So an enemy can see you and not find you?!? But if they can see you, they don't need to find you, because you lose all the advantages of Invisible if the enemy can see you.
And how does taking the Hide action to be quiet make it so they can no longer see you when you duck out of cover? It seems like everyone is arguing that Hide really just makes you move silently, but IT DOES NOT SAY THAT ANYWHERE!! The only affect you get by Hiding is the Invisible condition which is explicitly, exclusively sight based.
Instead of angrily typing in all caps, you should take a deep breath and actually read the rules of Stealth
Escape notice by moving quietly and hiding behind things.
Similarly, as an Halfling, you're not Invisible when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you unless you successfully Hide.
What's interesting that I've noticed as a general trend in this thread is people seem to imply, or even state, that the default state is being seen/heard/known.
But the opposite is true. Think of all the millions or billions of creatures in your d&d world. You don't know where they are. They're not actively hiding.
The default state must necessarily be unknown, unseen, unheard. Unless noted otherwise by your DM.
You only need to hide to be unseen/unheard/unknown if the DM would otherwise say you are detected but you wish to try to not be. When you are then doing, essentially, is maintain the default state despite a scenario that might otherwise be an exception to it.
Just thought that would be helpful for some folks to reframe their thoughts on that, and how/when the hiding rules even apply.
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.
When i call for an initiative for an encounter, i rule you automatically notice other creature that don't Hide.
Perception and Encounters: If the characters encounter another group of creatures and neither side is being stealthy, the two groups automatically notice each other once they are within sight or hearing range of one another.
It's also worth noting for those who believe Hiding in combat isn't a thing: "Fog of War. You exploit the distractions of battle, gaining Advantage on any Dexterity (Stealth) check you make as part of the Hide action during combat." That's a pretty strange rule to write if it's a game where Hiding in combat isn't legal.
Also: Additionally under the Skulker feat: "Sniper. If you make an attack roll while hidden and the roll misses, making the attack roll doesn’t reveal your location." Under the Observant feat: "Quick Search. You can take the Search action as a Bonus Action." Under the Thief's 9th level feature: "Stealth Attack (Cost: 1d6). If you have the Hide action’s Invisible condition, this attack doesn’t end that condition on you if you end the turn behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover."
Keep in mind that Skulker keeps the attacker hidden, not their attack form. If the attacker uses ammunition that flies through the air, a ray, or something else that leaves a pretty easy to see trail right back to who launched the attack - they'll still know where you are. Arrows the hit leave a pretty clear indication of what direction they came from, even some that miss... just saying.
I had one DM who tried arguing that we couldn't tell where an enemy was despite the fact that they were sniping at us with Rays of Frost (needless to say the table corrected that nonesense).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Unless you're using magical tracer arrows, there's no "pretty easy to see trail". You can't do much more than guess a general direction in the real world so I fail to see how you'd be able to do it in D&D.
you are talking about conceal yourself as if it is mechanical term. It is not, there is not a conceal in the glossary, or a place where they define conceal. Conceal as he already pointed out has a valid dictionary definition of trying to avoid being seen.
Yes, that is a valid dictionary definition in general, but that is not the definition which best matches up with the context of the concept being presented by the text for the Hide action. Instead, it is better to apply the definitions which relate to the concept of hiding, which is that concealing something causes its location to become unknown. By default, in 5e, a creature can only know where an object is if it can see it or hear it, as explained by the general rules in the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section.
The term "conceal" is not in the glossary, but that doesn't matter. Its meaning is described within the portion of the text which uses it. The Hide action begins by using the term and then goes on to explain what that term means within the context of the Hide action. In addition to explicitly describing several auditory effects which impact the mechanic, the main point that is made in the most recent iteration of the Hide action is that the term "conceal" in this context is being used as a synonym for "hidden". This is important because the general rules already describe what it means to be hidden in combat within the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section:
guessing the target’s location . . .
If you are hidden when you make an attack roll, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
As i already established, the dmg says people can hear you if you are trying to be quiet.(which would mean making no noise above a whisper) within 2d6+5 feet. This means, even if you are hidden people can hear you,
It might be helpful if you could provide an exact quote for this. My hunch is that it doesn't say exactly what you think it says. It seems unlikely to me that someone could go out of their way to take an action to attempt to remain extremely silent, be deemed to be wildly successful in that effort, and then someone nearby can still hear them without even making a roll. It seems more likely that that is a misinterpretation and that instead the DMG is giving guidance on a range for being able to hear people that are just generally behaving in a quiet manner that does NOT include attempts to actually be Stealthy.
show me, in the hide definition where it says people cant hear you, or that they dont know your location, or anything related.
This has already been quoted and explained a few times now.
See above for the summary of this explanation which includes the text explicitly describing several auditory effects which impact the mechanic as well as using terms which are explained in the general rules within the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section.
