D&D 5E Stealth

[Jaracove]

What is your go to method for traps & other hidden dangers?

We do what we've always done. I.e. the player tells me when they're character is searching for something (anything hidden), and I secretly roll behind the screen.

When I don't want to tip them off that something is in the vicinity, I have a sheet of pre determined d20 rolls. I just apply any relevant modifiers and use that as their chance to spot something.

EDIT: Thanks for answering my earlier question

 

[MARCVS AVRELIVS]

Here's another that cropped up

Sneak Attack (page 96)
A 1st level Rogue fires his crossbow at a target that's in melee with a companion (and in normal range).

The target is not incapacitated, it's fair to say the target is distracted (he's in melee combat) and the Rogue doesn't have disadvantage. So does the Rogue add his +1d6 Sneak Attack damage if he hits with his crossbow ranged attack?

Per the Basic Rules v3.4 covering Sneak Attack:

"The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon."

"You don’t need advantage on the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, that enemy isn’t incapacitated, and you don’t have disadvantage on the attack roll."

Given the parameters of your question, the answer is yes, the Rogue gets his Sneak Attack damage (assuming the companion is an enemy of the target, that is). If you have some way of removing disadvantage for long range (e.g. Sharpshooter feat), you would get sneak damage then, too.

When I see these discussions I wonder why so many people are so desperate to hide in combat.

Mostly to avoid being a target of the return attacks, I think. When you're a rogue and you just tagged someone big for some serious sneak attack damage, they might tend to make you a priority target. But if you manage to hide, maybe they'll direct that anger at someone else.

 

[Jester David]

To paraphrase Churchill, the stealth rules are the worst possible stealth rules, excluding all others that have been tried.

 

[ShadowSeeker]

When I see these discussions I wonder why so many people are so desperate to hide in combat. We hardly ever see that in our games. Hiding in combat is hard and always has been, and when I say hiding I mean creating a situation where the enemies cannot see you, hear you or otherwise sense where you are. If you don't want to be targeted why not walk behind a wall - no need to try and hide. If you are an elf in the woods move behind some bushes and hide if you like - or maybe behind your stationary ally as a Halfling. Unless you also move after hiding most monsters will know where you are and if they want to target you will move to do so. It only really helps against ranged attackers.

We use stealth and hiding all the time out of combat

It's because some racial features (halfling natural stealthy) and some classe features (rogue's cunning action) encourage players to hide in combat.

 

[Sunseeker]

When I see these discussions I wonder why so many people are so desperate to hide in combat. We hardly ever see that in our games. Hiding in combat is hard and always has been, and when I say hiding I mean creating a situation where the enemies cannot see you, hear you or otherwise sense where you are. If you don't want to be targeted why not walk behind a wall - no need to try and hide. If you are an elf in the woods move behind some bushes and hide if you like - or maybe behind your stationary ally as a Halfling. Unless you also move after hiding most monsters will know where you are and if they want to target you will move to do so. It only really helps against ranged attackers.

We use stealth and hiding all the time out of combat

I would wager due mostly to the special effects of the Rogue relying on being hidden or your target otherwise engaged.

Perception is used to foil hiding attempts that have been permitted when the DM has determined that conditions are conducive to hiding.

WRONG. The DM does not "permit" stealth attempts. The DM determines if your attempt at stealth succeeds based on how conducive the conditions are to hiding. This is exactly the point I was attempting to make. The Rules empower the player with the knowledge of what they can do. not the knowledge of what they'll have to ask permission to do. You can ask permission to do ANYTHING. But if the DM is going to deny the Rules and tell you that you cannot do a thing when the rules would otherwise say you could that is the absolute destruction of player agency and completely contrary to the point of a rules-based game.

There are plenty of games were the DM gets to make all the decisions, the players at a certain table may allow the DM to make the decisions (yay consent of the governed!) but by default, the Rules empower both the DM and the Players with some decision-making power. Think of it like the 10th Amendment.

It is not used to determine, for example, whether a creature is distracted, or whether a creature is seen clearly by others, or if a creature is sufficiently obscured to make an attempt at hiding. The circumstances must exist before any attempt is allowed. If you let everyone try to hide while being clearly observed, then the hiding rules become broken. Perception is only used when someone, or something, is already given a chance to be hidden.

That's the use of a perception check not of passive perception. Actively searching for something is when the Goblins attempt to locate Bob in the direction they last saw him heading. Passive perception is when they are engaged in other activities and cannot take the time to specifically search for a given thing.

We do what we've always done. I.e. the player tells me when they're character is searching for something (anything hidden), and I secretly roll behind the screen.

When I don't want to tip them off that something is in the vicinity, I have a sheet of pre determined d20 rolls. I just apply any relevant modifiers and use that as their chance to spot something.

EDIT: Thanks for answering my earlier question

So let me get this straight: your characters don't actually roll their own checks? Why are they even playing if you're determining the outcome for them?

