i dont agree with 3:53 "but the monster knows where you are" the only rules say " you cant hide from a creature that can see you" so a creature may know where you are but they still cant see you i think the concept behind it is the creature cant see what youre actually doing. using the tombstone example, the creature know youre behind it but it will not be able to see where you will attack from. you could fire an arrow from the left or the right.
As a rogue player who was Cunning Action: Hiding at the end of every turn to get Sneak Attack on the next turn, this video was extremely informative. Also the fact that an active perception check should never be lower than passive perception makes total sense. Thanks!
I'd argue the very premise of your argument is flawed from the start! It is not whether I'm hidden it's whether or not my attacked revealed my location in the first place! If I'm hiding and the party gets surprise on a group or I am just attacking from the shadows, when its my turn I fire my crossbow off how pray tell do you now divine my location? Were you looking in my direction?, Did you see the arrow? Can you see an arrow coming straight at you? Can you see an arrow from its profile? Which scenario has greatest chance of detecting arrow? When I missed and the arrow goes flying by your head can you perceive the direction it came from? ( Test it out face away from someone and have them shoot a air soft gun and try and figure out which direction its coming from. Directly behind, from the left, the right maybe above or perhaps below and to the right? The only fact you can articulate is behind is that enough?) When the arrow strikes you were you able to see where it came from? If we're in a poorly lit dungeon and I'm wearing all black when I dart out and attack striking your back and fade back into the shadows how are you seeing me? To counter this your evil mage casts daylight removing all shadow. On my turn I cast wall of light & combined with an already brightly lit room you have a brightly lit wall where I fire arrows from behind, even if you make your save to avoid being blinded How are you seeing me with all the cacophony of light? I trust I make my point clearly. I come at this from having played air soft and paintball. Knowing the enemy is in the vicinity is not enough it does not come close. Been in a situation where the other team "failed their stealth check so to speak young kids talking to loud and we were able to surprise the young kids only to be completely caught by surprise by the two snipers that took us out! Seems the snipers couldn't get the kids to remain quite so the just rolled with it! Had Scenario we're are sneaking up to a contested area.Three of us go undetected one to the left and two on the right however, two are making more noise than a herd of elephants coming from the rear of us. According to D&D logic the two members of the group should have denied the whole party "SURPRISE" because they got detected. In actuality while our team mates "died" they also led the enemy to their deaths because they moved up closer to take out our team mates and were totally and absolutely surprised when we attacked and took them out! This makes no sense logically, it makes no sense in reality it's absolute unmitigated garbage. The shear stupidity is mind boggling. If members of the party successfully made their checks they are hidden just as we remained hidden on the airsoft field! Your aware of drew your attention this doesn't translate into the whole party being discovered! ( This is why we never ever use rules as written for surprise as it makes no sense whatsoever!) These are all relevant facts because having a paintball or air soft round flying past your head alerts you that someone is near but, rarely ever has it revealed the hidden snipers location on the first "round of combat"! ( For the record airsoft BB's travel around same speed as most arrows around 300 FPS.) Understand I'm not saying that it can't happen or won't happen its possible that it could and it's possible that it don't. Now how does this all relate to D&D? Well not to be blunt but, you might want to scrutinize the very rules your quoting very clearly! Rules as written: PLAYERS HANDBOOK EXCERPT BEGIN ************************************* "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. PLAYERS HANDBOOK EXCERPT END *********************************** These ARE the rules as written. This might not have been what they intended however, it is what they wrote though! You'll notice that in the first two paragraphs clearly establish the following facts: Fact 1: You're considered hidden until you are discovered. Fact 2: There are only two things that can break your stealth they are: A:) if a creature can see you clearly B:) A loud noise. Those are the facts for the rules as written. This then gives us two true/false tests. Could the player have been seen when he attacked & did he make a loud noise. Thusly, if a player or player(s) should decide to attack in such a manner as to always render a false on both tests then by default they are not discovered. That is what the rules say. Couple of examples enchanting a bow that emits a sound of the rustling of leaves or a rat squeaking when its fired or your warlock casts minor illusion with the sounds of twenty arrows echoing from the area around you. Perhaps having a wizard cast darkness and a cleric cast silence on the arrows to be fired. These are steps players may take via magic what about mundane attacks? Is it possible to attack in a way to avoid being seen clearly or fire off your arrow timed to a loud sound in the distance? Consider, If i tell my DM I wish to fire my crossbow when the guard is faced away from me than there's no possible way for him to "see you clearly" thus this test is inevitably false they did not see me clearly, hell they could not see me. As to the arrow, whether hit or miss its whizzing by or toward the subject does NOT rise to the level of shouting a warning or knocking over a vase so this too can only be false. Understand, they did not specify ANY NOISE! They write "and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase." notice the verbiage "such as" which could also have been written as comparatively meaning that if the noise is the equivalent to shouting a warning or knocking over a vase it then breaks your cover. Hence the inevitable