Taking the Hide Action successfully and having the Invisible Condition have an overlap of benefits (but it seems like that wouldn't necessarily mean they are the same thing, I think). It seems like this leaves us with 2 types of invisibility, MagicalInvisibility and some sort of mundane, I’m successfully hiding,so I’m not seen, so then I can’t be seen, so thenI have the “invisible Condition”sort of invisibility.
I have to admit that I don’t like it.I probably have spent more time thinking about it than I will actually interact with it in game, so I’m probably also over-reacting.I think it’s inelegant and likely to cause problems.
The intention was to consolidate rules overhead, which is something D&D 5th edition does a lot and is generally speaking considered efficient games design.
Before, Hiding had it's own packet of properties and traits, many of which naturally overlapped with a lot of what the Invisible condition already did. Consolidating the rules that way means it's generally simpler to parse and track what hiding does because it's no longer it's own thing hidden (no pun intended) away in the rules. Instead it's a much more (IMO) intuitive "Pass this check, get the invisible condition" with conditions being very easy to find and look up.
It's a lot like how D&D will use the spellcasting supersystem to handle non-spell related things, such as items that give the effect of a spell, or class abilities that let you cast a spell even though the class isn't technically a spellcaster. Psionics is the prime example of this.
And setting a fixed minimum threshold helps discourage classes not specced for it trying to fish for a high roll. I doubt it was a persistent problem, but it makes for a quick universal “nope, you failed” point to save a little time resolving low rolls.
I've gotta say, since I've started using the 2024 rules, hiding is so much easier on me as a DM. It used to be a case of calling for a check, cross referencing it against every possible monsters passive perception, and then floating that number my side for the scene. Now it's just "Did you beat 15? Cool you're hidden, you note that number in case any monsters take the Search action". So much smoother and quicker
I've gotta say, since I've started using the 2024 rules, hiding is so much easier on me as a DM. It used to be a case of calling for a check, cross referencing it against every possible monsters passive perception, and then floating that number my side for the scene. Now it's just "Did you beat 15? Cool you're hidden, you note that number in case any monsters take the Search action". So much smoother and quicker
The intention was to consolidate rules overhead, which is something D&D 5th edition does a lot and is generally speaking considered efficient games design.
Before, Hiding had it's own packet of properties and traits, many of which naturally overlapped with a lot of what the Invisible condition already did. Consolidating the rules that way means it's generally simpler to parse and track what hiding does because it's no longer it's own thing hidden (no pun intended) away in the rules. Instead it's a much more (IMO) intuitive "Pass this check, get the invisible condition" with conditions being very easy to find and look up.
It's a lot like how D&D will use the spellcasting supersystem to handle non-spell related things, such as items that give the effect of a spell, or class abilities that let you cast a spell even though the class isn't technically a spellcaster. Psionics is the prime example of this.
I think you're exactly right about consolidating (language & conepts) and efficient games design.
re: looking up the Invisible Condition, in 2024 version it's defined by it's effects, not by what it is .. like "impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense" [2014] vs hidden .: unseen ~ not visible while hidden ~ "invisible" while hiding -> invisble (the defination creeps from unseen to invisible).
In order to take the hide action, you must be " Heavily Obscured or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight" but staying Heavily Obscured orbehind at least Three-Quarters Cove and out of any enemy’s line of sight is not one of the things that is listed as stoping you from continuing to be hidden [invisible] (and maybe it wouldn't work if it was always the case that not meeting those conditions means that you are no any longer hidden ), but then not having that sort of makes it seem like a creature can [perhaps always] be invisible right out in the open, without the use of magic. I think that is why consolidating the concepts of hidden and invisibility (and possibly the related concepts of going unnoticed/escaping notice/Stealth) might not work IMO: Invisible ≠ stealthy, but then if you gain the Invisible Condition, just by passing a DC 15 Stealth Check, maybe Stealth is functionally a whole lot like Invisibility in 2024.
I think it also cheapens and disincentivizes the Invisibility Spell: why waste a spell slot or spell prepartion on the Invisibility Spell if all it gets you is the Invisible condition, which could also be gotten by just taking the hide action and beating a DC 15 Stealth Check? -- Unless thost two ways of gaining the Invisibility contidtion do not confer the same kind or amount of Invisibility, which I think probbly ought to be the case, but I'm not sure that it ever says it (please correct me if I am wrong).
