While Nick (and Dual Wielding) were debated a lot in the beginning, I think the dust has mostly settled on that one. Darkness, however, I think is in the same boat as Hide: the rules don't seem to make a whole lot of sense when taken at face value, and it's not even a problem of "DnD is not a physics simulator". It's the fact that, by RAW, you can't see the moon at night...
If any enemy spots it, the player loses invis condition, but if its a single monster, its possible they could remain hidden for a while even out in the open.
To my understanding as soon as one enemy find you, you're no longer hidden and loose the Invisible condition.
.... that is literally what Im saying....
If any enemy spots you, you lose invis conditon.
But if there is only one enemy or so, then this piece seems applicable:
" and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight; if you can see a creature, you can discern whether it can see you."
If the enemy is not looking in your direction, even though you are out in the open, you.could retain the hidden condition.
That would have to be a purely subjective call.on the dm's part. But if all the melee players are north of the enemy and atracking the enemy, and the rogue is to the south, successfully hide during their previous action aand is now walking around, behind the enemy, where the enemy is not looking, concievably the dm could allow the rogue to maintain the invisible condition.
Obviously, if the rogue attacks or does the things that auto stops the invis condition, then it ends. But if thr rogue is simply trying to sneak over to the lever that drops the enemy into a pit of spikes, maybe the enemy just isnt looking to the south.
"You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you"
How does an enemy find a hidden rogue unless rhey take the Search Action and get to do a Perception Check against the Rogues Stealth check roll?
If the rogue is out in the open, the enemy could just turn around, but if they dont Search and they just rely on a distracted/passive perception, maybe they dont think to turn around?
While Nick (and Dual Wielding) were debated a lot in the beginning, I think the dust has mostly settled on that one. Darkness, however, I think is in the same boat as Hide: the rules don't seem to make a whole lot of sense when taken at face value, and it's not even a problem of "DnD is not a physics simulator". It's the fact that, by RAW, you can't see the moon at night...
I think if you say the moon casts dim light to infinity, you can see it, raw.
But having only 3 levels of color space brightness is def weird.
"You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you"
How does an enemy find a hidden rogue unless rhey take the Search Action and get to do a Perception Check against the Rogues Stealth check roll?
If the rogue is out in the open, the enemy could just turn around, but if they dont Search and they just rely on a distracted/passive perception, maybe they dont think to turn around?
Except it doesn't call for a Search Action, which would seem to be a simple and logical bit of text to include if the intention was that an enemy absolutely must spend action economy to locate you.
The argument that the enemy somehow can instantly track well enough to, say, take a Legendary Action against anyone on the field in the infinitesimal gap of time at the end of a turn or respond to spell cast from "behind" them as you describe it, but cannot perceive a character because they stood behind a crate- potentially for just a moment- because they've been "distracted" is getting into players narrating NPC agency for a favorable outcome.
While Nick (and Dual Wielding) were debated a lot in the beginning, I think the dust has mostly settled on that one. Darkness, however, I think is in the same boat as Hide: the rules don't seem to make a whole lot of sense when taken at face value, and it's not even a problem of "DnD is not a physics simulator". It's the fact that, by RAW, you can't see the moon at night...
I think if you say the moon casts dim light to infinity, you can see it, raw.
But having only 3 levels of color space brightness is def weird.
While my example was meant to really highlight the absurdity, the same logic applies to someone with a torch more than 40ft away. You can't see them (or the torch) without darkvision.
...but this thread (and the 3-4 other recent ones) is about Hide.
While my example was meant to really highlight the absurdity, the same logic applies to someone with a torch more than 40ft away. You can't see them (or the torch) without darkvision.
...but this thread (and the 3-4 other recent ones) is about Hide.
I'm sure this has been said ad infinitum elsewhere, but might as well go down the rabbit hole...
Depends on your interpretation, but I think the wording definitely leans more towards you being able to.
Heavily Obscured: "You have the Blinded condition while trying to see something in a Heavily Obscured space. See also “Blinded,” “Darkness,” and “Playing the Game” (“Exploration”)."
This could be read as either "when you are in" or "that is in," but given the phrasing the latter makes far more sense.
Obscured Areas: "A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the Rules Glossary) when trying to see something there."
Thereisn't much ambiguity to this one; you are trying to "see something there," it's a huge stretch to read this as "when you are there."
You being in a Heavily Obscured area doesn't automatically Blind you to everything; rather, you have the Blinded condition towards something you're trying to see that is, itself, in a Heavily Obscured area (such as Darkness). If something is in light, you can see it, even if you're in a Heavily Obscured area.
