Yep, if you look at my previously reply you'll see I discovered on further inspection of the rules that being hidden appears to apply on a creature by creature basis.
Depending on how much stock (if any) you put in the rules as intended, Jeremy Crawford in this interview (starts around 18:15) explains that if even one creature sees a hidden creature, then the creature is no longer hidden and must make a new attempt to hide. That being said, the interview and the rules themselves keep going back to the idea that the way stealth is handled is very much in the domain of the DM's judgment. I know this is always the case for everything in D&D, but stealth rules appear to have been written with enough intentional ambiguity to allow and require the DM to make the call on a given situation. And I understand that will be pretty disappointing to some people who like the specificity this channel often provides.
As for the OP's frustration, I find that it harms my own verisimilitude for a rogue to run behind a tree, hide, and then immediately take a shot with his crossbow, ostensibly while hidden. As the DM, I encourage players to move, take the shot, and then hide to set up the next round's hidden attack. Looks like it's allowed by the written rules, though.
Yep, if you look at my previously reply you'll see I discovered on further inspection of the rules that being hidden appears to apply on a creature by creature basis.
Depending on how much stock (if any) you put in the rules as intended, Jeremy Crawford in this interview (starts around 18:15) explains that if even one creature sees a hidden creature, then the creature is no longer hidden and must make a new attempt to hide. That being said, the interview and the rules themselves keep going back to the idea that the way stealth is handled is very much in the domain of the DM's judgment. I know this is always the case for everything in D&D, but stealth rules appear to have been written with enough intentional ambiguity to allow and require the DM to make the call on a given situation. And I understand that will be pretty disappointing to some people who like the specificity this channel often provides.
As for the OP's frustration, I find that it harms my own verisimilitude for a rogue to run behind a tree, hide, and then immediately take a shot with his crossbow, ostensibly while hidden. As the DM, I encourage players to move, take the shot, and then hide to set up the next round's hidden attack. Looks like it's allowed by the written rules, though.
The problem is that the rogue (balance wise) is expected to get Sneak Attack every round to keep in step with the other classes in combat. I think a partial fix for this is the Cunning Action: Aim UA. It solves the sticky issue of stealth and hiding while still having a trade off (no movement).
Yep, if you look at my previously reply you'll see I discovered on further inspection of the rules that being hidden appears to apply on a creature by creature basis.
Depending on how much stock (if any) you put in the rules as intended, Jeremy Crawford in this interview (starts around 18:15) explains that if even one creature sees a hidden creature, then the creature is no longer hidden and must make a new attempt to hide. That being said, the interview and the rules themselves keep going back to the idea that the way stealth is handled is very much in the domain of the DM's judgment. I know this is always the case for everything in D&D, but stealth rules appear to have been written with enough intentional ambiguity to allow and require the DM to make the call on a given situation. And I understand that will be pretty disappointing to some people who like the specificity this channel often provides.
As for the OP's frustration, I find that it harms my own verisimilitude for a rogue to run behind a tree, hide, and then immediately take a shot with his crossbow, ostensibly while hidden. As the DM, I encourage players to move, take the shot, and then hide to set up the next round's hidden attack. Looks like it's allowed by the written rules, though.
The problem is that the rogue (balance wise) is expected to get Sneak Attack every round to keep in step with the other classes in combat. I think a partial fix for this is the Cunning Action: Aim UA. It solves the sticky issue of stealth and hiding while still having a trade off (no movement).
I don't know that I agree with your conclusion here. It's stupidly easy to get Sneak Attack without ever having to Hide. Just attack the tank's target and you're golden. If you want to be able to sneak attack without teamwork, there's a subclass for that.
I don't know that I agree with your conclusion here. It's stupidly easy to get Sneak Attack without ever having to Hide. Just attack the tank's target and you're golden. If you want to be able to sneak attack without teamwork, there's a subclass for that.
Thanks for this, I honestly couldn't care less about the "theoretical DPS" of a class. The Sneak Attack is clearly an option for when the target is distracted or unaware, the rogues have tons of options to make this happen in creative ways. In our games, if they can't be bothered to find them and make combat a bit more story-oriented and less Wargamy-boardgamy-I-am-due-this-because-the-rules-say-so, as a DM it feels that it is my duty to explain to them - as per our session 0 or table rules - that this is not what we are looking for in the game at our tables.
That being said, once more, yes, RAW it works that way.
