D&D 5E Ranger Stealth - If you are traveling alone, you can move stealthily at a normal pace.???

[Bawylie]

Eh, reeks a bit of one true wayism. Heck, I agree with you, as far as preferred playstyle goes, and I still find this a bit insulting.

Alright look. When you set out to make a decision for yourself, you typically want the most favorable outcome you can get (or the one with the fewest costs). So you go through life necessarily deciding what works for you and what does not work for you.

For instance, I was taught to mow my lawn in straight vertical lines and then again in straight horizontal lines. Eventually I switched over to overlapping horizontal lines only.

I used to buy gas only when on E, but now I always buy it Wednesday after work.

You develop and refine habits and routines that lead you toward the highest levels of satisfaction or best yields, or convenience, or whatever.

Then someone comes along and says "So you believe you should only buy gas on wednesdays?!? Like Thursday's gas is inferior? You're an insulting cultist!" So what can you do?

I do the things I do because I believe them to be the best things for me to do. I don't see how I can reasonably be expected to choose crappier outcomes or lower levels of satisfaction just to avoid the accusation of "one-true-wayism."

So if someone comes along and says "Hey I've got this problem in my game and I'd like some input on how it can be improved," and I've got some perspective on how it can be improved, should I not share it? For the sake of simulationists? For the sake of avoiding the idea that one method of doing things might yield better results than another way of doing things? For pete's sake, the OP is basically asking for anyone to weigh in on what they think!

"But not you, Brad. You're convinced your idea is good. Only people who don't think they have good ideas can present those ideas without insult."

A big, No Thank You, Sir to that, too.


-Brad

 

[Satyrn]

Yeah. But players have more fun if they are not getting obvious metagame information that tells them whether or not there are observers .

Do I?

My gnome battlemaster is proficient in Stealth, although I've never actually used it yet. I'm gonna have to experiment on this.


(Also, there's an exhibitionist joke to be made in reply to that quote! )

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

No, it's pointing out that your scenarios equally support both arguments. Why that would me I should agree with you, now, I'm not sure.

...because what I was arguing against was that only having a stealth roll happen when it is resolving uncertainty changes how things go, so saying my scenario equally supports both the way it was written and assuming the unstated condition of making constant stealth checks, is clearly saying doing it my way doesn't actually change anything.

 

[discosoc]

So basically the last 4 pages kind of boil down to highlighting the fact that there are two general DM preferences:

1. DM's that want a roll for every possible action, even if it's just a "meta-roll" meant to someone prevent the player from "reading between the lines." I think this style is a bit paranoid, and seems to assume the player is incapable of separating character knowledge from player assumptions. On the up side, I guess it would really make a character who excels at the skill feel like they are getting their money's worth.

2. DM's that only want to roll for stuff when it's important. This is my preference, but I can see how a more tactical-minded group would find this to be boring maybe just not as exciting as rolling dice every few minutes.

**edit**

It also seems like some people are VERY obsessed with trying to somehow convince everyone that their idea is the right one. So much back and forth quoting that goes nowhere.

 

[Bawylie]

So basically the last 4 pages kind of boil down to highlighting the fact that there are two general DM preferences:

1. DM's that want a roll for every possible action, even if it's just a "meta-roll" meant to someone prevent the player from "reading between the lines." I think this style is a bit paranoid, and seems to assume the player is incapable of separating character knowledge from player assumptions. On the up side, I guess it would really make a character who excels at the skill feel like they are getting their money's worth.

2. DM's that only want to roll for stuff when it's important. This is my preference, but I can see how a more tactical-minded group would find this to be boring maybe just not as exciting as rolling dice every few minutes.

**edit**

It also seems like some people are VERY obsessed with trying to somehow convince everyone that their idea is the right one. So much back and forth quoting that goes nowhere.

Sometimes the back-and-forth quoting leads me to new understanding.

For instance, the claim "If you do X, you will not have problem Y" is NOT THE SAME as "You Must do X or else you will have problem Y."

Good to learn.


-Brad

 

[seebs]

Yes. Why would I advise someone to do something that I myself would not do?

Well, one reason might be that the thing would be of use to them, because you understand ways in which they differ from you.

People have different premises and different goals in gaming. Telling people they should do the thing your way, without first finding out what they're trying to accomplish, is counterproductive at best.

 

[Bawylie]

Well, one reason might be that the thing would be of use to them, because you understand ways in which they differ from you.

People have different premises and different goals in gaming. Telling people they should do the thing your way, without first finding out what they're trying to accomplish, is counterproductive at best.

Ok. But I didn't tell anyone to do anything my way. I told the OP it was his DM's decision, that I believed it was the wrong decision, and that I run it differently at my own table.

There is a world of difference between "Here is how I do it," and "Here is how You should do it."

Assuming people are telling others what to do, without first finding out what they're trying to accomplish, is counterproductive at best.



-Brad

 

[Plaguescarred]

When Galahan(ranger 4º level) stay alone in wilderness, her normal pace is stealth but my DM ask to me a new check of stealth again when i have a new enconter with monster or others, is right?

When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, THAT check’s total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.

I see no need to have you make another Stealth check if you weren't discovered or stop hiding.

Yan
D&D Playtester

 

[seebs]

Ok. But I didn't tell anyone to do anything my way. I told the OP it was his DM's decision, that I believed it was the wrong decision, and that I run it differently at my own table.

"The wrong decision" sounds a whole lot like "this other way is the right way to do it" which sounds a whole lot like "this other way is how you should do it".

 

[Bawylie]

"The wrong decision" sounds a whole lot like "this other way is the right way to do it" which sounds a whole lot like "this other way is how you should do it".

It also sounds like "his otter hay is now your crew duet."

I'm not accountable for your hallucination-version of what I actually said.


-Brad