D&D 5E Adjudicating "bursting in"

[BoldItalic]

* creeps up and bursts into the thread suddenly *

@OP: Take away the doors. Problem solved.

 

[Guest 6801328]

* creeps up and bursts into the thread suddenly *

@OP: Take away the doors. Problem solved.

Or lock them.

 

[I'm A Banana]

While all of this might be fine for in-combat hiding (which is generally silly to attempt, and I don't know why they keep throwing in abilities that seem to be trying to make it a thing), it basically makes out of combat stealth impossible, since one failed check blows stealth, you may as well be asking your stealther to take 1 while the perceiver takes 20.

It just means that if you want to do an ambush in one check, you need to attempt it while fairly close to your target (rogues within ~ 60 ft., monks a little less, everyone else within ~30 ft.). Unless your target is standing in an open field or a huge barren room or something, there's usually PLENTY of places to hide within that range, and if you're not within about 60 ft., your party can't be heard well anyway (closer, in the case of closed doors or somesuch.

It makes "I am sneaking the whole time and so I get surprise" a less viable tactic, but considering how powerful surprise is, I've got few issues with making this a tactic that requires some serious engagement to pull off.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The downside to making it really hard to sneak up close to enemies is that it encourages rogues to become snipers rather than stabbers, which I think is an unfortunate trend in the class.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It's interesting because I kind of do the inversion.

Rather than "passive Stealth" I use passive Perception for the watch, and have the PC's roll stealth. One of the things this does: because Hiding is an action, it means that a PC can move up to their speed and Hide, but they can't move while hiding. This means that things like guard patrols and the like are easier to pull off. Roll init for everyone: on the PC's turn, they can move up to their speed, and if they find a place to hide, they can take the Hide action. On the NPC's turn, maybe they move down the corridor on patrol or spend the round chatting with their buds or something. This creates a bit of give-and-take and also means that there's a bit of a "timer" on your stealth - sooner or later, you might roll low, and that means that the enemies will hear you.

This stops surprise from being a dominant strategy, but still something worth pulling off.

The "might roll low" is precisely the reason I stopped having every PC roll Hide checks as they snuck through dungeons. Too many rolls to make with incredibly fuzzy distances between party and monsters (which would determine things like Advantage/Disadvantage based upon distance, distraction, etc. etc.) If a PC is advancing 100 feet down a corridor towards a door, that's three 30' movements and a Hide check after each one to see how quiet they're being. Odds are pretty good that at least one of them is going to be a crap roll, which compared to the monster's PP on the other side of the door (even with -5 from Disadvantage for being being the door)... means the PC's gonna probably get heard somewhere along the way.

So I just figure... if we're letting PCs and monsters use average values to hear/see things, why not let them use average values to be quiet too? Thereby saving time across the board by not having so many repetitive dice rolls and giving everyone their most regular chance to be quieter / more perceptive than the other creatures in the dungeon? Especially when they aren't going out of their way to try and be either Super-Sneaky or Super-Attentive-- which if they do, I'll save my Active checks for Stealth and Perception to let them use then to get that better-than-average chance of pulling it off.

 

[DEFCON 1]

While all of this might be fine for in-combat hiding (which is generally silly to attempt, and I don't know why they keep throwing in abilities that seem to be trying to make it a thing), it basically makes out of combat stealth impossible, since one failed check blows stealth, you may as well be asking your stealther to take 1 while the perceiver takes 20.

And this is why I now use Passive Stealth for when the party is "moving quietly" throughout the dungeon. This of course assumes there is no monster within eyesight of the party-- if THAT'S the case, then absolutely I go into "combat stealth" mode, where PCs use their movement to get into a position of being Heavily Obscured and then using their action to make a DEX (Stealth) check to determine their Hiding DC.

But when people are completely out of line-of-sight from anyone in the dungeon because literally no one's around and instead are just trying to walk as quietly as possible... I find using repetitive Active DEX (Stealth) checks to determine how quiet they are being after each and every movement to be unnecessary and prone to a crapload of 1s and 2s showing up, thereby guaranteeing that almost no PC walks quietly. Almost every one will be "heard" by a monster's Passive Perception even if they are far enough away to get a -5 assigned to their PP due to distance or intervening terrain.

So I just compare average "quietness" and average "alertness" for each PC and monster as they get close enough to hear / be heard from each other, and those whose averages are too low (on either side) are the ones who won't act in the first round due to surprise.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The "might roll low" is precisely the reason I stopped having every PC roll Hide checks as they snuck through dungeons. Too many rolls to make with incredibly fuzzy distances between party and monsters (which would determine things like Advantage/Disadvantage based upon distance, distraction, etc. etc.) If a PC is advancing 100 feet down a corridor towards a door, that's three 30' movements and a Hide check after each one to see how quiet they're being. Odds are pretty good that at least one of them is going to be a crap roll, which compared to the monster's PP on the other side of the door (even with -5 from Disadvantage for being being the door)... means the PC's gonna probably get heard somewhere along the way.

This does bring up the question of "how close to the monster do you have to be before you HAVE to make Hide checks to avoid being dfetected?"