conclusion attacking from stealth does not necessarily break your stealth and may not actually result in your position being revealed in the first place. These are the rules as written. They are undeniable. It may or may not have been their intent never the less it is what is written . The most important issue with these facts that arise since the rules as written clearly don't ever specifically state "you're revealed when you attack!" lead us to the undeniable fact that both of our two tests resulted falsely, that is to say. "I was not clearly seen and the noise does not compare to that of shouting a warning or knocking over a vase and thusly, it is an inevitable fact we remain undiscovered thusly we remain hidden! Remember this fact you're considered hidden UNTIL you are discovered. We now need a mechanism to account for these inconsistencies that occur when the player(s) visual state that does not rise to the level of "see you clearly" and also account for the acoustic sounds that don't rise to the level of a "shouting a warning or knocking over a vase." Enter in the Contested Check. This gives the players the actual chance to go undiscovered while still providing a means of them being discovered. Something happened, the guards know stuff is going down they're just not sure what. The DM's can choose to impose penalties to Contested Checks or grant bonuses to players depending how things are playing out. If the rogue is consistently shooting from stealth and remaining in same initial location the DM my deem the fact that he's remaining stationary could very likely mean he'd be detected getting exponentially higher then longer he remains in said location and may grant a bonus to the creatures' Contested Checks. Contrast this with a rogue that fires twice and moves to a new location. Thusly, a DM might depending on whether the attempted stealth relocation went undetected impose penalties to the creatures contested check. This is by far a much better system actually allowing your players if they so choose to attempt a strategic stealth-ed approach. The downside as DM might have more rolls to make on whether or not the rogue is "discovered" or you could just acquiesce just acknowledge the rogues hidden. When we played it was not at all an issue. In my opinion especially with regards to surprise if a member of the party failed and was detected then what needs to occur is an active choice by the DM to actively searches for signs of the rest of the parties presence. If you neglect to do so then the party goes undetected. However, should while your actively looking the party members who were hidden then attack you well your surprised bud just like the guys we ambushed in the airsoft match were! This tracks on par with airsoft and paintball as well. While true a snipers location isn't necessarily revealed initially as more people show and more eye balls are in the area eventually his position will be compromised because its easier to see an objects profile than when its coming straight at you. As more people come into the area the likely hood of seeing the profile goes up exponentially till someone says over there in the trees!
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
i dont agree with 3:53 "but the monster knows where you are" the only rules say " you cant hide from a creature that can see you" so a creature may know where you are but they still cant see you
i think the concept behind it is the creature cant see what youre actually doing. using the tombstone example, the creature know youre behind it but it will not be able to see where you will attack from. you could fire an arrow from the left or the right.
As a rogue player who was Cunning Action: Hiding at the end of every turn to get Sneak Attack on the next turn, this video was extremely informative. Also the fact that an active perception check should never be lower than passive perception makes total sense. Thanks!
Great video but the audio seems to be threatening my phone speaker, same with my earphones. FYI. Thanks for this much needed video. 😊
So we're just ignoring the group stealth option in the book? If half of the party succeeds the whole party succeeds.
In reality passive perception can be better than active as looking for something in a hurry often ends up worse than calm but unfocused
I look at it like this active perp check vs passive? if they roll lower than their passive they were looking in the wrong place. and you pass.
Love it
I'd argue the very premise of your argument is flawed from the start! It is not whether I'm hidden it's whether or not my attacked revealed my location in the first place!
If I'm hiding and the party gets surprise on a group or I am just attacking from the shadows, when its my turn I fire my crossbow off how pray tell do you now divine my location?
Were you looking in my direction?, Did you see the arrow? Can you see an arrow coming straight at you? Can you see an arrow from its profile? Which scenario has greatest chance of detecting arrow?
When I missed and the arrow goes flying by your head can you perceive the direction it came from? ( Test it out face away from someone and have them shoot a air soft gun and try and figure out which direction its coming from. Directly behind, from the left, the right maybe above or perhaps below and to the right? The only fact you can articulate is behind is that enough?)
When the arrow strikes you were you able to see where it came from?
If we're in a poorly lit dungeon and I'm wearing all black when I dart out and attack striking your back and fade back into the shadows how are you seeing me?
To counter this your evil mage casts daylight removing all shadow. On my turn I cast wall of light & combined with an already brightly lit room you have a brightly lit wall where I fire arrows from behind, even if you make your save to avoid being blinded How are you seeing me with all the cacophony of light?
I trust I make my point clearly.
I come at this from having played air soft and paintball. Knowing the enemy is in the vicinity is not enough it does not come close. Been in a situation where the other team "failed their stealth check so to speak young kids talking to loud and we were able to surprise the young kids only to be completely caught by surprise by the two snipers that took us out! Seems the snipers couldn't get the kids to remain quite so the just rolled with it!
