If hiding is not meant be a "find a hiding spot and hide there" action, then is it meant to replace other parts of the Stealth skill as well? If the hide action represents not only ducking behind cover but also sneaking quietly without notice, why is the skill separate from the action? I'm thinking hiding was intended to be a stealth option, not the only function of the stealth skill.
Well, by the book Stealth also includes moving quietly, which can be independant of hiding. (and if I were trying to move out of a hiding spot without making noise that would break the invisible condition, I might make a second, separate stealth roll...)
Personally, I'd rule it could be used to shadow someone --- not try to be invisible or quiet, but to not look like you are following them. And I agree with the previous poster that shadowing could probably be done (different style) with Performance. "Sleight of body" as it were.
If the Hide action works to conceal you both in and out of cover, you take the hide action to hide, then use that one roll to narrate your way through a guarded area without making additional checks or changing tactics.
Were I the DM, I'd have them re-hide when they get to new rooms or new hallways, perhaps. Unless I just wanted the sneaking to be a quick single-roll scene.
And, if all the guards are doing is guarding, I wouldn't be popping out around them at all, without some other distractions going.
It seems strange to me that the intent would be to use the invisibility that somehow clings to you from hiding in one spot to act as your protection required to reach the next spot or to emerge and perform an activity, even such as movement.
I assume that 95+% of the time, Hiding is strictly round-to-round, each round, to get a sneak attack and hide again (as to not get attacked between said sneak attacks). It's a basic Rogue strategy, and an easy rule I've seen for it is that you get disadvantage to re-use a hiding spot.
Compared to the 2014 rules, in that case, the only difference is it being more clear that you can do that with melee attacks (i.e. the point of calling it out as a full Invisible Condition), instead of this being a snipers-only rule.
I assume that 95+% of the time, Hiding is strictly round-to-round, each round, to get a sneak attack and hide again (as to not get attacked between said sneak attacks). It's a basic Rogue strategy, and an easy rule I've seen for it is that you get disadvantage to re-use a hiding spot.
Compared to the 2014 rules, in that case, the only difference is it being more clear that you can do that with melee attacks (i.e. the point of calling it out as a full Invisible Condition), instead of this being a snipers-only rule.
I will admit that the hide action makes much more sense on a round-to-round basis. Though I'm still not convinced that it makes sense to emerge from cover, move 30 feet in 6 seconds and still somehow benefit from being invisible to get advantage on a melee attack. If the target is not in range of your melee attack, so you have to emerge from cover to attack the target while combat is in progress, I'm not sure you can reasonably say that you have the advantage of being invisible.
The text on hiding in the 2014 rules is more comprehensive than the snippet given in the rules glossary of the 2024 PHB. To be honest, I'm not sure why it was shortened. Sure, it allows for some of the "mother may I" interactions they were trying to get away from, but at least it clearly states that the DM makes these calls.
The 2014 rules actually make it pretty clear that you can't emerge from hiding during combat and remain hidden to attack a creature unless there are special circumstances.
"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the DM might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack roll before you are seen."
So hiding is really limited to the action as summarized above. It sounds like the are players looking for the game to have an Avoidance [Action], Diversion [Action], and Distracted condition; but currently the game doesn't offer it. It might have to be homebrewed, and it would require some analysis of the game mechanics. But currently, the Hide [Action] is limited to just a "duck and cover" type of maneuver and there are no benefits from the action if a character wants to move or attempt some higher form of subterfuge.
I fully believe the Hide action was intended as a duck and cover maneuver. That's why I first assumed the rule was intended to function only so long as the creature remained in its hiding spot.
Then why ever bother with the Stealth roll? You can just get behind cover and "duck" as a free action.
Cover doesn't necessarily make you unseen and if it does make you "Unseen" from your target, it generally also make your target "Unseen" from you so you do not get advantage on attacks from being behind cover. This is because the target knows exactly where you are behind that cover so it is watching the exact location where you will pop out from to try to attack them so you cannot attack them with advantage. The Hide action involves being sneaky enough that the enemy doesn't know exactly where you are anymore thus allowing you to pop out and attack them with advantage. The argument has always been does that momentary pop-out to attack before they notice you include running up to them to stab them? All the sage advice / developer tweets for 2014 said no it doesn't, and in the 2024 rules the books explicitly say that in general no it doesn't in the text quoted by Bravo Tango.