 

[TDarien]

Here's the thing that a lot of people seem to miss about hiding. Hiding has nothing to do with whether or not creatures know your location. Hiding is about creatures not being able to detect your location with their senses. It's a subtle difference, to be sure, but it's there.

Say I move behind a pillar and attempt to hide. You saw me move there, so logic tells you I'm still there. However, you can't perceive me anymore. The only clue you have to my presence is that's where you last saw me go. Certainly if I move away, you'll see me again, and it's not hard at all for you to move to a spot where you can see me. (Whether or not I can pop out and shoot you with advantage is up to the DM, because I have to first make myself visible to do so. It might fall within the "Under certain conditions" clause, or not, depending on the DM).

That said, if I succeed in my hide check behind that pillar, I am hidden, even though I may not be able to gain any benefit from it. Why is it important? Because I might be able to move from that spot undetected--perhaps by teleporting, climbing the pillar, or entering a secret door hidden within the pillar. Were I do do any of these without hiding first, it would be known to my enemies, because they can still detect me, even though they can't see me. These are just a few possibilities off the top of my head, I'm sure others exist.

This is a big change from previous editions, where stealth was tied to movement. In this edition, in order to move undetected you have to hide first, an action which is completely separate and independent of the actual movement.

 

[Prism]

It's because some racial features (halfling natural stealthy) and some classe features (rogue's cunning action) encourage players to hide in combat.

Rogue's probably so but I'm not convinced that the Halfling ability is a combat ability. It seems more suited to being used in out of combat situations when you want to move through a crowded bar room for example. Its very hard to use in combat unless the rest of the opponents are stationary

Rogues might want to use it since they can do it is a bonus action but I find it pretty tricky since there has to be dim light which darkvision trumps or some sort of mist or fog effect. It doesn't come up much for us. If we want not to be attacked then we usually dodge behind something or leave the room. Anyone can do that and you don't need hide.

I guess you could use hide when trying to flee, better as a rogue

 

[Jaracove]

So let me get this straight: your characters don't actually roll their own checks?

How old are you? I'm curious. Reason I'm curious is because I'm 47 years of age and that's how we have done it for 30+ years. Well before 3.5, 4ed and 5ed were even dreamed of. Works perfectly well. You make it sound like what we do is something weird and unheard of.

So let me get this straight: your characters don't actually roll their own checks?

I think you mean 'players' as characters can't roll dice. Anyway, I secretly roll for their characters when circumstances dictate that their characters wouldn't know about 'X' happening in the environment around them.

Why are they even playing if you're determining the outcome for them?

Because I'm a brilliant DM and they love my sessions of roleplaying. Also, I don't decide the outcome for them. The dice determines the outcome for them.

 

[jgsugden]

You can't win. When it comes to stealth, you can't have a system that is simple, realistic, clear and complete.

* Simple systems are going to be brief - and brevity is the enemy of complete, clear and simple rule sets. They'll leave too many questions uncovered to be clear.
* Realism in all situations can only be achieved through a large volume of rules. That is going to be complex, hard to delve through.
* Clear rules are rules that are easily managed, remembered and utilized. If a situation is complex and subject to a lot of conditions, it can't be clear.
* Complete rules need to cover any given situation that might arise. There are so many situations in D&D where stealth might be desirable that covering it all explicitly would require volumes of complex rules with countless exceptions.

To me, this edition gets it right: It gives us a very basic mechanic and tells the player to ask the DM if they can try stealth in a given situation. It makes it a judgment call and tells you who the judge is. Players might not love the judgment, but at least the rules are clear on how it is to be made. That is the best solution - even if it is unsatisfying.

 

[ShadowSeeker]

You can't win. When it comes to stealth, you can't have a system that is simple, realistic, clear and complete.

* Simple systems are going to be brief - and brevity is the enemy of complete, clear and simple rule sets. They'll leave too many questions uncovered to be clear.
* Realism in all situations can only be achieved through a large volume of rules. That is going to be complex, hard to delve through.
* Clear rules are rules that are easily managed, remembered and utilized. If a situation is complex and subject to a lot of conditions, it can't be clear.
* Complete rules need to cover any given situation that might arise. There are so many situations in D&D where stealth might be desirable that covering it all explicitly would require volumes of complex rules with countless exceptions.

To me, this edition gets it right: It gives us a very basic mechanic and tells the player to ask the DM if they can try stealth in a given situation. It makes it a judgment call and tells you who the judge is. Players might not love the judgment, but at least the rules are clear on how it is to be made. That is the best solution - even if it is unsatisfying.

Don't agree with you on this one. "Ask your DM" isn't a rule but a cop out, IMO. The rules can't possibly cover every situation. But all the discussions about stealth show that the RAW aren't very clear on the subject.

In this edition rules for skill checks are almost non existent.