The question asked about the RAW so... Yeah it's what's expected. I know you don't care about balance but for those who do they need to know the design reasons behind these rules to keep in line with other classes to maintain a balance. Yes there are lots of ways to get sneak attack and this is one. Just keep in mind nerfing it will hurt that balance and this could impact play negatively for the rogue.
Out of curiosity, I have heard the statement "Rogues are balanced around getting sneak attack every round" so many times that I accept it as true, but is this actually written anywhere? Did a rule designer actually say that somewhere? Or is it just anecdotal?
Out of curiosity, I have heard the statement "Rogues are balanced around getting sneak attack every round" so many times that I accept it as true, but is this actually written anywhere? Did a rule designer actually say that somewhere? Or is it just anecdotal?
Thanks Dave (in particular for the "in this case", just joking :D ), the way it's described by JC is that once you are no longer hidden, whatever the reason, it nullifies your stealth check and you need to roll again. I agree, this is not intuitive and it is not something that systematically applies in my game, it depends a lot on the circumstances as with most of the things around stealth. The principle here is that a group is globally alert and communicates with each other, so that they share information especially like this.
For those interested, I really suggest listening to the podcast on stealth, around 18:30.
Also, I have thought about another way to counteract the tactit, RAW, which is to use the ready action. It has to work on something perceivable, but it can work on something like "as soon as anything comes from behind that boulder", unless the rogue is invisible, something will poke out before the attack. I would allow it in my games because taking a ready action deprives you of your action and is chancy, if the rogue does not come out, you lose your action.
In that podcast, they said it is intentional to let rogue hide, attack and repeat.
to OP:
So let the rogue do that and don't try to shut it down completely. It just like you want to put some spell caster against high AC character but not full of them and blast the character into oblivion.
Keep in mind, you also can let the NPC play the same game. Let the NPCs hide and sneak onto players' backline.
The question asked about the RAW so... Yeah it's what's expected. I know you don't care about balance but for those who do they need to know the design reasons behind these rules to keep in line with other classes to maintain a balance.
There is no balance. I'm sorry, but the designers have expressely said that, contrary to 4e, there was no intent to exactly balance the classes anyway. None of our players has ever computed their DPS because it's a blatantly stupid exercise to do anyway. There will be many encounters, so many different circumstances, different ACs, different resistances, different powers, different opportunities to shine that it is pointless to compute a theoretical DPS. One day the paladin will shine for smiting the demon, the next day the rogue will shine for bakcstabbing the evil wizard, as a DM I will provide players with opportunities to shine, as equally as I can, and possibly more from story and character achievement than from "DPS".
Yes there are lots of ways to get sneak attack and this is one. Just keep in mind nerfing it will hurt that balance and this could impact play negatively for the rogue.
Once more, I couldn't care less. The rogue (if there is one in a group) has a game segment almost all on his own, exploration, so no rogue in our games has ever complained about "losing DPS". This is not a raid in a MMO with repetitive combats in controlled circumstances.
Balance can be more than just DPS and other classes than rogues can do exploration. Just because you wan't to play a certain way doesn't mean that other people can't or shouldn't. No need to be rude about it.
I want to remind people that the OPs question was regarding the following:
How does a rogue hide in combat, assuming they can?
Is a stealth roll made against the passive perception of enemies?
Do they have disadvantage in stealth because combat has already started?
Should the enemies make perception checks?
It is not regarding:
Should you homebrew changes to how stealth works
Should you homebrew changes to how rogues work
Does 'balance' exist in D&D
Other playstyles when playing rogue
Attacking or criticising other peoples playstyles, assessment of the game, or what they value when playing
If this conversation continues to wander so far away from the OPs original question and towards hostility and off topic subjects, we will be forced to lock it, especially considering it does seem the OPs question has actually be fairly solidly answered according to RAW. If people want to discuss alternate rules for rogues, stealth, hiding or anything else, we have the aptly named Homebrew and House Rulesforum
The DM decides is a skill check is needed and if it is succesfull.
So if there is only a single rock or a single tree to hide behind on an else open field, any creature with a little bit of Intelligence or Wisdom will figure out that is where the the opponent is hiding.
The thread obviously contains different opinions and different interpretations of RAW. Some of this comes down to how a DM defines and imagines stealth.
Stealth can mean -
1) a creature does not know the hidden creature is present. They are entirely unaware of the creature.