Even without the Hide + melee attack at Adv, it is pretty easy to sneak attack as a rogue even more so in 2024 with the introduction of Vex and Nick.
Personally, I'd rule it could be used to shadow someone --- not try to be invisible or quiet, but to not look like you are following them.
I separate this into two options:
1) You can follow someone by darting from hiding place to hiding place so that person doesn't see you following them - Stealth
2) You can try to act natural like you are just an ordinary person in the space and not following them - Performance (sometimes I allow Deception instead)
If players want I'll even allow a third option depending on the situation:
3) climb & leap from tree to tree or roof top to roof top to follow someone away from the directions they would normally be looking - Acrobatics/Athletics
Because IMO, it's much more fun if there are multiple possible solutions to problems to allow many different types of characters to solve any problem just some having better/safer options than others.
I assume that 95+% of the time, Hiding is strictly round-to-round, each round, to get a sneak attack and hide again (as to not get attacked between said sneak attacks). It's a basic Rogue strategy, and an easy rule I've seen for it is that you get disadvantage to re-use a hiding spot.
Compared to the 2014 rules, in that case, the only difference is it being more clear that you can do that with melee attacks (i.e. the point of calling it out as a full Invisible Condition), instead of this being a snipers-only rule.
I will admit that the hide action makes much more sense on a round-to-round basis. Though I'm still not convinced that it makes sense to emerge from cover, move 30 feet in 6 seconds and still somehow benefit from being invisible to get advantage on a melee attack. If the target is not in range of your melee attack, so you have to emerge from cover to attack the target while combat is in progress, I'm not sure you can reasonably say that you have the advantage of being invisible.
I think they've made the changes specifically to enable that particular stealth fantasy. (fun example, watch this video from the 4:50 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siecWGwj04M)
Anyway, "emerge from cover, move 30 feet in 6 seconds" is only likely to work once, at best.
To really use this strategy, you want 1) expertise in Stealth 2) take the Speedy feat 2a) you may also want the Skulker feat 3) be somewhere with dense enough cover (trees, rubble...) but not so dense as to have difficult terrain 4) always save your cunning action to Hide (so no Dash or Disengage or Bonus Action attack) Which is a fair bit to make the trick work consistently.
I found this passage in the Dungeon Master Guide about finding hidden creature for Calculated DCs;
Calculated DCs: nother way to handle similar situations is to have one creature’s ability check set the DC for another creature’s check. That’s how hiding works, for example: a hiding creature’s total Dexterity (Stealth) check sets the DC for Wisdom (Perception) checks made to find the hidden creature.
So hiding is really limited to the action as summarized above. It sounds like the are players looking for the game to have an Avoidance [Action], Diversion [Action], and Distracted condition; but currently the game doesn't offer it. It might have to be homebrewed, and it would require some analysis of the game mechanics. But currently, the Hide [Action] is limited to just a "duck and cover" type of maneuver and there are no benefits from the action if a character wants to move or attempt some higher form of subterfuge.
I fully believe the Hide action was intended as a duck and cover maneuver. That's why I first assumed the rule was intended to function only so long as the creature remained in its hiding spot.
Then why ever bother with the Stealth roll? You can just get behind cover and "duck" as a free action.
Because there's no mechanic for "ducking"; RAW if you are simply behind three-quarters cover then you get the benefit of that cover and that's it. To gain the benefit of Concealment from the 2024 Invisible condition, you need to have that condition some way.
I think it just makes it obvious that Hiding is not just a "duck and cover" action. You don't need stealth to take cover, and you don't need a DC 15 to duck.
It really is just a "duck and cover" type of maneuver. The way the Hide [Action] is written in the rules, the only benefit to successfully taking the action is the Invisible condition. It is achieved by a character taking benefit from an area that is Heavily Obscured ,or provides Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and succeeding on DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) ability check.
