But where does it say that in the rules? The way I read it, your stealth check remains in effect "until you are discovered or you stop hiding". It does not say "until you hide again". So, if we are tracking things individually like in my previous post and we become Hidden from some creatures but not other creatures -- am I even allowed to try to Hide again from the creatures who found me?
Or are you proposing this?
I was Hidden from A, B and C but now A has discovered me. If I want to attempt to hide from A I now throw away my stealth check vs B and C and roll a new check? So now I run the risk of failing my new Hide check and now I am no longer hidden from A, B or C? Or, I run the risk of successfully Hiding from A but simultaneously failing to Hide from B and/or C even though I was already previously hidden from them?
All of this is so much worse than my interpretation in my opinion.
I agree with Plaguescarred. When you try to hide again, your new Stealth roll replaces the old one. This is quite simple and intuitive solution to your example with enemies A, B, C and D. And I believe this is how it is played at most tables (at least I would be playing it like that).
I do acknowledge though, that it is not exactly explained and written like this in the rules. This is where the rules get vague and foggy. But it is, by my opinion, very logical solution.
To put it in perspective of your example: - You are hidden with roll of 11, and creature A discovers you with its Search action. B and C still do not know where you are. - Now you need to decide, if you try to hide again or remain as you are (therefore discovered by creature A). This decision is what makes it interesting. - And also it is logical. If you try to hide again, you need to spend an Action, therefore you make some effort to hide somehow differently and hopefully better. Your state changes and that is why the old Stealth roll (11) no longer apply. - You roll new Stealth and that becomes your measure of success. In your example you roll only 5. This means you totally screwed up your efforts and probably made some noise, which causes that all creatures notice you (by their passive Perception 10). Therefore you are no longer hidden from any of them. - If next round you try to hide again and roll 15, you are again hidden from all (passive perception 10). If new creature D joins the battle, and lets say it is very perceptive creature with passive Perception 16, it immediately notices you, because you have Stealth only 15.
I do not think it is worse interpretation, as you believe it to be. In fact to me this is very good interpretation. It offers options to the players, it is logical and offers certain level of realism. I see this as very simple, elegant and intuitive use of rules. And this is probably why everybody is understanding it like that. And why you have trouble convincing everybody about your point of view, which offers only some simplification (which is not needed) and brings a lot of logical issues, like that all enemies automatically knowing your location upon being discovered by one of them, allies being excluded from noticing you, and so on.
I agree with Plaguescarred. When you try to hide again, your new Stealth roll replaces the old one. This is quite simple and intuitive solution to your example with enemies A, B, C and D. And I believe this is how it is played at most tables (at least I would be playing it like that).
This is exactly how it works; the Hide action is not conditional, you can do it as often or as rarely as any other available action. Once an enemy discovers you you don't lose the ability to Hide, you can just try again, because the key thing once discovered is to break that awareness somehow, usually by (stealthily) changing location and finding some other hiding spot where they still can't see you.
It's important to keep in mind that a creature equalling or exceeding your Stealth check with its Perception check (or passive Perception) only means they find "signs of your presence", which doesn't mean that they actually see you. Most of the time it's going to mean they hear you, or maybe they notice your shadow through a doorway, footprints you've left on the ground, items you've disturbed etc. Discovering you means they know that someone is in the area, and where they are at that time, but until they actually see you you're still unseen. Hiding again means they no longer perceive any more signs of your presence, and then moving while hidden means they only know where you were, not where you now are, as long as your Stealth is high enough.
The hide and seek example remains ever relevant; by default to seek someone you must be able to see them, it's not enough just to hear them. Just because you heard someone in the next room doesn't mean you've found them yet; by the time you get there they could have snuck out to another room, or found a hiding spot within the room where you can't immediately find them (because you only knew they were in the room, you don't know exactly where they now are), in both cases this would be equivalent to taking the Hide action again.
Mechanically this means that taking the Search action and perceiving a hidden creature may not be enough if you can't move into a position where you can also see them, because if you can't then they can just immediately Hide and move somewhere else (while hidden from you). However if you can see them, they must move first (since they can't hide from creatures that can see them) and then try to Hide somewhere else, and then they need to keep moving because otherwise you still know where they are (i.e- it's not enough for them to go behind a box and hide, because you know they went behind the box and can just go over to it and see them again).
This is also why the ability to Hide and Search as bonus actions, legendary actions etc. can be so powerful, as it's a lot harder to hide from an adult red dragon, because it can detect you outside of turn order and then do as it pleases on its turn. While a Rogue can attack from hidden, then potentially become hidden again in the same turn, or they can take the Hide action twice if they didn't hide well enough the first time etc.