In fact, I am doing the exact opposite of this. I am quite literally quoting the exact text word for word.
And reading stuff into that text that isn't there. Let's pull apart hide
. . .
As such, all we know that hiding does is give you the invisible condition. The rules don't forbid it doing more... but they also don't require it to do more.
Yeah, for some reason you still aren't seeing it, and you continue to refuse to consider the text in its entirety even after everything has been rigorously explained many times now.
- Being invisible doesn't mean undetectable. A creature can always estimate the position of another creature (basically know where they are on the grid), if that creature hasn't taken the Hide action to actually conceal their presence. They just have disadvantage on attack rolls against them. That remains true even if you add other means to hinder their senses, like blinding and deafening them.
No, this is not accurate. A creature is unable to estimate the position of another creature if they are both Blinded and Deafened. Such a creature would be hidden from that other creature by default in this situation even without taking the Hide action since by default the only ways for a creature to know the location of anything is by seeing it or hearing it (or both).
Hiding is one way to become Unseen and Unheard and therefore conceal your location, but it's not the only way that this can happen.
The perception check is made with disadvantage if the hidden creature is in dim light and the perception check is based on sight.
This rule doesn't apply to finding creatures unless the one who is performing the Perception check is Deafened or something similar and it is actually possible to see the creature or to see evidence of the creature's location such as when that creature is "just" behind three-quarters cover. In 2024, a Perception check is described as using "a combination of senses", so under normal circumstances a Perception check to find a creature is not only going to be "based on sight".
If circumstances prevent a creature from detecting another one either by sight or hearing (with simultaneous Invisibility and Silence spells, for example), they cannot make a perception check to detect that creature. This doesn't affect the fact that even in these circumstances, they can still estimate the other creature's position if they're not actively hiding.
No. If a creature cannot be seen or heard, then they are hidden, and their location is unknown.
Does stepping out from cover make you seen? Who knows?
If there are alert enemies nearby who are looking around and you are out in the open, then you are seen by them. If you stop hiding, then you are no longer hidden.
Does leaning out to fire that bow make you seen? Who knows?
You can be hidden (Unseen and Unheard) while behind three-quarters cover.
(Note that this is currently still broken due to the use of the phrase "Line of Sight" in the Hide action. This phrase will have to be removed via errata and replaced with a more generic phrase in order for three-quarters cover to technically work as intended.)
My big question, that no one has seemed to answer yet, is this: If I step behind a column (become unseen) in combat, what does taking the Hide Action get me? It seems like all it does is make it so I can't be targeted by things that rely on sight (which I already have by way of the column), gives me advantage on attack rolls and disadvantage to attack me (I'm already unseen, so I already have this via Unseen Attacker/Targets). Does taking the Hide Action mean that if someone walks around the column they still can't see me? Does it mean that if I duck out to attack they can't see me?
If you step behind a column without hiding, then you have full cover. As such, you cannot be targeted by an attack even though the enemy DOES know where you are. However, you cannot attack that enemy from here either. In order to attack, you'll need to pop-out to at most three-quarters cover. When you do, you'll instantly be seen and so you cannot attack with advantage as an Unseen Attacker.
If you step behind a column and hide, then the enemy does NOT know where you are. Defensively, this doesn't currently matter much since you still have full cover and therefore cannot be targeted by an attack. However, when you pop-out to three-quarters cover to make an attack, the intent is that you can make that attack with advantage as an Unseen Attacker (note that this mechanic is currently technically broken -- see above).
Also, offensively, if combat begins from this position, then you also get advantage on your initiative roll. In addition, there might be a better chance to be deemed to have surprised your enemy, which would give your enemy disadvantage of their initiative roll.
Now, if someone walks around the column to the point where you are now in plain view, the end result is the same whether you hid or not. The enemy can see you. In the case where you hid, you are now just no longer hidden. Hiding is an ongoing activity and hiding requires you to be at least behind three-quarters cover. Once you no longer have three-quarters cover, you are no longer hiding. It's not really so much that the enemy "finds" you, it's just that you are no longer hiding. Being "found" is the term that is used when the enemy detects you while you ARE hiding.
However, if you come into the line of sight of an enemy, they can make a passive perception check to see you. And if you're in dim light when that happens, they do so at disadvantage.
No, this isn't how it works. You cannot hide while you are in an enemy's Line of Sight. Passive Perception is used "while hidden". If you are no longer hidden (because you are in the Line of Sight of an enemy) then Perception is not required. Do not allow a creature to roll a 99 on their Stealth roll and then know that there is no creature who has a high enough Passive Perception to be able to detect them out in the open. Such shenanigans are not intended and are not supported by the rules.
They know you're behind the column because they saw you get there, but if you come out, they won't see you come out unless they pass a Perception check against your Stealth roll.
No, this isn't how that works either.