Outside of Initiative, successfully taking the action will set a character up to have Advantage on the initiative should it be required.
During combat, a character that finds Three-Quarters Cover and successfully takes the Hide [Action] gets a buff from the Concealed and Attacks Affected elements of the Invisible condition. But the action's benefits are limited to that and can they can end rather easily.
Successfully taking the Hide [Action] doesn't grant any other benefits. It can't be used to benefit movement, other ability checks, avoiding detection, trickery, etc. It is an action a character can take when they "duck and cover"; it is not a requirement for taking cover, but the action only applies extra benefits to a creature is taking a form cover (including benefiting from an area that's Heavily Obscured).
I found this passage in the Dungeon Master Guide about finding hidden creature for Calculated DCs;
We already know how it works for creatures that are actually hiding and actually need a check to find. The issue is whether there are conditions for automatic removal of hiding.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The new rules says what they says. Once you're invisible you are. It says nothing about needing to maintain the conditions for the hide action the whole time, jut to do it it to start with.
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.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The rules saying creatures are alert and spot you if you are in the open are specific to during combat. Have you snuck up on an on-duty Secret Service Agent in a completely open room?
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
It's possible under certain conditions, but it basically requires the person you're sneaking up on to be looking in a different direction (facing or distraction). Typically in the situations where it would be possible you'd have advantage for other reasons anyway.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The new rules says what they says. Once you're invisible you are. It says nothing about needing to maintain the conditions for the hide action the whole time, jut to do it it to start with.
There is a bit of ambiguity in what the rules says they says. That's why so many conflicting interpretations have arisen.
One of the main points of contention, as others have pointed out, is the definition of "finds". Because it doesn't specify that the search action must be taken, it is not unreasonable to assume that looking directly at an unobstructed invisible creature "finds" them and breaks the condition. Especially since the Hide action is the more specific instance of the Invisible condition, and so its rules win out as being specific.
The other point of ambiguity is the condition required for hiding. You're correct that the rules do not state explicitly that moving from cover breaks the Invisible condition, but many people are assuming that is an oversight and the intention is to remain behind cover. Because the Invisible condition conceals you from sight, and the Hide action is not magic, from a logical perspective it does not make sense for the the hider to remain Invisible while nothing is keeping them from being seen.
In the case that finding requires a search action and Invisibility does not require cover, a player could literally walk circles around an alert creature in bright light and not break invisibility. Would the DM rule this way? Likely not, but it is an example of a weird interaction that arises from a completely reasonable interpretation of two parts of the text.
From a real world perspective, many things require the conditions of their initiation to remain during their continuation. Fire, for example, requires heat, oxygen, and fuel to be lit. If you remove any of those conditions, the fire will go out.
Like we've mentioned, it isn't difficult to make adjustments and allow for smooth, reasonable play at the table. We're just trying to sus out the base intent behind the Hide action.
Is it the beginning of stealth, required to go sneaking about?
Is it a duck and cover maneuver used to avoid detection?
Is it primarily a combat action, and not really intended for use outside of initiative?
We likely won't arrive at a satisfying answer until (if) clarification is provided via errata, but I like to think it through and hear others' thoughts anyway.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The rules saying creatures are alert and spot you if you are in the open are specific to during combat. Have you snuck up on an on-duty Secret Service Agent in a completely open room?
If they are on watch it could be assumed they are making search checks and a highly trained individual would be skilled in perception and maybe have expertise.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The rules saying creatures are alert and spot you if you are in the open are specific to during combat. Have you snuck up on an on-duty Secret Service Agent in a completely open room?
If they are on watch it could be assumed they are making search checks and a highly trained individual would be skilled in perception and maybe have expertise.
For one thing, people in combat tend to get "tunnel vision" and the rules (combat or otherwise) don't say anything (that I can find, at least) about being alert and spotting you. For example, I wouldn't invoke passive perception in full combat, except for characters in "overwatch position" perhaps. But...
