D&D 5E Stealth rules

[FormerlyHemlock]

Just wanted to inform you of the intended use.
But as Mike says, nothing against changing it offcourse

Sure, that's the same as what PHB 177 says. That's why the drow are making Stealth checks initially--to see if it beats the PCs' Wisdom(Perception) scores (to use the terminology from PHB 175).

 

[Nemio]

Sure, that's the same as what PHB 177 says. That's why the drow are making Stealth checks initially--to see if it beats the PCs' Wisdom(Perception) scores (to use the terminology from PHB 175).

Yes, was just commenting about the following where you made it seem that if you roll a 1 on your active perception check that you passive perception of 13 wouldn't matter anymore.

(Note: active rolls can be worse than passive rolls if you roll poorly, which is realistic because sometimes you can pay attention to the wrong things.)

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Oh, you're thinking that passive perception sets a floor on perception rolls? No, I'm going to go with PHB 177 on that instead. Passive perception applies "even if they aren't searching," which I read to mean "whenever they're not searching."

I see that you read Mearls as saying something different, but in any case, I'm not going with that interpretation. Active and passive are mutually exclusive as I read it.

 

[DaveDash]

I don't think Active and Passive are meant to be mutually exclusive, otherwise you get characters with great passives never really looking for anything (especially with the observant feat).

I rule stealth like an opposed check. If you win you win, no need to keep rerolling, unless it makes sense.

The only part of the stealth rules I am unhappy with is cunning action + stealth + attacking with advantage.

 

[Celtavian]

I don't think Active and Passive are meant to be mutually exclusive, otherwise you get characters with great passives never really looking for anything (especially with the observant feat).

I rule stealth like an opposed check. If you win you win, no need to keep rerolling, unless it makes sense.

The only part of the stealth rules I am unhappy with is cunning action + stealth + attacking with advantage.

That's one of the parts I enjoy. Makes is possible for a rogue to make Hide and Seek a deadly game not many want to play with them. It takes longer than the straight up smash you of the mother martials, but it's fun and appropriate.

I imagine it depends on how exacting you follow rules like the Halfling hiding behind people and what it means to have the enemy know where you are once you attack. If you're very legalistic, I can see how it might become a nightmare.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

That's one of the parts I enjoy. Makes is possible for a rogue to make Hide and Seek a deadly game not many want to play with them.

Other classes can play that game too--it just happens slower. Take cover, hide, spot the enemy, shoot them, take cover again. I agree that it's fun, and it's something I want as an option in my games.

Just hope your target doesn't turn out to be an intellect devourer hiding inside a humanoid shell. Then hide-and-seek actually becomes scream-and-die. (Intellect Devourers sense intelligent life within 300 feet, so no hiding.)

 

[Celtavian]

Other classes can play that game too--it just happens slower. Take cover, hide, spot the enemy, shoot them, take cover again. I agree that it's fun, and it's something I want as an option in my games.

Just hope your target doesn't turn out to be an intellect devourer hiding inside a humanoid shell. Then hide-and-seek actually becomes scream-and-die. (Intellect Devourers sense intelligent life within 300 feet, so no hiding.)

Intellect Devourers are so nasty in this edition. Very few classes have good intelligence saves.

 

[HarrisonF]

The problem with the original scenario and how it plays out is that the more rolls you demand, the more likely the d20 fate gods are going to have a bad roll come up. It normally only takes a single bad stealth roll to take things south.

In early levels, you have a stealth mod of +5 to +7 or so. In medium level ranges, for rogues/bards, you can expect something like a +8-10 stealth mod, for other classes, it often drops to around a +7-ish. If you have characters with passive perceptions of 15, then you end up with 25-40% chance of failing a roll. If you require several successful rolls, you are going to fail a lot. The same problem happens with larger groups.

We play it closer to the book where you just need a single success for most tasks. If situations change dramatically, or you start doing something new, then you may need a new check.

 

[DaveDash]

That's one of the parts I enjoy. Makes is possible for a rogue to make Hide and Seek a deadly game not many want to play with them. It takes longer than the straight up smash you of the mother martials, but it's fun and appropriate.

I imagine it depends on how exacting you follow rules like the Halfling hiding behind people and what it means to have the enemy know where you are once you attack. If you're very legalistic, I can see how it might become a nightmare.

The problem we had with it was - RAW - the Rogue was getting advantage on basically every attack, which I doubt was the intention. That's more or less a perma +5 bonus.

For now we've settled on a "If you're going to do it from the same spot over and over you get disadvantage on your stealth checks". I think my DM wants to get rid of it all together though after the first shot, forcing him to move around to gain that advantage.

 

[Celtavian]

The problem we had with it was - RAW - the Rogue was getting advantage on basically every attack, which I doubt was the intention. That's more or less a perma +5 bonus.

For now we've settled on a "If you're going to do it from the same spot over and over you get disadvantage on your stealth checks". I think my DM wants to get rid of it all together though after the first shot, forcing him to move around to gain that advantage.

I can see how that can be a problem. It is true by RAW a rogue could stand by a wall, thick tree, or rock and go back and forth gaining Hide with a bonus action or a Halfling could keep going behind a fighter, while using a ranged weapon to gain advantage and Sneak Attack.

We only allow this in our game if the rogue's movement takes it to a place that would allow him to hide again. Usually requires the rogue to break off combat, move to a place where it is not obvious they have hidden again. I don't mind the rogue being the master of hiding, in fact I like it, but a Halfling jumping back behind the fighter or staying by the same rock doesn't sit well with us from a verisimilitude standpoint. I much prefer Stealth as a skill the DM and player work out as circumstances change. It's too complex a skill with too many changing circumstances for the rule to be set in stone.