I’m not sure if this is intended, but RAW if at a condition that causes disadvantage, such as poisoned, it seems the best course of action is to force an encounter to happen in the dark or other condition that causes blindness. That way both attacker and defender with have cancelling advantage and disadvantage and since they don’t stack it would be straight rolls to hit. Understanding this applies only to melee attacks and normal vision, but am I reading this correctly?
You need to remember that D&D is a party based game. If you pop a darkness on top of the melee to help a poisoned fighter, then the rogue can’t see the enemy either so they don’t get sneak attack, and the mage can’t target the enemy because they can’t see it, etc. It might help one character, but everyone else loses out.
Heavily obscured/blindness creates weird rules interactions sometimes (for example 2 blind creatures being able to attack each other without disadvantage).
Heavily obscured/blindness creates weird rules interactions sometimes (for example 2 blind creatures being able to attack each other without disadvantage).
There are wierd rules interactions but I don't think that is one of them:
Normally you might have 50% chance to hit the opponent, when you miss it can either be because they managed to avoid trhe blow (e.g. duck out the way block your attack with a shield etc) or your attack could be at a place that does no damage (e.g. miss them entirely, hit solid part of othe armor).
If you are blind and relying on sound and things ot know where they are but they can see your chance to hit is reduced to 25% as it is far more likely that your blow will be in a place that does no damage and if not they still have decnet chance t oavoid it.
If you are both blind while you are more likely to attack in a place that does not damage if you don't it is extremely unlikely that they will be able to avoid the blow. Putting the chance to hitback to 50% seems reasonable.
No, mutual blindness definitely causes some nonsensical outcomes.
Consider this: I've got a bow and I'm being restrained by a roper. If I try to shoot any target, I'll have disadvantage for obvious reasons. If I then turn off the lights, my aim suddenly improves. Sure, you could argue my target can't see the attack coming, but I also can't see them.
The problem with the unseen attacker rules in my opinion is that your target being unable to see you shouldn't make much of a difference in your ability to hit them if you also can't see them. Limiting the advantage to situations where your target can't see you but you can see them resolves most of the situations that make people do a double take mid-play.
Heavily obscured/blindness creates weird rules interactions sometimes (for example 2 blind creatures being able to attack each other without disadvantage).
I have long modified the blindness rule at my table by adding a clause:
Attack rolls against the creature have advantage [if the attacker can see them], and the creature's attack rolls have disadvantage.
So basically two blinded creatures fighting, as in darkness, both have disadvantage.
Blindness has always been an interesting rule, looking from a battlemap point of view, I was wondering if players/enemies engaged while unable to see and move is there the assumption the attacker could follow the direction they go in or is there a random spot the attack would be directed to.
Blindness is kind of ridiculous in that (for us atleast) when in combat (especially using a map/grid) - UNLESS HIDDEN everyone knows where everyone is; blinded, invisible whatever.
So I just got a flying mount with Magical Secrets but realized that not just enemies - untrained npc's- can make a roll to 'listen' and know the exact 10ft x 10ft space I am occupying 100 ft. in the air - no special senses necessary.
But how does a flying creature hide?
They don't. Even with greater invisibility.
Clouds don't exist under certain thresholds unless there's a special environmental phenomena occurring.
In battle, a poisoned human (no darksight) npc in a huge underdark cavern could make a perception listen roll and know EXACTLY where I am 100ft+ (pick a number) in the air and then he could declare an attack on a space. All because you only get disadvantage once.
In battle, a poisoned human (no darksight) npc in a huge underdark cavern could make a perception listen roll and know EXACTLY where I am 100ft+ (pick a number) in the air and then he could declare an attack on a space. All because you only get disadvantage once.
This is one of the areas where the DM has a lot of latitude, not only to decide the appropriate DC for the perception check from your example, but also whether to give disadvantage on top of that because of various conditions. And even if you do locate the person, you have already used your action searching for them.
Blindness is kind of ridiculous in that (for us atleast) when in combat (especially using a map/grid) - UNLESS HIDDEN everyone knows where everyone is; blinded, invisible whatever.
