GX.Sigma
Adventurer
.....huh. That's weird.
D&D 5E October Playtest Packet - Magic Items, Updated XP, Monster Traits
- Thread starter Morrus
- Start date
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Libramarian
Adventurer
The boots make you move silently. So whenever you're trying to sneak around past someone, and the only way they would detect you is by hearing you, you don't need to make a check. You automatically succeed.Ok. We have so far in the playtest:
- Hide/Move Silently married as "Stealth".
- Spot/Listen married as "Perception".
- Stealth Mechanical Resolution Rules. These rules specificially speak to the "Hide" and "Spot" portion of the Stealtherception relationship - eg you must have concealment/cover or something to intervene between Line of Sight. (i) They do not speak to the "Listen" and "Move Silently" portion - specifically nothing about either the "Mover" having disadvantage over antagonistic terrain (dry leaves, gravel, etc) or the "Listener" having advantage on such contests. However, we do have one area of the current ruleset that interfaces with this. (ii) Disadvantage on Stealth Checks with Heavy Armor.
- Now we have a Cloak of Elvenkind that interacts with the "Hide:Spot" portion of the Stealth Mechanical Resolution Rules (bypasses prerequisite for conceleament). This would seem to set the standard for what the corresponding Boots "should" do. Right?
- Wrong. The Boots have no such "Move Silently:Listen" mechanical resolution portion of the Stealth rules for them to interact with. There is no (i). We have (ii) . But (ii) is nowhere to be found in the Stealth Rules. It is in the Equipment rules and its only detached reason by proxy of implication.
So then. We either have:
- Boots that do nothing because there are no corresponding Stealth rules that will give the wearer advantage.
- Boots that cancel disadvantage on Stealth checks over antagonistic terrain (dry leaves, gravel, etc) such as the disadvantage alloted to heavy armor wearers.
- Boots that cancel advantage on percievers' Listen checks to hear the person moving over antagonistic terrain.
Oddly incoherent and left up to interpretation. The rules are silent on this Move Silently:Listen relationship but they speak explicitly and directly the to Hide:Spot analog (indicating relevance and precedent). Therefore, many a group may never impose disadvantage on Stealth or give advantage on Listen in these scenarios. It thus opens up the paradigm whereby this vacuum of rule-space all of a sudden changes once a PC gets these Boots (in order to make the boots useful). All of a sudden, people are ad-hoc retrofitting a Move Silently:Listen rule and hard-coding it into their game so the wearer of the Boots has some mechanical advantage/use from the magic of the boots.
Thus:
Why is the rule not there in Stealth Rules in the first place? And then why is there no corresponding rules crunch (such as cancelling user disadvantage on Move Silently or cancelling contestant advantage on Listen) on the Boots?
It seems to me this is either (i) Right Hand/Left Hand design incoherency, (ii) design oversight, or (iii) a "Rulings not Rules" feature....which, of course, will just become an ad-hoc, retrofitted Rule for every single table once these Boots find their way into the game (or magical Boots of Elvenkind will have no mechanical functionality).
That is my 3rd attempt. I hope that makes sense.
Li Shenron
Legend
I think it creates problems at the table only if it's a rules lawyer's table.
It's not really about DM empowerment at all... it's about making the game for normal humans who (should) all understand something as simple as "you make no noise", rather than a game for lawyers.
tlantl
First Post
I don't think that's the issue here.What I believe the man is saying is that although there are rules covering stealth in general there isn't anything specific to the different ways of being detected, that is sight sound or smell. what it has to do with these items is another question entirely.
The boots are pretty straight forward but the cloak makes no sense at all. There is no bonus, nor does it say you become invisible in certain terrain, it just gives the a chance to hide. I'm sure you don't really need a cloak to be able to hide in a forest.
Blackwarder
Adventurer
I think that it's more the matter of being in plain sight and not crouching behind a tree, think about Frodo and Sam near the black gate in the second movie.
Warder
File along with items that:
- make your eyes glow red
- make your shield shiny
- give you perfect pitch
But it's not IMO rules lawyering to expect an explanation of a game mechanic effect, associated with a game item. I would prefer each magic item had such a thing (e.g. advantage on intimidation, disadvantage on diplomacy when you have glowing red eyes). You can still have rulings-not-rules and treat mechanics as guidelines with this setup.
Really that's one of the things I'd be paying my cash for: I can imagine fantasy trope stuff on the fly quick enough, usually too much to actually include in the game - I don't need a list of magic items to feed the creativity. However, I can't ad-lib in a consistent and workable rule for each item at anything like the same rate. So I pay for someone else's thoughts on the matter, written down.