The whole point is that if you are hidden, the do NOT know that you are there. How do they know that you are behind this column if they cannot see or hear you there? What if you subtly teleported away from that location? How do they really know that you are there? They don't.
If you come out of hiding, then you are no longer hiding. Of course they see you when you come out. A Perception check is not required if you are not hiding. The Perception check is only used "when hidden". If instead you just pop-out to three-quarters cover while remaining out of view of your enemies (currently: while out of the enemy's "Line of Sight") then in that case, they won't see you.
Furthermore, as always, if the DM decides that "circumstances are not appropriate for hiding" when you pop-out to three-quarters cover from that column in this specific scenario, then that will overrule the general hiding in three-quarters cover rule. It is perfectly reasonable for a DM to rule that during combat a terrain feature such as a column could be used for cover but is not appropriate for hiding.
Keep in mind that there's no rule that says that coming into the line of sight of an enemy automatically reveals your position. You have the invisible condition while hidden, and to end your hiding, an enemy has to FIND you, not just see you.
Hiding is an ongoing activity, and you cannot Hide when in an enemy's Line of Sight. If you are no longer hiding, then you are no longer hidden.
So you have to be unseen to attempt to become unseen. The moment you are seen, you are no longer unseen.
More like, you have to be unseen to attempt to become hidden. Not the same thing.
And becoming hidden makes you...*checks notes*...oh yes! Invisible aka unseen. In 5e, being Invisible meant that you could Hide without cover. In 5.5e Hiding makes you Invisible.
So if 3/4 cover makes you unseen, then I don't need to take the Hide action to gain the Unseen Attacker advantage.
Unfortunately, this also brings up the other can of worms, which is that the Invisible condition doesn't currently have anything to do with being Unseen. All that it does is to give you a list of three benefits, none of which cause you to be Unseen.
As mentioned by someone else in a recent post, the Hide action causes you to have the Invisible condition (the list of 3 additional benefits) in addition to becoming concealed / hidden (Unseen and Unheard and therefore location Unknown).
Yes, that is a valid dictionary definition in general, but that is not the definition which best matches up with the context of the concept being presented by the text for the Hide action. Instead, it is better to apply the definitions which relate to the concept of hiding, which is that concealing something causes its location to become unknown.
That's interpreting rules based on what you want them to say, not based on what they say. If a word has multiple definitions that could apply and doesn't clearly specify which one applies... the correct interpretation is not to pick one definition, the correct interpretation is that the rules are unclear.
To Hide: "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 or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight."
Note that these are not conditions to remain Hidden, merely to become Hidden in the first place.
The conditions that take you out of Hiding: "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, or you cast a spell with a Verbal component."
What "an enemy finds you" means is on the previous line: "Make note of your check’s total, which is the DC for a creature to find you with a Wisdom (Perception) check."
You don't really need to twist yourself in knots trying to interpret the English language. It's pretty clear. You duck behind cover, become Hidden and then only stop being Hidden if one of four conditions are met (none which have anything to do with cover or line of sight).
You don't really need to twist yourself in knots trying to interpret the English language. It's pretty clear. You duck behind cover, become Hidden and then only stop being Hidden if one of four conditions are met (none which have anything to do with cover or line of sight).
That's certainly a valid reading of the rules. It has the problem of producing nonsensical results.
As a DM, my current solution is to just use the 2014 rules for hiding (I have house rules for surprise), but it would be nice to know what the authors were trying to accomplish with the 2024 hide action -- I assume they didn't change the rules for no reason, they thought they were making the rules better.
The perception check is made with disadvantage if the hidden creature is in dim light and the perception check is based on sight.
This rule doesn't apply to finding creatures unless the one who is performing the Perception check is Deafened or something similar and it is actually possible to see the creature or to see evidence of the creature's location such as when that creature is "just" behind three-quarters cover. In 2024, a Perception check is described as using "a combination of senses", so under normal circumstances a Perception check to find a creature is not only going to be "based on sight".
Says who? I'm not quoting the whole post but this question applies to the rest: You know you're supposed to actually read the rules before claiming to know what happens, right? Pretty much nothing of what you said in that post matches the rules.
You don't really need to twist yourself in knots trying to interpret the English language. It's pretty clear. You duck behind cover, become Hidden and then only stop being Hidden if one of four conditions are met (none which have anything to do with cover or line of sight).
That's certainly a valid reading of the rules. It has the problem of producing nonsensical results.
As a DM, my current solution is to just use the 2014 rules for hiding (I have house rules for surprise), but it would be nice to know what the authors were trying to accomplish with the 2024 hide action -- I assume they didn't change the rules for no reason, they thought they were making the rules better.
I don't see anything 'nonsensical' about it. It produces results entirely consistent within the rules - and far simpler than the contortions people seem to be going through here to rationalize effectively deleting a skill with more detail about it than any other.
