D&D 5E Calibration of single character skill checks

[clearstream]

Right, right. So you apply a conversion factor to the difference. STR/2 is fine whether it is official or not - but I am curious when you have the chance to confirm...

I will do. FWIW it also works amazingly well at the table. My players frequently want to jump something (recently, puddles of aboleth slime in ToA).

• Is your Strength > distance? No need to roll.
• Is your Strength < distance? You'll need to roll twice the difference.

Say Strength = 10 and distance is 15'? You'll need a Strength (Athletics) check of least 10.

If the PC is trying to slink past the guards, they would likely be asked to roll Dexterity(Stealth). If the player rolls a 12 but one guard has a Passive Wisdom(Perception) of 13 then the PC did not succeed in their goal of slinking past the guards.

The guidance on stealth is that the roll 'rides'. Say they get past those two guards? Their 12 rides until they're spotted or stop sneaking. So have the succeeded or failed against the possible future guards they have not reached yet?

If the opposed check was 11 or lower, yes. Or, if the Noticing the Thing was a DC of 11 or lower, yes.

Passive Wisdom (Perception) is continuous, right? Always on while awake. No roll, and yet, it can come to beat some DC. Stealth can ride much like passive Perception. I also use passive Investigation and passive versions of the knowledge skills for what you just know, without needing to roll. (You might need to invest some effort and roll if the knowledge is obscure.)

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I will do. FWIW it also works amazingly well at the table. My players frequently want to jump something (recently, puddles of aboleth slime in ToA).

• Is your Strength > distance? No need to roll.
• Is your Strength < distance? You'll need to roll twice the difference.

Say Strength = 10 and distance is 15'? You'll need a Strength (Athletics) check of least 10.

Maybe a bit generous but that certainly can work.

The guidance on stealth is that the roll 'rides'. Say they get past those two guards? Their 12 rides until they're spotted or stop sneaking. So have the succeeded or failed against the possible future guards they have not reached yet?

I'd need you to point me to where the PHB/DMG say the roll "rides". To me, that leads to the absurd where the PC is potentially sneaking for over an hour (or some other long-ish period of time) between guards but using their same initial Dex(Stealth) roll. Let's say that initial roll was a 20. Do they really get to sneak through the whole large castle complex (which has dozens of guards with low Passive WIS(Perception) scores) for as long as they wish because of that one initial roll? I mean, maybe, if the DM wants to make a ruling as such. But I'm doubtful that's the RAW or even RAI on Dex(Stealth).

Passive Wisdom (Perception) is continuous, right? Always on while awake. No roll, and yet, it can come to beat some DC. Stealth can ride much like passive Perception. I also use passive Investigation and passive versions of the knowledge skills for what you just know, without needing to roll. (You might need to invest some effort and roll if the knowledge is obscure.)

Certainly not "always on while awake". Passive here is referring to the lack of roll not that the PC is being passive about their ability. Passive WIS(Perception) comes into play when the player states the PC is continuously searching for something, such as a secret door, or watching for monsters. That means not doing anything else is a prerequisite to maintain this continuous activity (excepting a Ranger in their Favored Terrain who gets an auto-success on Wisdom (Perception)). This creates tradeoffs during exploration - mapping vs foraging vs navigating vs searching for traps vs whatever.

 

[iserith]

I'd need you to point me to where the PHB/DMG say the roll "rides". To me, that leads to the absurd where the PC is potentially sneaking for over an hour (or some other long-ish period of time) between guards but using their same initial Dex(Stealth) roll. Let's say that initial roll was a 20. Do they really get to sneak through the whole large castle complex (which has dozens of guards with low Passive WIS(Perception) scores) for as long as they wish because of that one initial roll? I mean, maybe, if the DM wants to make a ruling as such. But I'm doubtful that's the RAW or even RAI on Dex(Stealth).

I'd like to see evidence of this "rides" thing too. It looks to me like the DM is calling for a check simply because the player described a task that sounded like it aligned with a skill proficiency without taking into account whether there is a meaningful consequence for failure. In this case, the PC is sneaking around. But if there's nobody there right now to notice them, then there's no reason to make a roll because there is no meaningful consequence for failure. Instead, the DM calls for an ability check when it's relevant to do so, such as when they approach those aforementioned guards. This "rides" ruling looks like a fix for a problem that is occurring at the point of calling for a roll without a consequence in the moment.

 

[clearstream]

I'd like to see evidence of this "rides" thing too. It looks to me like the DM is calling for a check simply because the player described a task that sounded like it aligned with a skill proficiency without taking into account whether there is a meaningful consequence for failure. In this case, the PC is sneaking around. But if there's nobody there right now to notice them, then there's no reason to make a roll because there is no meaningful consequence for failure. Instead, the DM calls for an ability check when it's relevant to do so, such as when they approach those aforementioned guards. This "rides" ruling looks like a fix for a problem that is occurring at the point of calling for a roll without a consequence in the moment.