2) a creature is not aware of what the specific creature is doing at this moment. They may know exactly where that creature is hiding but because the creature was successful on their stealth check that creature has no warning when the hidden creature is going to make an attack and has no time to react defensively.
In either case the hidden creature can attack with advantage. However, how you interpret the other rules in the PHB comes down to how the DM defines stealth/hidden which is not defined in the PHB
In the first case, a creature can not hide if any creature can see them. A creature may not be able to "hide" behind a rock repeatedly since the DM decides that the creature knows they are there anyway.
In the latter case, being hidden is on a creature by creature basis. Just because one creature can see the creature trying to hide does not let every other creature that has lost track of the hidden creature the ability to know exactly when and how the hidden creature might attack.
RAW, I think the rules tend to support the second idea of hidden more than the first.
----
In the OP example ...
1) If the rogue has total cover or are heavily obscured then they can attempt to hide. Hidden is "unseen and unheard". Some racial abilities allow hiding while only lightly obscured - wood elf in natural terrain/environment and a halfling behind a creature at least one size larger.
2) The stealth check is made against the passive perception of the opponents and may result in the rogue successfully hiding from some but not all opponents depending on their respective passive perception values.
3) The stealth check is NOT made at advantage or disadvantage in combat unless the DM decides their is a condition that would grant either. For example, if the combat or environment is especially noisy and the rogue has good cover then the DM might decide to grant advantage. In addition, by default, the stealth check is not made at disadvantage. Combat is chaotic, every creature is alert and paying attention but they are also likely involved in fighting other creatures and everyone is creating noise. Again, it is a DM decision as to when conditions would force a stealth check to have disadvantage but in terms of actual rules there is no difference between hiding in or out of combat.
4) Successfully hiding from a creature allows a rogue to make their attack with Advantage. Having Advantage is one way to enable sneak attack.
5) Stealth/hidden isn't possible if the creature can be clearly seen so if a creature moves to a location where they can see the rogue, the rogue is immediately not considered hidden from that creature.
6) A creature may also choose to take the Search action which allows them to make a perception check to see if they can become aware of a hidden creature. The DC is the hidden creatures stealth roll.
Depending on how a DM decides on what hidden means they may interpret RAW differently. It is up to the DM how they choose to run it. The description above is how I run it and it is supported by RAW but others read it differently.
----
One final comment, a rogue is a melee class with a number of cool abilities and skills. However, sneak attack is a fundamental part of the effectiveness of a rogue in combat. A rogue has one attack (exclusive of dual wielding which is available to every class). A pure rogue only has one attack but their damage progression is much smoother than other classes since it goes up by an average of 3.5 every two levels (adding the d6 sneak attack). A level 11 rogue will do exactly the same amount of damage as a level 1 rogue if they can't get sneak attack. A comparable level fighter has 3 attacks, a paladin has improved divine smite, a ranger or barbarian has extra attack and other damage boosting abilities. These are in addition to all of the other unrelated class features. These classes can do this damage every round, adding their stat modifiers to damage on every attack. Similarly, a warlock with agonizing blast at level 11 has the same. Damage and capability scale up for every class but it only scales up for the rogue IF they are able to utilize sneak attack. As an example, a basic rogue would do d8+6d6+5 at level 11 with a successful sneak attack which is an average of 30.5. A level 11 fighter with a longsword and dueling fighting style is doing 3x (d8+7) = 34.5. Even with sneak attack, a rogue is doing less damage than the other melee classes .. without it, the rogue is doing the same damage as a level 1 character.
So, personally, I do not see a reason to rule harshly against a rogue attempting to obtain sneak attack since it an essential part of their effectiveness in combat. It is less noticeable at levels 1-4 where the rogue shines with an extra 2d6 sneak attack at level 3 but like the moon druid, the advantage is quickly balanced as other classes receive their level 5 abilities. A rogue that doesn't do everything they can to obtain sneak attack, including using whatever terrain is available to hide in combat won't remain effective in combat.
Hiding before combat, absolutely, hiding during combat is a whole different animal. If the rogue is hiding behind a single barrel, then attacks, he cannot hide behind said barrel again and get a sneak bonus, that just wouldn't make sense. He's been revealed and did not move, everyone knows where he is. Now if he darts behind a wall and uses a bonus action to hide and then attacks from another location he would get sneak attack. Not that it really makes much difference as after round 1 there is normally a front line melee able to be engaged with whatever they are attacking to get sneak attack anyway. I had a player that was hiding around a corner, ran out into the open and straight toward his opponent who was fighting (at range) and facing that direction and wanted sneak attack, then also wanted to be able to take a step back and hide in the middle of an open room. He was genuinely upset that he couldn't do that and half the table facepalmed. He was "that guy" and thankfully is no longer in the group.
