D&D 5E 5e Surprise and Hiding Rules Interpretation

[Jon Gilliam]

Let's return to the scenario again where you've deceived an enemy into believing you're an ally. Let's say you meet the guy in the tavern, chat him up, and crit on a Deception. He now believes you mean him no harm.

The next day, you encounter him again, walk up to him, and attack. You already did your Deception check yesterday. Certainly people aren't continuously doing Insight checks every time them meet someone again to see if they've had a change of heart and now intend to murder them. Does that succeeding on that one-time Deception check gain you the permanent opportunity to surprise that opponent anytime you like?

In order to keep that from happening, you'd have to presume that creatures are always using passive Insight to counter a possible Deception, but that sounds much less reasonable than using passive Perception to always be on the lookout for something hidden that's going to attack you. With something Hidden/Stealthy, it's already presumed that the fact that they're hidden alone gives suspicion that they might mean harm, and justifies why someone's passive Perception would be continually alert to anything and anyone coming at them with stealth.

But, that's not the case with Deception. Once successfully deceived, why would a creature be wary enough to justify countering with passive Insight? And would you have to do another Deception check the second time you encountered this creature if you intend to surprise them, even though they were previously deceived? With hiding, it's clear why you need to do a Stealth check before surprise, but with Deception it's not.

Another problem is that there's no clear point to do the surprise determination. Let's say the rest of the party is hidden and you approach a foe trying to deceive: "Hey, hey - I'm your friend here, you've misunderstood..." That calls for an out-of-combat Insight vs Deception check, since you could be trying to start a parlay with your opponent.

But when do you do this passive Insight vs Deception check to determine surprise? It's clear for Stealth - once everyone's hidden, surprise can be determined. The only point of determination for surprise with Deception would be when the creature being deceptive decides to attack, but at that point they've already done the check. Surprise is meant to be something done by hiding as a group, and it's not meant to have a "triggering" creature who must decide at what point they intend to attack before surprise is determined.

If surprise-by-Charisma could be a thing, why wouldn't high-Charisma characters want to do it more often for surprise rather than hiding? Would they have to be visible to do this Deception, or would it be enough to lie convincingly unhidden but still behind cover? Could you use the "message" cantrip to deceive an opponent and still be hidden at the same time, and take the best of your Stealth check and your Deception check?

If RAW intended these other mechanisms for surprise, the rule would have been written something like this:
"The DM decides who might be surprised based on whether they notice a threat. As soon as any combatant intends to attack, the DM asks for a skill check using the skill each creature is employing to keep from being noticed as a threat and compares that to the passive score of the opposing skill of each creature on the opposing side"

But that's not what it says, and to take the rule to mean that RAW is explicitly giving discretion under RAW to decide surprise by other means would have the DM required to decide on the spot both the checks necessary and the conditions that initiate surprise being determined, all without any guidance from the rules.

Look at Hiding, something the DM is meant to decide on the spot with only guidance from the rules. The rules make that clear, and they provide guidance in the form of the Hiding side-box on p. 177. If there was guidance in the rules as to how a DM should run surprise other than Hiding vs Stealth, then I'd agree that's what RAW intended, but there's not.

I've done my best to be open to idea and to try to give opposing arguments a fair shake. But, at least right now, I just find absolutely no persuasive argument that Surprise was meant to be determined as anything but by Hiding, and no rules to help me as DM to make sure I'm being fair to players who might build their character concept on Stealth when deciding surprise on anything but that basis.

 

[Jon Gilliam]

Well, no. You can replace "threat" with "foe" and that still works. However, you smuggled in "hidden" which doesn't appear in either.

Being hidden is specified in the rule the DM is to use for determining surprise, on p. 189 of the PHB:

The DM determines who might be surprised. If
neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice
each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity
(Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive
Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the
opposing side.

And the phase "being stealthy" is used in the Sage Advice Compendium (and that's what hiding is, being Stealthy):

To be surprised, you must be caught off guard, usually because you failed to notice foes being stealthy or you were startled by an enemy with a special ability, such as the gelatinous cube’s Transparent trait, that makes it exceptionally surprising.