I also think that making it so that just passing a DC 15 Stealth automatically confers the Invisible condtion cheapens and and disincentivizes investing heavily in Perception.
I think it might interact weirdly with Surprise & Initiative too.
When you hide, what happens if you beat the DC 15 stealth check but there's a monster with a passive perception higher than your check result? This might be an obvious question, but I'm not familiar with all of the 2024 rules.
When you hide, what happens if you beat the DC 15 stealth check but there's a monster with a passive perception higher than your check result? This might be an obvious question, but I'm not familiar with all of the 2024 rules.
Nothing, the creature must actively take the search action to try and find you
Keep in mind that hiding requires you to not be in [colloquial] plain sight of a hostile creature
DC 15 basically represents an across-the-board average of the passive perception of all possible monsters
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
Even a dragon can't see through a solid opaque object, unless it has some special feature that allows that — which would mean the rogue would be "in plain sight" and not Invisible.
Keep in mind, though, that Perception (both passive and active) covers things beyond vision, and the Invisible condition doesn't do anything to prevent you from being detected by sound, smell, etc.
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
With a passive perception of 27, they're rolling that Perception check at a +17 meaning if the rogue "barely succeeded" on the hide action (DC 15), that dragon is probably auto succeeding with a minimum roll of 18. So it's largely academic
When you hide, what happens if you beat the DC 15 stealth check but there's a monster with a passive perception higher than your check result? This might be an obvious question, but I'm not familiar with all of the 2024 rules.
Nothing, the creature must actively take the search action to try and find you
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
With a passive perception of 27, they're rolling that Perception check at a +17 meaning if the rogue "barely succeeded" on the hide action (DC 15), that dragon is probably auto succeeding with a minimum roll of 18. So it's largely academic
The above statements are not accurate descriptions for how the mechanics work in the 2024 rules.
Whenever a DC is set for a Perception Check throughout the game, this same DC also applies to the use of the Passive Perception score which is applied without the creature in question having to take any action. This applies to all Perception Checks including activities such as looking for secret doors and so on:
Passive Perception is a score that reflects a creature’s general awareness of its surroundings. The DM uses this score when determining whether a creature notices something without consciously making a Wisdom (Perception) check.
A creature’s Passive Perception equals 10 plus the creature’s Wisdom (Perception) check bonus.
The Hide action does not require a Search action for the hidden creature to be no longer hidden. Instead, a hidden creature stops being hidden immediately after another creature "finds" that hidden creature with no further restriction on "how" that creature is found:
You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: . . . an enemy finds you . . .
In addition, a successful check only confers the Invisible condition "while hidden". So, if you are not actually hidden because an enemy instantly finds you then you do not have the condition even if your die roll was "successful":
On a successful check, you have the Invisible condition while hidden.
The Hide action sets a DC for being found via a Perception Check. By rule (see above), this same DC also applies to the usage of the Passive Perception score. The text for the Hide action does not have to explicitly restate this fact in order for those general rules to apply.
Therefore, in the above example, when the Rogue makes a "successful" roll of 15 for his stealth check, he is never actually hidden from the nearby dragon that has a Passive Perception of 27. That character might think that he is hidden from it, but he is not.
There is a reason why the game goes out of its way to list a Passive Perception score in the stat block for every single monster in the entire game. That statistic is not meant to be ignored.
What actually happens in the dragon case is that it has blindsight and hiding doesn't do anything. The way hiding changed in 2024 has driven several giant threads because people can't agree on what the text actually means.
That said, the concept of unifying rules is good, it's just that they should probably shouldn't have use invisible as the place to unify.
What actually happens in the dragon case is that it has blindsight and hiding doesn't do anything. The way hiding changed in 2024 has driven several giant threads because people can't agree on what the text actually means.
That said, the concept of unifying rules is good, it's just that they should probably shouldn't have use invisible as the place to unify.
Yeah, I like the flat DC thing for hiding — largely for the reasons Davyd mentioned earlier — but I think it was a mistake to overload the Invisible condition rather than making it its own thing.