Sneak attack is a big part of being a rogue, but the attack has to make sense as well as the hide.
Hi, I have a problem with a player and it gives me a headache. The player is a rogue, he attacks with a crossbow. The problem is that he wants to hide from the enemies when the combat has already started, and by RAW I think he can do it. But I don't know how this work. Is his stealth roll against the passive perception of enemies? Does has disadvantage in stealth because combat has already started? Should the enemies do perception?
In the interest of staying on topic, I will address the specific questions based on the way I interpret the written rules:
Is the stealth roll against the passive perception of enemies? Yes. Whether in combat or out of combat, this is the case unless someone is taking the search action, in which case they are making an active perception roll against the already-established stealth roll of the PC. If the player attempts to hide on the same round as the enemy searches, then the stealth check is made against the active perception roll since there is one.
Does [the player] have disadvantage in stealth because combat has already started? Not necessarily. The rules do not require this unless the DM determines the situation should warrant it.
Should the enemies do perception? The DM should decide if the NPC would logically respond to one or more sneak attacks coming from the same rock by actively attempting to search for the hidden rogue.
The implicit rule that the DM applies their judgment is always the case in D&D. In the case of stealth, the role of the DM's judgment is explicit in the written rules. Stealth is just too nuanced for the rules framework to account for all situations ahead of time.
The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.
You can't hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase. An invisible creature can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, and it does have to stay quiet.
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.
Passive Perception. When you hide, there's a chance someone will notice you even if they aren't searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the DM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature's passive Wisdom (Perception) score, which equals 10 + the creature's Wisdom modifier, as well as any other bonuses or penalties. If the creature has advantage, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. For example, if a 1st-level character (with a proficiency bonus of +2) has a Wisdom of 15 (a +2 modifier) and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) of 14.
What Can You See? One of the main factors in determining whether you can find a hidden creature or object is how well you can see in an area, which might be lightly or heavily obscured, as explained in chapter 8.
I've highlighted the areas that contradict what I thought and do seem to suggest that being hidden is handled on a creature by creature basis; you can be hidden from one but not another.
I usually rule on hiding in combat by seeing how the hidden player makes any attack from hiding. If they can shoot from hiding and can see the target (through a gap in a rock, an arrow slit, from darkness using darkvision, etc), then I grant advantage. If they shoot from hiding but can't see a target (around a corner, over a table), then the shot is normal (advantage from hiding canceled by disadvantage from being effectively blind while shooting). If they stand up or move out from hiding to get a clear shot, then they have come out of hiding and no longer have advantage. That sits with the second block of red text in the above comment
In the OP rogues case, if they are stepping out from behind a rock (especially with grid play), they have moved at least 5 feet (and honestly, if the obstacle they are hiding behind allows them to step out without moving at least one square, I'd rule its not big enough to hide behind and instead use cover rules), or they have stood up from prone behind a low obstacle (using movement as well to do so), then they have effectively unhidden themselves before attacking and have lost their advantage.
Hiding before combat, absolutely, hiding during combat is a whole different animal. If the rogue is hiding behind a single barrel, then attacks, he cannot hide behind said barrel again and get a sneak bonus, that just wouldn't make sense. He's been revealed and did not move, everyone knows where he is. Now if he darts behind a wall and uses a bonus action to hide and then attacks from another location he would get sneak attack. Not that it really makes much difference as after round 1 there is normally a front line melee able to be engaged with whatever they are attacking to get sneak attack anyway. I had a player that was hiding around a corner, ran out into the open and straight toward his opponent who was fighting (at range) and facing that direction and wanted sneak attack, then also wanted to be able to take a step back and hide in the middle of an open room. He was genuinely upset that he couldn't do that and half the table facepalmed. He was "that guy" and thankfully is no longer in the group.
Sneak attack is a big part of being a rogue, but the attack has to make sense as well as the hide.
This is based on one definition of hiding - the one that supposes that being hidden means that the opponent does not know a creature is in a particular location rather than the one which supposes the being hidden means that the creature doesn't know their exact location and what they are doing. There are likely other definitions of hidden.
