Hiding

[j_spencer93]

So I have a player who wants to hide in combat and such, but doesn't think I am doing it right (honestly im not 100% sure myself) so I am curious. How does hide work in 5th edition exactly? Is it good or bad? Examples of its usefulness?

[darknite]

There's a can of worms...

Here's how I run it.

1) The hider needs acceptable cover/concealment to hide behind from the perspective of the observer. They need not be entirely hidden from view but the majority should be obscured.

2) The hider needs to make a Hide action using their Stealth skill vs any eligible observer's Perception (either Passive or Active, depending on whether they're taking actions to do this).

3) If the hider's Stealth check beats an observer's Perception check, they're hidden from that person.

Being hidden doesn't necessarily mean an observer doesn't know the hiding individual is in that area, it just means they can't make them out enough to directly target. However if the observer hasn't spotted the hider to begin with, they wouldn't know they're location or even of their existence.

An observer can break a successful stealth check by getting line of sight behind an obstruction the hider is using for cover or get a good enough Perception check. Hiding is also broken if the hider attacks or breaks cover. Typically moving faster than half speed imposes Disadvantage to a Stealth roll.

Again, just the way I run it.

[j_spencer93]

There's a can of worms...

Here's how I run it.

1) The hider needs acceptable cover/concealment to hide behind from the perspective of the observer. They need not be entirely hidden from view but the majority should be obscured.

2) The hider needs to make a Hide action using their Stealth skill vs any eligible observer's Perception (either Passive or Active, depending on whether they're taking actions to do this).

3) If the hider's Stealth check beats an observer's Perception check, they're hidden from that person.

Being hidden doesn't necessarily mean an observer doesn't know the hiding individual is in that area, it just means they can't make them out enough to directly target. However if the observer hasn't spotted the hider to begin with, they wouldn't know they're location or even of their existence.

An observer can break a successful stealth check by getting line of sight behind an obstruction the hider is using for cover or get a good enough Perception check. Hiding is also broken if the hider attacks or breaks cover. Typically moving faster than half speed imposes Disadvantage to a Stealth roll.

Again, just the way I run it.

This is very similar to how I do it. I think the player is upset that it's different then his other DM allows (apparently...you could hide as long as they weren't actively fighting, reason given was those fighting would be to distracted to notice). Also we use to play a lot of D&D 3.5, so he might be upset its not as good as it use to be.

[Tanarii]

1) The hider needs acceptable cover/concealment to hide behind from the perspective of the observer. They need not be entirely hidden from view but the majority should be obscured.

This is where your DM variance tends to come in. The requirement is:
- The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding.
- You can’t hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise,

Basically, the DM has to rule on what qualifies as "see you clearly", and that is likely to vary from DM to DM. And circumstances in a given DMs game.

[j_spencer93]

This is where your DM variance tends to come in. The requirement is:
- The DM decides when circumstances are appropriate for hiding.
- You can’t hide from a creature that can see you clearly, and you give away your position if you make noise,

Basically, the DM has to rule on what qualifies as "see you clearly", and that is likely to vary from DM to DM. And circumstances in a given DMs game.

Ok so let me ask this now, although i did above as well, what are the benefits of being hidden? RAW and otherwise.
I grant advantage on attacks made while hidden.

[Teaguethebean]

Ok so let me ask this now, although i did above as well, what are the benefits of being hidden? RAW and otherwise.
I grant advantage on attacks made while hidden.

A simple rule of thumb is it uses the same rules as the benefits of the invisible condition sans advantage on strealth checks.

[j_spencer93]

A simple rule of thumb is it uses the same rules as the benefits of the invisible condition sans advantage on strealth checks.

Yea, i'd agree that is good and generally what I do. I think I was fair in the last game then.
Basically he was mad he couldn't hide whenever he wanted. Which is odd to me as he was obsessed with he must he hidden to sneak attack as well (me and the other players explained this as not being true)

[JackPhoenix]

A simple rule of thumb is it uses the same rules as the benefits of the invisible condition sans advantage on strealth checks.

Being invisible doesn't give you advantage on Dex (Stealth) checks.

Being hidden has single benefit: enemies don't know your position, so they have to guess and attack *a space* instead of aiming straight for your character. Being unseen is separate from being hidden, and while it is a prerequisite for being hidden, you can be unseen, but not hidden. Attacks against unseen target have disadvantage, and unseen attacker has advantage on their own attacks.

[Xetheral]

Being invisible doesn't give you advantage on Dex (Stealth) checks.

Which is somewhat ironic considering that a Cloak of Elvenkind does give advantage on stealth checks made to hide. But that's a whole different can of worms.

[JackPhoenix]

Which is somewhat ironic considering that a Cloak of Elvenkind does give advantage on stealth checks made to hide. But that's a whole different can of worms.

Cloak of Elvenkind also gives a disadvantage on Wis (Perception) checks to *see* the wearer. Invisibility makes any such check autofail, but it does nothing for other senses.