Manbearcat
Legend
@<!-- google_ad_section_start(weight=ignore) -->Libramarianand @<!-- google_ad_section_start(weight=ignore) -->Li Shenron<!-- google_ad_section_end -->
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_6030605", true); </SCRIPT>
Perhaps this effort will have some explanatory power:
In your adjudication of Stealth rules are you planning on (from the beginning of your game onward) (i) giving the Stealth-user disadvantage (or the Perceiver advantage) on all contests whereby the ground/terrain/footing is not agreeable/conducive to being quiet? This would include:
- Almost all wilderness settings (certainly all forest settings).
- A considerable number of closed rooms with marble, stone or some sort of composite flooring and stone walls.
- Gravelled, dry soil or muddy roadways.
- Older buildings with wooden flooring or sub-flooring.
- Trafficked areas with lots of obstructions that must be navigated.
<O
These boots seem to imply that you should do so (at the very beginning of your game…not just post-hoc once the boots come in). (ii) I hope we can agree that the above scenarios are the vast, vast majority of gaming scenarios. About the only type of scenario I can think of that is excluded (where the accoustics of the ground/room interface with your feet is not antagonistic toward sneaking/being stealthy) is open, urban areas (not alleys whereby the acoustics are conducive to soundwaves reverberating) with well cobbled/smooth roads.
<O
(iii) If the above is true, then it strikes me as terribly odd, inconsistent and incoherent that an entry (which would canvass the vast majority of Stealth contests) is not explicitly in the Stealth rules (as the Line of Sight rules are).
<O
It would have never occurred to me to do (i). But if the boots are going to have mechanical impact (and the game is going to make sense) then they must. They say that you should (iv) give the user disadvantage (or the perceiver advantage) on almost all Stealth scenarios…and that these boots should cancel that (dis)advantage.
<O
If you are planning on doing (i), and you agree with (ii) and are going to use (iv) to express the boots mechanically, then how is it that you do not agree with (iii)?
<!-- google_ad_section_start(weight=ignore) --><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_6030605", true); </SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_6030605", true); </SCRIPT>
Perhaps this effort will have some explanatory power:
In your adjudication of Stealth rules are you planning on (from the beginning of your game onward) (i) giving the Stealth-user disadvantage (or the Perceiver advantage) on all contests whereby the ground/terrain/footing is not agreeable/conducive to being quiet? This would include:
- Almost all wilderness settings (certainly all forest settings).
- A considerable number of closed rooms with marble, stone or some sort of composite flooring and stone walls.
- Gravelled, dry soil or muddy roadways.
- Older buildings with wooden flooring or sub-flooring.
- Trafficked areas with lots of obstructions that must be navigated.
<O
These boots seem to imply that you should do so (at the very beginning of your game…not just post-hoc once the boots come in). (ii) I hope we can agree that the above scenarios are the vast, vast majority of gaming scenarios. About the only type of scenario I can think of that is excluded (where the accoustics of the ground/room interface with your feet is not antagonistic toward sneaking/being stealthy) is open, urban areas (not alleys whereby the acoustics are conducive to soundwaves reverberating) with well cobbled/smooth roads.
<O
(iii) If the above is true, then it strikes me as terribly odd, inconsistent and incoherent that an entry (which would canvass the vast majority of Stealth contests) is not explicitly in the Stealth rules (as the Line of Sight rules are).
<O
It would have never occurred to me to do (i). But if the boots are going to have mechanical impact (and the game is going to make sense) then they must. They say that you should (iv) give the user disadvantage (or the perceiver advantage) on almost all Stealth scenarios…and that these boots should cancel that (dis)advantage.
<O
If you are planning on doing (i), and you agree with (ii) and are going to use (iv) to express the boots mechanically, then how is it that you do not agree with (iii)?
<!-- google_ad_section_start(weight=ignore) --><SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_6030605", true); </SCRIPT>
pauljathome
First Post
manbearcat is absolutely right. I think that he is just finding it difficult to explain his point.
Perhaps a simple example will help.
Your PC is in the forest and trying to sneak up on a guard.
How would you handle that when the PC
1) Has no magic items
2) Has an Elven cloak
3) Has Elven boots
4) Has BOTH elven boots and cloak
How much table variation would you expect in the answers to the above?
Perhaps a simple example will help.
Your PC is in the forest and trying to sneak up on a guard.
How would you handle that when the PC
1) Has no magic items
2) Has an Elven cloak
3) Has Elven boots
4) Has BOTH elven boots and cloak
How much table variation would you expect in the answers to the above?
Similar Threads
AD6_gamerati_skyscraper
Upcoming Releases
-
April 16 2024 -
May 31 2024 -
June 3 2024 -
June 4 2024 -
June 18 2024 -
July 16 2024 -
September 17 2024 -
October 1 2024 -
November 12 2024 -
February 18 2025