So I just got a flying mount with Magical Secrets but realized that not just enemies - untrained npc's- can make a roll to 'listen' and know the exact 10ft x 10ft space I am occupying 100 ft. in the air - no special senses necessary.
But how does a flying creature hide?
They don't. Even with greater invisibility.
Clouds don't exist under certain thresholds unless there's a special environmental phenomena occurring.
In battle, a poisoned human (no darksight) npc in a huge underdark cavern could make a perception listen roll and know EXACTLY where I am 100ft+ (pick a number) in the air and then he could declare an attack on a space. All because you only get disadvantage once.
But that's not how the rules work. By definition, an invisible creature is impossible to see. You should not know where a creature you can't see (regardless of reason) is unless something gives it away. While the rules for listening to determine an invisible creature's location are deliberately lax, meaning there is no RAW answer to "what's the DC?", the DC to hear most flying creatures (ignoring particularly noisy wings, like a hummingbird or wasp) should be so high as to be nearly impossible at only 30 feet away, let alone 100 feet away. Even if you manage it, TexasDevin is right - unless your GM is letting you use passive perception for this, you need to take the Search action to find such a target, and they'll have a turn to move before you get a new action, which also must be spent on Search. Your GM might also rule you can unambiguously tell your party members where a target is as part of your turn, of course. Remember, poisoned is disadvantage on ability checks, too, so even if you're allowed to use PP, the listener is at -5 to passive perception.
Your GM is severely nerfing the vision and hearing rules. You might want to show them some youtube videos on e.g. just how difficult it is to notice an owl in flight.
Forgive the horrible formatting, not sure how to quote text from another thread.
I'm sincerely curious now, we trawled forums to find an answer. Is there something incorrect about the below written?
To be clear I'm on a Griffon for the previous example which are Apex predators -not because they're quiet- but because they have a faster fly speed than most of their prey. We have a Disadvantage threshold for trying to hear past 100ft. like Ranged weapon profile ranges- but the point was that since its just another disadvantage it cancels out- you could still just happen to roll well and be found. More of a matter of WHEN not IF.
I feel the need to clarify one of the most debated rule, which concerns unseen target and vision and how these two topics are related to each other. Please, post your comments for corrections and clarification.
From the paragraph "Unseen target", it is clear that an unseen creature has advantage on attacks rolls against a target and that target has disadvantage against the unseen creature. Now, unseen creature is not equivalent to hidden creature. A hidden creature is contemporary unseen and unheard. A hidden creature, therefore, is not targetable if the means of perception rely on sight and hearing.
Unseen creature is equivalent to the vision status of heavily obscured, and a creature in this status can always try to hide. Equivalent situations to heavily obscured are being invisible, or if the target trying to perceive the creature is blinded.
So, unless an unseen (or heavily obscured) creature takes the Hide, the position of that creature is always known to the others. Some cases in which the unseen creature is automatically hidden is (as examples): when it is contemporary invisible and in a Silence area of effect, or when the others are contemporary blinded and deafened.
A creature with blindsight does not rely on sight, so an invisible creature is not unseen (or heavily obscured) for it. In this case, the invisible creature cannot try to hide, unless it goes out the range of blindsight.
Something else a lot of people miss: you automatically know the location of all non-hidden creatures when in combat. Outside of combat is a very different situation, and a DM is free to say a guard is too distracted to notice you climbing the city gate even though you're in broad daylight and there's nothing obscuring you.
It's one of those "technically, but" situations because it's a game.
You technically know where they are, if only because on a system using minis it is incredibly anti-gaming to have everyone remove their pieces from the board, so instead you develop a rule to accommodate the "lack of knowledge"; ie. disadvantage on trying to hit something you can't see. You technically know where they are, but not really (unless you can, say, hear them moving around). By RAW, you are supposed to guess where your target is (whether in darkness or properly hiding), and if you are wrong, you make the roll and the DM simply declares that you miss, but not necessarily that you guessed correctly. This appears to hold even for targeted spells (though not Area of Effect spells if the target is in the area you declare). In practice.. .well, read the first part of this paragraph again.
The specific wording can be found in the Player's Handbook (emphasis added by me):
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.
