check when taking any action to remain hidden, including moving to a new location. DM discretion is advised based on situation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
They did not put passive perception into the hide rules because passive perception only is involved if the dm wants it to be involved. Passive checks are strictly and completely a DM's opinion/ The hide rules are a player facing set of requirements as the standard situation.
The DM uses passive perception only when the DM feels like a creature would passively notice someone. For some DMs, thats always, but for other DMs, they may determine that only a trained dog and the guard have chance of passively percieving, as everyone else is eating food.
by building it into the hide rules itself you force everyone to check passive perception of every 'enemy' in the map, even if they arent necessarily attentive. If the DM wants this its fine but it doesnt need to be mandated.
further more you would be bringing the concept of passive perception into the players world, when as of now, this is. DM facing rule. Players would also expect themselves to passively be checking for creatures all the time, because you built into the rule. Does the DM think the group of adventures engrossed in a discussion/argument about goblin culture get a passive check?
this was an issue in 2024, because while the passive check page said they were totally optional, the hide rules referenced them, and many a player was salty because the DM didnt seem to let them uses their passive stats enough.
Also, as much of all of us like to think we are good at rules, nothing written here to make it better, imo, makes it any better. New inconsistencies and issues arrise with every rewrite ive seen, or it changes little. I'd also say that as stated in the Sage Advice, ita bit of a fools errand to think you can write a rule for every situation imaginable with no judgement required, in a system which is meant to model reality, and almost any situation a player can imagine. Most games can achieve more tight rules by severely limiting how many different types of thing a player can do, as well as severely limiting what happens in the world. Chess is a great game, with tight rules, but it has very few possible interactions between players vs players vs world.
Also the thing to remember about stealth, and they forgot this in 2014, is that its meant to be a stand in for all activities related to being sneaky or unknown. Many of yall are too concerened with minutia, or preventing it from being 'powerful' and missing that stealth needs to exist and be useful in the world.
If your stealth system doesnt allow some basic things
sneaking past a doorway with people in it
sucker punching someone
picking a pocket
escaping the notice of a beast
eavesdropping
sniping someone from a far a secure location
using an arrow slit
being David Copperfield ( a magcian)
losing someone chasing you
its not actually doing its job, you will have created a world of fantasy where players cant do things people easily and commonly do in real life. 2014 stealth failed this test. Many of yall are heading in the same direction.
They did not put passive perception into the hide rules because passive perception only is involved if the dm wants it to be involved.
Passive Perception is not a DM's discretion rule, it's a poorly defined rule. Given that it's defined as "The DM uses this score when determining whether a creature notices something without consciously making a Wisdom (Perception) check", it's pretty clearly what you're supposed to use to decide whether something or someone can be found without a check.
If your stealth system doesnt allow some basic things
I would note that I was trying to get at what maybe the rules intended, not how I would actually make the rules work. However:
sneaking past a doorway with people in it (outside of combat, stealth works however the DM wants it to work. In combat, that should only work if no-one is looking in that direction, which gets into the issue of D&D 5e not having facing)
sucker punching someone (that's using stealth to get a bonus to initiative, combined with something like the assassin's Surprising Strikes ability))
picking a pocket (not a stealth check at all, that's sleight of hand)
escaping the notice of a beast (works normally with existing rules)
eavesdropping (works normally with existing rules)
sniping someone from a far a secure location (works normally with existing rules)
using an arrow slit (this gets into the 3/4 cover problem)
being David Copperfield ( a magcian) (that's sleight of hand)
losing someone chasing you (the chase rules use stealth. Oddly enough, they also use passive perception, not a fixed DC).
Players and DMs should be using both passive and active checks for a large amount of gameplay as certain situations can be quickly resolved by passive checks only. Active checks should be used for situations where the result can change the course of play, and used sparingly or specifically depending on style of play.
No set of rules can accurately account for every fringe case situation that covers them all, but a fundamental base set of if you do x you might get y has to start somewhere.
If something is going to try and hide, you almost need to be aware of who might be looking in the direction and/or location you want to hide in or behind. If no one is playing attention, attempting to hide should be easy, but if some are a bit more alert then others, then how alert they are should determine how successful you need to be to hide and not be seen.
A lot of that is both player and dm understanding that a passive skill ability check can set a relative level of difficulty and having to roll means tossing a bit of uncertainty into the mix, ether plot wise or to create a more non railroading experience.
