D&D (2024) Am I crazy, or did they just turn Stealth into full Ninja mode?

[DEFCON 1]

Stealth and hiding rules are probably the most contentious rule system in D&D. No two DMs can ever agree on just how easy or difficult it should be to do it, especially within or without combat. Every single DM is going to end up adjudicating and re-writing the rules to a format and system THEY prefer regardless of whatever it is that WotC ends up putting in the books. Even the most crystal-clear ruleset WotC could include will get re-written by most DMs if that crystal-clear methodology is not one they actually want to use in their games.

And thus I personally don't think any of us should waste our time being concerned or up in arms with any part of this process of how the stealth and hiding rules get written. Because no matter what happens we're all pretty much going to be ignoring the eventual rules once the book gets published anyway.

 

[Sacrosanct]

If we didn’t have a long history of terribly vague stealth rules, I might agree with this.

Ultimately stealth is one of the most powerful abilities in the game, and if you have a stealth character in your party, one of the most common.

So stealth really needs to be crystal clear on what it can do and what it can not do…and this new version isn’t it. Stealth needs the rules weight that is appropriate for an ability of its power and frequency, and we are yet to get that in 5e

The problem that I've found is that if you want it to reflect clearly, you have to have stealth rules pretty robust and detailed*, and then you enter into the "this is too complicated to fit with the overall game design scope" issue. Looking up rules and slowing down game play is a top 3 bugbear to avoid in game design, but the trade off is ambiguity and ultimately letting tables just houserule to their level of simplicity.

* for example, how do you want to calculate all senses (sight, smell, hearing, touch) which may be different when detecting a creature, do creatures like dogs completely nullify invisibility or stealth, what is the penalty? What about lighting? Stuff to hide behind, footprints, just how much of a penalty do you get for armor or gear (backpacks with gear hanging off is noisy), etc. etc. etc.

 

[Xamnam]

Stealth and hiding rules are probably the most contentious rule system in D&D. No two DMs can ever agree on just how easy or difficult it should be to do it, especially within or without combat. Every single DM is going to end up adjudicating and re-writing the rules to a format and system THEY prefer regardless of whatever it is that WotC ends up putting in the books. Even the most crystal-clear ruleset WotC could include will get re-written by most DMs if that crystal-clear methodology is not one they actually want to use in their games.

And thus I personally don't think any of us should waste our time being concerned or up in arms with any part of this process of how the stealth and hiding rules get written. Because no matter what happens we're all pretty much going to be ignoring the eventual rules once the book gets published anyway.

As much as I hate to say it, this is exactly why I understand them giving a hardcoded DC, because it's the only way to put sneaking in the books in a way that would be remotely consistently used. And exactly to your point, if that's what they change to, I probably won't use it.

 

[Iosue]

It really shouldn't be that hard to write stealth rules that both make intuitive sense and work reasonably well in play. Sure, there will always be edge cases that need DM adjucation to deal with, but that's no excuse for having rules that need adjucation even in basic situations.

Well, no it's not hard in and of itself. What makes it hard for D&D is the wide swath of playstyles across tables. Is the setting grim and gritty, where stealth is hard? Or do you want a world where you can have Batman/Ninja/Master Thieves vanish as soon as someone's back is turned? And how do you incorporate a range of levels, so that the novice thief can be useful at Level 1, but a master of stealth (however that may be defined per the above) at Level 11, but it doesn't break the game? And what appeals to the widest segment of your customer base? That's what makes it hard.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The problem that I've found is that if you want it to reflect clearly, you have to have stealth rules pretty robust and detailed*, and then you enter into the "this is too complicated to fit with the overall game design scope" issue. Looking up rules and slowing down game play is a top 3 bugbear to avoid in game design, but the trade off is ambiguity and ultimately letting tables just houserule to their level of simplicity.