There are no less than 9 different areas of the PHB that need to be referenced to fully understand the "do I know where an invisible creature is?" question. Anyone that tells you that one of these sections has supremacy, and definitively answers how it works RAW, is lying or misunderstanding the nuance involved.
Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard.
...
HIDING
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, “Adventuring.”
When you look around for clues and make deductions based on those clues, you make an Intelligence (Investigation) check. You might deduce the location of a hidden object, discern from the appearance of a wound what kind of weapon dealt it, or determine the weakest point in a tunnel that could cause it to collapse. Poring through ancient scrolls in search of a hidden fragment of knowledge might also call for an Intelligence (Investigation) check.
Your Wisdom (Perception) check lets you spot, hear, or otherwise detect the presence of something. It measures your general awareness of your surroundings and the keenness of your senses. For example, you might try to hear a conversation through a closed door, eavesdrop under an open window, or hear monsters moving stealthily in the forest. Or you might try to spot things that are obscured or easy to miss, whether they are orcs lying in ambush on a road, thugs hiding in the shadows of an alley, or candlelight under a closed secret door.
While traveling at a slow pace, the characters can move stealthily. As long as they’re not in the open, they can try to surprise or sneak by other creatures they encounter. See the rules for hiding in chapter 7 "Using Ability Scores."
Noticing Threats
Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat. The DM might decide that a threat can be noticed only by characters in a particular rank. For example, as the characters are exploring a maze of tunnels, the DM might decide that only those characters in the back rank have a chance to hear or spot a stealthy creature following the group, while characters in the front and middle ranks cannot.
While traveling at a fast pace, characters take a –5 penalty to their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to notice hidden threats.
The most fundamental tasks of adventuring — noticing danger, finding hidden objects, hitting an enemy in combat, and targeting a spell, to name just a few — rely heavily on a character's ability to see. Darkness and other effects that obscure vision can prove a significant hindrance.
A given area might be lightly or heavily obscured. In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light, patchy fog, or moderate foliage, creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.
A heavily obscured area—such as darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage—blocks vision entirely. A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
The presence or absence of light in an environment creates three categories of illumination: bright light, dim light, and darkness.
Bright light lets most creatures see normally. Even gloomy days provide bright light, as do torches, lanterns, fires, and other sources of illumination within a specific radius.
Dim light, also called shadows, creates a lightly obscured area. An area of dim light is usually a boundary between a source of bright light, such as a torch, and surrounding darkness. The soft light of twilight and dawn also counts as dim light. A particularly brilliant full moon might bathe the land in dim light.
Darkness creates a heavily obscured area. Characters face darkness outdoors at night (even most moonlit nights), within the confines of an unlit dungeon or a subterranean vault, or in an area of magical darkness.
When you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check in an attempt to hide, following the rules for hiding. If you succeed, you gain certain benefits, as described in the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section later in this chapter.
When you take the Search action, you devote your attention to finding something. Depending on the nature of your search, the DM might have you make a Wisdom (Perception) check or an Intelligence (Investigation) check.
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.
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.
An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense. For the purpose of hiding, the creature is heavily obscured. The creature's location can be detected by any noise it makes or any tracks it leaves.
Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have advantage.
So if a creature is in Heavy Obscurement (darkness, fog, etc.), then everyone else is Blinded when they try to see them... but Blinded in the Appendix and Vision & Light in Chapter 8 don't really address whether either or both interfere with "knowing where a creature is." An Invisible creature mentions its location can be detected by noise or tracks... but must its location be detected by noise or tracks automatically, when it's standing still? Unanswered. Chapter 9 says that you can attack invisible creatures... but the way it describes it includes guessing squares that you aren't sure they're in, so that hardly tells you explicitly that you DEFINITELY know where invisible unhidden creatures are. Hiding is certainly one way to conceal your location, but does not tell you it's the only way, or that your location is always known unless you Hide? Is knowing what square an invisible or obscured creature in an active search, or a passive noticing a threat, or no check at all and just automatic?