There are many tools at the DM's disposal to deal with guards. Including: 1) automatic failure of perception checks (magical darkness and silence?) 2) disadvantage of perception checks (some "storm of weasels" effect ongoing?) 3) allowance or disallowance of passive perception 4) advantage of perception checks (sunny day, no combat, warned about intruders?) 5) automatic success of perception checks (backed into a corner with the whole room in field-of-view...)
So it's not like both "you can sneak up on guards" and "guards can catch you sneaking up on them" can't be true, or can't depend on skill rolls.
So it's not like both "you can sneak up on guards" and "guards can catch you sneaking up on them" can't be true, or can't depend on skill rolls.
That's true, and is sort of the same as the informal "stay hidden" mechanic touched on earlier. In that case, the implication is that retaining invisibility and remaining unnoticed while moving or taking an action after successfully hiding requires one or more additional checks.
I found this passage in the Dungeon Master Guide about finding hidden creature for Calculated DCs;
We already know how it works for creatures that are actually hiding and actually need a check to find. The issue is whether there are conditions for automatic removal of hiding.
There's a way Resolving Outcome can be automatic. If a DM determine its trivial to spot a hidden creature walking in an open room then no D20 Test should be needed.
Is a D20 Test Warranted? If the task is trivial or impossible, don’t bother with a D20 Test. A character can move across an empty room or drink from a flask without making a Dexterity check, whereas no lucky die roll will allow a character with an ordinary bow to hit the moon with an arrow. Call for a D20 Test only if there’s a chance of both success and failure and if there are meaningful consequences for failure.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The rules saying creatures are alert and spot you if you are in the open are specific to during combat. Have you snuck up on an on-duty Secret Service Agent in a completely open room?
If they are on watch it could be assumed they are making search checks and a highly trained individual would be skilled in perception and maybe have expertise.
If we are in combat though, a Rogue can Hide as a BA and then attack as an Action without the target getting to take a turn to use their action to make a Perception check. So RAW 2024 says you only need to roll a DC 15 Stealth check to successfully hide from the Secret Service Agent in combat, and then the question is: can you move across a completely open room and stab them while still being hidden all in one turn? That is what's being argued for by those who argue the invisible condition isn't automatically lost when you move out of your hiding place.
Hence why this text:
"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the DM might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack roll before you are seen."
Exists to say that: no, as soon as you come out of hiding you are found. So no you cannot run from a hiding place, sneak up behind a creature and stab them with Adv from hiding while in combat. In exploration phase hiding works a bit differently because then there is the option of the target not paying attention, and creatures can be in a constant state of making Perception checks.
So it's not like both "you can sneak up on guards" and "guards can catch you sneaking up on them" can't be true, or can't depend on skill rolls.
That's true, and is sort of the same as the informal "stay hidden" mechanic touched on earlier. In that case, the implication is that retaining invisibility and remaining unnoticed while moving or taking an action after successfully hiding requires one or more additional checks.
Nope that is not stated anywhere in the rules, that is entirely up to the DM to decide based on the situation. Which is as it should be since whether you can or not move around without being noticed depends massively on the specific situation.
Personally, I would not ask for repeated rolls to accomplish a single sneaking-goal in the exploration phase of the game, just as I wouldn't ask for repeated rolls to accomplish any other task (e.g. I don't ask for 5 athletics checks to climb a cliff). Instead the PC would roll once, and I'd either roll perception for the enemy or us their passive and depending on where the character moved to - i.e. how close to different NPCs they got, or how good of a hiding place they found - they would get spotted or not.
Nope that is not stated anywhere in the rules, that is entirely up to the DM to decide based on the situation. Which is as it should be since whether you can or not move around without being noticed depends massively on the specific situation.
Personally, I would not ask for repeated rolls to accomplish a single sneaking-goal in the exploration phase of the game, just as I wouldn't ask for repeated rolls to accomplish any other task (e.g. I don't ask for 5 athletics checks to climb a cliff). Instead the PC would roll once, and I'd either roll perception for the enemy or us their passive and depending on where the character moved to - i.e. how close to different NPCs they got, or how good of a hiding place they found - they would get spotted or not.