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
With a passive perception of 27, they're rolling that Perception check at a +17 meaning if the rogue "barely succeeded" on the hide action (DC 15), that dragon is probably auto succeeding with a minimum roll of 18. So it's largely academic
Except it now forces a action from that "dragon" which is pretty expensive for something you barely succeeded at before the scene really started, and therefore at the cost of no action to you. And they have to know to use search, so outside guards who maybe you can argue take the search action every round everyone is just as easy to get the drop on as the most oblivious foe. You can sneak up on sherlock holmes as easily as homer Simpson.
specifically dragons would probably auto detect due to their senses, but beholder or whatever else is known for a good perception but without blindsight. I don't think ease of use is a good enough reason for this change, but I never really had an issue with this it took me like 2 seconds to compare against the passive perceptions.
What was the intention behind making a successful Hide Action grant the Invisible Condition, in the 2024 Player's Handbook?
Only the Devs know the intentions behind the change, we can only speculate what we think it is. Invisible is the new Unseen and makes no loud noise the new Unheard, all this with a DC 15 threshhold.
If they made the change to make it easier to use and undersand, i think it has been a huge failure as this rule was the most debated subject when 5E24 released.
Even after the errata to Hide, it's still not clear to all judging by the existences of threads on the subject on this very forum and Mike Mearls thread at EnWorld.
I think a blogpost or dragontalk explaining the new Stealth rules in details would have help clarify their intentions, how it's meant to play out etc.. especially after seeing reactions to it but silence radio still remain to this day.
That said, the concept of unifying rules is good, it's just that they should probably shouldn't have use invisible as the place to unify.
Yeah, this is where I fall with it. The idea of turning being unseen into a condition is a solid one, but the implementation was lacking. Even calling it the Invisible condition causes issues from the jump, because the creature is not, in fact, invisible
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
With a passive perception of 27, they're rolling that Perception check at a +17 meaning if the rogue "barely succeeded" on the hide action (DC 15), that dragon is probably auto succeeding with a minimum roll of 18. So it's largely academic
The above statements are not accurate descriptions for how the mechanics work in the 2024 rules.
Whenever a DC is set for a Perception Check throughout the game, this same DC also applies to the use of the Passive Perception score which is applied without the creature in question having to take any action. This applies to all Perception Checks including activities such as looking for secret doors and so on:
Passive Perception is a score that reflects a creature’s general awareness of its surroundings. The DM uses this score when determining whether a creature notices something without consciously making a Wisdom (Perception) check.
A creature’s Passive Perception equals 10 plus the creature’s Wisdom (Perception) check bonus.
The Hide action does not require a Search action for the hidden creature to be no longer hidden. Instead, a hidden creature stops being hidden immediately after another creature "finds" that hidden creature with no further restriction on "how" that creature is found:
You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: . . . an enemy finds you . . .
In addition, a successful check only confers the Invisible condition "while hidden". So, if you are not actually hidden because an enemy instantly finds you then you do not have the condition even if your die roll was "successful":
On a successful check, you have the Invisible condition while hidden.
The Hide action sets a DC for being found via a Perception Check. By rule (see above), this same DC also applies to the usage of the Passive Perception score. The text for the Hide action does not have to explicitly restate this fact in order for those general rules to apply.
Therefore, in the above example, when the Rogue makes a "successful" roll of 15 for his stealth check, he is never actually hidden from the nearby dragon that has a Passive Perception of 27. That character might think that he is hidden from it, but he is not.
There is a reason why the game goes out of its way to list a Passive Perception score in the stat block for every single monster in the entire game. That statistic is not meant to be ignored.
Why do you leave the part that cleary say "On a successful check, you have the Invisible condition. Make note of your check's total, which is the DC for a creature to FIND you with a Wisdom (Perception) CHECK."?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What was the intention behind making a successful Hide Action grant the Invisible Condition, in the 2024 Player's Handbook?
There's an entry about the Hide Action in Sage Advice: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/sae/players-handbook#Hide, which I think is likely good; it conflicts with some of the older theories about how the Hide action (and being Hidden) work.