You could choose to make a lot of the word "usually" there, but I've already been accused of reading to much into a fine-toothed combing of the words of the rules, and the Sage Advice text isn't meant to be read literally as rules, but contextually as further explaining the rules that were published in the rulebooks. I think "usually" in that sentence just leaves open the possibility of being hidden by foes due to them being distracted. That's something Jeremy Crawford mentioned in the video - that you could be considered hidden and gain surprise when approaching foes who are dreaming about almond croissants or whatever his funny example was.

 

[Jon Gilliam]

Close ... but no cigar. I think that this is meant to be one of the things that makes an assassin an assassin. The assassin of course does have advantage. The assassin can do it on their own, but the rogue needs just that bit more help (like an ally)

They can't - and no one ever claimed they could. Sneak Attack is a specific rogue class ability. Everyone can exploit a foe's distraction, but a rogue gets specific bonuses for doing it.

Except that a rogue's Sneak Attack isn't assumed to apply during a surprise round. The assassin on the other hand can pull some really interesting shenanigans because they don't need to interact directly with the hiding rules to get their super-sneak attack off. For example 80' away and round two corners, taking advantage of dash and a thrown dagger. And assassins but not rogues getting serious danger from pretending to be e.g. a drunk or a civilian or even committing murder on the dance floor is not something I have a problem with.

You're missing my argument, which is from the intent of the designers. Given a certain theme or archetype of something from fantasy literature, the designers choose to represent that thing from a mechanics perspective and allocate it to a class or race, giving each class or race its set of "special" things that are supposed to be just that - special.

If the designers had intended for just any character with no necessary justification from an ability to setup what thematically constitutes a sneak attack by abusing an edge interpretation of the surprise rules, you have diminished the special features of characters who chose a particular race or class to be able to act out that theme in play. The designers also know that players are smart and always looking for ways to push the boundaries of what they can do, and they'd know if it was possible to setup surprise this way, that players will find combinations of spells or ability checks that they could bring out of the box and replicate.

 

[Jon Gilliam]

Here's something I'd be interested in : does anyone here run official 5e Adventurer's League play? If so, have you ever had a case where you ended up running surprise in official play on any other basis than passive Perception vs Stealth?

 

[Jon Gilliam]

By the time it took me to read and digest the whole thread, I could have probably run 100 ambushes scenarios, all of them awfully wrong by the RAW and yet perfectly fine for my players.

And if you're not enjoying the repartee, nothing's making you engage in this debate. My players, on the other hand, are very interested in the rules, what they mean, and how they can use them to their advantage as a player. I think that's a common affliction (tongue-in-cheek there).

 

[Jon Gilliam]

No. Assassins assassinate through surprise when they can. Which is why when assassins assassinate through surprise they get automatic critical hits - which is a pretty huge bonus especially when you roll a lot of dice of damage. The ability is intended to encourage assassins to surprise people to make their assassination attempts.

The assassination doesn't hand the advantage of surprise but it does mean that assassins even more than other characters want to surprise their foes. They are just supposed to use the rest of their toolkit to handle that - things like their deception and their stealth skills, and teamwork.



Bwuh? Death Strike stacks on top of the surprise round. Advantage to attack rolls, triggering Sneak Attack and an automatic critical hit (which doubles the sneak attack) on top of gettting the free round is pretty clearly a far bigger bonus than just getting the free round. Assassins are intended to want to surprise their foes - and then put out a ridiculous amount of damage.

A level 3 Dex 16 assassin with a shortbow or shortsword will, on their surprise round, be attacking with advantage and do 6d6+3 damage if their attack hits. With their high dex it is likely that they act on the next round before their opponent, again with advantage, for a further 3d6+3 damage on whichever foe they choose to attack. That's really pretty good for a level 3 character - and far more than anyone else gets. Other people get the free round - but only the assassin gets free advantage and free critical hits so their free round is far better than anyone else's free round.

If the designers had intended to cover every option they'd have written a very different game from 5e. They have however made clear (in one of the videos you presented) that catching someone by surprise does not require being hidden and can be done e.g. through an innocuous disguise when someone is not expecting trouble. They have written what happens in the case of surprise.

The only thing they have not done is given set DCs for all the ways you can catch someone by surprise.

No, assassins don't assassinate through the "surprise" mechanic at all, since their abilities that are themed to assassination do not require surprise to engage. If they happen to already have surprise, those abilities are even more powerful. You say that yourself, "Death Strike stacks on top of the surprise round."