None of these questions are explicitly answered, and even if you think you can read all of those sections above and come up with a synthesis that makes sense to you, it's quite a stretch to say that "RAW definitely says invisible creatures are detected automatically until they Hide." There is no "hidden" condition. There is no rule which describes when and how creature's locations are generally known. Class features like the Rogue's 14th level Blindsense seem very much to imply that invisible creatures are not generally detected even when they aren't hidden. It's complicated.
I am aware of Jeremy Crawford's tweet on the issue (two blind people fighting are at normal rolls), but for my game i'm houseruling that both are at disadvantage. Two blind people fighting should not favor the attacker, they should both be equally disadvantaged.
Allowing whichever one is attacking to cancel their disadvantage is a huge bonus. As someone stated above, why should your aim suddenly (greatly) improve because both have the same penalty.
If the defender has a +2 to her AC from Dex, and is blind. A blind attacker no longer at disadvantage gets the equivalent of a +5 to hit. I can see saying the defender can't use their dex bonus (giving in this case a +2 to the blind attacker), but the RAW system gives a much larger bonus. This becomes more so if the defender has no dex bonus (heavy armor). The attacker basically loses nothing from being blind, and gains the equivalent of a +5.
I usually play Rules as Written, but in this case it's just too much to swallow. So I'm houseruling a change to the invisible/blindness conditions. Instead of it granting Advantage to all attack rolls, i'm changing it to giving Advantage on any attack rolls against targets that you can see/detect.
Picture a sabre style fencing competition (the style where both thrusting and slashing can score points). But we place both contestants into a "square" adjacent to each other and tell them that they cannot leave the square when it is not their "turn". When one attacks the other on their turn, there are many reasons why that attack might "miss" -- only a low percentage of these misses occurs because the attack literally misses the target. Most of the time it will be because the other fencer saw the attack coming and dodged out of the way, or because the other fencer saw the attack coming and raised their own weapon to successfully parry the attack.
Now blindfold them both but they each wear a collar with a device that emits a loud and unique beeping sound. They can't tell what they are trying to hit quite as well as before, but they still have a decent idea because of the noise. However, when they take a swing at the other fencer -- that other fencer has more or less no idea at all that this attack is coming, when it is coming and from which direction it is coming. Maybe they keep their sword positioned a certain way and occasionally get lucky by "parrying" an attack here or there, but most of the time that the first fencer takes a swing in the general ballpark it is going to be a hit.
The rules are actually somewhat reasonable if we assume that combatants can somehow hear as well as described above.
I realize this is an old thread but a couple of clarifications to comments made:
1) Can a rogue use sneak attack when both the rogue and the target are blinded and another enemy of the target is within 5' of it? Yes.
"You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll."
If both, the rogue and their target are blinded then the rogue does NOT have disadvantage on the attack roll. They have a regular die roll. So if the attack is eligible for sneak attack for other reasons then the attack would count as a sneak attack. However, keep in mind that being blinded will also prevent the rogue from having advantage on the attack roll no matter what other circumstances are in effect.
2) 5e characters are assumed to have been trained to know where their opponents are. So if they suddenly can't see, then they still know where their opponents were when making attacks. In addition, if the opponent moves then unless they have taken the hide action to move quietly enough not to be noticed then their location is still known.
HOWEVER
3) Hidden is explicitly defined in the rules as both unseen and unheard. A creature that is both unseen and unheard IS hidden whether they take the hide action or not (at DM discretion).
So, do two creatures 100' apart with a wall between them (or two creatures who are blinded) automatically know where the other is? No. The two creatures can't see each other, if the DM decides that there is no way for them to hear each other then they are hidden by definition, they don't need to make a hide check since they are unseen and unheard - thus hidden - and any change in their location is not known to the opponent.
Similarly, a DM could decide that a fight near a waterfall is so loud that it is impossible to hear another creature moving. In such a case, a creature that becomes invisible would be automatically hidden unless the DM decides they could possibly be noticed by tracks or other interactions. On the other hand, a creature that becomes blinded in such a circumstance would still know where creatures were last seen but they will be unable to know where they might move if the DM decides that they are automatically hidden because they are unseen and unheard.