* for example, how do you want to calculate all senses (sight, smell, hearing, touch) which may be different when detecting a creature, do creatures like dogs completely nullify invisibility or stealth, what is the penalty? What about lighting? Stuff to hide behind, footprints, just how much of a penalty do you get for armor or gear (backpacks with gear hanging off is noisy), etc. etc. etc.

It's all because some DMs mistakenly think "Playing RAW" is still the Holy Grail of D&D gaming, rather than the giant anvil that is secured around their neck dragging them to the depths.

Maybe someday everyone will finally see that "Houserule" is not a dirty word... but obviously that day isn't today.

 

[Clint_L]

Stealth and hiding rules are probably the most contentious rule system in D&D. No two DMs can ever agree on just how easy or difficult it should be to do it, especially within or without combat. Every single DM is going to end up adjudicating and re-writing the rules to a format and system THEY prefer regardless of whatever it is that WotC ends up putting in the books. Even the most crystal-clear ruleset WotC could include will get re-written by most DMs if that crystal-clear methodology is not one they actually want to use in their games.

And thus I personally don't think any of us should waste our time being concerned or up in arms with any part of this process of how the stealth and hiding rules get written. Because no matter what happens we're all pretty much going to be ignoring the eventual rules once the book gets published anyway.

I more or less agree with you except for it using the wording of it using the invisible condition. Putting the word "invisible" anywhere near it is bound to cause confusion. That's just asking for trouble.

 

[Oofta]

As much as I hate to say it, this is exactly why I understand them giving a hardcoded DC, because it's the only way to put sneaking in the books in a way that would be remotely consistently used. And exactly to your point, if that's what they change to, I probably won't use it.

It should not be the same difficulty to sneak past a drunken ogre as an alert ancient red dragon. The number will be difficult to hit at low levels and automatic at higher levels for some classes.

It's an awful rule that buys nothing because the DM still has to say it's possible.

 

[Xamnam]

It should not be the same difficulty to sneak past a drunken ogre as an alert ancient red dragon. The number will be difficult to hit at low levels and automatic at higher levels for some classes.

I agree!

 

[Sacrosanct]

It's all because some DMs mistakenly think "Playing RAW" is still the Holy Grail of D&D gaming, rather than the giant anvil that is secured around their neck dragging them to the depths.

Maybe someday everyone will finally see that "Houserule" is not a dirty word... but obviously that day isn't today.

Yep. It's why in my own system, I give enough information to hopefully give GMs a guideline, but not too much that you have to memorize a bunch of rules.

When attempting to move stealthy, you must move at half your movement speed or less and make a Agility ability check, adding any relevant modifiers. This result is the TCN value any creature attempting to find you must beat to detect you, using its perception (Intuition) roll. You can attempt to be stealthy as long as no creature you want to hide from can see you when you make an attempt and you have appropriate cover and/or concealment. You can’t just hide in the middle of an empty room; you need something to hide in or behind, such as deep shadows, a large rock, etc.
Attempting any attack or casting a spell reveals you, unless otherwise noted. Creatures that aren’t actively searching still have a chance to detect you. If twice their Mental modifier is higher than or equal to your stealth check TCN, they will have detected the you. Other creatures, such as many beasts, will have a trait that identifies the TCN number they will automatically succeed at detection with.

For Example, Raven wants to move stealthily while exploring a dungeon. She rolls her SL pool resulting in a 6. Any creature attempting to discover her needs to make an Intuition ability check against a TCN of 6. Creatures not actively looking for her would need to have a Mental modifier of at least +3 to detect her unless they have a Detect trait in their statblock, like the mighty but adorable badger.
A badger has a Detect trait of 7 out to 30 feet. Because 7 is higher than Raven’s 6, if Raven comes within 30 feet of the badger, she is automatically detected even if the badger isn’t actively searching for her.

 

[SkidAce]

It should not be the same difficulty to sneak past a drunken ogre as an alert ancient red dragon. The number will be difficult to hit at low levels and automatic at higher levels for some classes.

It's an awful rule that buys nothing because the DM still has to say it's possible.

I was going to type this exact scenario. Thanks!