D&D 5E Simplifying Stealth (and all ability checks, really)

[Khelon Testudo]

Um... the premise of the thread is simplifying skill checks. Not complicating them further.

 

[cmad1977]

I think the easiest way to simplify skill checks is to only call for one the moment something might happen.
You want to stealth up to the window and listen to the secret conversation? Cool. It happens. During the conversation one of the participants gets up from the table and heads towards the window....
Make a stealth check.

 

[GMMichael]

So let's assume this is how all skill checks are to be made. Now....on to stealth. Probably the most challenging skill for how to adjudicate it. There are two ways to go about, assuming the above:

1. Keep it a simple as possible. DM applies a bonus or penalty based on scenario that they feel is most appropriate. I.e, "It's dim light, but you're trying sneak past a dog and are wearing chain mail, so I think that would be a hard check. And hard checks impart a -10 penalty." Player: "Ok, since my dex is 16 and I normally have a +4 bonus, that means I need to roll a 10 or lower. Got it."

2. Have a table that lists common factors and individual modifiers, and you tally them all up to get a final modifier. The pro for this is that it takes away DM ruling, and puts it in an objective format. The con is that this could really slow this check resolution up.

Easy: +5 to effective ability score value (so a STR of 13 would need an 18 or less on the d20 roll)
Moderate: -
Difficult: -5
Hard: -10
Very Hard: -15
Near Impossible: -20* (a nat 1 is always a success, and a nat 20 is always a failure)

Difficulty points that modify the ability score is fine. The part about "I normally have a +4 bonus" doesn't quite work - I assume some part of that bonus is already included in the 16 dex. Considering that ability scores will typically be 10 to 18, let's look at some cases...

Tiptoe behind the armed guard in broad daylight without being noticed, Very Hard:
10 dex less 15 difficulty = -5. 0% chance of success.
18 dex less 15 difficulty = 3. 15% chance of success.

Sneak across the empty courtyard at night, okay if the owls notice you, Easy:
10 dex add 5 difficulty = 15. 25% chance to fail. (DM shouldn't call for roll.)
18 dex add 5 difficulty = 23. 100% chance of success.

Should there be 100% and 0% odds? How do magic items affect these? Is the difference between a 10 and 18 dex character always 40% odds?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Um... the premise of the thread is simplifying skill checks. Not complicating them further.

The premise is flawed.

 

[Sacrosanct]

The premise is flawed.

You not liking a premise doesn't mean it's flawed.

There is nothing flawed with a premise of simplifying skill checks. Largely because it comes down to subjective preferences

 

[GreyLord]

This is an extremely delayed reply...

Ironically, stealth used to be handled in this fashion in D&D. Then they came up with the Thief class with Thief skills...

How to Handle that???

Everyone can still make Stealth Checks like they always did...but now Thieves can try to move absolutely silently and hide in a Shadow (as opposed to just hiding behind things and such), OR...if they fail their stealth checks...they can also make a check to move silently or hide in shadows!!!

Somehow this was lost over the years during AD&D and by 3e they neutered move silently and hide for Rogues. In many ways, forgetting how the old ways handled it before Thieves were an actual class and that other characters could do similar things with a simple ability check made Thieves/Rogues FAR LESS effective than they originally were or intended

(and to make matters show how less effective...in the original creation from what I understand, though it did not make it to the supplement, Thief skills were used more like magic abilities, in that a thief would gain them and could accomplish them automatically. Want to pick a lock? Have the Skill...done. You've picked the Lock. Want to find a trap..done. You've found the traps simply by checking.

Imagine if Rogues had those abilities these days...

Of course, you MIGHT want to balance that out with something (like make them a little less effective in combat like they were originally, where they may get extra damage on a first strike stealth attack, but other than that were far less effective than they tend to be now, and had less HP and AC than other classes who were not wizards).

 

[Starfox]

Not in favor. This is why.

How much variation you allow from the ability scores influences how much you would add from training/levels. So if you allow the 3-18 range of ability scores to influence a roll directly, you also need to increase the training/levels modifiers. And suddenly you run out of space on the d20.

What yopu could do is reduce the spread in ability scores, and then use the ability scores directly. Basically, the new value would be the current value (3-18 range) halved, +5. Then you use this modified score to calculate all rolls. But the 3-18 range seems to be a holy cow. [Yes, I know its more 8-16 these days.]