I absolutely agree that the requirements to successfully sneak depend heavily on the situation.
Im not sure that the requirements to remain Invisible are intended to be that way though. In my opinion, invisibility seems like a special instance of stealth, where a creature has found a place or environment that they can use to conceal themselves more securely than they normally would be while sneaking about.
I do not believe that exiting the hiding spot (cover, etc.) would necessarily end stealth for the creature, but I do think it is intended to end the invisible condition. The difference between "not currently seen" and "not able to be seen".
The wording does not state this currently, as the requirements to take the hide action are not explicitly stated as being necessary to stay hidden. I'm working under the assumption that there is a small oversight in the printed material.
As far as having the creature roll multiple times for the same sneaking goal, I agree with you there as well. I would likely have them make an additional check if they attempted something potentially very loud or risky while sneaking, but that's an exception, not the norm.
I think I would have them make another check to regain the invisible condition though, when moving from one hiding spot to another. You can remain unseen while sneaking about, but remaining unable to be seen requires something to conceal you, similar to the combat scenario you described.
The hide action is the action to become hidden. As written, once you become hidden, you remain hidden until you are revealed, no action required.
Well, by the book Stealth also includes moving quietly, which can be independant of hiding. (and if I were trying to move out of a hiding spot without making noise that would break the invisible condition, I might make a second, separate stealth roll...)
Personally, I'd rule it could be used to shadow someone --- not try to be invisible or quiet, but to not look like you are following them. And I agree with the previous poster that shadowing could probably be done (different style) with Performance. "Sleight of body" as it were.
Were I the DM, I'd have them re-hide when they get to new rooms or new hallways, perhaps. Unless I just wanted the sneaking to be a quick single-roll scene.
And, if all the guards are doing is guarding, I wouldn't be popping out around them at all, without some other distractions going.
I assume that 95+% of the time, Hiding is strictly round-to-round, each round, to get a sneak attack and hide again (as to not get attacked between said sneak attacks). It's a basic Rogue strategy, and an easy rule I've seen for it is that you get disadvantage to re-use a hiding spot.
Compared to the 2014 rules, in that case, the only difference is it being more clear that you can do that with melee attacks (i.e. the point of calling it out as a full Invisible Condition), instead of this being a snipers-only rule.
I will admit that the hide action makes much more sense on a round-to-round basis. Though I'm still not convinced that it makes sense to emerge from cover, move 30 feet in 6 seconds and still somehow benefit from being invisible to get advantage on a melee attack. If the target is not in range of your melee attack, so you have to emerge from cover to attack the target while combat is in progress, I'm not sure you can reasonably say that you have the advantage of being invisible.
The text on hiding in the 2014 rules is more comprehensive than the snippet given in the rules glossary of the 2024 PHB. To be honest, I'm not sure why it was shortened. Sure, it allows for some of the "mother may I" interactions they were trying to get away from, but at least it clearly states that the DM makes these calls.
The 2014 rules actually make it pretty clear that you can't emerge from hiding during combat and remain hidden to attack a creature unless there are special circumstances.
"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the DM might allow you to stay hidden as you approach a creature that is distracted, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack roll before you are seen."
Cover doesn't necessarily make you unseen and if it does make you "Unseen" from your target, it generally also make your target "Unseen" from you so you do not get advantage on attacks from being behind cover. This is because the target knows exactly where you are behind that cover so it is watching the exact location where you will pop out from to try to attack them so you cannot attack them with advantage. The Hide action involves being sneaky enough that the enemy doesn't know exactly where you are anymore thus allowing you to pop out and attack them with advantage. The argument has always been does that momentary pop-out to attack before they notice you include running up to them to stab them? All the sage advice / developer tweets for 2014 said no it doesn't, and in the 2024 rules the books explicitly say that in general no it doesn't in the text quoted by Bravo Tango.
Even without the Hide + melee attack at Adv, it is pretty easy to sneak attack as a rogue even more so in 2024 with the introduction of Vex and Nick.