[Millstone85]

Ok so let me ask this now, although i did above as well, what are the benefits of being hidden? RAW and otherwise.Hidden = Unseen + Unheard

The benefits of being unseen, whether you are also unheard or not, are:

You have advantage on attack rolls against a creature that can't see you.
A creature that can't see you has disadvantage on attack rolls against you.

Being unheard as well as unseen provides this extra benefit:

A creature that can neither hear nor see you has to guess your location.

This is all from the PHB page 194-195, Unseen Attackers and Targets.

[Tanarii]

Hidden = Unseen + Unheard
Snipped for brevity but well detailed.

The important part here is if the DM determines/rules you can't be clearly seen and clearly heard, but neither are you automatically totally unseen or totally silent, but you're attempting to be so, you get to make a check at the cost of an action. If you succeed, you are unheard and unseen.

It's a check because the outcome is in doubt.

[Bjarkmundur]

I think the important part to remember is that you can have to creatures next to each other, and you are hidden to one but not the other.

Just remember to use this against your players as well. A lot of the time showing players something in action against them is better then an explanation. This is also a good trick to make the players create the ruling instead of you. For example, if you are hidden to one creature but not the other, can the second creature tell the first where you are, and therefor you are not hidden? See how the players tackle this scenario, and then reference it later.

[No brains]

You should also consider the player character's race. A couple of them make hiding weird.

A goblin can always hide (in proper concealment) as a bonus action. They can pull the snipe, hide, move loop each turn.

A wood elf can hide in any "natural" instance of light obscurement. Technically this means any shadow, but even less permissive readings allow wood elves to hide in spots other creatures could not. The PHB cites that they can successfully hide with heavy rain as their cover.

A halfling can hide behind a larger ally. In theory, a halfling rogue can pull a goblin's business, but while doing ring around the rosie with a teammate.

[Nagog]

From the sounds of it, they wish to hide to gain sneak attack, right? Are they aware that Rogues deal sneak attack damage when they are flanking an enemy? If you have a front line fighter (barbarian, fighter, or paladins are the go-to, however some other classes can substitute), having them tag team an enemy may remove his disdain for the new rules regarding hiding, as he now no longer needs to do so as frequently to gain his scaling damage benefit. If you don't have a front line fighter, consider giving him a familiar to flank for him. He'd have to play tactically as to not have his familiar die in each combat scenario, but it could still work. If you are attempting to get them off of the video-game esque playstyle of stab, hide, repeat, and have him think more outside the box, line up enemies that are spread out and have a wide variety of passive perceptions. Or just throw in one enemy with the Alert feat to really ruin his repetitive playstyle.

[JackPhoenix]

From the sounds of it, they wish to hide to gain sneak attack, right? Are they aware that Rogues deal sneak attack damage when they are flanking an enemy? If you have a front line fighter (barbarian, fighter, or paladins are the go-to, however some other classes can substitute), having them tag team an enemy may remove his disdain for the new rules regarding hiding, as he now no longer needs to do so as frequently to gain his scaling damage benefit. If you don't have a front line fighter, consider giving him a familiar to flank for him. He'd have to play tactically as to not have his familiar die in each combat scenario, but it could still work. If you are attempting to get them off of the video-game esque playstyle of stab, hide, repeat, and have him think more outside the box, line up enemies that are spread out and have a wide variety of passive perceptions. Or just throw in one enemy with the Alert feat to really ruin his repetitive playstyle.

No need for flanking (which is an optional rule). Having an ally next to the enemy, or any source of advantage at all is enough to allow sneak attack, assuming you don't have disadvantage.

[Bjarkmundur]

No need for flanking (which is an optional rule). Having an ally next to the enemy, or any source of advantage at all is enough to allow sneak attack, assuming you don't have disadvantage.

It's a figure of speech. Flanking the mechanic and flanking the act of outnumbering your opponent are two different things.

[j_spencer93]

From the sounds of it, they wish to hide to gain sneak attack, right? Are they aware that Rogues deal sneak attack damage when they are flanking an enemy? If you have a front line fighter (barbarian, fighter, or paladins are the go-to, however some other classes can substitute), having them tag team an enemy may remove his disdain for the new rules regarding hiding, as he now no longer needs to do so as frequently to gain his scaling damage benefit. If you don't have a front line fighter, consider giving him a familiar to flank for him. He'd have to play tactically as to not have his familiar die in each combat scenario, but it could still work. If you are attempting to get them off of the video-game esque playstyle of stab, hide, repeat, and have him think more outside the box, line up enemies that are spread out and have a wide variety of passive perceptions. Or just throw in one enemy with the Alert feat to really ruin his repetitive playstyle.

Thats what I was confused about. I explained this to him. Repeatedly. But for some reason he just wanted to be hidden. Im not sure if its from previous sessions with another DM or what but he was adamant that being hidden was necessary to play a rogue.

[JackPhoenix]

It's a figure of speech. Flanking the mechanic and flanking the act of outnumbering your opponent are two different things.

And you don't require either. The rogue can stand 120' away with a crossbow, and the ally may by surrounded by 8 enemies, and it will still be sufficient for sneak attack.