My theory was that it was supposed to fix the problem with how See Invisibility interacted with the Invisible Condition, in the 2014 Version: https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https://preview.redd.it/i-swear-this-isnt-about-any-particular-person-v0-7z01bs0tjr1a1.jpg?auto=webp&s=dfa30cc12b4e953be57c2c382c7478d45eb0f32e
Taking the Hide Action successfully and having the Invisible Condition have an overlap of benefits (but it seems like that wouldn't necessarily mean they are the same thing, I think). It seems like this leaves us with 2 types of invisibility, Magical Invisibility and some sort of mundane, I’m successfully hiding, so I’m not seen, so then I can’t be seen, so then I have the “invisible Condition” sort of invisibility.
I have to admit that I don’t like it. I probably have spent more time thinking about it than I will actually interact with it in game, so I’m probably also over-reacting. I think it’s inelegant and likely to cause problems.
The intention was to consolidate rules overhead, which is something D&D 5th edition does a lot and is generally speaking considered efficient games design.
Before, Hiding had it's own packet of properties and traits, many of which naturally overlapped with a lot of what the Invisible condition already did. Consolidating the rules that way means it's generally simpler to parse and track what hiding does because it's no longer it's own thing hidden (no pun intended) away in the rules. Instead it's a much more (IMO) intuitive "Pass this check, get the invisible condition" with conditions being very easy to find and look up.
It's a lot like how D&D will use the spellcasting supersystem to handle non-spell related things, such as items that give the effect of a spell, or class abilities that let you cast a spell even though the class isn't technically a spellcaster. Psionics is the prime example of this.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
And setting a fixed minimum threshold helps discourage classes not specced for it trying to fish for a high roll. I doubt it was a persistent problem, but it makes for a quick universal “nope, you failed” point to save a little time resolving low rolls.
I've gotta say, since I've started using the 2024 rules, hiding is so much easier on me as a DM. It used to be a case of calling for a check, cross referencing it against every possible monsters passive perception, and then floating that number my side for the scene. Now it's just "Did you beat 15? Cool you're hidden, you note that number in case any monsters take the Search action". So much smoother and quicker
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
That's actually very Compelling!
I think you're exactly right about consolidating (language & conepts) and efficient games design.
re: looking up the Invisible Condition, in 2024 version it's defined by it's effects, not by what it is .. like "impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense" [2014] vs hidden .: unseen ~ not visible while hidden ~ "invisible" while hiding -> invisble (the defination creeps from unseen to invisible).
In order to take the hide action, you must be " Heavily Obscured or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight" but staying Heavily Obscured or behind at least Three-Quarters Cove and out of any enemy’s line of sight is not one of the things that is listed as stoping you from continuing to be hidden [invisible] (and maybe it wouldn't work if it was always the case that not meeting those conditions means that you are no any longer hidden ), but then not having that sort of makes it seem like a creature can [perhaps always] be invisible right out in the open, without the use of magic. I think that is why consolidating the concepts of hidden and invisibility (and possibly the related concepts of going unnoticed/escaping notice/Stealth) might not work IMO: Invisible ≠ stealthy, but then if you gain the Invisible Condition, just by passing a DC 15 Stealth Check, maybe Stealth is functionally a whole lot like Invisibility in 2024.
I think it also cheapens and disincentivizes the Invisibility Spell: why waste a spell slot or spell prepartion on the Invisibility Spell if all it gets you is the Invisible condition, which could also be gotten by just taking the hide action and beating a DC 15 Stealth Check? -- Unless thost two ways of gaining the Invisibility contidtion do not confer the same kind or amount of Invisibility, which I think probbly ought to be the case, but I'm not sure that it ever says it (please correct me if I am wrong).
I also think that making it so that just passing a DC 15 Stealth automatically confers the Invisible condtion cheapens and and disincentivizes investing heavily in Perception.
I think it might interact weirdly with Surprise & Initiative too.
When you hide, what happens if you beat the DC 15 stealth check but there's a monster with a passive perception higher than your check result? This might be an obvious question, but I'm not familiar with all of the 2024 rules.
Nothing, the creature must actively take the search action to try and find you
Keep in mind that hiding requires you to not be in [colloquial] plain sight of a hostile creature
DC 15 basically represents an across-the-board average of the passive perception of all possible monsters
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Weird. I feel like a dragon with a passive perception of 27 should be able to spot the rogue that just barely succeeded in hiding behind the barrel (or any other person-size object).
