D&D (2024) New stealth rules.

[Iosue]

Taken from here

View attachment 374838
View attachment 374837

DC 15, with cover, and turns you invisible.

Am I reading this right that you can hide around a corner and just walk past the guards at the front entrance?

I’ll just repeat what I said when we had this same discussion last year.

On the whole, I prefer natural language and dislike a preponderance of conditions, so I am not in favor of the rule as it’s currently written.

BUT, it strikes me a wee bit disingenuous to take what are obviously game mechanics terms and treat them like natural language. The invisible condition is not invisibility, it is mechanical heuristic to simplify various situations in which a character cannot be seen by visual means. A character that walks right by the guards is no longer hiding, thus no longer benefiting from the Hide Action, thus no longer under the Invisible condition, thus is seen by the guards. I would adjudicate it this way every day of the week, twice on Sundays, and lose nary a wink of sleep over it.

 

[Charlaquin]

This actually isn't as bad as it first seems.

1. PC makes Stealth roll. You must be under cover or heavy concealment
2. Does roll beat 15? You are hidden/invisible. If not, you are still visible.

This is the first problem. It means it’s never any easier or harder to hide from any creature than from another. A deaf, blind toddler and an ancient dragon are exactly the same difficulty to hide from.

3. Your stealth roll now becomes the DC for search checks to find you.
4. You are invisible until you make noise, attack or your enemy spots you.

This is the second problem. You’re invisible, so an enemy can never spot you unless they use their action to search. By these rules, you can come out from behind cover, walk right up in front of an enemy, dance a jig, flip it the bird, and moon it, and as long as you do those things quietly, it will never know you’re there. That’s stupid.

5. You have advantage on initiative, attack roll, and enemy has disadvantage on attack rolls.

The play loop looks like this:

1. Find a hiding spot
2. Roll stealth, must beat a 15. Note total
3. Go invisible, sneak up to guard.
4. Guard rolls perception vs stealth roll.
5. Not seen? Attack with advantage (and adv on init) you are no longer invisible/hiding. You cannot hide again while the enemy has sight in them.

All of that is fine, except for the must be a 15 part, and the part where you become literally invisible, so if the guard doesn’t have truesight or see invisibility, he needs to coincidentally guess that he needs to take the search action at exactly the right time.

 

[bedir than]

Am I reading this right that you can hide around a corner and just walk past the guards at the front entrance?

But assuming you beat them (and DC 15), you can still walk right in front of their face.

The rules mention that if you are in line of sight you aren't invisible.
You clearly give up your stealth when in such a situation.

 

[Remathilis]

I'd have a problem with this part. It's the player's action, they should be the ones rolling.

This is exactly why we have/had passive perception!

They did roll the original stealth roll.

PC: 1d20 + prof + Dex = 19 (beats DC 15)
Guard: 1d20 + prof + Wis = 14
19 > 14, so PC successfully sneaks.

If guard rolls a 20, PC has hidden but was spotted. PC rolls 14 or less, he fails to hide and guard sees him as normal.

 

[Charlaquin]

BUT, it strikes me a wee bit disingenuous to take what are obviously game mechanics terms and treat them like natural language. The invisible condition is not invisibility, it is mechanical heuristic to simplify various situations in which a character cannot be seen by visual means. A character that walks right by the guards is no longer hiding, thus no longer benefiting from the Hide Action, thus no longer under the Invisible condition, thus is seen by the guards. I would adjudicate it this way every day of the week, twice on Sundays, and lose nary a wink of sleep over it.

One doesn’t have to interpret the invisible condition as literal invisibility (though IMO it’s kind of absurd not to) to reach the conclusion that these rules allow walking right past the guard. The hide action says you have the invisible condition until you’re spotted, and the invisible condition says you can’t be seen. This condition prevents you from being spotted, unless you break one of the other requirements such as making too much noise, or an enemy takes the search action and beats your stealth check with their perception check.

 

[MarkB]

This is the first problem. It means it’s never any easier or harder to hide from any creature than from another. A deaf, blind toddler and an ancient dragon are exactly the same difficulty to hide from.

You're not hiding from any creatures, though, because in order to even attempt this you cannot be within any enemy's line of sight.

This is the second problem. You’re invisible, so an enemy can never spot you unless they use their action to search. By these rules, you can come out from behind cover, walk right up in front of an enemy, dance a jig, flip it the bird, and moon it, and as long as you do those things quietly, it will never know you’re there. That’s stupid.

Yeah, that part is poorly worded. There should be an additional "losing Hidden" clause of not being at least X level cover / obscurement against a foe whose line of sight you're within.

All of that is fine, except for the must be a 15 part, and the part where you become literally invisible, so if the guard doesn’t have truesight or see invisibility, he needs to coincidentally guess that he needs to take the search action at exactly the right time.

If he's a guard, he should be doing that pretty regularly anyway.

 

[Charlaquin]

The rules mention that if you are in line of sight you aren't invisible.
You clearly give up your stealth when in such a situation.

Where? I don’t see that in the text Treantmonk cited.

 

[Charlaquin]

You're not hiding from any creatures, though, because in order to even attempt this you cannot be within any enemy's line of sight.

Sure, but as far as I can see there’s no need to remain out of line of sight once you’re invisible.

Yeah, that part is poorly worded. There should be an additional "losing Hidden" clause of not being at least X level cover / obscurement against a foe whose line of sight you're within.

That would go a long way towards improving these rules, yes. It would make the “invisible” condition pretty misleadingly named in this instance, but at least it would be a functional rule.

If he's a guard, he should be doing that pretty regularly anyway.

 

[Weiley31]

Taken from here

View attachment 374838
View attachment 374837

DC 15, with cover, and turns you invisible.

Am I reading this right that you can hide around a corner and just walk past the guards at the front entrance?

I'm pretty sure that even if you pass a DC 15 stealth check, if you decide to do the "Cuban Pete" dance number from The Mask, in front of a bunch of armed guards your hidden/invisible condition ends IMMEDIATELY!

 

[bedir than]

Where? I don’t see that in the text Treantmonk cited.

WHILE you're meeting those situations.
If you are no longer in those situations the while is no longer valid.