Finally, a DM could decide that a creature like an Invisible Stalker which flies, is completely invisible, and may only make the sound of a breeze could be hidden all the time (except when they make an attack or cast a spell - at which point their location is known) depending on how quiet the environment is.
P.S. I think up2ng makes a good description of why advantage and disadvantage cancelling makes sense for 5e. Hit points represent far more than physical damage, a combat round represents far more than one attack, moving to block, minimize or deflect an attack is as important an element in determining a hit as the physical armor the character is wearing (keep in mind that 5e is not a simulation and these are heroic fantasy characters).
Does it really make sense for lack of vision to effectively cancel out all other forms of advantage/disadvantage? Probably not - it really depends on how much of a factor avoidance is as part of a creatures defence - but it is a simple solution that doesn't require trying to analyse the reason for each instance of advantage and disadvantage, decide what exactly does "restrained" or "poisoned" or other effects mean or do and then decide whether it would make any bigger difference than just being blinded while your opponent can't see your attack coming. It is just easiest for everyone to cancel them all.
Long range attacks when neither can see the other can be covered by the DM deciding whether it is even possible for the opponents to hear each other. If it isn't then they are hidden and although an attacker could fire at the last known location, after that creature moves, the attacker will be guessing what location they might be in.
If you've played with a DM that determined that invisible = hidden, you probably understand why the rules push back against that. It makes invisibility massively powerful. A creature with Greater Invisibility and a high movement speed is basically invincible. You spend your action to locate it (maybe), and then it moves again before you have another action to attack it.
Combat is not fun if you can't even locate your enemy. This is a game first and foremost, and combat should be fun. Thus becoming totally hidden is a difficult and expensive thing to do to keep the game fun.
I’m not sure if this is intended, but RAW if at a condition that causes disadvantage, such as poisoned, it seems the best course of action is to force an encounter to happen in the dark or other condition that causes blindness. That way both attacker and defender with have cancelling advantage and disadvantage and since they don’t stack it would be straight rolls to hit. Understanding this applies only to melee attacks and normal vision, but am I reading this correctly?
You need to remember that D&D is a party based game. If you pop a darkness on top of the melee to help a poisoned fighter, then the rogue can’t see the enemy either so they don’t get sneak attack, and the mage can’t target the enemy because they can’t see it, etc. It might help one character, but everyone else loses out.
Heavily obscured/blindness creates weird rules interactions sometimes (for example 2 blind creatures being able to attack each other without disadvantage).
There are wierd rules interactions but I don't think that is one of them:
Normally you might have 50% chance to hit the opponent, when you miss it can either be because they managed to avoid trhe blow (e.g. duck out the way block your attack with a shield etc) or your attack could be at a place that does no damage (e.g. miss them entirely, hit solid part of othe armor).
If you are blind and relying on sound and things ot know where they are but they can see your chance to hit is reduced to 25% as it is far more likely that your blow will be in a place that does no damage and if not they still have decnet chance t oavoid it.
If you are both blind while you are more likely to attack in a place that does not damage if you don't it is extremely unlikely that they will be able to avoid the blow. Putting the chance to hitback to 50% seems reasonable.
No, mutual blindness definitely causes some nonsensical outcomes.
Consider this: I've got a bow and I'm being restrained by a roper. If I try to shoot any target, I'll have disadvantage for obvious reasons. If I then turn off the lights, my aim suddenly improves. Sure, you could argue my target can't see the attack coming, but I also can't see them.
The problem with the unseen attacker rules in my opinion is that your target being unable to see you shouldn't make much of a difference in your ability to hit them if you also can't see them. Limiting the advantage to situations where your target can't see you but you can see them resolves most of the situations that make people do a double take mid-play.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I have long modified the blindness rule at my table by adding a clause:
So basically two blinded creatures fighting, as in darkness, both have disadvantage.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Blindness has always been an interesting rule, looking from a battlemap point of view, I was wondering if players/enemies engaged while unable to see and move is there the assumption the attacker could follow the direction they go in or is there a random spot the attack would be directed to.
Blindness is kind of ridiculous in that (for us atleast) when in combat (especially using a map/grid) - UNLESS HIDDEN everyone knows where everyone is; blinded, invisible whatever.