Had Scenario we're are sneaking up to a contested area.Three of us go undetected one to the left and two on the right however, two are making more noise than a herd of elephants coming from the rear of us. According to D&D logic the two members of the group should have denied the whole party "SURPRISE" because they got detected. In actuality while our team mates "died" they also led the enemy to their deaths because they moved up closer to take out our team mates and were totally and absolutely surprised when we attacked and took them out! This makes no sense logically, it makes no sense in reality it's absolute unmitigated garbage. The shear stupidity is mind boggling. If members of the party successfully made their checks they are hidden just as we remained hidden on the airsoft field! Your aware of drew your attention this doesn't translate into the whole party being discovered! ( This is why we never ever use rules as written for surprise as it makes no sense whatsoever!)
These are all relevant facts because having a paintball or air soft round flying past your head alerts you that someone is near but, rarely ever has it revealed the hidden snipers location on the first "round of combat"! ( For the record airsoft BB's travel around same speed as most arrows around 300 FPS.) Understand I'm not saying that it can't happen or won't happen its possible that it could and it's possible that it don't.
Now how does this all relate to D&D?
Well not to be blunt but, you might want to scrutinize the very rules your quoting very clearly!
Rules as written:
PLAYERS HANDBOOK EXCERPT BEGIN *************************************
"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.
PLAYERS HANDBOOK EXCERPT END ***********************************
These ARE the rules as written. This might not have been what they intended however, it is what they wrote though!
You'll notice that in the first two paragraphs clearly establish the following facts:
Fact 1: You're considered hidden until you are discovered.
Fact 2: There are only two things that can break your stealth they are:
A:) if a creature can see you clearly
B:) A loud noise.
Those are the facts for the rules as written. This then gives us two true/false tests. Could the player have been seen when he attacked & did he make a loud noise.
Thusly, if a player or player(s) should decide to attack in such a manner as to always render a false on both tests then by default they are not discovered. That is what the rules say.
Couple of examples enchanting a bow that emits a sound of the rustling of leaves or a rat squeaking when its fired or your warlock casts minor illusion with the sounds of twenty arrows echoing from the area around you. Perhaps having a wizard cast darkness and a cleric cast silence on the arrows to be fired. These are steps players may take via magic what about mundane attacks? Is it possible to attack in a way to avoid being seen clearly or fire off your arrow timed to a loud sound in the distance?
Consider, If i tell my DM I wish to fire my crossbow when the guard is faced away from me than there's no possible way for him to "see you clearly" thus this test is inevitably false they did not see me clearly, hell they could not see me. As to the arrow, whether hit or miss its whizzing by or toward the subject does NOT rise to the level of shouting a warning or knocking over a vase so this too can only be false.
Understand, they did not specify ANY NOISE! They write "and you give away your position if you make noise, such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase." notice the verbiage "such as" which could also have been written as comparatively meaning that if the noise is the equivalent to shouting a warning or knocking over a vase it then breaks your cover.
Hence the inevitable conclusion attacking from stealth does not necessarily break your stealth and may not actually result in your position being revealed in the first place. These are the rules as written. They are undeniable. It may or may not have been their intent never the less it is what is written .
The most important issue with these facts that arise since the rules as written clearly don't ever specifically state "you're revealed when you attack!" lead us to the undeniable fact that both of our two tests resulted falsely, that is to say. "I was not clearly seen and the noise does not compare to that of shouting a warning or knocking over a vase and thusly, it is an inevitable fact we remain undiscovered thusly we remain hidden! Remember this fact you're considered hidden UNTIL you are discovered.
We now need a mechanism to account for these inconsistencies that occur when the player(s) visual state that does not rise to the level of "see you clearly" and also account for the acoustic sounds that don't rise to the level of a "shouting a warning or knocking over a vase."
Enter in the Contested Check. This gives the players the actual chance to go undiscovered while still providing a means of them being discovered.
Something happened, the guards know stuff is going down they're just not sure what. The DM's can choose to impose penalties to Contested Checks or grant bonuses to players depending how things are playing out.
If the rogue is consistently shooting from stealth and remaining in same initial location the DM my deem the fact that he's remaining stationary could very likely mean he'd be detected getting exponentially higher then longer he remains in said location and may grant a bonus to the creatures' Contested Checks.
Contrast this with a rogue that fires twice and moves to a new location. Thusly, a DM might depending on whether the attempted stealth relocation went undetected impose penalties to the creatures contested check. This is by far a much better system actually allowing your players if they so choose to attempt a strategic stealth-ed approach. The downside as DM might have more rolls to make on whether or not the rogue is "discovered" or you could just acquiesce just acknowledge the rogues hidden. When we played it was not at all an issue. In my opinion especially with regards to surprise if a member of the party failed and was detected then what needs to occur is an active choice by the DM to actively searches for signs of the rest of the parties presence. If you neglect to do so then the party goes undetected. However, should while your actively looking the party members who were hidden then attack you well your surprised bud just like the guys we ambushed in the airsoft match were!
This tracks on par with airsoft and paintball as well. While true a snipers location isn't necessarily revealed initially as more people show and more eye balls are in the area eventually his position will be compromised because its easier to see an objects profile than when its coming straight at you. As more people come into the area the likely hood of seeing the profile goes up exponentially till someone says over there in the trees!
God why is always 5e?