However, RAW, if a creature can not see or hear an opponent then that opponent IS hidden. The rules say nothing about the size or nature of the obstacle blocking the view of the creature. The DM is free to impose any rules they wish on whether a creature can hide over and over in the same spot or not.
However, RAW this is completely allowed, all that is required is that the obstacle make the creature trying to hide unseen by the creature they are trying to hide from. Any additional rules on hiding are house rules applicable to that DMs game and should be explained in session 0.
The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.
You can't hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase. An invisible creature can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, and it does have to stay quiet.
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.
Passive Perception. When you hide, there's a chance someone will notice you even if they aren't searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the DM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature's passive Wisdom (Perception) score, which equals 10 + the creature's Wisdom modifier, as well as any other bonuses or penalties. If the creature has advantage, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. For example, if a 1st-level character (with a proficiency bonus of +2) has a Wisdom of 15 (a +2 modifier) and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) of 14.
What Can You See? One of the main factors in determining whether you can find a hidden creature or object is how well you can see in an area, which might be lightly or heavily obscured, as explained in chapter 8.
I've highlighted the areas that contradict what I thought and do seem to suggest that being hidden is handled on a creature by creature basis; you can be hidden from one but not another.
If they stand up or move out from hiding to get a clear shot, then they have come out of hiding and no longer have advantage. That sits with the second block of red text in the above comment
Actually the second block of red refers to coming out of hiding and moving. If you are hidden behind a rock, simply shooting over the top of the rock by standing up is a quick enough action to still count as hidden for the first shot.
The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding. When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.
You can't hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase. An invisible creature can always try to hide. Signs of its passage might still be noticed, and it does have to stay quiet.
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.
Passive Perception. When you hide, there's a chance someone will notice you even if they aren't searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the DM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature's passive Wisdom (Perception) score, which equals 10 + the creature's Wisdom modifier, as well as any other bonuses or penalties. If the creature has advantage, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. For example, if a 1st-level character (with a proficiency bonus of +2) has a Wisdom of 15 (a +2 modifier) and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) of 14.
What Can You See? One of the main factors in determining whether you can find a hidden creature or object is how well you can see in an area, which might be lightly or heavily obscured, as explained in chapter 8.
I've highlighted the areas that contradict what I thought and do seem to suggest that being hidden is handled on a creature by creature basis; you can be hidden from one but not another.
If they stand up or move out from hiding to get a clear shot, then they have come out of hiding and no longer have advantage. That sits with the second block of red text in the above comment
Actually the second block of red refers to coming out of hiding and moving. If you are hidden behind a rock, simply shooting over the top of the rock by standing up is a quick enough action to still count as hidden for the first shot.
There’s no RAW here to confirm your statement. It’s DMs judgement. My ruling is based on using 1/2 your movement to stand up (assuming you are prone behind the rock).
If you can't ever get a clear line of sight to your enemy(which would provide the enemy the same to you) without losing your Hidden status, Stealth attacks would be pointless. That's why in a different rule, it states:
Unseen Attackers and Targets
Combatants often try to escape their foes' notice by hiding, casting the invisibility spell, or lurking in darkness.
When you attack a target that you can't see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn't in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target's location correctly.
When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden--both unseen and unheard--when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
one thing to note... once you stop moving, you are no longer hidden if there is nothing hidding you !
exemple... i make a stealth check behind a rock. i run toward the other rock but stop short 10 feet int he middle of the open road. the stealth check ends there, you are no longer hidden !
heres how i dealt with a similar event that hapenned to me a while back...
Player: shoot a goblin through the open door. moves 5 feet aside the door and hides as a bonus action. Goblin: shoots another player as the first disappeared from the door. Player: goes back to the door and shoot with advantage the goblin then hide again next to the door. Goblin, having enough of being bullied, ready an action to shoot anything showing up in the door frame. Player comes out, gets shot by an arrow from goblin and then proceed in telling me he was hidden and the goblin couldn'T know when or if he ever would show up. DM: i tell the player the goblin was looking specifically through that door frame, saw you coming out, shot his arrows.
thats as simple as that, if players can do it, so can enemies. if a creature is looking at the very place the player is, there is no way that mob will be surprised or disadvantaged. fact, once creatures knows you are in the vicinity, they will search for you. they will be on the look out. using an action to single out someone is a stupid thing. in combat its more logical to have the enemy be always on the look out, just like players do it. not being on the look out means certain death, i doubt enemies would want to be dead.
that's my take on it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Running from one hiding spot to another(being in the open) by RAW could completely negate your ability to hide. Since there is a lot of DM input to Stealth scenarios, we usually say that the lack of hiding in the small gaps might be covered by darkness or distractions and still allow you to Stealth hustle to the next spot to be safely Hidden. In other situations, you might pass through lit areas or other circumstances that either negate the Stealth or give a creature Advantage on Passive and Active checks to detect the sneak.
