Hiding is very important in D&D 5th Edition as it may allow you to avoid combat entirely or engage in combat where the first turn you have advantage and your opponent effectively loses their turn and cannot even take reactions until their turn of inactivity is over.
The Hiding rules (pg 177 PHB) seem to have a contradiction with another part of the PHB, I have separated into clauses that I have numbered for quick reference:
- 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, 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
{note: there was an errata that significantly changed these rules, early editions of the PHB are significantly different}
I'd like to point out that being Lightly Obscured (defined Pg 183 of PHB) seems to avoid the limitation of Clause 2. But it's not specific, it depends on inferring the meaning of "see you clearly".
This lack of specificity is exacerbated by the traits of Wood Elf on Page 24 of the PHB (earlier in the book) where the Mask of the Wild (MotW) trait is specified:
You can attempt to hide even when you are only lightly obscured by foliage, heavy rain, falling snow, mist, and other natural phenomena.
It has been put to me that the MotW trait proves or indicates or somehow leads to the conclusions that Clause 2 is meant to mean you can be clearly seen when lightly obscured and the only way you can attempt to hide is to be heavily obscured or have this trait or a similar trait from the Skulker feat.
It is the language "even when you are only" which is taken to mean an attempt is otherwise impossible. This is similar to the language of feats like Sentinel "Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action" the difference is the rules on Opportunity Attacks and disengage are specific with no ambiguity.
(EDIT: this is to address the contention that if you cannot always hide when Lightly Obscured ipso facto, therefore.. you can ONLY hide if you are Heavily Obscured, Invisible, or the creature you're hiding from is blinded. The idea that there's no possible combination of circumstances that could allow you to hide when lightly obscured other than explicit rules like Skulker/MotW.)
My contention is that the Hiding rules on Pg 177 are general rules and the MotW is a specific rule that is not actually redundant. But I'm not sure if I am missing something, is this a correct interpretation of the rules?
So should a DM allow creatures to hide from creatures if they are lightly obscured if the totality of circumstances be appropriate? And the way a Wood Elf or creature with Skulker should be treated differently is they only need the rules specified in the trait not the totality of circumstances as ruled by the DM?
Addendum
Examples of circumstances where a DM may allow a creature to hide when lightly obscured even without an explicit rule allowing hiding when lightly obscured:
- the hider is camouflaged after a sufficient a survival check
- the creature is a beast with a natural camouflage pattern
- great distance from the seeking creature
- hider benefits from the spell Pass Without Trace or Blur
- Hider use of half-cover or three-quarters cover
- seeker distracted by another activity that requires focus elsewhere
- poor vision short of blindness in the seeking creature
- the hider is size small or smaller
None of this would be necessary for a Wood Elf or any creature with the Skulker feat to hide when lightly obscured.