Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Uller" data-source="post: 7317839" data-attributes="member: 413">Example...Character A is chasing B down a street and B ducks into an ally using his full movement.&nbsp; A can't see B.&nbsp; There is sufficient noise from the crowd on the street and A's own running feet that A can't hear B.&nbsp; From the point A lost sight of B A has no idea what B did after that (though A can guess).The way I've always run it is no.&nbsp; B is not hidden.&nbsp; As soon as A turns the corner A can see B unless B is obscured by something and even then A has a good idea where B is unless B used the hide action.&nbsp; Even if B was invisible or A somehow blinded or it was dark...B has to hide to be hidden.I'm beginning&nbsp; to rethink that now.&nbsp; A few encounters have just not felt right to me.Two examples:&nbsp; A PC came to a locked door.&nbsp; Behind it were some witches. The PC started picking the lock.&nbsp; The witches heard this and all cast invisibility.&nbsp; But they didn't have time to also &quot;hide&quot;.&nbsp; But once the door opened I didn't&nbsp; see any reason the party would know the location of invisible witches that didn't act yet.&nbsp; So I had the witches roll a stealth check.&nbsp; Any PCs whose passive perception was lower than the check was surprised.&nbsp; Any who was not surprised knew something was there but not exactly where.2). I mentioned in another thread I ran a solo game for my son's paladin.&nbsp; He figured out he was going against a medusa and when he got to its lair he diverted his eyes and burst in to attack it.&nbsp; I let him know where it was and attack w/ disadv.&nbsp; He beat it in init...so it hadn't acted yet. This just didn't feel right.&nbsp; In hindsight I should have said he could close his eyes but then the medusa would start out hidden.&nbsp; Or he could take the search action to try to locate the medusa through hearing.&nbsp; Or he could try just not looking right at it and that would mean he could locate it automatically but would have to save against its gaze but with adv (and his attacks would still be at disadv and its would be at adv).I know...I know...this will reopen the whole stealth can o worms.&nbsp; But I want others&nbsp; thoughts before I let my group know I am changing how I usually rule.My thought is that in some circumstances, a character can get a free stealth check without using the hide action.&nbsp; If there is some circumstance that would cause an opponent to lose track of where the character is.&nbsp;&nbsp; It has to be something really overwhelming...like character B above becoming invisible or ducking into total darkeness or there being multiple side allies and the pursuer has to guess which one was taken...Sent from my [device_name] using <a href="http://EN World mobile app" target="_blank">EN World mobile app</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Uller, post: 7317839, member: 413"] Example... Character A is chasing B down a street and B ducks into an ally using his full movement. A can't see B. There is sufficient noise from the crowd on the street and A's own running feet that A can't hear B. From the point A lost sight of B A has no idea what B did after that (though A can guess). The way I've always run it is no. B is not hidden. As soon as A turns the corner A can see B unless B is obscured by something and even then A has a good idea where B is unless B used the hide action. Even if B was invisible or A somehow blinded or it was dark...B has to hide to be hidden. I'm beginning to rethink that now. A few encounters have just not felt right to me. Two examples: A PC came to a locked door. Behind it were some witches. The PC started picking the lock. The witches heard this and all cast invisibility. But they didn't have time to also "hide". But once the door opened I didn't see any reason the party would know the location of invisible witches that didn't act yet. So I had the witches roll a stealth check. Any PCs whose passive perception was lower than the check was surprised. Any who was not surprised knew something was there but not exactly where. 2). I mentioned in another thread I ran a solo game for my son's paladin. He figured out he was going against a medusa and when he got to its lair he diverted his eyes and burst in to attack it. I let him know where it was and attack w/ disadv. He beat it in init...so it hadn't acted yet. This just didn't feel right. In hindsight I should have said he could close his eyes but then the medusa would start out hidden. Or he could take the search action to try to locate the medusa through hearing. Or he could try just not looking right at it and that would mean he could locate it automatically but would have to save against its gaze but with adv (and his attacks would still be at disadv and its would be at adv). I know...I know...this will reopen the whole stealth can o worms. But I want others thoughts before I let my group know I am changing how I usually rule. My thought is that in some circumstances, a character can get a free stealth check without using the hide action. If there is some circumstance that would cause an opponent to lose track of where the character is. It has to be something really overwhelming...like character B above becoming invisible or ducking into total darkeness or there being multiple side allies and the pursuer has to guess which one was taken... Sent from my [device_name] using [url]EN World mobile app[/url] [/QUOTE]

Verification