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

[Selas]

Yes, and I am telling you by the rules (2024) there is no facing. At beast, as @Selas pointed out it is an optional rule in 2014.

The rules establish how to determine Line of Sight as I've shown, so when the Rogues move, then are in Line of Sight.

In ToM it becomes more the DM's perrogative, certainly!

I play ToM, so this is certainly easier to pull off

 

[ezo]

Where does it say ther is no facing, this discussion on the hide action is about facing.

Well, I've shown you the Line of Sight rule... where is the rule on Facing?? (in 2024 )

 

[FrogReaver]

In the case of the magic spells or magical abilities that grants the Invisible condition: special senses, abilities or magic are the only things the PHB directly mentions. Perception--which governs normal sight--is not used as a check to end it unless it is specified in the text.

What gives you the impression that somehow being seen (even by those senses) ends the invisible condition or the invisible spell? It doesn’t.

 

[ezo]

What gives you the impression that somehow being seen (even by those senses) ends the invisible condition or the invisible spell? It doesn’t.

Technically it denies the invisible creature the last two effects: Concealed and Attacks Affected.

But no, it doesn't end the spell. If the creature that can see you dies, you remain Invisible (provided you didn't end it some other way, of course...).

 

[Selas]

What gives you the impression that somehow being seen (even by those senses) ends the invisible condition or the invisible spell? It doesn’t.

They bypass it, not end it

 

[FrogReaver]

They bypass it, not end it

2 out of the 3 sections of it. But yea.

So how do you propose a creature with the invisible condition can ‘somehow be seen’?

Keep in mind whatever applies for invisible condition due to hiding (in regards to somehow seeing) will also apply to the invisible condition from the spell, because it’s the same condition.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

2 out of the 3 sections of it. But yea.

So how do you propose a creature with the invisible condition can ‘somehow be seen’?

With a scattered bag of flour!

 

[Sorinth]

Again, there is no facing in 5E so therefore no "field" (cone plus peripheral) of sight. A creature can establish Line of Sight all around them. Maybe this will help:

View attachment 397020
A sentry is standing in a clearing (why? no clue... not important) in Bright Light. Rogue A, B, and C all have Heavy Obscurment in very thick woods. Each is trying to move from their position across an opening to other Heavy Obscurement. There is no facing in 5E, so the sentry has Line of Sight on A (white line), B (yellow line), and C (red line).

From your PoV, he will see A, maybe B depending on how good his peripheral vision is, but not C because he is "behind the sentry". While I agree with you that is how it should work and would if 5E used facing, it doesn't. So, he will see all three.

Now, ToM, the DM can simply tell the player of Rogue C, "He is looking away from your position" and deny Line of Sight I suppose. But he could just as easily say the sentry is occasionally turning to look behind himself so might see Rogue C.

This isn't true, there's lots of things that exist but don't have explicit rules defined which simply means the DM decides. Not sure if in the new PHB they have the same line, but in the '14 PHB says in combat creatures stay alert for danger all around. Essentially in combat they are constantly glancing over their shoulder and looking around. If the guard is doing the same and glancing around constantly then yes they effectively have a 360 degree vision, though even then if a player says they wait for him to look one way and make a break for the next bit of cover it comes down to how the DM adjudicates that situation. They might say the distance is to far to cross before the guard looks back so automatically seen, they might say that's a great plan and autosuccess, they might use the stealth value that was previously rolled and compare it to the guards PP, or they might call for a new roll. There are no rules to explicitly define which option is how it's supposed to be ruled, but that doesn't mean facing doesn't exist, it means facing is under DM discrestion.

 

[kayakingpoodle]

Yes, and I am telling you by the rules (2024) there is no facing. At beast, as @Selas pointed out it is an optional rule in 2014.

The rules establish how to determine Line of Sight as I've shown, so when the Rogues move, they are in Line of Sight.

In ToM it becomes more the DM's perrogative, certainly!

Well, I've shown you the Line of Sight rule... where is the rule on Facing?? (in 2024 )

HERE
"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."

If there is no facing, how can "if you can see a creature, you can discern whether it can see you."
If there is no facing the when you can see them the they can see you. No decerning possible without facing.

Now where is it written there is no facing?

 

[Selas]

Well, I've shown you the Line of Sight rule... where is the rule on Facing?? (in 2024 )

There's none. You can do a word search in the 2024 books on DDB and you will find no mention of facing rules. Do a search on the 2014 DMG and you get the Facing rules in CH8