I like it, but would you allow something with blindsight or tremorsense to "see through" the hiding? If not, you would need to add stipulations (or a blanket statement about it). In my mind, the language of 2014 "unseen and unheard" was good because it explicitly told you that it wasn't just vision-based.
If we were completely discarding the way the current rules want to do it, I would start with
Unseen
An unseen creature has not or can not be seen. Unseen targets benefit from the rules for Unseen Attackers and Targets, and cannot be targeted by abilities that require sight. A creature that is Unseen by all enemies has advantage on initiative checks
Blind
A blind creature treats all creatures and targets as unseen, and automatically fails all rolls based on vision.
Blindsight
A creature with blindsight is unaffected by Blind, Invisible, and Obscured (from effects other than cover) when the target is within its radius.
Cover
Full cover heavily obscures creatures behind it.
Darkness
Darkness obscures creatures within it.
Heavily Obscured (Opaque, Area)
If an area is heavily obscured by an opaque effect, vision through, into, or out of the area is impossible (rendering creatures unseen).
Heavily Obscured (Relative)
A creature that is heavily obscured from another creature is treated as unseen by that creature.
Hidden (Relative)
A creature that is hidden from another creature is treated as unseen by that creature. Unlike being heavily obscured, it is possible to see the creature with an appropriate perception check.
Invisible
An invisible creature is treated as unseen by any creature that is unable to see invisible.
In the current rules, what makes the hidden state preferable to straight up invisibility is the ability to move quietly that the successful stealth check grants you (as per the definition of stealth).
Your proposed definition of Hidden doesn't mention that at all, and therefore every creature would always be able to estimate the location of any other creature, so long as their hearing is not impaired.
More like “ Hidden: after successfully hiding from a creature, you are considered ‘Unseen’ by that creature.”
Unseen: you can not be perceived by sight, and any feature that relies on sight is at disadvantage.
That still allows the invisible conditions OR when hidden to have flexibility in defining how you can still be seen and when you can not be seen.
Using blinded and some might think just hiding causes the opposing side to gain the blind condition.
It’s just better to actually define two conditions if your going to make a hidden condition, that way you can separate the invisible condition and slide the unseen condition in while defining how you would lose just the Unseen part.
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.
In the current rules, what makes the hidden state preferable to straight up invisibility is the ability to move quietly that the successful stealth check grants you (as per the definition of stealth).
Correction: what makes the hidden state preferable to straight up invisibility is undefined and could be nothing at all.
Yeah, I think since Blind and Deaf exists they are the perfect conditions to use.
Eg. You are Blind and Deaf to any creature that is hidden to you until you make a perception check, or passive perception, that exceeds their stealth check that allowed them to be hidden.
Then hidden would just describe ways it might end early. Yell. Cast spells. Etc.
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.
In the current rules, what makes the hidden state preferable to straight up invisibility is the ability to move quietly that the successful stealth check grants you (as per the definition of stealth).
Your proposed definition of Hidden doesn't mention that at all, and therefore every creature would always be able to estimate the location of any other creature, so long as their hearing is not impaired.
the hide condition, by raw is different ,means of wchieving the effects of invisible. Many features and mechanics achieve the same thing through different means. In 2014 you could increase your jump distance by athletic check, you can also increase your jump distance by a spell. You can use stealth to make no noise, you can also casta silence spell, you can use charisma checks to charm a person, you can also use spells. You can open doors with theives tools, or you can use a spell. There is no innate concept that two mechanics cant achieve similar ends.
by the rules you can seek to use an ability check to nit be noticed. While hiding does involve a stealth check, that doesnt mean the stealth check is for the purpose of being heard. For example, you can make an athletic check to run and an athletic check to climb and an athletic check to jump, that doesnt mean whenever you make an athletic check it counts for all 3.
now, a DM may houserule that it does both hide, and a check to be unheard, but officially at this time, its a bit of a reach to say thats what the rules actually say. That said, i domt think the intention is that attempting on being unnoticed or unheard would always follow the rules of hide. Many of the circumstances in which you are trying not to be heard, would not requre cover to initiate. Likewise a dm. might etermine that stealth to be silent is closer to a static DC rather than stealth versus perception, (like hude basically is) because if you make no sound, you make no sound, even if people are aware of your existence. But they leave it up to the dm how they want to adjucate ability checks to remain silent, whether they incorporate into hide or use other means.