It's difficult for me to not feel I'm being intentionally misunderstood here ... other characters and classes should not be able to encroach on the defined abilities of assassins and rogues by setting up edge interpretations of the surprise mechanic somehow on a Charisma basis to effect something thematically similar to their abilities. Surprise is a very powerful bonus in combat, and setting up edge-cases to gain it should not equal or dwarf the abilities of an assassin or rogue that are meant to represent those situations thematically, even if the assassin/rouge does gain additional benefit when a creature is surprised. Just any ole character should not be able to setup clever combinations of checks to gain the larger part of the bonus applicable to those situations and encroach onto the what makes those other classes special. If you want to be an assassin or a rogue, just be an assassin or rogue and play by the rules as written.

 

[Jon Gilliam]

Cool, now do this for a non-rogue. Or, in other words, you've chosen the rogue as your example because it can be bent to your argument, even if through special pleading. Surprise is not rogue specific, so however you imagine a rogue that's not the general case.

It appears that your underlying issue is that you think surpruse is too strong an advantage so limitations on PCs gaining it are appropriate. I would take this as an opportunity to point out that GMs have inifinite dragons, so even if PCs get surprise all the time, it diesn't really impact the GMs ability to create challenges. Think putside your box, don't just try to make the box smaller.

No, the issue is balance among character classes, and preserving the qualities of the class that a player has chosen so that they can feel that they have a special thing that their character does that other characters can't do. If a player has chosen a Stealthy class and/or race (say you're a lightfoot Halfling rogue or assassin), your choices should be respected in play by the DM in that your character has lots of opportunities to Hide and initiate surprise with a Stealth check that uses your undoubtedly high Dexterity score and your proficiency in Stealth.

Deciding that surprise can be ran differently, without any guidance in the rules to how that should be done or even any indication that the designers intended that case, allows characters with other high ability scores and skill proficiencies to detract from the specialness of the classes and races that are supposed to be good in those situations.

 

[Jon Gilliam]

They did say it. They said, "Roll initiative" which you only do when facing a foe.



Probably because people tried to incorrectly apply "threat" and "surprise" to traps and such outside of combat, because they didn't understand the rules.



You are assuming here. All that clearly states is that you can't be surprised by someone who hides once combat has begun.


No. It's only presuming combat has begun AND that hiding is a way to gain surprise. Nothing about those sentences indicates that hiding is the ONLY way to gain surprise.

Note that combat starts before saying "Roll Initiative" : see the "combat step-by-step" box on p.177 of the PHB. That's the 3rd step, after you've already decided combat has begun. The problem with having a "triggering character" for surprise who has deceived opponents that they're friendly in role-play is that surprise then isn't determined until they say they intend to attack. And once they intend to attack, they've already done the check that you would use to determine surprise.

 

[Jon Gilliam]

Here's a further situation that wouldn't make sense : A high-charisma party member is parlaying with opponents in role-play in a situation where it wouldn't otherwise make sense for the whole party to suddenly be able to hide (let's say they came upon them unexpectedly). The high-charisma person by succeeding in a Deception check to convince the opponents that the party is friendly and not a threat, gives the rest of the party a chance to move to places to hide, and then that high-charisma player can then "trigger" a surprise determination by saying they intend to attack, using their Deception check in place of a Stealth check.

To me, this seems completely replicable. What keeps the party from attempting this every time they come across opponents unexpectedly?

 

[Jon Gilliam]

Giving considerations to the opposing arguments (particularly the Orchestra scenario that was mentioned at one point), I'll shift the question from "What do I think the rules intend?" to "What would I do as DM?"

Here's my thoughts on that. If a character had infiltrated an opposing organization to get close to the head of it (maybe a crime boss in the thieves' guild), say resolving this as a Downtime Activity as per Xanathar's Guide between milestones, and then appears in a combat situation with the rest of the party pretending to be a member of the other side, I would probably allow that character to automatically succeed on their Stealth check for surprise purposes, effectively having them Hidden in plane sight for the start of combat. I would judge that they are "particularly surprising" due to the having succeeded at the Downtime Activity.

But, I'm not pretending that's RAW.