I agree with Plaguescarred. When you try to hide again, your new Stealth roll replaces the old one. This is quite simple and intuitive solution to your example with enemies A, B, C and D. And I believe this is how it is played at most tables (at least I would be playing it like that).
I do acknowledge though, that it is not exactly explained and written like this in the rules. This is where the rules get vague and foggy. But it is, by my opinion, very logical solution.
- And also it is logical. If you try to hide again, you need to spend an Action, therefore you make some effort to hide somehow differently and hopefully better. Your state changes and that is why the old Stealth roll (11) no longer apply.
I disagree with this for several reasons. To me, this solution is not intuitive and also not logical AND it's not what the rule says.
What you are saying is that when you are discovered, you can still be hidden from some other creatures, but when you Hide you actually expose yourself and break your own stealth. Logically, this is actually exactly backwards of how it should be. Hiding should have the chance to improve your position or maintain the status quo (which is how contests work) and being discovered should actually expose you.
My interpretation is that when you try to Hide you go from Unhidden to Hidden and THAT stealth check remains until you are discovered or you stop hiding. If you try to Hide again, the DM should simply say "circumstances are not appropriate for Hiding since you are already Hidden -- you already have an active stealth check". If you insist, then what you must do is to "stop hiding" first. You intentionally throw away your stealth score. Narratively, you are intentionally exposing your position in a visual or auditory manner. THEN you can attempt to Hide again.
I guess in some ways you guys are suggesting that this would be required under your interpretation also -- but that makes sooooo much less sense when you are supposedly already hidden from "some" creatures.
And this is probably why everybody is understanding it like that. And why you have trouble convincing everybody about your point of view
Actually, I'm not really sure why so many are having trouble with this rule. Mainly, it's probably because it should have been written a bit better, although I actually think that this rule is pretty clear compared to many other clearly ambiguous rules in this game.
Another possibility is simply because of "group think", where people within a community sort of learn from each other over time. "We play that way because everybody plays that way" or, "it's always been played that way" or whatever. A classic example is the game of Monopoly. It's pretty well understood that a fairly low percentage of Monopoly players actually play by the rules as written. In many cases, they don't even know it -- they never really carefully read the rules. They just made assumptions, did what seemed right, and learned from other players.
It's also possible that people who already know and understand the rule are not bothering to read and comment in this thread. Who knows?
I agree with Plaguescarred. When you try to hide again, your new Stealth roll replaces the old one. This is quite simple and intuitive solution to your example with enemies A, B, C and D. And I believe this is how it is played at most tables (at least I would be playing it like that).
This is exactly how it works;
Actually, it's not. Even Aasimar11 goes on to acknowledge this later in his post. It's simply how some people play. But, it's not the rule. The rule is: THAT stealth check remains in effect "until you are discovered or you stop hiding".
It's important to keep in mind that a creature equalling or exceeding your Stealth check with its Perception check (or passive Perception) only means they find "signs of your presence", which doesn't mean that they actually see you.
Except for the incorrect interpretation of what happens in a tie, this is generally correct and is a good point. Some previous posters were equating things like "line of sight" with Hiding -- they are not the same thing. In the example that I gave in a previous post where I hide behind a row of bushes with 3 enemies on the other side -- those enemies were "searching" for me from the other side of the bushes. They would not be able to see me, but they can learn my location with a successful search -- presumably by hearing me or seeing the bush move in a certain way or whatever -- the how and why of it doesn't matter, that's up to the DM and the players to explain as part of the story. (Similarly, the how and why of all enemies discovering a creature simultaneously doesn't matter either -- that's up to the DM and players to explain as part of the story.)
If instead one of the 3 enemies in my example had simply walked around to the other side of the bushes and stood there watching me squat down behind them -- no check required, I am discovered automatically. The perception check is only required when you can NOT see the other creature clearly.
Discovering you means they know that someone is in the area, and where they are at that time, but until they actually see you you're still unseen. Hiding again means they no longer perceive any more signs of your presence, and then moving while hidden means they only know where you were, not where you now are, as long as your Stealth is high enough.
This is actually all true. We have to be careful with this though. It is not actually a requirement to move in order to become hidden. Once you become hidden, you cannot be targeted by an attack. The attacker can attack a location, but not the Hidden creature directly.
Mechanically this means that taking the Search action and perceiving a hidden creature may not be enough if you can't move into a position where you can also see them, because if you can't then they can just immediately Hide and move somewhere else (while hidden from you). However if you can see them, they must move first (since they can't hide from creatures that can see them) and then try to Hide somewhere else, and then they need to keep moving because otherwise you still know where they are (i.e- it's not enough for them to go behind a box and hide, because you know they went behind the box and can just go there).
