Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
The action gives the invisible condition, and the invisible condition gives advantage on attack rolls. However, the invisible condition from hide also ends once an attack roll of made, so if you attack someone after taking the hide action, does it have advantage or not? Need to know so I can bully my players with Shadows and Shadow Dragons next session :)
Yes, just the once, hit or miss. (Though there are some class features and feats that mess with that a bit.)
It's the same as how Invisibility stops as soon as you attack. Although the Condition ended the attacker still has Advantage.
One thing to be aware of, however, There are arguments to be made that on occasion the Invisibility condition for Hide may be broken before the attack is made (e.g., if the person Hiding is forced to approach their target from the front without adequate cover for a long enough distance), but these arguments are not without people who will vehemently disagree. It comes down to exactly how you interpret certain phrases (primarily the phrase 'an enemy finds you') and how potent you want Stealth to be.
The invisible condition from hide ends immediately after making an attack roll, and thus the attack roll benefits from being invisible (unless invisibility is ended by something else, of course).
Perhaps even more importantly, the Hide action causes you to become hidden (concealed).
The resulting interaction asked about in this OP is covered elsewhere in the general rules in a sidebar called Unseen Attackers and Targets:
"
When a creature can’t see you, you have Advantage on attack rolls against it.
If you are hidden when you make an attack roll, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
"
It's impossible to draw line of sight to a Hidden creature, because they're Invisible. So the only way to 'find them' is pass the perception check.
RAW, this is correct. However, the Invisible does not specify a duration. Most DM's would rule that you can not take the Hide action in the brush at the edge of a field, then move into the open and spend the next 3 turns standing in that open field in broad daylight and remain unseen by the enemies all around you. While this is strictly within the rules, it makes no sense from a narrative or logical perspective. Ultimately, it is up to the DM do decide when the conditions of any given situation make it difficult (possibly requiring a Stealth check) or downright impossible for you to remain Invisible to the enemies.
The DM can not follow the rules whenever they choose. But this is the Rules & Game Mechanics forum. The rules are the law.
And it does specify a duration. "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." How long are you Hidden? Until one of those things happen.
This is from the Sage Advice Compendium, which are considered official rulings:
If you are seen, you are no longer hidden and lose the Invisible condition. Standing in plain sight with enemies around would would obviously qualify as being seen in the same way that Blindsight or Truesight would.
The rules in this case are also extremely unclear, and open to many different interpretations.
And, RAW, there are times when no roll is required, at the DMs discretion. You stand out in the middle of the open, the DM says 'yes, you used the Stealth action, but that is a skill and not a magical spell, so they automatically succeed in their Perception roll'.
That, absolutely, is RAW. Please stop acting like people who disagree with you are not following the rules. You don't like the DM making that choice, fine. Don't play with that DM. However, do not act like them making that decision is somehow ignoring the rules.
Please note, I'm not saying that your interpretation does not follow the rules. You, as the DM, can decide that no, they do still require a Perception check since it is at your discretion.
Because of DM discretion two conflicting results can occur without either result requiring someone to ignore a rule.
At any rate, there are other threads that are dedicated to this subject, rather than continuing it as a tangent.
And this is what I meant when I said that there are arguments to be made and people who will just as vehemently argue against the point, ZardiacTheW1zard. At the end of the day you will have to decide exactly what your discretion on the matter is. Just keep in mind that you are working with your players and not against them and whatever decision you make they should be comfortable with (maybe they want a more fantastic campaign where Stealth can be used that way, maybe they don't) and the ruling should be consistent (if the rule affects the NPCs one way it really should affect the players in the same way).
Yes, anyone who's actually interested in the hide argument (which isn't relevant to this thread, there's nothing unclear or disputed about the particular question the OP was asking) can find multiple threads.
Not at all the same. Blindsight and Truesight ignore Invisible, and thus ignore Hidden (unless you are behind total cover or heavily obscured from those sight types). They can see you because they can draw line of sight to you. Normal sight does not (and can never 'see you' without the defined perception check method, because it can never draw line of sight to you). Your interpretation here is just obviously wrong.
But I will otherwise drop this in this thread.