I completely agree with you Door Hide example.
The first time is: "Ow, where did that arrow come from"!?
The second time is: "Damn it, I had no idea where and when they would take another potshot at me".
Third time is: "Alright. Come on, come on...Bam, got you"!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You don't see it mentioned because it is a different conversation from what is going on in this thread.
Depending on how much stock (if any) you put in the rules as intended, Jeremy Crawford in this interview (starts around 18:15) explains that if even one creature sees a hidden creature, then the creature is no longer hidden and must make a new attempt to hide. That being said, the interview and the rules themselves keep going back to the idea that the way stealth is handled is very much in the domain of the DM's judgment. I know this is always the case for everything in D&D, but stealth rules appear to have been written with enough intentional ambiguity to allow and require the DM to make the call on a given situation. And I understand that will be pretty disappointing to some people who like the specificity this channel often provides.
As for the OP's frustration, I find that it harms my own verisimilitude for a rogue to run behind a tree, hide, and then immediately take a shot with his crossbow, ostensibly while hidden. As the DM, I encourage players to move, take the shot, and then hide to set up the next round's hidden attack. Looks like it's allowed by the written rules, though.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
The problem is that the rogue (balance wise) is expected to get Sneak Attack every round to keep in step with the other classes in combat. I think a partial fix for this is the Cunning Action: Aim UA. It solves the sticky issue of stealth and hiding while still having a trade off (no movement).
I don't know that I agree with your conclusion here. It's stupidly easy to get Sneak Attack without ever having to Hide. Just attack the tank's target and you're golden. If you want to be able to sneak attack without teamwork, there's a subclass for that.
The question asked about the RAW so... Yeah it's what's expected. I know you don't care about balance but for those who do they need to know the design reasons behind these rules to keep in line with other classes to maintain a balance. Yes there are lots of ways to get sneak attack and this is one. Just keep in mind nerfing it will hurt that balance and this could impact play negatively for the rogue.
Out of curiosity, I have heard the statement "Rogues are balanced around getting sneak attack every round" so many times that I accept it as true, but is this actually written anywhere? Did a rule designer actually say that somewhere? Or is it just anecdotal?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Yes Mearls talked about it in a happy fun hour:
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/9of93a/psa_rogues_were_balanced_to_get_sneak_attack
In that podcast, they said it is intentional to let rogue hide, attack and repeat.
to OP:
So let the rogue do that and don't try to shut it down completely. It just like you want to put some spell caster against high AC character but not full of them and blast the character into oblivion.
Keep in mind, you also can let the NPC play the same game. Let the NPCs hide and sneak onto players' backline.
Balance can be more than just DPS and other classes than rogues can do exploration. Just because you wan't to play a certain way doesn't mean that other people can't or shouldn't. No need to be rude about it.
I want to remind people that the OPs question was regarding the following:
It is not regarding:
If this conversation continues to wander so far away from the OPs original question and towards hostility and off topic subjects, we will be forced to lock it, especially considering it does seem the OPs question has actually be fairly solidly answered according to RAW. If people want to discuss alternate rules for rogues, stealth, hiding or anything else, we have the aptly named Homebrew and House Rules forum
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
The DM decides is a skill check is needed and if it is succesfull.
So if there is only a single rock or a single tree to hide behind on an else open field, any creature with a little bit of Intelligence or Wisdom will figure out that is where the the opponent is hiding.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]The thread obviously contains different opinions and different interpretations of RAW. Some of this comes down to how a DM defines and imagines stealth.
Stealth can mean -
1) a creature does not know the hidden creature is present. They are entirely unaware of the creature.
2) a creature is not aware of what the specific creature is doing at this moment. They may know exactly where that creature is hiding but because the creature was successful on their stealth check that creature has no warning when the hidden creature is going to make an attack and has no time to react defensively.