A lot of this is somewhat bad information. As soon as you discover a hidden creature, they are no longer hidden whether you can see them or not. Their location is now known. When we say things like "because they can just immediately Hide", that is making a pretty big assumption that they will actually be successful when they try to Hide. Once you discover a creature, they must successfully Hide in order to become Hidden again.
Also, when we say "and then they need to keep moving because otherwise you still know where they are", that is just incorrect. You CAN successfully hide behind a box or a tree trunk or whatever, unless the DM deems that the circumstances are not appropriate for hiding. Moving is NOT a requirement for becoming Hidden. Once you are Hidden, your location is unknown. IF the enemy then attacks the correct LOCATION, AND you had not yet moved, then he could successfully hit you with an attack in that manner. But he can NOT directly target you with an attack since you are indeed Hidden.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
But where does it say that in the rules? The way I read it, your stealth check remains in effect "until you are discovered or you stop hiding". It does not say "until you hide again". So, if we are tracking things individually like in my previous post and we become Hidden from some creatures but not other creatures -- am I even allowed to try to Hide again from the creatures who found me?
Or are you proposing this?
I was Hidden from A, B and C but now A has discovered me. If I want to attempt to hide from A I now throw away my stealth check vs B and C and roll a new check? So now I run the risk of failing my new Hide check and now I am no longer hidden from A, B or C? Or, I run the risk of successfully Hiding from A but simultaneously failing to Hide from B and/or C even though I was already previously hidden from them?
All of this is so much worse than my interpretation in my opinion.
I agree with Plaguescarred. When you try to hide again, your new Stealth roll replaces the old one. This is quite simple and intuitive solution to your example with enemies A, B, C and D. And I believe this is how it is played at most tables (at least I would be playing it like that).
I do acknowledge though, that it is not exactly explained and written like this in the rules. This is where the rules get vague and foggy. But it is, by my opinion, very logical solution.
To put it in perspective of your example:
- You are hidden with roll of 11, and creature A discovers you with its Search action. B and C still do not know where you are.
- Now you need to decide, if you try to hide again or remain as you are (therefore discovered by creature A). This decision is what makes it interesting.
- And also it is logical. If you try to hide again, you need to spend an Action, therefore you make some effort to hide somehow differently and hopefully better. Your state changes and that is why the old Stealth roll (11) no longer apply.
- You roll new Stealth and that becomes your measure of success. In your example you roll only 5. This means you totally screwed up your efforts and probably made some noise, which causes that all creatures notice you (by their passive Perception 10). Therefore you are no longer hidden from any of them.
- If next round you try to hide again and roll 15, you are again hidden from all (passive perception 10). If new creature D joins the battle, and lets say it is very perceptive creature with passive Perception 16, it immediately notices you, because you have Stealth only 15.
I do not think it is worse interpretation, as you believe it to be. In fact to me this is very good interpretation. It offers options to the players, it is logical and offers certain level of realism. I see this as very simple, elegant and intuitive use of rules.
And this is probably why everybody is understanding it like that. And why you have trouble convincing everybody about your point of view, which offers only some simplification (which is not needed) and brings a lot of logical issues, like that all enemies automatically knowing your location upon being discovered by one of them, allies being excluded from noticing you, and so on.
This is exactly how it works; the Hide action is not conditional, you can do it as often or as rarely as any other available action. Once an enemy discovers you you don't lose the ability to Hide, you can just try again, because the key thing once discovered is to break that awareness somehow, usually by (stealthily) changing location and finding some other hiding spot where they still can't see you.
It's important to keep in mind that a creature equalling or exceeding your Stealth check with its Perception check (or passive Perception) only means they find "signs of your presence", which doesn't mean that they actually see you. Most of the time it's going to mean they hear you, or maybe they notice your shadow through a doorway, footprints you've left on the ground, items you've disturbed etc. Discovering you means they know that someone is in the area, and where they are at that time, but until they actually see you you're still unseen. Hiding again means they no longer perceive any more signs of your presence, and then moving while hidden means they only know where you were, not where you now are, as long as your Stealth is high enough.
The hide and seek example remains ever relevant; by default to seek someone you must be able to see them, it's not enough just to hear them. Just because you heard someone in the next room doesn't mean you've found them yet; by the time you get there they could have snuck out to another room, or found a hiding spot within the room where you can't immediately find them (because you only knew they were in the room, you don't know exactly where they now are), in both cases this would be equivalent to taking the Hide action again.