While Nick (and Dual Wielding) were debated a lot in the beginning, I think the dust has mostly settled on that one. Darkness, however, I think is in the same boat as Hide: the rules don't seem to make a whole lot of sense when taken at face value, and it's not even a problem of "DnD is not a physics simulator". It's the fact that, by RAW, you can't see the moon at night...
I think if you say the moon casts dim light to infinity, you can see it, raw.
But having only 3 levels of color space brightness is def weird.
Technically you can't say that RAW, because:
Darkness. Darkness creates a Heavily Obscured area. Characters face Darkness outdoors at night (even most moonlit nights), ...
"You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you"
How does an enemy find a hidden rogue unless rhey take the Search Action and get to do a Perception Check against the Rogues Stealth check roll?
If the rogue is out in the open, the enemy could just turn around, but if they dont Search and they just rely on a distracted/passive perception, maybe they dont think to turn around?
Except it doesn't call for a Search Action, which would seem to be a simple and logical bit of text to include if the intention was that an enemy absolutely must spend action economy to locate you.
The argument that the enemy somehow can instantly track well enough to, say, take a Legendary Action against anyone on the field in the infinitesimal gap of time at the end of a turn or respond to spell cast from "behind" them as you describe it, but cannot perceive a character because they stood behind a crate- potentially for just a moment- because they've been "distracted" is getting into players narrating NPC agency for a favorable outcome.
"Except it doesn't call for a Search Action,
Well it most certainly does in the basic rules for hide.
Rogue makes a stealth check, dc 15. On success they are hidden, and the value rogue rolled becomes dc for any Perception check to find the rogue.
If rogue remains motionless, even if enemy is looking towards the rogue who is behind cover, hidden, and has the invisible condition, the enemy does not percieve the rogue.
Rules say if hidden, enemy must do a perception check, dc equal to stealth check, to spot them, find them, whatever.
If rogue comes out in open and there are a bunch of enemies can assume one will spot them and rogue loses invis condition.
BUT if there is only one enemy, and the rest of the party attacks that enemy in an effort to distract that one enemy, the dm could rule that the enemy never bothers to look in the direction of the rogue, never does a search, and the rogue remains invisible while standing out in the open, because no enemy is looking at them.
If an active search is required to percieve a hidden rogue, an active search ought at least be considered as a requirement for spotting a rogue who was hidden, but is now in the open, and there is only one enemy, and the rest of party is distracting it.
No where in the 2024 rules for Hide does passive perception ever get mentioned, so the only way to do a perception check is to take the Search action.
2014: rogue stealth check=16 versus goblin perception check=17, rogue never hides. Ever.
2024, minimal interpretation: rogue stealth check dc 15, rolls a 16, is hidden and has invisible condition. They can now attack with advantage. ON THE GOBLINS TURN, goblin takes Search action, rolls a 17, spots the rogue.
At a minimum, the difference between 2014 and 2024 hide rules is 2024 rules allows the rogue the chance to at least hide DURING THEIR TURN, before an enemy can spot them.
This is actually an improvement from 2014 rules where thr "contested check" basically gave the goblin a free Search action on the rogues turn.
If youre not actively searching, dm should at most use your passive perception minus 5 to see if you catch the rogue out of the corner of your eye.
2024 fixes two things, the silly free Search action hidden inside the "contested check" and the fact that Passive Perception is for when youre actively looking and should take a -5 during combat.
While Nick (and Dual Wielding) were debated a lot in the beginning, I think the dust has mostly settled on that one. Darkness, however, I think is in the same boat as Hide: the rules don't seem to make a whole lot of sense when taken at face value, and it's not even a problem of "DnD is not a physics simulator". It's the fact that, by RAW, you can't see the moon at night...
.... that is literally what Im saying....
If any enemy spots you, you lose invis conditon.
But if there is only one enemy or so, then this piece seems applicable:
" and you must be out of any enemy’s line of sight; if you can see a creature, you can discern whether it can see you."
If the enemy is not looking in your direction, even though you are out in the open, you.could retain the hidden condition.
That would have to be a purely subjective call.on the dm's part. But if all the melee players are north of the enemy and atracking the enemy, and the rogue is to the south, successfully hide during their previous action aand is now walking around, behind the enemy, where the enemy is not looking, concievably the dm could allow the rogue to maintain the invisible condition.
Obviously, if the rogue attacks or does the things that auto stops the invis condition, then it ends. But if thr rogue is simply trying to sneak over to the lever that drops the enemy into a pit of spikes, maybe the enemy just isnt looking to the south.