If you want to play by different rules in your campaign, that's on you. But make your players aware you're using homebrew rules in session zero so they can know not to play classes that were balanced around the use of Stealth.
My big question, that no one has seemed to answer yet, is this: If I step behind a column (become unseen) in combat, what does taking the Hide Action get me? It seems like all it does is make it so I can't be targeted by things that rely on sight (which I already have by way of the column), gives me advantage on attack rolls and disadvantage to attack me (I'm already unseen, so I already have this via Unseen Attacker/Targets). Does taking the Hide Action mean that if someone walks around the column they still can't see me? Does it mean that if I duck out to attack they can't see me?
If you step behind a column without hiding, then you have full cover. As such, you cannot be targeted by an attack even though the enemy DOES know where you are. However, you cannot attack that enemy from here either. In order to attack, you'll need to pop-out to at most three-quarters cover. When you do, you'll instantly be seen and so you cannot attack with advantage as an Unseen Attacker.
If you step behind a column and hide, then the enemy does NOT know where you are. Defensively, this doesn't currently matter much since you still have full cover and therefore cannot be targeted by an attack. However, when you pop-out to three-quarters cover to make an attack, the intent is that you can make that attack with advantage as an Unseen Attacker (note that this mechanic is currently technically broken -- see above).
Also, offensively, if combat begins from this position, then you also get advantage on your initiative roll. In addition, there might be a better chance to be deemed to have surprised your enemy, which would give your enemy disadvantage of their initiative roll.
Now, if someone walks around the column to the point where you are now in plain view, the end result is the same whether you hid or not. The enemy can see you. In the case where you hid, you are now just no longer hidden. Hiding is an ongoing activity and hiding requires you to be at least behind three-quarters cover. Once you no longer have three-quarters cover, you are no longer hiding. It's not really so much that the enemy "finds" you, it's just that you are no longer hiding. Being "found" is the term that is used when the enemy detects you while you ARE hiding.
What am I doing behind the column that makes the enemy forget that I went there? Is 5.5e Hide actually a spell slot free, watered down Modify Memory?
Or are you finally admitting that Hide doesn't actually do anything? You just said yourself it is broken when you are in line of sight, which you need to be in order to attack, losing your advantage.
5.5e Hide is either so situational as to be pointless (you have to blind the target in order to make it useful, but then you would already have advantage on your attacks so it's pointless), or broken beyond belief (I step behind a column, roll a 30 on my stealth check and just become invisible until I cast a spell or make an attack). You've already said that Hiding makes you move quietly, so I won't be making a sound louder than a whisper. Out of combat I can just be out of sight and take the Hide action repeatedly until I roll a Nat 20 and just become invisible forever.
When we don't have any definition of "stop hiding", and the rule itself never even says you can "stop hiding" just "you stop being hidden when...", someone could bump into you and RAW have no idea you are there because you're invisible and they can't roll higher than your check. Again, "But the DM can rule that this rule doesn't apply." doesn't mean that the rule works. It just means that in order to make the rule work, the DM has to make their own rules.
When we don't have any definition of "stop hiding", and the rule itself never even says you can "stop hiding" just "you stop being hidden when...", someone could bump into you and RAW have no idea you are there because you're invisible and they can't roll higher than your check. Again, "But the DM can rule that this rule doesn't apply." doesn't mean that the rule works. It just means that in order to make the rule work, the DM has to make their own rules.
If you bump into someone (or they bump into you), they are alerted to your presence (they "find" you) and the condition will end. "Oh, sorry, I didn't see you there!"
Out of combat, I think you need to keep making stealth rolls (each room? each move action? the DM will determine, like always) to stay quiet enough. In combat, I would give you the "first" move a free "quietly" because you already made a roll and set a DC to hear you (this is solely to streamline play). And in most combats you'll be atacking or whatever after one Move or less, anyway. But I would not say the initial Hide action gives you free silent movement for arbitrary amounts of time.
The people saying that invisibility alone makes you "unfound" are ignoring the rules for noise and moving silently (very simple rules, those). The people saying that stepping out of cover makes you automatically found are ignoring the Hide rules and several feats/features that build off them. The truth lies in-between these extremes, which is why Hide is neither OP nor useless. Like basically every rule in 5.x, there is intentional room made for DM rulings, to keep the rules from being unwieldy --- this usually involves lots of common sense, because the rules have no pretentions of being a simulation.
When we don't have any definition of "stop hiding", and the rule itself never even says you can "stop hiding" just "you stop being hidden when...", someone could bump into you and RAW have no idea you are there because you're invisible and they can't roll higher than your check. Again, "But the DM can rule that this rule doesn't apply." doesn't mean that the rule works. It just means that in order to make the rule work, the DM has to make their own rules.
If you bump into someone (or they bump into you), they are alerted to your presence (they "find" you) and the condition will end. "Oh, sorry, I didn't see you there!"