You can add two additional concepts to cover hiding, if they seem appropriate
Unknown (by X)
X is not aware that you are in the area at all. Normally only possible outside of combat. Characters who are unknown to their enemies have advantage on initiative checks. If you are seen or found, you are no longer unknown.
Unfound (by X)
X is not aware of your current location, though they are normally aware of where they lost track of you. If you are seen, heard, or found in some other way, you are no longer unfound.
Unseen (by X)
X can not or has not seen you.
Hide (from X)
Requires 3/4 or better cover, or for the character to be currently unseen. The character becomes unseen and unfound, and your hide check becomes the DC of a search check. You are automatically seen if you have less than 3/4 cover and the creature you're hiding is able to see you (i.e. no effect makes seeing you impossible).
Search
When you take a search action, you find hidden creatures. If it is possible to see them, you also see them.
It doesn't matter what you'd do, they aren't going to change it. We already went through this before during the UA and they didn't change it. HB it however you like, but don't fool yourself into thinking opining here will have any affect on the published rules.
I think everyone knows they arent changing the rules drastically at this point, the real questions are mostly about how the rule is meant to be applied.
But to pentagreul, i think the reason why they basically made hide very simple, is because when you start trying to tweak it, you make it even more complex.
hide in 2024 is really simple.
If people cant currently see you well, you can avoid being visually noticed with dc 15 stealth check. the number you roll is the DC for someone to notice you. The effect ends if you become too noticeable, the narrative requires it, or people have special abilities.
the legalese version of the rule is just clarifying details.
the thing that blows peoples minds is that its basically primarily based on ability checks. They feel like it should be based on where the targets are looking, but 5e doesnt have that concept, so stealth/hiding cant work with that concept.
basically in 5e you are only 'looking' in any specific direction narratively, and most people playing dont realize it.
Its not a feature that is written confusingly, various people just want it to do more or less, or work differently.
Stealth DC versus perception check. you gain the same benefits as being invisible. unless narrative or special feature subverts it. pretty simple.
I think everyone knows they arent changing the rules drastically at this point, the real questions are mostly about how the rule is meant to be applied.
But to pentagreul, i think the reason why they basically made hide very simple, is because when you start trying to tweak it, you make it even more complex.
Hide in 2014 was very simple. The problem with the 2024 hide rules isn't that they're simple, it's that they're incomprehensible.
In 2014, once you were discovered, you weren't hidden. 2024 does the same. Neither has any language about relative hidden status, but neither really forbids it, if a DM wants the hassle.
The point of that is to keep it very easy to track. In practical terms, you can do things like "remove your figure from the board" or "mark them as invisible in the VTT", and once you are discovered, undo that.
The in-game "logic" of this is that upon finding you, an enemy can (as a "free action") just alert its teammates to your presence.
I think everyone knows they arent changing the rules drastically at this point, the real questions are mostly about how the rule is meant to be applied.
But to pentagreul, i think the reason why they basically made hide very simple, is because when you start trying to tweak it, you make it even more complex.
hide in 2024 is really simple.
If people cant currently see you well, you can avoid being visually noticed with dc 15 stealth check. the number you roll is the DC for someone to notice you. The effect ends if you become too noticeable, the narrative requires it, or people have special abilities.
the legalese version of the rule is just clarifying details.
the thing that blows peoples minds is that its basically primarily based on ability checks. They feel like it should be based on where the targets are looking, but 5e doesnt have that concept, so stealth/hiding cant work with that concept.
basically in 5e you are only 'looking' in any specific direction narratively, and most people playing dont realize it.
Its not a feature that is written confusingly, various people just want it to do more or less, or work differently.
Stealth DC versus perception check. you gain the same benefits as being invisible. unless narrative or special feature subverts it. pretty simple.
You might gain the same benefits as being invisible, but the means of no longer being able to be seen are different.
Magical invisibility means an object or creature can be in another creature’s line of sight but still not be seen unless the observer has some means of circumventing the illusion, Being hidden requires an object or creature to be out of the line of sight of any method that would normally allow the hidden thing to be seen.
Using the invisible condition to just give a hidden creature the same benefits was a cheap and poorly thought out approach.
If just an Unseen condition was made and then being invisible or Hidden or really anything that requires something to be seen could be better refined that relies on sight.
And just because one creature or thing might be able to see you does not mean everyone and everything else can see you as well. They might be able to alert others to something that is hidden or invisible, but if the others don’t have the ability to see you, then you have a very difficult problem.
