D&D (2024) Thoughts on Stealth and D&D2024

[Parmandur]

that is not a good excuse for a poor description though. Just because everything can be fixed / decided by the DM does not excuse the rules from being well thought out

The point of the Skill system is to rely on snap judgement rulings, not detailed rules like there were in 3E. It is a feature, not a bug. The designers did not set out to provide detailed cases and final, they designed a fuzzy system on purpose.

One might prefer a different approach, but it is a disagreement at a philosophical lwvel rather than a particular failure point.

 

[mamba]

The point of the Skill system is to rely on snap judgement rulings, not detailed rules like there were in 3E.

and I am sure they could have done a better job while sticking to that principle and not wandering into 3e territory

 

[Parmandur]

and I am sure they could have done a better job while sticking to that principle and not wandering into 3e territory

They...didn't?

I just red the Hide action entry in the Rules Glossary, and it is quite clear, actually...? It does require DM narrative adjudication, yes, but again that's the game.

 

[MerricB]

They...didn't?

I just red the Hide action entry in the Rules Glossary, and it is quite clear, actually...? It does require DM narrative adjudication, yes, but again that's the game.

Problem is that it reads well, and then you try to unpack "find" and "line of sight".

Three-Quarters Cover and no line-of-sight -- not really compatible.

Find -- what exactly does that mean?

Once you can determine how you want to handle it, it runs okay, but two DMs can be very different in how they handle it. I'm all up for DM judgment, but they've been very, very specific about what you need to become hidden, but the rules for losing that status are almost absent.

Consider how you'd rule the following situations:

• The rogue stays behind 3/4 cover while moving and then shoots an enemy
• The rogue moves from 3/4 cover to 1/2 cover and then shoots an enemy
• The rogue moves from 3/4 cover to open ground but behind his allies (1/2 cover) and then shoots an enemy
• The rogue moves from 3/4 cover to 1/2 cover in a mist (lightly obscured)
• The rogue moves from 3/4 cover to open ground in a mist (lightly obscured)
• The rogue moves from 3/4 cover to open ground with no cover
• The rogue hides behind 3/4 cover with an enemy who has cast See Invisibility nearby
• The rogue hides behind 3/4 cover with a Stealth roll of 15 with a enemy dragon with a Passive Perception of 25 nearby

Think about these situations, and think about what rules apply. Do you think the rules are stated in an obvious manner, or require a lot of flipping through the books to find what applies? Or are they very reliant on DM rulings?

Also: try to do that ONLY referencing 2024 books! It's very easy to get caught up with what previous versions said. (I've played WAY too many different versions of D&D and PF, so I've got a lot of previous rules confusing me!)

Cheers!

 

[ezo]

Since I am not that familiar with the Stealth rules in 2024, but in reading them a bit, I find myself in this discussion.

An enemy sees my rogue moves behind a large, wide pillar (say 10 feet). So now he has Total Cover and is out of line of sight, attempts to Hide using Cunning Action, and succeeds against the DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check with a total 18. He now has the Invisible condition.

He then moves out from behind the pillar to engage his enemy who has a Passive Perception of 12. Since the 18 beats the Passive Perception of the enemy, it doesn't "find" my rogue, so the Invisible condition doesn't end. He then uses his Action to Attack the enemy with Advantage, gaining Sneak Attack on a hit.

Now, am I reading all that correctly? Is there some other rule elsewhere I am missing? I realize it doesn't make sense as written, just trying to see if I have the technical reading correct.

Hide
With the Hide action, you try to conceal yourself. To do so, you must succeed on a DC 15 Dexterity (Stealth) check while you're Heavily Obscured or behind Three-Quarters Cover or Total Cover, and you must be out of any enemy's line of sight; if you can see a creature, you can discern whether it can see you.

On a successful check, you have the Invisible condition. Make note of your check's total, which is the DC for a creature to find you with a Wisdom (Perception) check.

The condition ends on you immediately after any of the following occurs: you make a sound louder than a whisper, an enemy finds you, you make an attack roll, or you cast a spell with a Verbal component.

My issues with Hide:

if you can see a creature, you can discern whether it can see you. Why? How do you know? You are trying to Hide, right? Maybe it doesn't see you, or it does and is pretending not to. To assume you automatically know it can see you makes no sense. You are either Heavily Obscured or behind 3/4 or Total Cover.

Or was this phrase simply put there to let you know if you are in an enemy's line of sight???

an enemy finds you. This should include "or you move into an enemy's line of sight".

Invisible
While you have the Invisible condition, you experience the following effects.

Surprise. If you're Invisible when you roll Initiative, you have Advantage on the roll.

Concealed. You aren't affected by any effect that requires its target to be seen unless the effect's creator can somehow see you. Any equipment you are wearing or carrying is also concealed.

Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Disadvantage, and your attack rolls have Advantage. If a creature can somehow see you, you don't gain this benefit against that creature.

My issues with Invisible:

I hate that Invisible is a "condition" because every other condition is negative and/or has detrimental consequences. It bothers me in 2014 and it still bothers me now.

 

[Parmandur]

Once you can determine how you want to handle it, it runs okay, but two DMs can be very different in how they handle it.

Well...yeah.

 

[Charlaquin]

The condition doesn't need to say that and should not say that. When, whether and how the condition applies is independent of the definition of the condition. i think that may be our disconnect.

This is among the reasons why I don't think conditions is the right way to do this. just use simple, declarative language.

"If a character makes a successful Hide check against another creature's Passive Perception, the hiding character cannot be targeted by spells or abilities require sight. The hiding character has advantage on attack rolls against creature sit is hidden from, and creatures it is hidden from, if somehow allowed an attack, have disadvantage on the attack roll. A character that is hidden against another creature is no longer hidden after it attacks, casts a spell with a verbal component, or moves into that creature's lines of sight."

Note that the above assumes definitions of things like line of sight, concealment, cover, and how those things impact that Hide roll.

That works fine because of the bolded line. If the current Hide action had that part, it would work fine too.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think the lack of clarity there is to allow for d20ntests to determine stuff like facing, the NPC suddenly needing to tie their shoes, etc. in response to the rolled results.

There would be room for that anyway, since the rule says the DM determines when circumstances are appropriate for hiding.

 

[Charlaquin]

and I am sure they could have done a better job while sticking to that principle and not wandering into 3e territory

In fact, they already did so with the 2014 stealth rules. Those rules were certainly not perfect, but they were a heck of a lot better than these ones.

 

[Reynard]

In fact, they already did so with the 2014 stealth rules. Those rules were certainly not perfect, but they were a heck of a lot better than these ones.

I don't know -- we argued about those rules here A LOT too.