Dragon Talk | Official D&D Podcast | Dungeons & Dragons

Each week, the D&D team sits down with celebrities and personalities from across gaming and pop culture to discuss the world's greatest roleplaying game.

dnd.wizards.com

@Swarmkeeper At 17:30, Jeremy explains that when someone makes a stealth check, they keep that roll until someone discovers them, or they decide they're going to stop hiding.

 

[iserith]

Dragon Talk | Official D&D Podcast | Dungeons & Dragons

Each week, the D&D team sits down with celebrities and personalities from across gaming and pop culture to discuss the world's greatest roleplaying game.

dnd.wizards.com

@Swarmkeeper At 17:30, Jeremy explains that when someone makes a stealth check, they keep that roll until someone discovers them, or they decide they're going to stop hiding.

That may be true in combat, but isn't otherwise true. If this is the same podcast that keeps getting thrown around in arguments about passive checks being a floor for everything, then - like that assertion - this "rides" thing is being taken out of context. Also, Jeremy "Shield Master" Crawford isn't a good source for anything in my view related to rules interpretations.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Dragon Talk | Official D&D Podcast | Dungeons & Dragons

Each week, the D&D team sits down with celebrities and personalities from across gaming and pop culture to discuss the world's greatest roleplaying game.

dnd.wizards.com

@Swarmkeeper At 17:30, Jeremy explains that when someone makes a stealth check, they keep that roll until someone discovers them, or they decide they're going to stop hiding.

Ah, I see now. You seem to be equating "hiding" with "sneaking past guards". I mean, they are quite similar in that both use Dex(Stealth), but I would say they are quite distinct activities. PHB p174 (emphasis mine): "So a character who has proficiency in the Stealth skill is particularly good at Dexterity checks related to sneaking and hiding."

Also, JC's interpretations are... not rules. Got anything supporting this "rides" interpretation from the PHB or DMG?

 

[clearstream]

Ah, I see now. You seem to be equating "hiding" with "sneaking past guards". I mean, they are quite similar in that both use Dex(Stealth), but I would say they are quite distinct activities. PHB p174 (emphasis mine): "So a character who has proficiency in the Stealth skill is particularly good at Dexterity checks related to sneaking and hiding."

Also, JC's interpretations are... not rules. Got anything supporting this "rides" interpretation from the PHB or DMG?

There have been numerous threads on stealth on this and other forums. "Hidden" is the state a creature is in when it has used an action to make a stealth check so that it is unseen and unheard, and other creatures don't know its location. I guess one would call a hidden creature that is moving, "sneaking", but notwithstanding the text you emphasised there isn't a mechanical difference in 5th edition between sneaking and hiding.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

There have been numerous threads on stealth on this and other forums. "Hidden" is the state a creature is in when it has used an action to make a stealth check so that it is unseen and unheard, and other creatures don't know its location. I guess one would call a hidden creature that is moving, "sneaking", but notwithstanding the text you emphasised there isn't a mechanical difference in 5th edition between sneaking and hiding.

OK, but you haven't answered the question yet. Where in the books does it say a roll "rides"?

Also, still curious about the Strength mechanic you mentioned earlier...

 

[iserith]

There have been numerous threads on stealth on this and other forums. "Hidden" is the state a creature is in when it has used an action to make a stealth check so that it is unseen and unheard, and other creatures don't know its location. I guess one would call a hidden creature that is moving, "sneaking", but notwithstanding the text you emphasised there isn't a mechanical difference in 5th edition between sneaking and hiding.

In that podcast, they're talking about combat, Hide Action, Search action, and general awareness in the context of combat where the meaningful consequence for failure is built in. It doesn't apply to situations like trying to hide when nobody is around to notice you. There's no check for that. You just hide wherever it is you say you hide. If someone does turn up that could notice you and you're still trying to hide, now we make a check because meaningful consequences for failure - a prerequisite for an ability check at all - are present (and presumably an uncertain outcome is in play, the other prerequisite).

 

[clearstream]

Also, JC's interpretations are... not rules. Got anything supporting this "rides" interpretation from the PHB or DMG?

Suppose that contrary to JC's advice, we don't have stealth rolls ride. There are a couple of consequences worth considering -

1. It would be entailed that the hiding creature makes a separate stealth roll per possible observer (because we're not allowing the roll to ride)
2. Per RAW in combat hiding is an action (when you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check to hide) and we don't have actions outside of our turn
3. Therefore if a new possible observer arrives outside our turn, we are unable to make a stealth check against their perception

Generally speaking, if we decide to grasp the RAW as not allowing one stealth check to cover multiple or new possible observers (i.e. to ride) then we create a thorny problem to resolve. Of course, we can always ignore the RAW, but then it is not clear to me why we want to ignore the RAW and a chief game designer's advice about the RAW, in order to make a lot more dice rolls for stealth?