The whole you ether have a condition or you don’t is the problem, as being hidden or invisible means at some point you can both have the condition and not have the condition at the same time based on different perceptions.
They tried to shoehorn invisibility into being hidden in an attempt to shorten stealth like they did with surprise, but failed to realize that being magically invisible requires far different means of being “seen” than does being hidden.
Magical invisibility usually requires magic or special abilities to be visually seen, otherwise a perception check just gives a general location of where an invisible thing might be, while only being hidden requires you to just be seen or heard to know exactly where the hidden thing is located.
A static DC is just an attempt to minimize rolling and possibly speed up gameplay, but it also creates unnecessary and unintended effects and situations.
As it currently stands, being hidden is not the same as being magically invisible, and a static DC is the cheapest and poorest means of of attempting to define what it means to be unseen.
" 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.
Yeah, I think since Blind and Deaf exists they are the perfect conditions to use.
Blind and Deaf are universal conditions, not relative conditions. Unseen and unheard are terms already used elsewhere.
This is untrue. The rules for Heavily Obscured specifically state that you treat yourself as Blinded when trying to see into an area of Heavy Obscurement. So Blind is already relative, this would just expand that to treating yourself as Blinded when trying to see a creature that is Hidden from you.
In 2014, once you were discovered, you weren't hidden. 2024 does the same. Neither has any language about relative hidden status, but neither really forbids it, if a DM wants the hassle.
The point of that is to keep it very easy to track. In practical terms, you can do things like "remove your figure from the board" or "mark them as invisible in the VTT", and once you are discovered, undo that.
The in-game "logic" of this is that upon finding you, an enemy can (as a "free action") just alert its teammates to your presence.
5.5e explicitly forbids relative hidden. "...and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight;" You explicitly cannot Hide if any enemy can see you, and you lose the Invisible condition when an enemy finds you.
And the enemy can apparently do this as a free reaction as they don't have to wait for their turn to do anything. But again, being aware that someone is in the bush is not the same as seeing someone in the bush. Thus you should (I know this is not RAW) be able to be hidden from one person and not another. How many times have you seen something (maybe an animal in the woods) and tried to point it out to someone and they just can't see it. You could even be pointing right at it, but it's really hard to see through camouflage until you finally do, and then you can't unsee it.
In 2014, once you were discovered, you weren't hidden. 2024 does the same. Neither has any language about relative hidden status, but neither really forbids it, if a DM wants the hassle.
The point of that is to keep it very easy to track. In practical terms, you can do things like "remove your figure from the board" or "mark them as invisible in the VTT", and once you are discovered, undo that.
The in-game "logic" of this is that upon finding you, an enemy can (as a "free action") just alert its teammates to your presence.
5.5e explicitly forbids relative hidden. "...and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight;" You explicitly cannot Hide if any enemy can see you, and you lose the Invisible condition when an enemy finds you.
And the enemy can apparently do this as a free reaction as they don't have to wait for their turn to do anything. But again, being aware that someone is in the bush is not the same as seeing someone in the bush. Thus you should (I know this is not RAW) be able to be hidden from one person and not another. How many times have you seen something (maybe an animal in the woods) and tried to point it out to someone and they just can't see it. You could even be pointing right at it, but it's really hard to see through camouflage until you finally do, and then you can't unsee it.
That more so is due to 5e largely ignoring the effect of distance for the most part. Pointing out someone's pet dog hiding under a bed 5 ft away from from you is much easier than pointing out a racoon hiding under a car 60 ft away, but 5e treats both situations identically for simplicity.
E.g. RAW Hiding from an sentry 80 ft away on a 40 ft high wall, is exactly the same as hiding from bandit searching the bushes right next to you with their spear.
This is untrue. The rules for Heavily Obscured specifically state that you treat yourself as Blinded when trying to see into an area of Heavy Obscurement.
Which is also badly worded, as it means anything with immunity to the blind condition can see through heavy obscurement at any range (most things with blindness immunity have blindsight, but not all), and it means that if you try and see something in a heavily obscured area, suddenly you are unable to see anything.
This is untrue. The rules for Heavily Obscured specifically state that you treat yourself as Blinded when trying to see into an area of Heavy Obscurement.
Which is also badly worded, as it means anything with immunity to the blind condition can see through heavy obscurement at any range (most things with blindness immunity have blindsight, but not all), and it means that if you try and see something in a heavily obscured area, suddenly you are unable to see anything.