In either case the hidden creature can attack with advantage. However, how you interpret the other rules in the PHB comes down to how the DM defines stealth/hidden which is not defined in the PHB
In the first case, a creature can not hide if any creature can see them. A creature may not be able to "hide" behind a rock repeatedly since the DM decides that the creature knows they are there anyway.
In the latter case, being hidden is on a creature by creature basis. Just because one creature can see the creature trying to hide does not let every other creature that has lost track of the hidden creature the ability to know exactly when and how the hidden creature might attack.
RAW, I think the rules tend to support the second idea of hidden more than the first.
----
In the OP example ...
1) If the rogue has total cover or are heavily obscured then they can attempt to hide. Hidden is "unseen and unheard". Some racial abilities allow hiding while only lightly obscured - wood elf in natural terrain/environment and a halfling behind a creature at least one size larger.
2) The stealth check is made against the passive perception of the opponents and may result in the rogue successfully hiding from some but not all opponents depending on their respective passive perception values.
3) The stealth check is NOT made at advantage or disadvantage in combat unless the DM decides their is a condition that would grant either. For example, if the combat or environment is especially noisy and the rogue has good cover then the DM might decide to grant advantage. In addition, by default, the stealth check is not made at disadvantage. Combat is chaotic, every creature is alert and paying attention but they are also likely involved in fighting other creatures and everyone is creating noise. Again, it is a DM decision as to when conditions would force a stealth check to have disadvantage but in terms of actual rules there is no difference between hiding in or out of combat.
4) Successfully hiding from a creature allows a rogue to make their attack with Advantage. Having Advantage is one way to enable sneak attack.
5) Stealth/hidden isn't possible if the creature can be clearly seen so if a creature moves to a location where they can see the rogue, the rogue is immediately not considered hidden from that creature.
6) A creature may also choose to take the Search action which allows them to make a perception check to see if they can become aware of a hidden creature. The DC is the hidden creatures stealth roll.
Depending on how a DM decides on what hidden means they may interpret RAW differently. It is up to the DM how they choose to run it. The description above is how I run it and it is supported by RAW but others read it differently.
----
One final comment, a rogue is a melee class with a number of cool abilities and skills. However, sneak attack is a fundamental part of the effectiveness of a rogue in combat. A rogue has one attack (exclusive of dual wielding which is available to every class). A pure rogue only has one attack but their damage progression is much smoother than other classes since it goes up by an average of 3.5 every two levels (adding the d6 sneak attack). A level 11 rogue will do exactly the same amount of damage as a level 1 rogue if they can't get sneak attack. A comparable level fighter has 3 attacks, a paladin has improved divine smite, a ranger or barbarian has extra attack and other damage boosting abilities. These are in addition to all of the other unrelated class features. These classes can do this damage every round, adding their stat modifiers to damage on every attack. Similarly, a warlock with agonizing blast at level 11 has the same. Damage and capability scale up for every class but it only scales up for the rogue IF they are able to utilize sneak attack. As an example, a basic rogue would do d8+6d6+5 at level 11 with a successful sneak attack which is an average of 30.5. A level 11 fighter with a longsword and dueling fighting style is doing 3x (d8+7) = 34.5. Even with sneak attack, a rogue is doing less damage than the other melee classes .. without it, the rogue is doing the same damage as a level 1 character.
So, personally, I do not see a reason to rule harshly against a rogue attempting to obtain sneak attack since it an essential part of their effectiveness in combat. It is less noticeable at levels 1-4 where the rogue shines with an extra 2d6 sneak attack at level 3 but like the moon druid, the advantage is quickly balanced as other classes receive their level 5 abilities. A rogue that doesn't do everything they can to obtain sneak attack, including using whatever terrain is available to hide in combat won't remain effective in combat.
Hiding before combat, absolutely, hiding during combat is a whole different animal. If the rogue is hiding behind a single barrel, then attacks, he cannot hide behind said barrel again and get a sneak bonus, that just wouldn't make sense. He's been revealed and did not move, everyone knows where he is. Now if he darts behind a wall and uses a bonus action to hide and then attacks from another location he would get sneak attack. Not that it really makes much difference as after round 1 there is normally a front line melee able to be engaged with whatever they are attacking to get sneak attack anyway. I had a player that was hiding around a corner, ran out into the open and straight toward his opponent who was fighting (at range) and facing that direction and wanted sneak attack, then also wanted to be able to take a step back and hide in the middle of an open room. He was genuinely upset that he couldn't do that and half the table facepalmed. He was "that guy" and thankfully is no longer in the group.