I separate this into two options:
1) You can follow someone by darting from hiding place to hiding place so that person doesn't see you following them - Stealth
2) You can try to act natural like you are just an ordinary person in the space and not following them - Performance (sometimes I allow Deception instead)
If players want I'll even allow a third option depending on the situation:
3) climb & leap from tree to tree or roof top to roof top to follow someone away from the directions they would normally be looking - Acrobatics/Athletics
Because IMO, it's much more fun if there are multiple possible solutions to problems to allow many different types of characters to solve any problem just some having better/safer options than others.
I think they've made the changes specifically to enable that particular stealth fantasy. (fun example, watch this video from the 4:50 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siecWGwj04M)
Anyway, "emerge from cover, move 30 feet in 6 seconds" is only likely to work once, at best.
To really use this strategy, you want
1) expertise in Stealth
2) take the Speedy feat
2a) you may also want the Skulker feat
3) be somewhere with dense enough cover (trees, rubble...) but not so dense as to have difficult terrain
4) always save your cunning action to Hide (so no Dash or Disengage or Bonus Action attack)
Which is a fair bit to make the trick work consistently.
I found this passage in the Dungeon Master Guide about finding hidden creature for Calculated DCs;
It really is just a "duck and cover" type of maneuver. The way the Hide [Action] is written in the rules, the only benefit to successfully taking the action is the Invisible condition. It is achieved by a character taking benefit from an area that is Heavily Obscured ,or provides Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and succeeding on DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) ability check.
Outside of Initiative, successfully taking the action will set a character up to have Advantage on the initiative should it be required.
During combat, a character that finds Three-Quarters Cover and successfully takes the Hide [Action] gets a buff from the Concealed and Attacks Affected elements of the Invisible condition. But the action's benefits are limited to that and can they can end rather easily.
Successfully taking the Hide [Action] doesn't grant any other benefits. It can't be used to benefit movement, other ability checks, avoiding detection, trickery, etc. It is an action a character can take when they "duck and cover"; it is not a requirement for taking cover, but the action only applies extra benefits to a creature is taking a form cover (including benefiting from an area that's Heavily Obscured).
We already know how it works for creatures that are actually hiding and actually need a check to find. The issue is whether there are conditions for automatic removal of hiding.
Yall really never just snuck up to someone in a completely open room? I've done it on accident.
The new rules says what they says. Once you're invisible you are. It says nothing about needing to maintain the conditions for the hide action the whole time, jut to do it it to start with.
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.
The rules saying creatures are alert and spot you if you are in the open are specific to during combat. Have you snuck up on an on-duty Secret Service Agent in a completely open room?
It's possible under certain conditions, but it basically requires the person you're sneaking up on to be looking in a different direction (facing or distraction). Typically in the situations where it would be possible you'd have advantage for other reasons anyway.
There is a bit of ambiguity in what the rules says they says. That's why so many conflicting interpretations have arisen.
One of the main points of contention, as others have pointed out, is the definition of "finds". Because it doesn't specify that the search action must be taken, it is not unreasonable to assume that looking directly at an unobstructed invisible creature "finds" them and breaks the condition. Especially since the Hide action is the more specific instance of the Invisible condition, and so its rules win out as being specific.
The other point of ambiguity is the condition required for hiding. You're correct that the rules do not state explicitly that moving from cover breaks the Invisible condition, but many people are assuming that is an oversight and the intention is to remain behind cover. Because the Invisible condition conceals you from sight, and the Hide action is not magic, from a logical perspective it does not make sense for the the hider to remain Invisible while nothing is keeping them from being seen.
In the case that finding requires a search action and Invisibility does not require cover, a player could literally walk circles around an alert creature in bright light and not break invisibility. Would the DM rule this way? Likely not, but it is an example of a weird interaction that arises from a completely reasonable interpretation of two parts of the text.
From a real world perspective, many things require the conditions of their initiation to remain during their continuation. Fire, for example, requires heat, oxygen, and fuel to be lit. If you remove any of those conditions, the fire will go out.
