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

[Maxperson]

Oh no, there are some here definitely trolling or arguing in bad faith because this topic has been covered ad nauseum since the PHB released.

Disagreeing with you isn't trolling or bad faith. We see it differently is all.

 

[Charlaquin]

Here is where we part ways. I think that the RAI is for the creature to be seen, but the RAW is written horribly and if followed to the letter, allows the creature to move out into the open without being seen.

I do think that is a possibility, which is why I’m only 90% confident. But as I say in post 476, I think the designers were trying to write the DM discretion element out of the stealth rules in 2024, probably to make them easier to resolve by computers (be they future video games or hypothetical AI DMs). Instead of needing the DM to decide that a creature is distracted enough not to notice you when you sneak out of cover, these new rules seem to assume that a creature is distracted enough as long as its passive Perception is not higher than your stealth check, and does not use the Search action and roll higher on its Perception check.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I do think that is a possibility, which is why I’m only 90% confident. But as I say in post 476, I think the designers were trying to write the DM discretion element out of the stealth rules in 2024, probably to make them easier to resolve by computers (be they future video games or hypothetical AI DMs). Instead of needing the DM to decide that a creature is distracted enough not to notice you when you sneak out of cover, these new rules seem to assume that a creature is distracted enough as long as its passive Perception is not higher than your stealth check, and does not use the Search action and roll higher on its Perception check.

I don't like interpreting the rule that way but, yeah, I think you are on to something here.

 

[Selas]

Right. Folks are applying reason and assumption to what the words say and then saying that the words work just fine as they are. They are conflating their inferences and assumptions with RAW, but that's not how RAW works. RAW is what is written, not what people can infer, reason, or assume about it.

I'm perfectly aware of what the RAW is, but that's not what Charlaquin asked me for.

Here is where we part ways. I think that the RAI is for the creature to be seen, but the RAW is written horribly and if followed to the letter, allows the creature to move out into the open without being seen.

I actually agree with Charlaquin here, but I still think this is scenario dependent. The design intent is there though

I do think that is a possibility, which is why I’m only 90% confident. But as I say in post 476, I think the designers were trying to write the DM discretion element out of the stealth rules in 2024, probably to make them easier to resolve by computers (be they future video games or hypothetical AI DMs). Instead of needing the DM to decide that a creature is distracted enough not to notice you when you sneak out of cover, these new rules seem to assume that a creature is distracted enough as long as its passive Perception is not higher than your stealth check, and does not use the Search action and roll higher on its Perception check.

Agreed, though I really don't care to think much about the 3D-VTT which was probably what they had in mind

 

[Maxperson]

If you are hiding behind something and the other guy looks behind that thing.....does he need magic or a special sense to see you?

As things are written? Or by common sense? Those are two different things here.

Remember, Crawford's rulings over the last several years show very clearly that you go by exactly what is written and can't assume anything that makes sense. See his ruling that See Invisibility doesn't let you see through invisibility or stop the effects of invisibility.

 

[Maxperson]

And thee line you included WAS present in the very last UA8 before the PHB release, yet people complained because it made Hide the same as the Invisibility spell, so WotC removed it. SHOCKER!!!!

This is the text from UA8:

The problem wasn't the line, it was that hiding uses the invisible condition. They didn't fix the problem by removing the line. They made it worse.

 

[Maxperson]

I'm perfectly aware of what the RAW is, but that's not what Charlaquin asked me for.

I actually agree with Charlaquin here, but I still think this is scenario dependent. The design intent is there though

I'm curious as to why you think the design intent is for the person to remain unseen when out in plain sight, rather than it being an oversight or mistake? Not trying to argue. Just trying to see the other perspective here.

 

[Maxperson]

Serious side question: why the DC 15 for the check?

Probably a combination of simplicity and so you wouldn't be found out a ton by low rolls.

 

[ezo]

Probably a combination of simplicity and so you wouldn't be found out a ton by low rolls.

15 is too high. You won't be found by 90% of the creatures at that number.

You might as well be "invisible".

 

[Maxperson]

I'll concede to your interpretation as it's actually something I've been mulling about in this discussion, I think as long as you are successfully hiding a Wis(perception) check is necessary to find you... however I don't concede that if character A hides behind a rock, then character B looks behind said rock, character B needs to make a check to "find" him... as he is no longer hidden.

First, I don't think anyone here will play it any other way than what you just described. However, what is written doesn't support that.

Hide action on page 368:

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

Search action on page 373:
"The Search table suggests which skills are applicable when you take this action."

"Perception Concealed creature or object"

Those two things indicate that as written, if you go behind the rock you need to make 1) take the search action, and 2) Roll higher than the hiding check total to find the hiding individual.

The stealth skill states it allows one to...Escape notice by moving quietly and hiding behind things. Which supports my initial assertion that one cannot simply walk out into the open (line of sight) and still utilize stealth. If character B looks behind that rock you are no longer able to use stealth to hide

You're assuming things not written, though, which Crawford doesn't do when he makes his Rulings. It's a very reasonable assumption, but it remains an assumption that what is written does not confirm.