So I just got a flying mount with Magical Secrets but realized that not just enemies - untrained npc's- can make a roll to 'listen' and know the exact 10ft x 10ft space I am occupying 100 ft. in the air - no special senses necessary.
But how does a flying creature hide?
They don't. Even with greater invisibility.
Clouds don't exist under certain thresholds unless there's a special environmental phenomena occurring.
In battle, a poisoned human (no darksight) npc in a huge underdark cavern could make a perception listen roll and know EXACTLY where I am 100ft+ (pick a number) in the air and then he could declare an attack on a space. All because you only get disadvantage once.
This is one of the areas where the DM has a lot of latitude, not only to decide the appropriate DC for the perception check from your example, but also whether to give disadvantage on top of that because of various conditions. And even if you do locate the person, you have already used your action searching for them.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
But that's not how the rules work. By definition, an invisible creature is impossible to see. You should not know where a creature you can't see (regardless of reason) is unless something gives it away. While the rules for listening to determine an invisible creature's location are deliberately lax, meaning there is no RAW answer to "what's the DC?", the DC to hear most flying creatures (ignoring particularly noisy wings, like a hummingbird or wasp) should be so high as to be nearly impossible at only 30 feet away, let alone 100 feet away. Even if you manage it, TexasDevin is right - unless your GM is letting you use passive perception for this, you need to take the Search action to find such a target, and they'll have a turn to move before you get a new action, which also must be spent on Search. Your GM might also rule you can unambiguously tell your party members where a target is as part of your turn, of course. Remember, poisoned is disadvantage on ability checks, too, so even if you're allowed to use PP, the listener is at -5 to passive perception.
Your GM is severely nerfing the vision and hearing rules. You might want to show them some youtube videos on e.g. just how difficult it is to notice an owl in flight.
Forgive the horrible formatting, not sure how to quote text from another thread.
I'm sincerely curious now, we trawled forums to find an answer. Is there something incorrect about the below written?
To be clear I'm on a Griffon for the previous example which are Apex predators -not because they're quiet- but because they have a faster fly speed than most of their prey. We have a Disadvantage threshold for trying to hear past 100ft. like Ranged weapon profile ranges- but the point was that since its just another disadvantage it cancels out- you could still just happen to roll well and be found. More of a matter of WHEN not IF.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/3062-a-guideline-for-unseen-target-and-vision
#1 May 12, 2017
- View User Profile
- View Posts
- Send Message
- Follow User
ModeratorI feel the need to clarify one of the most debated rule, which concerns unseen target and vision and how these two topics are related to each other. Please, post your comments for corrections and clarification.
From the paragraph "Unseen target", it is clear that an unseen creature has advantage on attacks rolls against a target and that target has disadvantage against the unseen creature. Now, unseen creature is not equivalent to hidden creature. A hidden creature is contemporary unseen and unheard. A hidden creature, therefore, is not targetable if the means of perception rely on sight and hearing.
Unseen creature is equivalent to the vision status of heavily obscured, and a creature in this status can always try to hide. Equivalent situations to heavily obscured are being invisible, or if the target trying to perceive the creature is blinded.
So, unless an unseen (or heavily obscured) creature takes the Hide, the position of that creature is always known to the others. Some cases in which the unseen creature is automatically hidden is (as examples): when it is contemporary invisible and in a Silence area of effect, or when the others are contemporary blinded and deafened.
A creature with blindsight does not rely on sight, so an invisible creature is not unseen (or heavily obscured) for it. In this case, the invisible creature cannot try to hide, unless it goes out the range of blindsight.
Something else a lot of people miss: you automatically know the location of all non-hidden creatures when in combat. Outside of combat is a very different situation, and a DM is free to say a guard is too distracted to notice you climbing the city gate even though you're in broad daylight and there's nothing obscuring you.
It's one of those "technically, but" situations because it's a game.