Generally, I presume that most environments are pretty noisy, so you don't get heard until you're pretty close - someone clomping along in full plate still wouldn't be heard until they're within ~ 60 ft. or so (rule of thumb is you can hear someone talking at about 20 meters, presuming that most sounds PC's make are in the general realm of "a spoken conversation" isn't a bad assumption).

A DM who wants to start forcing you to sneak 100 ft. + away from your target is kind of presuming a LOT more noise than I generally would! (and, unless the monster has a 100+ ft. view around himself and thus is in the center of the proverbial open field, your vision would probably be about the same, if not less).

So I just figure... if we're letting PCs and monsters use average values to hear/see things, why not let them use average values to be quiet too? Thereby saving time across the board by not having so many repetitive dice rolls and giving everyone their most regular chance to be quieter / more perceptive than the other creatures in the dungeon? Especially when they aren't going out of their way to try and be either Super-Sneaky or Super-Attentive-- which if they do, I'll save my Active checks for Stealth and Perception to let them use then to get that better-than-average chance of pulling it off.

For me, trying to achieve surprise = trying to be super-sneaky, and the default state of most critters in the world = pretty attentive. And I personally wouldn't use average values for sneaking PC's for three big reasons. The first is because rolling is fun and gives the player a sense of agency over their skill usage - it is an active thing they can do. The second is because if monsters sneak up on the party, I don't want to have them roll Perception checks and thus give away that there's something that they need to perceive. The third is because each instance of hiding is its own action, subject to the particular nuances of the new place that you've moved your body to, while standing in one spot and staring at a doorway (or glancing between them, or walking a path, etc.) is less changeable, and a bit less subject to simple luck.

To be clear, not saying your way is bad or anything (stealth rules are really up to DM interpretation in 5e), just giving some reasons why I wouldn't personally do it that way.

 

[Uller]

While all of this might be fine for in-combat hiding (which is generally silly to attempt, and I don't know why they keep throwing in abilities that seem to be trying to make it a thing),

So someone is firing arrows at you and you are standing beside a bush. You are claiming it would be silly to move behind the bush to break the enemy's line of site and attempt to make them lose sight of you to make you harder to target and to possibly be able to target an enemy that is unaware of exactly where you are or what you are doing?

Umm...okay. I disagree. I think not attempting to hide or otherwise cause your foes to lose track of you or your allies if only for a moment would be silly.

Edit: in fact....while I dont claim to have ever been in real combat...at least not the sort depicted in action movies or in games...I served in the infantry and have been on the battlefield (real battlefield...not training) when shots have been fired. In each case my reaction and those of the soldiers around me (because this is what we were trained to do) was to seek cover then manuever to be able to return fire or fire at any threats in our sector, preferably without being seen. Is that not "hiding"? In combat? If so why would this not be "a thing" in a game that depicts combat? If not, then what is it?

 

[Guest 6801328]

One of my dogs, a mutt who I think is part coyote or maybe fox, could teach ninjas a thing or two. (No, I don't mean her ability to jump on counters twice her height and steal food without knocking anything over. Well, maybe also for that reason.)

She can absolutely vanish in plain sight. I'll think she's nearby outside, and all of the sudden she's just gone. I call out for her, thinking she's wandered far off, and she'll stand up 15 feet away, in the slightest depression in the grass, in a shadow. If you had pointed to the spot beforehand and said, "Could a dog hide here?" I would say "no way". She has an amazing instinct for disappearing into terrain.

And not just once. You'd think I'd be on to her tricks by now, and I expect her to do it, but I still can't find her when she vanishes.

She's totally changed my appreciation for where it is possible to hide.

 

[Saeviomagy]

So someone is firing arrows at you and you are standing beside a bush. You are claiming it would be silly to move behind the bush to break the enemy's line of site and attempt to make them lose sight of you to make you harder to target and to possibly be able to target an enemy that is unaware of exactly where you are or what you are doing?

No, that's what the cover and concealment rules do. Stealth isn't needed for that.

Umm...okay. I disagree. I think not attempting to hide or otherwise cause your foes to lose track of you or your allies if only for a moment would be silly.

Edit: in fact....while I dont claim to have ever been in real combat...at least not the sort depicted in action movies or in games...I served in the infantry and have been on the battlefield (real battlefield...not training) when shots have been fired. In each case my reaction and those of the soldiers around me (because this is what we were trained to do) was to seek cover then manuever to be able to return fire or fire at any threats in our sector, preferably without being seen. Is that not "hiding"? In combat? If so why would this not be "a thing" in a game that depicts combat? If not, then what is it?

All of which is only applicable at range and when you can break contact. And again: the cover and concealment rules do all of this except "fire at threats without being seen" fine. The stealth rules also won't allow you to fire without being spotted.

So, to amend and make clear my meaning: the stealth rules as presented are pretty poor for any situation except "you are out of sight of the enemy with enough space to make them unsure of your location", but things like the lightfoot halfling naturally stealthy, wood elf hide in natural surroundings, rogue's cunning action and ranger's vanish all try to make them work in ways that are hard to imagine and adjudicate if not completely counter intuitive.

Perhaps my original post should have said "in melee" hiding or something similar.