D&D (2024) New stealth rules.

[mellored]

This part is incorrect. First if you're in line of sight, you lose invisibility.

Where does it say that?

And wouldn't that make the invisibility spell pretty pointless?

 

[Stalker0]

The “while” here refers to the conditions you must be under while making the check, not in order to remain hidden once the check has been made and succeeded.

yeah considering the passage goes out of its way later to specifically list the things that would break your hiding, and that does not include the cover/obscurement..... I cannot accept the interpretation that the "while" means you have to stay in those conditions to maintain stealth.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

Where does it say that?

And wouldn't that make the invisibility spell pretty pointless?

It doesn't say that. If you were meant to lose invisibility when you leave cover, it would say so. There's no "secret" rules in d&d - things do what they say they do and don't do what they don't say they do.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think thats the goal: You have to roll at least a 15, even if the monster you're hiding from has a super low Passive perception (like say, 8). It’s to set a Floor.

Yeah, now that it’s been pointed out, I do think that’s probably the correct interpretation of the text, but good lord is it poorly worded if that’s the intent.

 

[Stalker0]

There's no "secret" rules in d&d - things do what they say they do and don't do what they don't say they do.

Not really true, lots and lots of things in dnd are unspecified and just assumed. For example, the rules for underwater combat or lakes or bodies of water never specify that I get wet, and stay wet when I leave the water. But I doubt a single person here would try to argue that a character leaves the water and is completely dry.

 

[Stalker0]

Yeah, now that it’s been pointed out, I do think that’s probably the correct interpretation of the text, but good lord is it poorly worded if that’s the intent.

yeah the fact that they kept a sidebar for passive perception when it should be a core part of the stealth rules is a bit ludicrous to me.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

Not really true, lots and lots of things in dnd are unspecified and just assumed. For example, the rules for underwater combat or lakes or bodies of water never specify that I get wet, and stay wet when I leave the water. But I doubt a single person here would try to argue that a character leaves the water and is completely dry.

That's not what I'm referring to. I am specifically referencing a statement from Jeremy Crawford:

"Beware of claims that a rule does something mentioned nowhere in that rule or elsewhere in the core books. There aren't secret rules."

When you are analyzing a rule, it only does what it says it does. Your example is not analyzing a rule.

 

[MarkB]

Not sure I want to rip this can of worms further open, but what the heck.

It's worth taking another look at the Invisible condition:

Note that the only thing Invisible gives you unconditionally is advantage on Initiative checks. The other two benefits only occur unless "the creature can somehow see you".

If you walk up to a guard in plain sight, you may be gaining the benefit of a condition called "invisible", but the guard can definitely somehow see you.

 

[Charlaquin]

So, assuming the interpretation that having a higher passive perception than the hidden creature’s stealth check result counts as a successful perception check to find them (and I do think that’s correct) and assuming heavy obscuration still gives disadvantage on perception checks, we can imagine a case where leaving the obscured area immediately results in the hiding being spotted. Let’s say the seeking creature has a passive perception of 18. While the hiding creature is in a heavily obscured area, perception checks to find them have disadvantage, so the seeking creature’s passive perception is reduced by 5, giving them a functional 13. The hiding creature makes their check and gets a 17; enough to become invisible. Then the hiding creature leaves the obscured area, and perception checks to find them no longer have disadvantage. The seeking creature’s passive perception is now 18 again, higher than the 17 the hiding creature rolled on the check, so they are no longer invisible.

I actually don’t hate that. I just think the DC 15 floor is kind of superfluous, and the condition being called “invisible” is misleading.

 

[Charlaquin]

Not sure I want to rip this can of worms further open, but what the heck.

It's worth taking another look at the Invisible condition:

Note that the only thing Invisible gives you unconditionally is advantage on Initiative checks. The other two benefits only occur unless "the creature can somehow see you".

If you walk up to a guard in plain sight, you may be gaining the benefit of a condition called "invisible", but the guard can definitely somehow see you.

Wow, right you are. Why the hell is the condition even called “invisible” if being seen negates its benefits? Being impossible to see (except with magic) should be the primary if not sole benefit of being invisible. This confusion could have easily been avoided by just changing the condition’s name to “hidden.”