Like we've mentioned, it isn't difficult to make adjustments and allow for smooth, reasonable play at the table. We're just trying to sus out the base intent behind the Hide action.
Is it the beginning of stealth, required to go sneaking about?
Is it a duck and cover maneuver used to avoid detection?
Is it primarily a combat action, and not really intended for use outside of initiative?
We likely won't arrive at a satisfying answer until (if) clarification is provided via errata, but I like to think it through and hear others' thoughts anyway.
If they are on watch it could be assumed they are making search checks and a highly trained individual would be skilled in perception and maybe have expertise.
For one thing, people in combat tend to get "tunnel vision" and the rules (combat or otherwise) don't say anything (that I can find, at least) about being alert and spotting you. For example, I wouldn't invoke passive perception in full combat, except for characters in "overwatch position" perhaps. But...
There are many tools at the DM's disposal to deal with guards. Including:
1) automatic failure of perception checks (magical darkness and silence?)
2) disadvantage of perception checks (some "storm of weasels" effect ongoing?)
3) allowance or disallowance of passive perception
4) advantage of perception checks (sunny day, no combat, warned about intruders?)
5) automatic success of perception checks (backed into a corner with the whole room in field-of-view...)
So it's not like both "you can sneak up on guards" and "guards can catch you sneaking up on them" can't be true, or can't depend on skill rolls.
That's true, and is sort of the same as the informal "stay hidden" mechanic touched on earlier. In that case, the implication is that retaining invisibility and remaining unnoticed while moving or taking an action after successfully hiding requires one or more additional checks.
There's a way Resolving Outcome can be automatic. If a DM determine its trivial to spot a hidden creature walking in an open room then no D20 Test should be needed.
If we are in combat though, a Rogue can Hide as a BA and then attack as an Action without the target getting to take a turn to use their action to make a Perception check. So RAW 2024 says you only need to roll a DC 15 Stealth check to successfully hide from the Secret Service Agent in combat, and then the question is: can you move across a completely open room and stab them while still being hidden all in one turn? That is what's being argued for by those who argue the invisible condition isn't automatically lost when you move out of your hiding place.
Hence why this text:
Exists to say that: no, as soon as you come out of hiding you are found. So no you cannot run from a hiding place, sneak up behind a creature and stab them with Adv from hiding while in combat. In exploration phase hiding works a bit differently because then there is the option of the target not paying attention, and creatures can be in a constant state of making Perception checks.
Nope that is not stated anywhere in the rules, that is entirely up to the DM to decide based on the situation. Which is as it should be since whether you can or not move around without being noticed depends massively on the specific situation.
Personally, I would not ask for repeated rolls to accomplish a single sneaking-goal in the exploration phase of the game, just as I wouldn't ask for repeated rolls to accomplish any other task (e.g. I don't ask for 5 athletics checks to climb a cliff). Instead the PC would roll once, and I'd either roll perception for the enemy or us their passive and depending on where the character moved to - i.e. how close to different NPCs they got, or how good of a hiding place they found - they would get spotted or not.
I absolutely agree that the requirements to successfully sneak depend heavily on the situation.
Im not sure that the requirements to remain Invisible are intended to be that way though. In my opinion, invisibility seems like a special instance of stealth, where a creature has found a place or environment that they can use to conceal themselves more securely than they normally would be while sneaking about.
I do not believe that exiting the hiding spot (cover, etc.) would necessarily end stealth for the creature, but I do think it is intended to end the invisible condition. The difference between "not currently seen" and "not able to be seen".
The wording does not state this currently, as the requirements to take the hide action are not explicitly stated as being necessary to stay hidden. I'm working under the assumption that there is a small oversight in the printed material.
As far as having the creature roll multiple times for the same sneaking goal, I agree with you there as well. I would likely have them make an additional check if they attempted something potentially very loud or risky while sneaking, but that's an exception, not the norm.
I think I would have them make another check to regain the invisible condition though, when moving from one hiding spot to another. You can remain unseen while sneaking about, but remaining unable to be seen requires something to conceal you, similar to the combat scenario you described.