And even if the active roll is less then the passive, the passive just means you can’t get worse than it already is.
For a player a simple passive perception check might get them a quick “no one seems to be looking, or no one is paying attention, …” type description.
Or you might get something like,” you watch for a minute and notice a few people scanning around looking for something, do you want to continue? Make a roll.”
A player should never have absolute certainty about trying anything stealth wise no matter how high they can get the ability. And if a player does go the high build route, that high ability should be used to offset the lower ability party members to average out the situational difficulty.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
They did not put passive perception into the hide rules because passive perception only is involved if the dm wants it to be involved.
Passive Perception is not a DM's discretion rule, it's a poorly defined rule. Given that it's defined as "The DM uses this score when determining whether a creature notices something without consciously making a Wisdom (Perception) check", it's pretty clearly what you're supposed to use to decide whether something or someone can be found without a check.
If your stealth system doesnt allow some basic things
I would note that I was trying to get at what maybe the rules intended, not how I would actually make the rules work. However:
sneaking past a doorway with people in it (outside of combat, stealth works however the DM wants it to work. In combat, that should only work if no-one is looking in that direction, which gets into the issue of D&D 5e not having facing)
sucker punching someone (that's using stealth to get a bonus to initiative, combined with something like the assassin's Surprising Strikes ability))
picking a pocket (not a stealth check at all, that's sleight of hand)
escaping the notice of a beast (works normally with existing rules)
eavesdropping (works normally with existing rules)
sniping someone from a far a secure location (works normally with existing rules)
using an arrow slit (this gets into the 3/4 cover problem)
being David Copperfield ( a magcian) (that's sleight of hand)
losing someone chasing you (the chase rules use stealth. Oddly enough, they also use passive perception, not a fixed DC).
it is literally only used when the DM decides that a creature might notice something passively, i dont mean its listed as optional, i mean inherent in passive perception is that the DM will decide based on their own judgement or feeling when it applies and when it doesnt.
its not like attacking a creature, or even the hide rules, which are things that a player can usually depend on or access.
The DM decides, do i think this creature would notice without conciously attempting? ok ill make a check. That can mean every creature or no creature, and they specifically seperated it from the hide rules.
its not for determining if something can be found without a check, because it replaces a check by definition. If you are using passive perception, you have already decided that a creature can find something without a check.
"'
Passive Checks
Ability checks normally represent a character’s active effort to accomplish something, but occasionally you need a passive measure of how good a character is at doing a thing. Passive Perception is the most common example. (references {Perception}) You can extend the concept of a passive ability check to other abilities and skills.
For example, if your game features a lot of social interaction, you can record each character’s Passive Insight score, calculated in much the same way as Passive Perception: 10 plus all modifiers that normally apply to a Wisdom (Insight) check."
also there is a heading on using passive checks when you dont want to alert the players. Its definitely a rule that requires input from the DM and is not always assumed to be in use. Otherwise everyone's minimum roll would be plus 10. The intent is, when the DM thinks its appropriate is when its appropriate, its not built into any rule.
they are checks like any other, and its up to the DM to determine when to use a passive check, or an active check. Passive perception is the most used one, but its still used when the DM thinks it applies
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So, taking the Hide action means I no longer cast a shadow? And that the dust I kicked up from moving just disappears? If I'm not moving, how am I making sound for them to hear me? And why does taking this action make my body invisible to watchful enemies when I pop out to 3/4 cover, but completely visible if I pop out to 1/2 cover?
You are once again homebrewing a rule about "no longer hiding". Nowhere in the rule does it say it is an ongoing action, nowhere does it list "stop hiding" as something that stops the Hidden condition. It gives an explicit list. That would be like you saying that you are no longer on the ground because you just stopped being Prone. "It doesn't cost half of my movement, I just stopped being Prone." When the game spells out explicit things that end a condition, you can't just willy nilly add things that you like or think would make sense and call it RAW. Just like if someone cast Invisibility on you, you can't just choose to stop being Invisible. The duration has to run out, their concertation has to end, or you make an attack/deal damage/cast a spell.
PHB: "These are the things that stop you from being Hidden" You: "Well what if I just stop being Hidden?" PHB: "Did you do one of these explicit things?" You: "No, I just stopped." PHB: "..."
And if you're argument is " 'Line of Sight' is not actually line of sight" then you have given up any argument of natural language, and that Line of Sight must be an undefined game term that is not what natural language line of sight is.
I honestly wonder if contentious rules like this would benefit from the designers giving us a pure "intention" and then letting the community crowd source the actual rules language that would facilitate that intent.
I don't know that 'intention' is needed so much as a consistent and relevant answer.
Consider this question: "If I’m hidden and a creature with Blindsight or Truesight sees me, am I still hidden?". This is a question no one cares about. Everyone agrees that Blindsight or Truesight allow you to see through Invisible, including the Invisible from Hide. The actual question that needs answering is "Do abilities like Blindsight and Truesight allow a creature to skip Search checks they'd otherwise need to make?".
The Sage Advice is riddled with these sort of vague non-answers. Consider "How do I tell if something in the game is magical?". The answer they give merely restates rules no one is debating. The question people want answered isn't just a restatement of rules everyone agrees on - it's how to deal with the inconsistent and unreliable labeling of effects as 'magical'.
For example, consider Wild Shape. The base Wild Shape doesn't use the word 'magical' at all. However, the Circle of the Moon Wild Shape does. Does this mean that regular Druids can use Wild Shape in an anti-magic field... but Circle of the Moon Druids can't? (Note: Please don't use this as a jumping off point for an unrelated rules debate about Wild Shape - if you really want to argue about Wild Shape, start a new thread - here I'm just using it as an example of how these Sage Advice answers are maddeningly vague.)
That process would likely be a trainwreck. Mostly, what it calls for is someone who actually specializes in writing rules (which is a species of technical writing).
I don't know if this is what they intended, but here's one example of more clearly written:
I agree that the initial conversation around it would have a large amount of contrary and unusable text, but there are technical writers out there and like I said, this would only be for rules where they tried, and failed, to make it clear what you could and couldn't do. This is one of them.
That there is a debate about whether the Hide rules allow you to ever make a sneak attack (or hide at all behind 3/4 cover), as written, is a problem with the written rules.
I imagined it something like this:
1. We want you to be able to hide and remain hidden as long as you are obscured by 3/4 cover or better.
2. We want you to be able to start a turn hidden and use that state to apply sneak attack for rogues (ranged only? melee? movement allowed?).
3. We want the hidden state to only apply if you are hidden from... (one foe? all foes? all creatures? something else?).
4. We want the hidden state to drop when you move in such a way that you could be easily found.
5. Etc.
Then, we would workshop the language that would actually accomplish this. I imagine the majority of people that would actually enjoy this sort of thing would actually be somewhat proficient in it.
Bear in mind that this is a dev team that has never understood that there's a difference between darkness (transparent, obscures vision into it but does not affect seeing through or out) and dense fog (opaque, obscures vision into, through, or out of it).
The biggest problem with hiding is the entire thing is built on some faulty ground. The all or nothing approach of being hidden, vs not being hidden. As a trait of yours.
Instead, whether or not you are detected should be a condition of the observer. They're the ones who are changing: Either aware or not aware of your location/presence.
All the problems are an extension of this incorrect starting point.
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.
While I agree that being hidden is a relative concept, not an absolute concept, I'm not sure how most of the problems relate to that.
LOL it would turn into a 100 page argument with no resolution. Just look at the ranger discussion posts when people offer up their version of the ranger.
This is even worse than what we have, now there are three clauses that are undefined for people to argue over:
"an enemy finds you" - see every thread about the current stealth rules.
"that would obviously make you noticed" - Does grappling obviously make you noticed? Does throwing caltrops on the group obviously make you noticed?
"otherwise out of sight of all enemies" - same problem with 3/4 cover is that out of sight or no? what about if I throw a sheet over myself? I'm out of sight aren't I? What about if I'm underwater? What about if put up an illusion between me and the enemies?
Plus there's the whole issue of Wall of Force providing Total Cover but being transparent - by your rules someone could hide even if there was nothing between them and the enemies other than an invisible Wall of Force...
I would actually write it:
With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you’re Heavily Obscured, behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover from all enemies
, or otherwise out of sight of all enemies. If you can see an enemy, you can discern whether you are able to hide from it.On a successful check, you are Hidden. While Hidden, you gain the invisible condition
and inaudible. Make a note of the DC, which is the DC for a creature to find you with an search (perception) test, or with passive perception (no action required). Advantage or Disadvantage should be applied to this roll (or as bonuses to Passive checks) as appropriate for the conditions.You stop being Hidden immediately after any of the following occurs:
you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you,an enemy succeeds in their Search check, you make an attack roll, you cast a spell with a Verbal component,you lose any of the prerequisites for the hide action, or you take any other action that would obviously make you noticed.You'll notice I've subtracted all the vague and subjective language in favor of talking about specific game mechanics.
Of the things you point out
"DM Discretion" clauses are part of the problem. DM discretion is assumed by general rule. Mentioning it specifically is both unnecessary and confusing. The one time my version called "DM Discretion", it was only to clarify rules that exist elsewhere about Advantage/Disadvantage.
In a manner of speaking, yes. The Hide action is abstracting a deliberate process that you are taking to make sure that such things are not easily noticeable to an enemy. It is more than simply positioning yourself behind some sort of cover. It is persistently taking an active (not passive) approach to continuously take the steps that are necessary to prevent your enemies from automatically finding you. So, if you roll well, you might realize that a particular posture behind the column is casting a visible shadow and you then contort your body in such a way that this shadow is eliminated or blends in with other shadows or doesn't look so much like a humanoid shadow or whatever. Same with taking some actual steps to ensure that the various buckles on your armor do not jingle together when a slight gust of wind blows through, and so on and so forth. You are actively doing something called "hiding" on an ongoing basis which is more than just existing someplace with no additional effort.
There are all sorts of ways and reasons why you might be making a sound. The buckles on your armor might jingle together when a soft breeze blows through the area. You might subconsciously shift your weight from one foot to the other while wearing squeaky shoes. If we are talking about situations where you are not hiding then you might be having a conversation with someone or singing in the shower or coughing or laughing. If you are attempting to Hide, then you are probably making a deliberate effort to not do such obvious things, but the value of your die roll will determine how successful you are at muting the less obvious things. The sound of your breathing. The rustling of your clothes in the wind. Maybe another creature's passive perception is so high that it can hear your heart beating from a mile away and you'll never be able to roll a high enough Stealth value to be able to do anything about that. The possibilities are endless and in fact coming up with a creative reason why you were not quiet enough when you rolled terribly on your Stealth check might be part of the fun for some people.
The simple answer to this is because that's what the rules say. Plus, it appears that the intention was to correct a technical oversight that existed within the 2014 rules whereby it was never really technically possible to hide behind total cover and then actually attack anyone with advantage even though most people played that way and the rules in other places seemed to be written with the assumption that this was possible.
But to expand on this, I believe that the idea is that this is supposed to represent someone lurking behind a dense bush and then peering at you from a small slit between the branches and foliage, or an archer who is sneaking around on the battlements of a castle and he could pop out to fire from beside any one of dozens of obstacles, and so on.
In my opinion, the actual usefulness to an attacker in such a situation is meant to be adjudicated by the DM on a case-by-case basis by using the general rule for being able to hide under "appropriate circumstances". In your column example, if the enemy is 10 feet away and watching the column intently then it is perfectly reasonable for the DM to simply declare that this situation is not appropriate for hiding. You are still unseen, and you still have whichever level of cover is dictated by the rules for cover, but you wouldn't be able to hide due to DM fiat.
First of all, very importantly, being "hidden" is not a Condition. This appears to be a deliberate design decision. Even Sage Advice makes a point to avoid using the term "condition", but instead it is a "game state":
As such, we cannot apply the rules for how conditions are applied to creatures and the rules for their removal.
Likewise, being Hidden is not a spell effect. As such, we cannot apply the rules for durations of spells or other methods of ending spell effects.
The "Prone" example is not comparable at all. Becoming Prone and continuing to remain Prone are passive activities. It requires no resources at all to transition from standing normally to dropping Prone -- you just declare that you are doing it. However, by explicit rules text, it requires half of your movement to transition from being Prone back into a normal standing position. That requires actual, tangible effort. Standing up is an active activity. Remaining Prone is a passive one. This is the opposite of the activity of Hiding, which requires an ongoing active effort.
The reason why you won't find such details in the rule book is because before the rules are even written at all we all must begin with a general framework of common sense about how the real world works and then we apply those details to our storytelling throughout the game. We must all be on the same page about what words mean in the common English language so that when such words are used in the rules, we at least have a starting point.
On that note, I believe that the authors are acting under the assumption that we all know what the activity of "hiding" or "concealing yourself" means in the real world, at least in general. They probably assume that we have all played or are at least aware of the game of Hide-and-Seek or perhaps some other real-world scenario where hiding is involved. In the game of Hide-and-Seek, when someone else is looking for you, you must actively attempt to Hide. Once hidden, you must actively continue to hide. This is an ongoing activity that requires ongoing effort. Now, when mom rings the dinner bell and all of the kids who were playing the game run into the house and sit around the dinner table, then all of those kids are no longer hiding. They are no longer actively participating in the activity of hiding. If one of the players who is playing the role of one of those kids tries to claim that the rest of the kids around the table cannot see him because he still has an active and high Stealth roll value . . . that's just not going to fly. That Stealth roll which was made earlier is no longer valid. It is no longer valid because that kid is no longer hiding. His presence is currently obvious to the other kids around the table and no Search action is necessary for them to be able to find this kid since there is currently no active Stealth value to attempt to beat.
And that leads us to two other important points on the topic:
First, the Search action, by definition, is an attempt "to discern something that isn’t obvious". If something is obvious, then this action is not required. By extension, we should be able to realize that the point of the Hide action is to make your presence less obvious. When successful, you cross over the threshold from your location being obvious to not obvious and this is why the Search action becomes necessary in order to find you.
The second point is perhaps the most important of all. The 2024 DMG makes a deliberate point in an almost berating manner to potential "problem" players and Dungeon Masters that the rules of the game should not be intentionally twisted or interpreted in such a way that deliberately defies the intent or the spirit of the rule and/or goes against common sense or fun for the group. I don't have the exact wording in front of me so I'm paraphrasing, but everyone here should know to what I am referring here. It is part of our commonsense framework to assume that if you are actively performing some sort of activity and then you stop doing so, then you are no longer performing that activity. This applies to all manner of activities which require ongoing effort such as running, climbing, swimming, concentrating, speaking, and on and on and on. We do not need any rule to tell us this. Nor do we want our rule book to be filled up with so much unnecessary nonsense.
As mentioned earlier, there are events which "stop you" from hiding. If you stop hiding, that really is not something that "stops you" from hiding, so this really doesn't belong on that list. As per the above explanation, this really doesn't belong on any list. It's just common sense.
The problem with hide/hidden is it’s a skill challenge that DM’s hate to deal with.
Any time you attempt to Hide[Action] make a Dexterity[Stealth] roll. Compare this result to the passive Perception of any enemy creature not actively using the Search[Action]. Any creature actively using the Search[Action] makes a Perception(Wisdom) check. The higher of ether the creatures passive or active Perception[Search] total is used to determine if a creature can be seen.
Any creature wanting to remain hidden must make a Dexterity[Stealth] check when taking any action to remain hidden, including moving to a new location. DM discretion is advised based on situation.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
They did not put passive perception into the hide rules because passive perception only is involved if the dm wants it to be involved. Passive checks are strictly and completely a DM's opinion/ The hide rules are a player facing set of requirements as the standard situation.
The DM uses passive perception only when the DM feels like a creature would passively notice someone. For some DMs, thats always, but for other DMs, they may determine that only a trained dog and the guard have chance of passively percieving, as everyone else is eating food.
by building it into the hide rules itself you force everyone to check passive perception of every 'enemy' in the map, even if they arent necessarily attentive. If the DM wants this its fine but it doesnt need to be mandated.
further more you would be bringing the concept of passive perception into the players world, when as of now, this is. DM facing rule. Players would also expect themselves to passively be checking for creatures all the time, because you built into the rule. Does the DM think the group of adventures engrossed in a discussion/argument about goblin culture get a passive check?
this was an issue in 2024, because while the passive check page said they were totally optional, the hide rules referenced them, and many a player was salty because the DM didnt seem to let them uses their passive stats enough.