Sneak attack is a big part of being a rogue, but the attack has to make sense as well as the hide.
In the interest of staying on topic, I will address the specific questions based on the way I interpret the written rules:
The implicit rule that the DM applies their judgment is always the case in D&D. In the case of stealth, the role of the DM's judgment is explicit in the written rules. Stealth is just too nuanced for the rules framework to account for all situations ahead of time.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I usually rule on hiding in combat by seeing how the hidden player makes any attack from hiding. If they can shoot from hiding and can see the target (through a gap in a rock, an arrow slit, from darkness using darkvision, etc), then I grant advantage. If they shoot from hiding but can't see a target (around a corner, over a table), then the shot is normal (advantage from hiding canceled by disadvantage from being effectively blind while shooting). If they stand up or move out from hiding to get a clear shot, then they have come out of hiding and no longer have advantage. That sits with the second block of red text in the above comment
In the OP rogues case, if they are stepping out from behind a rock (especially with grid play), they have moved at least 5 feet (and honestly, if the obstacle they are hiding behind allows them to step out without moving at least one square, I'd rule its not big enough to hide behind and instead use cover rules), or they have stood up from prone behind a low obstacle (using movement as well to do so), then they have effectively unhidden themselves before attacking and have lost their advantage.
Hiding in combat should be difficult.
This is based on one definition of hiding - the one that supposes that being hidden means that the opponent does not know a creature is in a particular location rather than the one which supposes the being hidden means that the creature doesn't know their exact location and what they are doing. There are likely other definitions of hidden.
However, RAW, if a creature can not see or hear an opponent then that opponent IS hidden. The rules say nothing about the size or nature of the obstacle blocking the view of the creature. The DM is free to impose any rules they wish on whether a creature can hide over and over in the same spot or not.
However, RAW this is completely allowed, all that is required is that the obstacle make the creature trying to hide unseen by the creature they are trying to hide from. Any additional rules on hiding are house rules applicable to that DMs game and should be explained in session 0.
Actually the second block of red refers to coming out of hiding and moving. If you are hidden behind a rock, simply shooting over the top of the rock by standing up is a quick enough action to still count as hidden for the first shot.
There’s no RAW here to confirm your statement. It’s DMs judgement. My ruling is based on using 1/2 your movement to stand up (assuming you are prone behind the rock).
If you can't ever get a clear line of sight to your enemy(which would provide the enemy the same to you) without losing your Hidden status, Stealth attacks would be pointless. That's why in a different rule, it states:
one thing to note... once you stop moving, you are no longer hidden if there is nothing hidding you !
exemple... i make a stealth check behind a rock. i run toward the other rock but stop short 10 feet int he middle of the open road. the stealth check ends there, you are no longer hidden !
heres how i dealt with a similar event that hapenned to me a while back...
Player: shoot a goblin through the open door. moves 5 feet aside the door and hides as a bonus action.
Goblin: shoots another player as the first disappeared from the door.
Player: goes back to the door and shoot with advantage the goblin then hide again next to the door.
Goblin, having enough of being bullied, ready an action to shoot anything showing up in the door frame.
Player comes out, gets shot by an arrow from goblin and then proceed in telling me he was hidden and the goblin couldn'T know when or if he ever would show up.
DM: i tell the player the goblin was looking specifically through that door frame, saw you coming out, shot his arrows.
thats as simple as that, if players can do it, so can enemies. if a creature is looking at the very place the player is, there is no way that mob will be surprised or disadvantaged.
fact, once creatures knows you are in the vicinity, they will search for you. they will be on the look out. using an action to single out someone is a stupid thing. in combat its more logical to have the enemy be always on the look out, just like players do it. not being on the look out means certain death, i doubt enemies would want to be dead.
that's my take on it.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Running from one hiding spot to another(being in the open) by RAW could completely negate your ability to hide. Since there is a lot of DM input to Stealth scenarios, we usually say that the lack of hiding in the small gaps might be covered by darkness or distractions and still allow you to Stealth hustle to the next spot to be safely Hidden. In other situations, you might pass through lit areas or other circumstances that either negate the Stealth or give a creature Advantage on Passive and Active checks to detect the sneak.
I completely agree with you Door Hide example.
The first time is: "Ow, where did that arrow come from"!?
The second time is: "Damn it, I had no idea where and when they would take another potshot at me".
Third time is: "Alright. Come on, come on...Bam, got you"!