You technically know where they are, if only because on a system using minis it is incredibly anti-gaming to have everyone remove their pieces from the board, so instead you develop a rule to accommodate the "lack of knowledge"; ie. disadvantage on trying to hit something you can't see. You technically know where they are, but not really (unless you can, say, hear them moving around). By RAW, you are supposed to guess where your target is (whether in darkness or properly hiding), and if you are wrong, you make the roll and the DM simply declares that you miss, but not necessarily that you guessed correctly. This appears to hold even for targeted spells (though not Area of Effect spells if the target is in the area you declare). In practice.. .well, read the first part of this paragraph again.
The specific wording can be found in the Player's Handbook (emphasis added by me):
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.
There are no less than 9 different areas of the PHB that need to be referenced to fully understand the "do I know where an invisible creature is?" question. Anyone that tells you that one of these sections has supremacy, and definitively answers how it works RAW, is lying or misunderstanding the nuance involved.
PHB Chapter 7 - Using Ability Scores - Dexterity
PHB Chapter 7 - Using Ability Scores - Intelligence
PHB Chapter 7 - Using Ability Scores - Wisdom
PHB Chapter 8 - Movement - Stealth
PHB Chapter 8 - Vision & Light
PHB Chapter 9 - Actions in Combat - Hide
PHB Chapter 9 - Actions in Combat - Search
PHB Chapter 9 - Unseen Attackers
PHB Appendix A - Conditions - Blinded
PHB Appendix A - Conditions - Invisible
So if a creature is in Heavy Obscurement (darkness, fog, etc.), then everyone else is Blinded when they try to see them... but Blinded in the Appendix and Vision & Light in Chapter 8 don't really address whether either or both interfere with "knowing where a creature is." An Invisible creature mentions its location can be detected by noise or tracks... but must its location be detected by noise or tracks automatically, when it's standing still? Unanswered. Chapter 9 says that you can attack invisible creatures... but the way it describes it includes guessing squares that you aren't sure they're in, so that hardly tells you explicitly that you DEFINITELY know where invisible unhidden creatures are. Hiding is certainly one way to conceal your location, but does not tell you it's the only way, or that your location is always known unless you Hide? Is knowing what square an invisible or obscured creature in an active search, or a passive noticing a threat, or no check at all and just automatic?
None of these questions are explicitly answered, and even if you think you can read all of those sections above and come up with a synthesis that makes sense to you, it's quite a stretch to say that "RAW definitely says invisible creatures are detected automatically until they Hide." There is no "hidden" condition. There is no rule which describes when and how creature's locations are generally known. Class features like the Rogue's 14th level Blindsense seem very much to imply that invisible creatures are not generally detected even when they aren't hidden. It's complicated.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I'm bookmarking this post just to have it as a quick reference.
You're right. The simplicity of the "one source of advantage/disadvantage only" means that this works.
However, it's metagaming and might be frowned upon (it would at my table).
Making combat take twice as long for the same result.
In my experience, it has sped up combat because it encourages the blind characters to do things other than flail around blindly.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I am aware of Jeremy Crawford's tweet on the issue (two blind people fighting are at normal rolls), but for my game i'm houseruling that both are at disadvantage. Two blind people fighting should not favor the attacker, they should both be equally disadvantaged.
Allowing whichever one is attacking to cancel their disadvantage is a huge bonus. As someone stated above, why should your aim suddenly (greatly) improve because both have the same penalty.
If the defender has a +2 to her AC from Dex, and is blind. A blind attacker no longer at disadvantage gets the equivalent of a +5 to hit. I can see saying the defender can't use their dex bonus (giving in this case a +2 to the blind attacker), but the RAW system gives a much larger bonus. This becomes more so if the defender has no dex bonus (heavy armor). The attacker basically loses nothing from being blind, and gains the equivalent of a +5.
I usually play Rules as Written, but in this case it's just too much to swallow. So I'm houseruling a change to the invisible/blindness conditions. Instead of it granting Advantage to all attack rolls, i'm changing it to giving Advantage on any attack rolls against targets that you can see/detect.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
Picture a sabre style fencing competition (the style where both thrusting and slashing can score points). But we place both contestants into a "square" adjacent to each other and tell them that they cannot leave the square when it is not their "turn". When one attacks the other on their turn, there are many reasons why that attack might "miss" -- only a low percentage of these misses occurs because the attack literally misses the target. Most of the time it will be because the other fencer saw the attack coming and dodged out of the way, or because the other fencer saw the attack coming and raised their own weapon to successfully parry the attack.