I would disagree with you here. It says "A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition (see Appendix A) when trying to see something in that area." (underlines mine)
It does not give you the Blinded condition, so immunity to Blinded wouldn't apply here (unless you also have Blindsight/Tremorsense). And it only applies when trying to see something in that area. It doesn't make you unable to see anything just because you tried to see into . I think the language actually works fairly well here and is pretty obvious what the intent is.
Edit: Sorry, I was basing this off of the 5e rules, not the 5.5e rules. Yes, the 5.5e rules for Heavily Obscured are written bad and should feel bad.
In 2014, once you were discovered, you weren't hidden. 2024 does the same. Neither has any language about relative hidden status, but neither really forbids it, if a DM wants the hassle.
The point of that is to keep it very easy to track. In practical terms, you can do things like "remove your figure from the board" or "mark them as invisible in the VTT", and once you are discovered, undo that.
The in-game "logic" of this is that upon finding you, an enemy can (as a "free action") just alert its teammates to your presence.
5.5e explicitly forbids relative hidden. "...and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight;" You explicitly cannot Hide if any enemy can see you, and you lose the Invisible condition when an enemy finds you.
And the enemy can apparently do this as a free reaction as they don't have to wait for their turn to do anything. But again, being aware that someone is in the bush is not the same as seeing someone in the bush. Thus you should (I know this is not RAW) be able to be hidden from one person and not another. How many times have you seen something (maybe an animal in the woods) and tried to point it out to someone and they just can't see it. You could even be pointing right at it, but it's really hard to see through camouflage until you finally do, and then you can't unsee it.
That more so is due to 5e largely ignoring the effect of distance for the most part. Pointing out someone's pet dog hiding under a bed 5 ft away from from you is much easier than pointing out a racoon hiding under a car 60 ft away, but 5e treats both situations identically for simplicity.
E.g. RAW Hiding from an sentry 80 ft away on a 40 ft high wall, is exactly the same as hiding from bandit searching the bushes right next to you with their spear.
See, this is where the DM determining advantage, disadvantage, or what is appropriate for hiding comes into play. If I were your DM and you were 80 ft away from a guard hiding in a bush, I wouldn't even call for a check. I'd just let you say you were hidden. Now if the Bandit is searching the bush you're in, prodding it with his spear, I would definitely give him advantage on the search action he is taking. And if you were hiding under a bed, someone noticed you and told everyone, all they have to do is bend slightly to see you and you would automatically be found by everyone.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I like it, but would you allow something with blindsight or tremorsense to "see through" the hiding? If not, you would need to add stipulations (or a blanket statement about it). In my mind, the language of 2014 "unseen and unheard" was good because it explicitly told you that it wasn't just vision-based.
If we were completely discarding the way the current rules want to do it, I would start with
Unseen
An unseen creature has not or can not be seen. Unseen targets benefit from the rules for Unseen Attackers and Targets, and cannot be targeted by abilities that require sight. A creature that is Unseen by all enemies has advantage on initiative checks
Blind
A blind creature treats all creatures and targets as unseen, and automatically fails all rolls based on vision.
Blindsight
A creature with blindsight is unaffected by Blind, Invisible, and Obscured (from effects other than cover) when the target is within its radius.
Cover
Full cover heavily obscures creatures behind it.
Darkness
Darkness obscures creatures within it.
Heavily Obscured (Opaque, Area)
If an area is heavily obscured by an opaque effect, vision through, into, or out of the area is impossible (rendering creatures unseen).
Heavily Obscured (Relative)
A creature that is heavily obscured from another creature is treated as unseen by that creature.
Hidden (Relative)
A creature that is hidden from another creature is treated as unseen by that creature. Unlike being heavily obscured, it is possible to see the creature with an appropriate perception check.
Invisible
An invisible creature is treated as unseen by any creature that is unable to see invisible.
This doesn't take hearing into account.
In the current rules, what makes the hidden state preferable to straight up invisibility is the ability to move quietly that the successful stealth check grants you (as per the definition of stealth).
Your proposed definition of Hidden doesn't mention that at all, and therefore every creature would always be able to estimate the location of any other creature, so long as their hearing is not impaired.
More like “ Hidden: after successfully hiding from a creature, you are considered ‘Unseen’ by that creature.”
Unseen: you can not be perceived by sight, and any feature that relies on sight is at disadvantage.