Out of combat, I think you need to keep making stealth rolls (each room? each move action? the DM will determine, like always) to stay quiet enough. In combat, I would give you the "first" move a free "quietly" because you already made a roll and set a DC to hear you (this is solely to streamline play). And in most combats you'll be atacking or whatever after one Move or less, anyway. But I would not say the initial Hide action gives you free silent movement for arbitrary amounts of time.
The people saying that invisibility alone makes you "unfound" are ignoring the rules for noise and moving silently (very simple rules, those). The people saying that stepping out of cover makes you automatically found are ignoring the Hide rules and several feats/features that build off them. The truth lies in-between these extremes, which is why Hide is neither OP nor useless. Like basically every rule in 5.x, there is intentional room made for DM rulings, to keep the rules from being unwieldy --- this usually involves lots of common sense, because the rules have no pretentions of being a simulation.
But that is not what the rule or anyone's interpretation of the rule is. Everyone here is saying that your Stealth roll is the check to find you. So they either have to have a passive above it or take the Search action to try to beat it. So bumping into someone doesn't make you found.
That's one of the big issues with 5.5e. Invisible in 5e let you try to Hide as it made you heavily obscured. 5.5e Hiding just grants you the Invisible condition and doesn't say anything about being silent or stealthy. They've turned the rule on its head between (non)editions.
Can you reference the "Hide rules and several feats/features" that mean that you aren't found when someone sees you/you step into their line of sight?
Since I expect this goalpost to get moved, and I'm already bothering to post, might as well cover the other bits, too: - Hide makes you invisible, with extra riders (effectively a "hidden" condition). The stealth check sets the DC to find you with a Search Action. The Search Action is not the end-all-be-all of how you can be found. - Being hidden ends when you make too loud of a sound. You normally roll Stealth to move quietly. (That is a seperate-but-relevant rule, in another chapter.) Other people can use Passive Perception to hear you. This is usually at DM discretion because passive scores are almost always used by the DM (rather than "actively" used by a player). - The Hide action makes you unseen, and "not moving" or "moving stealthily" makes you unheard. Being unheard and unseen means people don't know where you are. (That is also a seperate-but-relevant rule, in another chapter.) - Nothing in the rules says anything about "bumping into someone," and that's exactly the sort of thing that falls under DM purview. You were the one who brought it up; your DM would be the one to make a ruling on it --- and there's a pretty obvious ruling to make there. I think that's a pretty obvious example of "an enemy finds you" which is, explicitly, something that ends the condition. "If you do not understand this, I cannot explain it to you."
- If you just hang out behind cover/obscurement, not making noise, you'll remain unseen and unheard until some spends a Search Action and rolls well enough to find you. (Or someone walks right into your hiding spot, or some other common-sense thing the DM rules on.) - If you leave cover but keep beating everyone's Passive Perception scores with "move silently" Stealth checks, you'll also remain unseen and unheard, until you attack/cast/etc. - "Use the Hide roll to also move silently for a single Move" is not an explicit rule anywhere. However, it streamlines the most common hiding-in-combat situation, is the sort of rule at least one DM I play with uses, and is a ruling I would usually make when DMing. I'm sure there are tons of edge-cases and exceptions, which is why it remains in the "rulings not rules" domain.
The Dungeon Master Guide says noticing a hidden creature is never trivially easy. I interpret this is when circumstances are appropriate for hiding though.
So i rule an enemy finds you when you come out of Heavily Obscured area or from behind Cover into enemy's line of sight unless heavily distracted somehow
When to Call for a Check
An important time to call for a Wisdom (Perception) check is when another creature is using the Stealth skill to hide. Noticing a hidden creature is never trivially easy or automatically impossible, so characters can always try Wisdom (Perception) checks to do so.
What am I doing behind the column that makes the enemy forget that I went there? Is 5.5e Hide actually a spell slot free, watered down Modify Memory?
It means they know where you last were, rather than knowing where you currently are. If you hide and don't or can't move, their guess about your location will be very accurate.
What am I doing behind the column that makes the enemy forget that I went there? Is 5.5e Hide actually a spell slot free, watered down Modify Memory?
It means they know where you last were, rather than knowing where you currently are. If you hide and don't or can't move, their guess about your location will be very accurate.
I guess I'm still not seeing what difference taking the Hide action makes. Either way, they can't see me, and have a pretty good idea of where I am. Or are you saying if I go behind a column and don't Hide that the enemy gains X-Ray vision and can see me?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Instead of angrily typing in all caps, you should take a deep breath and actually read the rules of Stealth
See? It was right there the whole time.
You're not Invisible behind Three-Quarters Cover unless you successfully Hide.
Similarly, as an Halfling, you're not Invisible when you are obscured only by a creature that is at least one size larger than you unless you successfully Hide.
