D&D 5E Asymmetrical stealth

[FrogReaver]

All the mo e reason to encourage them to scout.


Sent from my iPad using EN World mobile app

#1 Which is boring for the rest of the players unless you are a very skilled DM that can scene flip easily and make both scenes interesting.
#2 It takes one non stealthy character at that point to say screw it and ruin the other characters investment into stealth.

By splitting up the party like that you really can't appease the stealthy character player and the rest of the players.

 

[iserith]

But what if the goal wasn't to attack the guards but to sneak past them? Are you sure you want a party of very stealthy characters to have that low of a chance of sneaking past the guards?

Maybe they don't have to roll at all in such a situation, depending on their approach. Or maybe it's a group check, if the DM thinks it's uncertain.

 

[FrogReaver]

Maybe they don't have to roll at all in such a situation, depending on their approach. Or maybe it's a group check, if the DM thinks it's uncertain.

So use group checks for non combat stealth checks? Don't use them for combat ones?

 

[iserith]

So use group checks for non combat stealth checks? Don't use them for combat ones?

Maybe. It depends on the context of the scene plus the goal and approach the players describe. That said, determining surprise has very specific rules and group checks aren't used in the resolution so far as I can tell.

 

[redrick]

I think it's appropriate to use group stealth checks when sneaking around outside of encounter distance. Once the characters get to the point where they are actually sneaking up on somebody, they should roll individually. (And the characters who remain hidden, while not having the advantage of surprise, will at least have the advantage of being hidden.)

The rogue with expertise in stealth will still want to scout ahead sometimes, because they are almost guaranteed success, particularly if they are able to gain advantage some way. The group still has a reasonable chance at failure.

Only rolling one check for a group of NPCs sneaking up on the PCs, even if it is the lowest proficiency, is still way too kind to those NPCs. What's wrong with rolling more than one or two checks? Buy more d20s!

 

[Ancalagon]

Yep. Now imagine if 2 of those people in the party were bad at stealth. Only had a 30% chance of successs. Now we are at a 4.6% chance stealth.
Now imagine if 3 of those people in the party were bad at stealth. Only had a 30% chance of success. Now we are at a 1.7% chance of stealth.

I know surprise is a huge advantage but stealth isn't just for surprise. It's for sneaking past guards. It's for going unnoticed in a large crowd. It's for scouting the enemies operation out without being noticed.

I also know its typically boring for others if 1 guy stealths ahead on his own and they sit back from a safe location and watch for the next 15 minutes. It's also sucky if the stealthy guy wants to try and use his stealth and other players always try to come with him when doing so makes his chance of success drop to nearly nothing.

Exactly. And it's not fun.

It's fun if from time to time goblins get the drop on the PCs. And it's fun if time to time the PCs get to sneak past the guards. etc etc.

I'll note that for group checks, the important part is the "middle" guy - the really good guy will probably succeed, and lady clanky mcclangy will probably fail, but the skill checks of the "average" party members become very important. And suddenly that makes thinking about stealth important not just for the party rogue.

 

[iserith]

The simplest solution on the player side of the equation is to plan on spending Inspiration in a stealth situation to even out any disadvantage the character may have from armor or by having a low Dex in general. It's not as if the players don't have resources to offset the areas where their characters are weak. And if for some reason they don't, they should really look into shoring up deficiencies if they are planning on regularly undertaking tasks they aren't good at doing. I don't see why they should count on the DM to offset this for them by calling for group checks. The rules even say group checks don't come up often and that seems reasonable to me given the advantages of them.

And if you can't sneak your way past the guards, try talking your way past. Or killing them, quickly. Use your strengths instead of lamenting your weaknesses. Sometimes you can't do it all.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I think a lot of the problem is different view concerning the role of the DM, whether the DM is the storyteller or the world builder and referee.

In the vision of the referee as storyteller, it is the DM's job to make sure everyone is entertained and having a good time. It is his/her job to make sure that everyone shares the spotlight equally. In this vision, asymmetrical stealth is a problem because it difficult for the DM to entertain each player equally and give each player equal face time. If you're group sees the DM as a storyteller, you might be better off using group stealth checks.

If you're group sees the DM as a world builder and referee first and foremost, group stealth checks upset the underlying principles of the world, namely that someone trained in stealth can move so quietly that he/she can somehow make up someone clanking down the corridor next to him. Player-driven sandbox games require the players to have a basis in the physics of the game world in order to make informed choices. The easiest way to ensure that is for the mundane (non-magical) elements of the game world behave as they would in ours. Therefore group stealth checks would be ill advised in this vision of the game.

Which vision your group uses may determine how best to make use of the guidelines presented in the PHB, MM, and DMG.

 

[iserith]

I think a lot of the problem is different view concerning the role of the DM, whether the DM is the storyteller or the world builder and referee.

The DM is supposed to be all of these things. It isn't one or the other. "One player, however, takes on the role of the Dungeon Master (DM), the game's lead storyteller and referee..." (Basic Rules, page 2). " Chapter 1 of the DMG is entirely about the DM as world builder and that's not exclusive of being a storyteller.

I would say that whether or not someone utilizes group checks for Stealth all the time, some of the time, or none of the time has no impact on the DM's roles above.

 

[jgsugden]

There are a lot of ways to do these things. While I'm sure mine works well, others can also work well. One of the reasons they made stealth rules more vague in this edition was that they recognized there are many ways to do it, and that people historically can't agree on them ... so leave it up to the DM on fine implementation.