That still allows the invisible conditions OR when hidden to have flexibility in defining how you can still be seen and when you can not be seen.
Using blinded and some might think just hiding causes the opposing side to gain the blind condition.
It’s just better to actually define two conditions if your going to make a hidden condition, that way you can separate the invisible condition and slide the unseen condition in while defining how you would lose just the Unseen part.
" 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.
Correction: what makes the hidden state preferable to straight up invisibility is undefined and could be nothing at all.
Yeah, I think since Blind and Deaf exists they are the perfect conditions to use.
Eg. You are Blind and Deaf to any creature that is hidden to you until you make a perception check, or passive perception, that exceeds their stealth check that allowed them to be hidden.
Then hidden would just describe ways it might end early. Yell. Cast spells. Etc.
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.
Blind and Deaf are universal conditions, not relative conditions. Unseen and unheard are terms already used elsewhere.
the hide condition, by raw is different ,means of wchieving the effects of invisible. Many features and mechanics achieve the same thing through different means. In 2014 you could increase your jump distance by athletic check, you can also increase your jump distance by a spell. You can use stealth to make no noise, you can also casta silence spell, you can use charisma checks to charm a person, you can also use spells. You can open doors with theives tools, or you can use a spell. There is no innate concept that two mechanics cant achieve similar ends.
by the rules you can seek to use an ability check to nit be noticed. While hiding does involve a stealth check, that doesnt mean the stealth check is for the purpose of being heard. For example, you can make an athletic check to run and an athletic check to climb and an athletic check to jump, that doesnt mean whenever you make an athletic check it counts for all 3.
now, a DM may houserule that it does both hide, and a check to be unheard, but officially at this time, its a bit of a reach to say thats what the rules actually say. That said, i domt think the intention is that attempting on being unnoticed or unheard would always follow the rules of hide. Many of the circumstances in which you are trying not to be heard, would not requre cover to initiate. Likewise a dm. might etermine that stealth to be silent is closer to a static DC rather than stealth versus perception, (like hude basically is) because if you make no sound, you make no sound, even if people are aware of your existence. But they leave it up to the dm how they want to adjucate ability checks to remain silent, whether they incorporate into hide or use other means.
You can add two additional concepts to cover hiding, if they seem appropriate
Unknown (by X)
X is not aware that you are in the area at all. Normally only possible outside of combat. Characters who are unknown to their enemies have advantage on initiative checks. If you are seen or found, you are no longer unknown.
Unfound (by X)
X is not aware of your current location, though they are normally aware of where they lost track of you. If you are seen, heard, or found in some other way, you are no longer unfound.
Unseen (by X)
X can not or has not seen you.
Hide (from X)
Requires 3/4 or better cover, or for the character to be currently unseen. The character becomes unseen and unfound, and your hide check becomes the DC of a search check. You are automatically seen if you have less than 3/4 cover and the creature you're hiding is able to see you (i.e. no effect makes seeing you impossible).
Search
When you take a search action, you find hidden creatures. If it is possible to see them, you also see them.
It doesn't matter what you'd do, they aren't going to change it. We already went through this before during the UA and they didn't change it. HB it however you like, but don't fool yourself into thinking opining here will have any affect on the published rules.
I think everyone knows they arent changing the rules drastically at this point, the real questions are mostly about how the rule is meant to be applied.
But to pentagreul, i think the reason why they basically made hide very simple, is because when you start trying to tweak it, you make it even more complex.
hide in 2024 is really simple.
If people cant currently see you well, you can avoid being visually noticed with dc 15 stealth check. the number you roll is the DC for someone to notice you. The effect ends if you become too noticeable, the narrative requires it, or people have special abilities.
the legalese version of the rule is just clarifying details.
the thing that blows peoples minds is that its basically primarily based on ability checks. They feel like it should be based on where the targets are looking, but 5e doesnt have that concept, so stealth/hiding cant work with that concept.
basically in 5e you are only 'looking' in any specific direction narratively, and most people playing dont realize it.
Its not a feature that is written confusingly, various people just want it to do more or less, or work differently.
Stealth DC versus perception check. you gain the same benefits as being invisible. unless narrative or special feature subverts it. pretty simple.
Hide in 2014 was very simple. The problem with the 2024 hide rules isn't that they're simple, it's that they're incomprehensible.