What's interesting that I've noticed as a general trend in this thread is people seem to imply, or even state, that the default state is being seen/heard/known.
But the opposite is true. Think of all the millions or billions of creatures in your d&d world. You don't know where they are. They're not actively hiding.
The default state must necessarily be unknown, unseen, unheard. Unless noted otherwise by your DM.
You only need to hide to be unseen/unheard/unknown if the DM would otherwise say you are detected but you wish to try to not be. When you are then doing, essentially, is maintain the default state despite a scenario that might otherwise be an exception to it.
Just thought that would be helpful for some folks to reframe their thoughts on that, and how/when the hiding rules even apply.
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.
When i call for an initiative for an encounter, i rule you automatically notice other creature that don't Hide.
Also:
Additionally under the Skulker feat: "Sniper. If you make an attack roll while hidden and the roll misses, making the attack roll doesn’t reveal your location."
Under the Observant feat: "Quick Search. You can take the Search action as a Bonus Action."
Under the Thief's 9th level feature: "Stealth Attack (Cost: 1d6). If you have the Hide action’s Invisible condition, this attack doesn’t end that condition on you if you end the turn behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover."
Keep in mind that Skulker keeps the attacker hidden, not their attack form. If the attacker uses ammunition that flies through the air, a ray, or something else that leaves a pretty easy to see trail right back to who launched the attack - they'll still know where you are. Arrows the hit leave a pretty clear indication of what direction they came from, even some that miss... just saying.
I had one DM who tried arguing that we couldn't tell where an enemy was despite the fact that they were sniping at us with Rays of Frost (needless to say the table corrected that nonesense).
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Unless you're using magical tracer arrows, there's no "pretty easy to see trail". You can't do much more than guess a general direction in the real world so I fail to see how you'd be able to do it in D&D.
Yes, that is a valid dictionary definition in general, but that is not the definition which best matches up with the context of the concept being presented by the text for the Hide action. Instead, it is better to apply the definitions which relate to the concept of hiding, which is that concealing something causes its location to become unknown. By default, in 5e, a creature can only know where an object is if it can see it or hear it, as explained by the general rules in the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section.
The term "conceal" is not in the glossary, but that doesn't matter. Its meaning is described within the portion of the text which uses it. The Hide action begins by using the term and then goes on to explain what that term means within the context of the Hide action. In addition to explicitly describing several auditory effects which impact the mechanic, the main point that is made in the most recent iteration of the Hide action is that the term "conceal" in this context is being used as a synonym for "hidden". This is important because the general rules already describe what it means to be hidden in combat within the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section:
It might be helpful if you could provide an exact quote for this. My hunch is that it doesn't say exactly what you think it says. It seems unlikely to me that someone could go out of their way to take an action to attempt to remain extremely silent, be deemed to be wildly successful in that effort, and then someone nearby can still hear them without even making a roll. It seems more likely that that is a misinterpretation and that instead the DMG is giving guidance on a range for being able to hear people that are just generally behaving in a quiet manner that does NOT include attempts to actually be Stealthy.
This has already been quoted and explained a few times now.
See above for the summary of this explanation which includes the text explicitly describing several auditory effects which impact the mechanic as well as using terms which are explained in the general rules within the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section.
Yeah, for some reason you still aren't seeing it, and you continue to refuse to consider the text in its entirety even after everything has been rigorously explained many times now.
I agree to disagree with you on this topic.
No, this is not accurate. A creature is unable to estimate the position of another creature if they are both Blinded and Deafened. Such a creature would be hidden from that other creature by default in this situation even without taking the Hide action since by default the only ways for a creature to know the location of anything is by seeing it or hearing it (or both).
Hiding is one way to become Unseen and Unheard and therefore conceal your location, but it's not the only way that this can happen.
This rule doesn't apply to finding creatures unless the one who is performing the Perception check is Deafened or something similar and it is actually possible to see the creature or to see evidence of the creature's location such as when that creature is "just" behind three-quarters cover. In 2024, a Perception check is described as using "a combination of senses", so under normal circumstances a Perception check to find a creature is not only going to be "based on sight".
No. If a creature cannot be seen or heard, then they are hidden, and their location is unknown.
Being unseen is a prerequisite for hiding. It is half of the requirement for your location to be unknown to other creatures.
If there are alert enemies nearby who are looking around and you are out in the open, then you are seen by them. If you stop hiding, then you are no longer hidden.
You can be hidden (Unseen and Unheard) while behind three-quarters cover.
(Note that this is currently still broken due to the use of the phrase "Line of Sight" in the Hide action. This phrase will have to be removed via errata and replaced with a more generic phrase in order for three-quarters cover to technically work as intended.)
If you step behind a column without hiding, then you have full cover. As such, you cannot be targeted by an attack even though the enemy DOES know where you are. However, you cannot attack that enemy from here either. In order to attack, you'll need to pop-out to at most three-quarters cover. When you do, you'll instantly be seen and so you cannot attack with advantage as an Unseen Attacker.