Now blindfold them both but they each wear a collar with a device that emits a loud and unique beeping sound. They can't tell what they are trying to hit quite as well as before, but they still have a decent idea because of the noise. However, when they take a swing at the other fencer -- that other fencer has more or less no idea at all that this attack is coming, when it is coming and from which direction it is coming. Maybe they keep their sword positioned a certain way and occasionally get lucky by "parrying" an attack here or there, but most of the time that the first fencer takes a swing in the general ballpark it is going to be a hit.
The rules are actually somewhat reasonable if we assume that combatants can somehow hear as well as described above.
I realize this is an old thread but a couple of clarifications to comments made:
1) Can a rogue use sneak attack when both the rogue and the target are blinded and another enemy of the target is within 5' of it? Yes.
"You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll."
If both, the rogue and their target are blinded then the rogue does NOT have disadvantage on the attack roll. They have a regular die roll. So if the attack is eligible for sneak attack for other reasons then the attack would count as a sneak attack. However, keep in mind that being blinded will also prevent the rogue from having advantage on the attack roll no matter what other circumstances are in effect.
2) 5e characters are assumed to have been trained to know where their opponents are. So if they suddenly can't see, then they still know where their opponents were when making attacks. In addition, if the opponent moves then unless they have taken the hide action to move quietly enough not to be noticed then their location is still known.
HOWEVER
3) Hidden is explicitly defined in the rules as both unseen and unheard. A creature that is both unseen and unheard IS hidden whether they take the hide action or not (at DM discretion).
So, do two creatures 100' apart with a wall between them (or two creatures who are blinded) automatically know where the other is? No. The two creatures can't see each other, if the DM decides that there is no way for them to hear each other then they are hidden by definition, they don't need to make a hide check since they are unseen and unheard - thus hidden - and any change in their location is not known to the opponent.
Similarly, a DM could decide that a fight near a waterfall is so loud that it is impossible to hear another creature moving. In such a case, a creature that becomes invisible would be automatically hidden unless the DM decides they could possibly be noticed by tracks or other interactions. On the other hand, a creature that becomes blinded in such a circumstance would still know where creatures were last seen but they will be unable to know where they might move if the DM decides that they are automatically hidden because they are unseen and unheard.
Finally, a DM could decide that a creature like an Invisible Stalker which flies, is completely invisible, and may only make the sound of a breeze could be hidden all the time (except when they make an attack or cast a spell - at which point their location is known) depending on how quiet the environment is.
P.S. I think up2ng makes a good description of why advantage and disadvantage cancelling makes sense for 5e. Hit points represent far more than physical damage, a combat round represents far more than one attack, moving to block, minimize or deflect an attack is as important an element in determining a hit as the physical armor the character is wearing (keep in mind that 5e is not a simulation and these are heroic fantasy characters).
Does it really make sense for lack of vision to effectively cancel out all other forms of advantage/disadvantage? Probably not - it really depends on how much of a factor avoidance is as part of a creatures defence - but it is a simple solution that doesn't require trying to analyse the reason for each instance of advantage and disadvantage, decide what exactly does "restrained" or "poisoned" or other effects mean or do and then decide whether it would make any bigger difference than just being blinded while your opponent can't see your attack coming. It is just easiest for everyone to cancel them all.
Long range attacks when neither can see the other can be covered by the DM deciding whether it is even possible for the opponents to hear each other. If it isn't then they are hidden and although an attacker could fire at the last known location, after that creature moves, the attacker will be guessing what location they might be in.
If you've played with a DM that determined that invisible = hidden, you probably understand why the rules push back against that. It makes invisibility massively powerful. A creature with Greater Invisibility and a high movement speed is basically invincible. You spend your action to locate it (maybe), and then it moves again before you have another action to attack it.
Combat is not fun if you can't even locate your enemy. This is a game first and foremost, and combat should be fun. Thus becoming totally hidden is a difficult and expensive thing to do to keep the game fun.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm