10
\$\begingroup\$

Assuming that I'm using the Bracers of Flying Daggers magic item (from Waterdeep: Dragon Heist, p. 190):

This armband appears to have thin daggers strapped to it. As an action, you can pull up to two magic daggers from the bracer and immediately hurl them, making a ranged attack with each dagger. A dagger vanishes if you don't hurl it right away, and the daggers disappear right after they hit or miss. The bracer never runs out of daggers.

I'm hidden from the creature I want to attack, so I have advantage on attack rolls against him.

Analyzing the item wording, it seems that the two daggers are meant to be thrown at the same time, one for each hand. To sustain this idea, there's the fact that you can't move between those two attacks.

My question is this:

Would I apply advantage from being hidden on both the attacks?

\$\endgroup\$
9
\$\begingroup\$

No, the second attack is not at advantage, you are no longer hidden

The rule from the the PHB p. 195 about attacking from hiding is:

Unseen Attackers and Targets

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.

If a character is hidden and as its action it attacks, the first attack out of the ones available to it (Extra Attack, the bracers you mention, etc.) is at advantage due to the rule above: "When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it".

However the second part of the rule, "you give away your location when the attack hits or misses" refers to a single attack, "the attack", not to the entire Attack action (or the action used with the bracers to attack). This means you have given your position away and any further attacks as part of the same action are not at advantage unless there is another reason for it.

This answer has so far described how the Attack action works with the "attacker is hidden" rules, which is not technically the action described in the bracers item. However this exposes a flaw in the description of the item which introduces significant ambiguity: there is no actual rule for the item specified that allows a RAW ruling about how it exactly works with the hidden rules. As such the only way to answer this question, without diving into potentially complex and un-balancing rules, is to assume that the action used by the bracers to attack works in the same way as the Attack action does. Of course this is now in the realm of DM fiat.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ "Give away your location" is not the same as "become visible" \$\endgroup\$ – jgn Nov 22 '19 at 5:05
3
\$\begingroup\$

I do not think you stay hidden after the first attack. Otherwise the Skulker Feat is almost useless, as it states:

When you are hidden from a creature and miss it with a ranged weapon attack, making the attack doesn't reveal your position.

That feat overrides this general rule

Unseen Attackers and Targets
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. (PHB. p. 195)

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to RPG.SE! Take the tour if you haven't already, and check out the help center for more guidance. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast Mar 25 '19 at 22:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ "Give away your location" is not the same as "become visible" \$\endgroup\$ – jgn Nov 22 '19 at 5:05
-2
\$\begingroup\$

You have advantage on both attacks.

The rules for unseen attackers states:

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.

So long as you are unseen, you will have advantage on attack rolls. You do reveal your location though.

Revealing your location is not the same as being seen

Whenever you make an attack while hidden, you will give away your location. However, knowing someone's location does not mean you can see them. This is easily understood by reading the Invisible condition:

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.

If knowing someone's location was enough to see them, then being invisible would do nothing at all.

You still have advantage when you make the second attack. You are still hidden.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ There's nothing in the question to imply that the hidden character is invisible, so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up. If the attacker is just using Stealth to hide and then attacks, by giving their position away they become visible to the target and so do not get advantage on the second attack. It is possible for them to still be unseen, but it is by no means common. \$\endgroup\$ – Blckknght Nov 22 '19 at 7:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Blckknght I brought up the invisible condition to show that knowing someones location doesn't mean you can see them. You do not become visible just because someone knows your location. The rules for invisibility are a great example to help people understand this, because it's obvious that if knowing someones location means you can see them, then invisibility does absolutely nothing. \$\endgroup\$ – jgn Nov 22 '19 at 7:25
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Right, so I think you should say "it depends on whether you're now visible after attacking or not", rather than "you're still unseen". Because for most characters who are not invisible (or who's invisibility ends upon attacking), they will be seen and so your answer is wrong. \$\endgroup\$ – Blckknght Nov 22 '19 at 7:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Blckknght Successfully hiding makes you unseen unless individuals can beat your stealth check with a perception check. If you have done this and attack, then you remain unseen despite your location being given away. This is the same as when you make noise when hiding, etc. Since this was the situation given by the OP, I think it's an appropriate answer. Additionally, you should never understand having your location given away as being visible, so it is cleaner not to imply this is ever the case. \$\endgroup\$ – jgn Nov 22 '19 at 7:53
  • \$\begingroup\$ Hmm, I've always assumed "you give your location away" to be synonymous with "you stop hiding" which is one of the conditions for ending being hidden (given in the box on p177 of the PHB). I take it you interpret things differently? At a minimum I'd suggest that any creature you've revealed your location to should immediately get a free perception check to see you if you don't have any special means preventing it (that is, you're not invisible and there's at least dim light in your location). \$\endgroup\$ – Blckknght Nov 22 '19 at 8:07
-6
\$\begingroup\$

You would get advantage on both of the attacks

Let's have a look at the wording in the PHB:

PHB Page 192:

Attack

The most common action to take in combat is the Attack action,...Certain features, such as the Extra Attack feature of the fighter, allow you to make more than one attack with this action.

PHB Page 195:

Unseen attackers and targets

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.

Let's differentiate the 'Attack Action' and an attack. A single 'Attack Action' can be compose of multiple attacks, as in the extra attack feature.

Now look at the second part of the 'Unseen Attackers' wording, I think it is implied that it should read:

If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack action, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.

Now this is obviously up to interpretation so I'd love to see what other people think too.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I disagree. If that was intended to be read as "Attack Action" it would say so. There are many, many other places in the book where it clearly specifies 'Attack Action' as opposed to 'An Attack.' \$\endgroup\$ – guildsbounty Mar 1 '19 at 17:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ As an addition...if you read that statement the way you are interpreting it, that would also mean that Attack-roll spells gain no benefit from being hidden. Because those are triggered with the 'Cast a Spell' Action, not the 'Attack' Action. Oh...and the daggers thrown from the Bracer are not part of the Attack Action either...they are the 'Activate a Magic Item' Action, as you "Use an action to drawn and throw two daggers from the bracers" not "As part of your Attack Action" \$\endgroup\$ – guildsbounty Mar 1 '19 at 17:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ Welcome to rpg stack exchange! Please take the tour rpg.stackexchange.com/tour \$\endgroup\$ – Protonflux Mar 1 '19 at 17:16
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ Please don't worry about the down-votes on your answer, it is the way that the site works to promote the "best" answer. Literally everyone has answers down-voted at some point, more often early in their "career" here. \$\endgroup\$ – Protonflux Mar 1 '19 at 17:22
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ Please carry on contributing as it is only with people doing what you are doing, answering questions, that a "best" answer bubbles up for each question. You can even answer a question twice if you change your mind, and leaving the original answer helps people see how the conversation about the question evolved, even though it means people can still down-vote it. \$\endgroup\$ – Protonflux Mar 1 '19 at 17:24

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.