Even a dragon can't see through a solid opaque object, unless it has some special feature that allows that — which would mean the rogue would be "in plain sight" and not Invisible.
Keep in mind, though, that Perception (both passive and active) covers things beyond vision, and the Invisible condition doesn't do anything to prevent you from being detected by sound, smell, etc.
pronouns: he/she/they
With a passive perception of 27, they're rolling that Perception check at a +17 meaning if the rogue "barely succeeded" on the hide action (DC 15), that dragon is probably auto succeeding with a minimum roll of 18. So it's largely academic
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
and also . . .
The above statements are not accurate descriptions for how the mechanics work in the 2024 rules.
Whenever a DC is set for a Perception Check throughout the game, this same DC also applies to the use of the Passive Perception score which is applied without the creature in question having to take any action. This applies to all Perception Checks including activities such as looking for secret doors and so on:
The Hide action does not require a Search action for the hidden creature to be no longer hidden. Instead, a hidden creature stops being hidden immediately after another creature "finds" that hidden creature with no further restriction on "how" that creature is found:
In addition, a successful check only confers the Invisible condition "while hidden". So, if you are not actually hidden because an enemy instantly finds you then you do not have the condition even if your die roll was "successful":
The Hide action sets a DC for being found via a Perception Check. By rule (see above), this same DC also applies to the usage of the Passive Perception score. The text for the Hide action does not have to explicitly restate this fact in order for those general rules to apply.
Therefore, in the above example, when the Rogue makes a "successful" roll of 15 for his stealth check, he is never actually hidden from the nearby dragon that has a Passive Perception of 27. That character might think that he is hidden from it, but he is not.
There is a reason why the game goes out of its way to list a Passive Perception score in the stat block for every single monster in the entire game. That statistic is not meant to be ignored.
What actually happens in the dragon case is that it has blindsight and hiding doesn't do anything. The way hiding changed in 2024 has driven several giant threads because people can't agree on what the text actually means.
That said, the concept of unifying rules is good, it's just that they should probably shouldn't have use invisible as the place to unify.
Yeah, I like the flat DC thing for hiding — largely for the reasons Davyd mentioned earlier — but I think it was a mistake to overload the Invisible condition rather than making it its own thing.
pronouns: he/she/they
So wait, is blindsight actually saying that it cannot see something behind total cover UNLESS that thing is invisible? That needs immediate errata.
Except it now forces a action from that "dragon" which is pretty expensive for something you barely succeeded at before the scene really started, and therefore at the cost of no action to you. And they have to know to use search, so outside guards who maybe you can argue take the search action every round everyone is just as easy to get the drop on as the most oblivious foe. You can sneak up on sherlock holmes as easily as homer Simpson.
specifically dragons would probably auto detect due to their senses, but beholder or whatever else is known for a good perception but without blindsight. I don't think ease of use is a good enough reason for this change, but I never really had an issue with this it took me like 2 seconds to compare against the passive perceptions.
No, that's not what it's saying. The thing being invisible doesn't override the clause about not being able to see things behind total cover.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Only the Devs know the intentions behind the change, we can only speculate what we think it is. Invisible is the new Unseen and makes no loud noise the new Unheard, all this with a DC 15 threshhold.
If they made the change to make it easier to use and undersand, i think it has been a huge failure as this rule was the most debated subject when 5E24 released.
Even after the errata to Hide, it's still not clear to all judging by the existences of threads on the subject on this very forum and Mike Mearls thread at EnWorld.
I think a blogpost or dragontalk explaining the new Stealth rules in details would have help clarify their intentions, how it's meant to play out etc.. especially after seeing reactions to it but silence radio still remain to this day.
Yeah, this is where I fall with it. The idea of turning being unseen into a condition is a solid one, but the implementation was lacking. Even calling it the Invisible condition causes issues from the jump, because the creature is not, in fact, invisible
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
No, it's just that being invisible doesn't really do anything if you're behind total cover.
My general opinion of the 2024 stealth rules is that they took bad rules... and made them worse.
Why do you leave the part that cleary say "On a successful check, you have the Invisible condition. Make note of your check's total, which is the DC for a creature to FIND you with a Wisdom (Perception) CHECK."?