"You stop being hidden immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you"
How does an enemy find a hidden rogue unless rhey take the Search Action and get to do a Perception Check against the Rogues Stealth check roll?
If the rogue is out in the open, the enemy could just turn around, but if they dont Search and they just rely on a distracted/passive perception, maybe they dont think to turn around?
I think if you say the moon casts dim light to infinity, you can see it, raw.
But having only 3 levels of color space brightness is def weird.
They move so the hidden rogue no longer has the prerequisites for stealth. They use an ability that defeats invisibility.
Except it doesn't call for a Search Action, which would seem to be a simple and logical bit of text to include if the intention was that an enemy absolutely must spend action economy to locate you.
The argument that the enemy somehow can instantly track well enough to, say, take a Legendary Action against anyone on the field in the infinitesimal gap of time at the end of a turn or respond to spell cast from "behind" them as you describe it, but cannot perceive a character because they stood behind a crate- potentially for just a moment- because they've been "distracted" is getting into players narrating NPC agency for a favorable outcome.
While my example was meant to really highlight the absurdity, the same logic applies to someone with a torch more than 40ft away. You can't see them (or the torch) without darkvision.
...but this thread (and the 3-4 other recent ones) is about Hide.
I'm sure this has been said ad infinitum elsewhere, but might as well go down the rabbit hole...
Depends on your interpretation, but I think the wording definitely leans more towards you being able to.
Darkness:
"An area of Darkness is Heavily Obscured. See also “Heavily Obscured” and “Playing the Game” (“Exploration”)."
Heavily Obscured:
"You have the Blinded condition while trying to see something in a Heavily Obscured space. See also “Blinded,” “Darkness,” and “Playing the Game” (“Exploration”)."
This could be read as either "when you are in" or "that is in," but given the phrasing the latter makes far more sense.
Obscured Areas:
"A Heavily Obscured area—such as an area with Darkness, heavy fog, or dense foliage—is opaque. You have the Blinded condition (see the Rules Glossary) when trying to see something there."
There isn't much ambiguity to this one; you are trying to "see something there," it's a huge stretch to read this as "when you are there."
You being in a Heavily Obscured area doesn't automatically Blind you to everything; rather, you have the Blinded condition towards something you're trying to see that is, itself, in a Heavily Obscured area (such as Darkness). If something is in light, you can see it, even if you're in a Heavily Obscured area.
Technically you can't say that RAW, because:
"Except it doesn't call for a Search Action,
Well it most certainly does in the basic rules for hide.
Rogue makes a stealth check, dc 15. On success they are hidden, and the value rogue rolled becomes dc for any Perception check to find the rogue.
If rogue remains motionless, even if enemy is looking towards the rogue who is behind cover, hidden, and has the invisible condition, the enemy does not percieve the rogue.
Rules say if hidden, enemy must do a perception check, dc equal to stealth check, to spot them, find them, whatever.
If rogue comes out in open and there are a bunch of enemies can assume one will spot them and rogue loses invis condition.
BUT if there is only one enemy, and the rest of the party attacks that enemy in an effort to distract that one enemy, the dm could rule that the enemy never bothers to look in the direction of the rogue, never does a search, and the rogue remains invisible while standing out in the open, because no enemy is looking at them.
If an active search is required to percieve a hidden rogue, an active search ought at least be considered as a requirement for spotting a rogue who was hidden, but is now in the open, and there is only one enemy, and the rest of party is distracting it.
No where in the 2024 rules for Hide does passive perception ever get mentioned, so the only way to do a perception check is to take the Search action.
2014: rogue stealth check=16 versus goblin perception check=17, rogue never hides. Ever.
2024, minimal interpretation: rogue stealth check dc 15, rolls a 16, is hidden and has invisible condition. They can now attack with advantage. ON THE GOBLINS TURN, goblin takes Search action, rolls a 17, spots the rogue.
At a minimum, the difference between 2014 and 2024 hide rules is 2024 rules allows the rogue the chance to at least hide DURING THEIR TURN, before an enemy can spot them.
This is actually an improvement from 2014 rules where thr "contested check" basically gave the goblin a free Search action on the rogues turn.
If youre not actively searching, dm should at most use your passive perception minus 5 to see if you catch the rogue out of the corner of your eye.
2024 fixes two things, the silly free Search action hidden inside the "contested check" and the fact that Passive Perception is for when youre actively looking and should take a -5 during combat.
"Passive Perception is for when you're actively looking" is a wild sentence.