If you step behind a column and hide, then the enemy does NOT know where you are. Defensively, this doesn't currently matter much since you still have full cover and therefore cannot be targeted by an attack. However, when you pop-out to three-quarters cover to make an attack, the intent is that you can make that attack with advantage as an Unseen Attacker (note that this mechanic is currently technically broken -- see above).
Also, offensively, if combat begins from this position, then you also get advantage on your initiative roll. In addition, there might be a better chance to be deemed to have surprised your enemy, which would give your enemy disadvantage of their initiative roll.
Now, if someone walks around the column to the point where you are now in plain view, the end result is the same whether you hid or not. The enemy can see you. In the case where you hid, you are now just no longer hidden. Hiding is an ongoing activity and hiding requires you to be at least behind three-quarters cover. Once you no longer have three-quarters cover, you are no longer hiding. It's not really so much that the enemy "finds" you, it's just that you are no longer hiding. Being "found" is the term that is used when the enemy detects you while you ARE hiding.
No, this isn't how it works. You cannot hide while you are in an enemy's Line of Sight. Passive Perception is used "while hidden". If you are no longer hidden (because you are in the Line of Sight of an enemy) then Perception is not required. Do not allow a creature to roll a 99 on their Stealth roll and then know that there is no creature who has a high enough Passive Perception to be able to detect them out in the open. Such shenanigans are not intended and are not supported by the rules.
No, this isn't how that works either.
The whole point is that if you are hidden, the do NOT know that you are there. How do they know that you are behind this column if they cannot see or hear you there? What if you subtly teleported away from that location? How do they really know that you are there? They don't.
If you come out of hiding, then you are no longer hiding. Of course they see you when you come out. A Perception check is not required if you are not hiding. The Perception check is only used "when hidden". If instead you just pop-out to three-quarters cover while remaining out of view of your enemies (currently: while out of the enemy's "Line of Sight") then in that case, they won't see you.
Furthermore, as always, if the DM decides that "circumstances are not appropriate for hiding" when you pop-out to three-quarters cover from that column in this specific scenario, then that will overrule the general hiding in three-quarters cover rule. It is perfectly reasonable for a DM to rule that during combat a terrain feature such as a column could be used for cover but is not appropriate for hiding.
Hiding is an ongoing activity, and you cannot Hide when in an enemy's Line of Sight. If you are no longer hiding, then you are no longer hidden.
Unfortunately, this also brings up the other can of worms, which is that the Invisible condition doesn't currently have anything to do with being Unseen. All that it does is to give you a list of three benefits, none of which cause you to be Unseen.
As mentioned by someone else in a recent post, the Hide action causes you to have the Invisible condition (the list of 3 additional benefits) in addition to becoming concealed / hidden (Unseen and Unheard and therefore location Unknown).
That's interpreting rules based on what you want them to say, not based on what they say. If a word has multiple definitions that could apply and doesn't clearly specify which one applies... the correct interpretation is not to pick one definition, the correct interpretation is that the rules are unclear.
Let's review.
To Hide: "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 or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight."
Note that these are not conditions to remain Hidden, merely to become Hidden in the first place.
The conditions that take you out of Hiding: "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, or you cast a spell with a Verbal component."
What "an enemy finds you" means is on the previous line: "Make note of your check’s total, which is the DC for a creature to find you with a Wisdom (Perception) check."
You don't really need to twist yourself in knots trying to interpret the English language. It's pretty clear. You duck behind cover, become Hidden and then only stop being Hidden if one of four conditions are met (none which have anything to do with cover or line of sight).
That's certainly a valid reading of the rules. It has the problem of producing nonsensical results.
As a DM, my current solution is to just use the 2014 rules for hiding (I have house rules for surprise), but it would be nice to know what the authors were trying to accomplish with the 2024 hide action -- I assume they didn't change the rules for no reason, they thought they were making the rules better.
Says who? I'm not quoting the whole post but this question applies to the rest: You know you're supposed to actually read the rules before claiming to know what happens, right? Pretty much nothing of what you said in that post matches the rules.
I don't see anything 'nonsensical' about it. It produces results entirely consistent within the rules - and far simpler than the contortions people seem to be going through here to rationalize effectively deleting a skill with more detail about it than any other.
If you want to play by different rules in your campaign, that's on you. But make your players aware you're using homebrew rules in session zero so they can know not to play classes that were balanced around the use of Stealth.
What am I doing behind the column that makes the enemy forget that I went there? Is 5.5e Hide actually a spell slot free, watered down Modify Memory?
Or are you finally admitting that Hide doesn't actually do anything? You just said yourself it is broken when you are in line of sight, which you need to be in order to attack, losing your advantage.
