D&D 5E Questions on stealth...

[Ahglock]

The problem I have with the much stricter interpretation of "can see you" could be taken so far as to mean that the stealther can't even peer from around the first column to see what the guard is doing, because at that point the guard "can" see him clearly. That doesn't sound like any fun to me.

Id also say if your ruling makes it impossible for dragon slaying heroes to do things people are very capable of doing in reality you might be diminishing the fun levels a bit.

Also under the stealth side bar in the dexterity actions section it does expressly make a distinction of in and out of combat awareness and that that you can just sneak up behind someone outside of combat. I'm not sure how well that tracks with the more strict wording of can. You'd have to assume a bunch of extra conditions like a heavy fog just weren't mentioned whey saying you can sneak up behind someone. As otherwise they potentially could be seen. Would make it a pointless distinction as you could sneak up on them in combat despite 360 degree awareness with those conditions.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm a bit confused with the Heavily Obscured condition. It basically says if you're heavily obscured, you are essentially blind. So why do you have to make a Dex check to become hidden if your opponent is blind? I can see it if you're making a lot of noise, but if you're hiding at the end of the hall and not doing anything, would you still need a Dex check?

Because the DEX (Stealth) check is really checking to see not how "unseen" you are... but how quiet you are, how much you are masking any possible scent you have, and how much you aren't affecting the environment.

The rules are set up that you have to start by being unseen-- either behind a solid object that entirely blocks line of sight, or in an area so dense with something (foliage, fog, darkness) that you essentially are behind a "solid" object due to it being Heavily Obscured terrain. You start here at the barest minimum. If you don't have this, then you can't even bother trying to make the check, regardless of any other factors.

Once you've established that you've reached the requirements for not being seen clearly-- IE behind Heavily Obscured terrain or out of line of sight-- the check is then to see how much of the other masking agents you put into place so that nobody knows you are there. The higher the check, the quieter you, the less movement you are making that causes dust to swirl, or branches to sway, or tapestries to flutter, or shadows to dance on the walls, or scents to waft, or air currents to breeze. All the various things that someone could notice and give a hint that someone is around. The lower the check, the worse you did to mask those things and which an alert person might notice.

It's very counter-intuitive to a certain extent, because everyone I think goes into it believing that "hiding" is all about not being seen, and thus if someone can't be seen then they're hidden. But the game takes it on faith that of course someone trying to be stealthy is trying not to be seen. That's a given and assumed that anyone good at stealth is going to be good at not being seen. But that it's all the other stuff that we usually don't think about (sounds, smells, reflections, shadows, air movements etc.) that are what the perceptive person will pick up on to realize someone is around. And so that's what the DEX (Stealth) check is determining a value for.

 

[Springheel]

The higher the check, the quieter you, the less movement you are making that causes dust to swirl, or branches to sway, or tapestries to flutter, or shadows to dance on the walls, or scents to waft, or air currents to breeze. All the various things that someone could notice and give a hint that someone is around. The lower the check, the worse you did to mask those things and which an alert person might notice.

So if a player isn't actually moving, would you give them an advantage on their stealth check? They've already cut out one of the major things that might give away their position.

 

[Garresh]

*sigh* The more I try to find a solution to this the more I hate how 5e handles stealth. It's pretty abysmal, and about the only blemish on an otherwise excellent system.

 

[Dausuul]

The rules are set up that you have to start by being unseen-- either behind a solid object that entirely blocks line of sight, or in an area so dense with something (foliage, fog, darkness) that you essentially are behind a "solid" object due to it being Heavily Obscured terrain.

The rule (per errata) is that you have to start by being not clearly seen, which is a subtle but crucial distinction. It's left up to the DM to decide just what that means.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So if a player isn't actually moving, would you give them an advantage on their stealth check? They've already cut out one of the major things that might give away their position.

Just not moving? Me personally, no. I assume the baseline way someone is trying to hide is to get out of sight and then not move, so I treat that as the standard DEX (Stealth) check. To gain Advantage, they'd have to do something more than just that. So for instance, if they helped mask their own scent by hiding inside something with a bad stench, then possibly... if they hid while next to something making obvious loud noises (thereby masking their own), then possibly... if they hid downwind from a larger than just regular breeze air source, then possibly. And they'd get Disadvantage on their check if they were trying to do various activities or things while hidden-- for instance trying to verbally cast a spell under their breath, or walking/standing on incredibly noisy ground and terrain (sand, crunchy leaves etc.)

From my perspective... most monsters have such mediocre Passive Perceptions anyway that anyone who is proficient in Stealth will usually be able to gain the Hidden status and do whatever it is they want to accomplish. So I don't need to go out of my way to try and stop them. Let them have fun sneaking around, and if necessary just use monsters with much higher HP totals such that getting hit with Sneak Attacks from Hidden isn't that big of a deal.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The rule (per errata) is that you have to start by being not clearly seen, which is a subtle but crucial distinction. It's left up to the DM to decide just what that means.

Which I interpret to be just them reiterating 'Heavily Obscured.'

Heavily Obscuring terrain is not solid-- a person who is within it can see out of it. That rogue behind the thick bushes can see through bits of the bushes at the people out in the open, and which is why someone who is within Heavily Obscuring terrain doesn't have the Blinded condition. Thus... since they can see out through the terrain, they are not completely blocked from line of sight, and if someone looked into those bushes long enough, that person could be seen because the obscurement isn't complete. So by my interpretation... that's what the errata is making clear. Someone inside Heavily Obscuring terrain isn't blocked completely from line of sight... they can possibly be seen, but just not clearly... but they are also obscured enough that they may make a DEX (Stealth) check to Hide.

For my money... errata just clarified the rules and didn't change them at all.

 

[Agamon]

*sigh* The more I try to find a solution to this the more I hate how 5e handles stealth. It's pretty abysmal, and about the only blemish on an otherwise excellent system.

The rule is fine, in my opinion. It's heavy-handed DMs that think screwing over the players is their job that is the real problem.

I feel for ya, dude. :/

 

[Agamon]

*double post

 

[Garresh]

The rule is fine, in my opinion. It's heavy-handed DMs that think screwing over the players is their job that is the real problem.

I feel for ya, dude. :/

Eh I don't think it's intentional, though realizing the degree is frustrating. Gonna shoot for diplomacy with a dash of excessively stupid min maxing as the way to go.