In 2014, once you were discovered, you weren't hidden. 2024 does the same. Neither has any language about relative hidden status, but neither really forbids it, if a DM wants the hassle.
The point of that is to keep it very easy to track. In practical terms, you can do things like "remove your figure from the board" or "mark them as invisible in the VTT", and once you are discovered, undo that.
The in-game "logic" of this is that upon finding you, an enemy can (as a "free action") just alert its teammates to your presence.
You might gain the same benefits as being invisible, but the means of no longer being able to be seen are different.
Magical invisibility means an object or creature can be in another creature’s line of sight but still not be seen unless the observer has some means of circumventing the illusion, Being hidden requires an object or creature to be out of the line of sight of any method that would normally allow the hidden thing to be seen.
Using the invisible condition to just give a hidden creature the same benefits was a cheap and poorly thought out approach.
If just an Unseen condition was made and then being invisible or Hidden or really anything that requires something to be seen could be better refined that relies on sight.
And just because one creature or thing might be able to see you does not mean everyone and everything else can see you as well. They might be able to alert others to something that is hidden or invisible, but if the others don’t have the ability to see you, then you have a very difficult problem.
The whole you ether have a condition or you don’t is the problem, as being hidden or invisible means at some point you can both have the condition and not have the condition at the same time based on different perceptions.
They tried to shoehorn invisibility into being hidden in an attempt to shorten stealth like they did with surprise, but failed to realize that being magically invisible requires far different means of being “seen” than does being hidden.
Magical invisibility usually requires magic or special abilities to be visually seen, otherwise a perception check just gives a general location of where an invisible thing might be, while only being hidden requires you to just be seen or heard to know exactly where the hidden thing is located.
A static DC is just an attempt to minimize rolling and possibly speed up gameplay, but it also creates unnecessary and unintended effects and situations.
As it currently stands, being hidden is not the same as being magically invisible, and a static DC is the cheapest and poorest means of of attempting to define what it means to be unseen.
" 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.
This is untrue. The rules for Heavily Obscured specifically state that you treat yourself as Blinded when trying to see into an area of Heavy Obscurement. So Blind is already relative, this would just expand that to treating yourself as Blinded when trying to see a creature that is Hidden from you.
5.5e explicitly forbids relative hidden. "...and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight;" You explicitly cannot Hide if any enemy can see you, and you lose the Invisible condition when an enemy finds you.
And the enemy can apparently do this as a free reaction as they don't have to wait for their turn to do anything. But again, being aware that someone is in the bush is not the same as seeing someone in the bush. Thus you should (I know this is not RAW) be able to be hidden from one person and not another. How many times have you seen something (maybe an animal in the woods) and tried to point it out to someone and they just can't see it. You could even be pointing right at it, but it's really hard to see through camouflage until you finally do, and then you can't unsee it.
That more so is due to 5e largely ignoring the effect of distance for the most part. Pointing out someone's pet dog hiding under a bed 5 ft away from from you is much easier than pointing out a racoon hiding under a car 60 ft away, but 5e treats both situations identically for simplicity.
E.g. RAW Hiding from an sentry 80 ft away on a 40 ft high wall, is exactly the same as hiding from bandit searching the bushes right next to you with their spear.
Which is also badly worded, as it means anything with immunity to the blind condition can see through heavy obscurement at any range (most things with blindness immunity have blindsight, but not all), and it means that if you try and see something in a heavily obscured area, suddenly you are unable to see anything.
I would disagree with you here. It says "A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition (see Appendix A) when trying to see something in that area." (underlines mine)
It does not give you the Blinded condition, so immunity to Blinded wouldn't apply here (unless you also have Blindsight/Tremorsense). And it only applies when trying to see something in that area. It doesn't make you unable to see anything just because you tried to see into . I think the language actually works fairly well here and is pretty obvious what the intent is.
Edit: Sorry, I was basing this off of the 5e rules, not the 5.5e rules. Yes, the 5.5e rules for Heavily Obscured are written bad and should feel bad.
See, this is where the DM determining advantage, disadvantage, or what is appropriate for hiding comes into play. If I were your DM and you were 80 ft away from a guard hiding in a bush, I wouldn't even call for a check. I'd just let you say you were hidden. Now if the Bandit is searching the bush you're in, prodding it with his spear, I would definitely give him advantage on the search action he is taking. And if you were hiding under a bed, someone noticed you and told everyone, all they have to do is bend slightly to see you and you would automatically be found by everyone.