Mechanically this means that taking the Search action and perceiving a hidden creature may not be enough if you can't move into a position where you can also see them, because if you can't then they can just immediately Hide and move somewhere else (while hidden from you). However if you can see them, they must move first (since they can't hide from creatures that can see them) and then try to Hide somewhere else, and then they need to keep moving because otherwise you still know where they are (i.e- it's not enough for them to go behind a box and hide, because you know they went behind the box and can just go over to it and see them again).
This is also why the ability to Hide and Search as bonus actions, legendary actions etc. can be so powerful, as it's a lot harder to hide from an adult red dragon, because it can detect you outside of turn order and then do as it pleases on its turn. While a Rogue can attack from hidden, then potentially become hidden again in the same turn, or they can take the Hide action twice if they didn't hide well enough the first time etc.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
I disagree with this for several reasons. To me, this solution is not intuitive and also not logical AND it's not what the rule says.
What you are saying is that when you are discovered, you can still be hidden from some other creatures, but when you Hide you actually expose yourself and break your own stealth. Logically, this is actually exactly backwards of how it should be. Hiding should have the chance to improve your position or maintain the status quo (which is how contests work) and being discovered should actually expose you.
My interpretation is that when you try to Hide you go from Unhidden to Hidden and THAT stealth check remains until you are discovered or you stop hiding. If you try to Hide again, the DM should simply say "circumstances are not appropriate for Hiding since you are already Hidden -- you already have an active stealth check". If you insist, then what you must do is to "stop hiding" first. You intentionally throw away your stealth score. Narratively, you are intentionally exposing your position in a visual or auditory manner. THEN you can attempt to Hide again.
I guess in some ways you guys are suggesting that this would be required under your interpretation also -- but that makes sooooo much less sense when you are supposedly already hidden from "some" creatures.
Actually, I'm not really sure why so many are having trouble with this rule. Mainly, it's probably because it should have been written a bit better, although I actually think that this rule is pretty clear compared to many other clearly ambiguous rules in this game.
Another possibility is simply because of "group think", where people within a community sort of learn from each other over time. "We play that way because everybody plays that way" or, "it's always been played that way" or whatever. A classic example is the game of Monopoly. It's pretty well understood that a fairly low percentage of Monopoly players actually play by the rules as written. In many cases, they don't even know it -- they never really carefully read the rules. They just made assumptions, did what seemed right, and learned from other players.
It's also possible that people who already know and understand the rule are not bothering to read and comment in this thread. Who knows?
Actually, it's not. Even Aasimar11 goes on to acknowledge this later in his post. It's simply how some people play. But, it's not the rule. The rule is: THAT stealth check remains in effect "until you are discovered or you stop hiding".
Except for the incorrect interpretation of what happens in a tie, this is generally correct and is a good point. Some previous posters were equating things like "line of sight" with Hiding -- they are not the same thing. In the example that I gave in a previous post where I hide behind a row of bushes with 3 enemies on the other side -- those enemies were "searching" for me from the other side of the bushes. They would not be able to see me, but they can learn my location with a successful search -- presumably by hearing me or seeing the bush move in a certain way or whatever -- the how and why of it doesn't matter, that's up to the DM and the players to explain as part of the story. (Similarly, the how and why of all enemies discovering a creature simultaneously doesn't matter either -- that's up to the DM and players to explain as part of the story.)
If instead one of the 3 enemies in my example had simply walked around to the other side of the bushes and stood there watching me squat down behind them -- no check required, I am discovered automatically. The perception check is only required when you can NOT see the other creature clearly.
This is actually all true. We have to be careful with this though. It is not actually a requirement to move in order to become hidden. Once you become hidden, you cannot be targeted by an attack. The attacker can attack a location, but not the Hidden creature directly.
A lot of this is somewhat bad information. As soon as you discover a hidden creature, they are no longer hidden whether you can see them or not. Their location is now known. When we say things like "because they can just immediately Hide", that is making a pretty big assumption that they will actually be successful when they try to Hide. Once you discover a creature, they must successfully Hide in order to become Hidden again.
Also, when we say "and then they need to keep moving because otherwise you still know where they are", that is just incorrect. You CAN successfully hide behind a box or a tree trunk or whatever, unless the DM deems that the circumstances are not appropriate for hiding. Moving is NOT a requirement for becoming Hidden. Once you are Hidden, your location is unknown. IF the enemy then attacks the correct LOCATION, AND you had not yet moved, then he could successfully hit you with an attack in that manner. But he can NOT directly target you with an attack since you are indeed Hidden.