Also, as much of all of us like to think we are good at rules, nothing written here to make it better, imo, makes it any better. New inconsistencies and issues arrise with every rewrite ive seen, or it changes little. I'd also say that as stated in the Sage Advice, ita bit of a fools errand to think you can write a rule for every situation imaginable with no judgement required, in a system which is meant to model reality, and almost any situation a player can imagine. Most games can achieve more tight rules by severely limiting how many different types of thing a player can do, as well as severely limiting what happens in the world. Chess is a great game, with tight rules, but it has very few possible interactions between players vs players vs world.
Also the thing to remember about stealth, and they forgot this in 2014, is that its meant to be a stand in for all activities related to being sneaky or unknown. Many of yall are too concerened with minutia, or preventing it from being 'powerful' and missing that stealth needs to exist and be useful in the world.
If your stealth system doesnt allow some basic things
sneaking past a doorway with people in it
sucker punching someone
picking a pocket
escaping the notice of a beast
eavesdropping
sniping someone from a far a secure location
using an arrow slit
being David Copperfield ( a magcian)
losing someone chasing you
its not actually doing its job, you will have created a world of fantasy where players cant do things people easily and commonly do in real life. 2014 stealth failed this test. Many of yall are heading in the same direction.
Passive Perception is not a DM's discretion rule, it's a poorly defined rule. Given that it's defined as "The DM uses this score when determining whether a creature notices something without consciously making a Wisdom (Perception) check", it's pretty clearly what you're supposed to use to decide whether something or someone can be found without a check.
I would note that I was trying to get at what maybe the rules intended, not how I would actually make the rules work. However:
Players and DMs should be using both passive and active checks for a large amount of gameplay as certain situations can be quickly resolved by passive checks only. Active checks should be used for situations where the result can change the course of play, and used sparingly or specifically depending on style of play.
No set of rules can accurately account for every fringe case situation that covers them all, but a fundamental base set of if you do x you might get y has to start somewhere.
If something is going to try and hide, you almost need to be aware of who might be looking in the direction and/or location you want to hide in or behind. If no one is playing attention, attempting to hide should be easy, but if some are a bit more alert then others, then how alert they are should determine how successful you need to be to hide and not be seen.
A lot of that is both player and dm understanding that a passive skill ability check can set a relative level of difficulty and having to roll means tossing a bit of uncertainty into the mix, ether plot wise or to create a more non railroading experience.
And even if the active roll is less then the passive, the passive just means you can’t get worse than it already is.
For a player a simple passive perception check might get them a quick “no one seems to be looking, or no one is paying attention, …” type description.
Or you might get something like,” you watch for a minute and notice a few people scanning around looking for something, do you want to continue? Make a roll.”
A player should never have absolute certainty about trying anything stealth wise no matter how high they can get the ability. And if a player does go the high build route, that high ability should be used to offset the lower ability party members to average out the situational difficulty.
" Darkvision doesn’t work in Magical darkness, and if something is magical, Never Trust it acts the same way as a non-magical version of that same thing!”- Discotech Mage over a cup of joe.
Oddly enough, the most comprehensive stealth rules are found in the rules for ending a chase.
it is literally only used when the DM decides that a creature might notice something passively, i dont mean its listed as optional, i mean inherent in passive perception is that the DM will decide based on their own judgement or feeling when it applies and when it doesnt.
its not like attacking a creature, or even the hide rules, which are things that a player can usually depend on or access.
The DM decides, do i think this creature would notice without conciously attempting? ok ill make a check. That can mean every creature or no creature, and they specifically seperated it from the hide rules.
its not for determining if something can be found without a check, because it replaces a check by definition. If you are using passive perception, you have already decided that a creature can find something without a check.
"'
Passive Checks
Ability checks normally represent a character’s active effort to accomplish something, but occasionally you need a passive measure of how good a character is at doing a thing. Passive Perception is the most common example. (references {Perception}) You can extend the concept of a passive ability check to other abilities and skills.
For example, if your game features a lot of social interaction, you can record each character’s Passive Insight score, calculated in much the same way as Passive Perception: 10 plus all modifiers that normally apply to a Wisdom (Insight) check."
also there is a heading on using passive checks when you dont want to alert the players. Its definitely a rule that requires input from the DM and is not always assumed to be in use. Otherwise everyone's minimum roll would be plus 10. The intent is, when the DM thinks its appropriate is when its appropriate, its not built into any rule.
they are checks like any other, and its up to the DM to determine when to use a passive check, or an active check. Passive perception is the most used one, but its still used when the DM thinks it applies