5.5e Hide is either so situational as to be pointless (you have to blind the target in order to make it useful, but then you would already have advantage on your attacks so it's pointless), or broken beyond belief (I step behind a column, roll a 30 on my stealth check and just become invisible until I cast a spell or make an attack). You've already said that Hiding makes you move quietly, so I won't be making a sound louder than a whisper. Out of combat I can just be out of sight and take the Hide action repeatedly until I roll a Nat 20 and just become invisible forever.
When we don't have any definition of "stop hiding", and the rule itself never even says you can "stop hiding" just "you stop being hidden when...", someone could bump into you and RAW have no idea you are there because you're invisible and they can't roll higher than your check. Again, "But the DM can rule that this rule doesn't apply." doesn't mean that the rule works. It just means that in order to make the rule work, the DM has to make their own rules.
If you bump into someone (or they bump into you), they are alerted to your presence (they "find" you) and the condition will end. "Oh, sorry, I didn't see you there!"
Out of combat, I think you need to keep making stealth rolls (each room? each move action? the DM will determine, like always) to stay quiet enough. In combat, I would give you the "first" move a free "quietly" because you already made a roll and set a DC to hear you (this is solely to streamline play). And in most combats you'll be atacking or whatever after one Move or less, anyway. But I would not say the initial Hide action gives you free silent movement for arbitrary amounts of time.
The people saying that invisibility alone makes you "unfound" are ignoring the rules for noise and moving silently (very simple rules, those). The people saying that stepping out of cover makes you automatically found are ignoring the Hide rules and several feats/features that build off them. The truth lies in-between these extremes, which is why Hide is neither OP nor useless. Like basically every rule in 5.x, there is intentional room made for DM rulings, to keep the rules from being unwieldy --- this usually involves lots of common sense, because the rules have no pretentions of being a simulation.
But that is not what the rule or anyone's interpretation of the rule is. Everyone here is saying that your Stealth roll is the check to find you. So they either have to have a passive above it or take the Search action to try to beat it. So bumping into someone doesn't make you found.
That's one of the big issues with 5.5e. Invisible in 5e let you try to Hide as it made you heavily obscured. 5.5e Hiding just grants you the Invisible condition and doesn't say anything about being silent or stealthy. They've turned the rule on its head between (non)editions.
Can you reference the "Hide rules and several feats/features" that mean that you aren't found when someone sees you/you step into their line of sight?
Basically covered in this post just above.
Since I expect this goalpost to get moved, and I'm already bothering to post, might as well cover the other bits, too:
- Hide makes you invisible, with extra riders (effectively a "hidden" condition). The stealth check sets the DC to find you with a Search Action. The Search Action is not the end-all-be-all of how you can be found.
- Being hidden ends when you make too loud of a sound. You normally roll Stealth to move quietly. (That is a seperate-but-relevant rule, in another chapter.) Other people can use Passive Perception to hear you. This is usually at DM discretion because passive scores are almost always used by the DM (rather than "actively" used by a player).
- The Hide action makes you unseen, and "not moving" or "moving stealthily" makes you unheard. Being unheard and unseen means people don't know where you are. (That is also a seperate-but-relevant rule, in another chapter.)
- Nothing in the rules says anything about "bumping into someone," and that's exactly the sort of thing that falls under DM purview. You were the one who brought it up; your DM would be the one to make a ruling on it --- and there's a pretty obvious ruling to make there. I think that's a pretty obvious example of "an enemy finds you" which is, explicitly, something that ends the condition. "If you do not understand this, I cannot explain it to you."
- If you just hang out behind cover/obscurement, not making noise, you'll remain unseen and unheard until some spends a Search Action and rolls well enough to find you. (Or someone walks right into your hiding spot, or some other common-sense thing the DM rules on.)
- If you leave cover but keep beating everyone's Passive Perception scores with "move silently" Stealth checks, you'll also remain unseen and unheard, until you attack/cast/etc.
- "Use the Hide roll to also move silently for a single Move" is not an explicit rule anywhere. However, it streamlines the most common hiding-in-combat situation, is the sort of rule at least one DM I play with uses, and is a ruling I would usually make when DMing. I'm sure there are tons of edge-cases and exceptions, which is why it remains in the "rulings not rules" domain.
The Dungeon Master Guide says noticing a hidden creature is never trivially easy. I interpret this is when circumstances are appropriate for hiding though.
So i rule an enemy finds you when you come out of Heavily Obscured area or from behind Cover into enemy's line of sight unless heavily distracted somehow
It means they know where you last were, rather than knowing where you currently are. If you hide and don't or can't move, their guess about your location will be very accurate.
I guess I'm still not seeing what difference taking the Hide action makes. Either way, they can't see me, and have a pretty good idea of where I am. Or are you saying if I go behind a column and don't Hide that the enemy gains X-Ray vision and can see me?