Those are two of the steady states into which a thread can degenerate, but there's a third you left out: "Argument about the stealth rules."
This thread was at maximum entropy from the first post.
D&D 5E (2014) Crawford on Stealth
- Thread starter SkidAce
- Start date
This thread was at maximum entropy from the first post.
I'm going to be playing a Deep Gnome fighter in a game tonight. I've decided he's going to have an Australian accent.
Why? Because he's from the Land Down Under.
Awesome. I love when things beak away from the classic cliches. Elves in my world will be the ones with a Scottish accent, but it will be the softer Conversational scottish, rather than the screaming "OH AYE, AYE'L AXE YER FACE BUT GUUD LIDDLE LADDY!"
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
That's not competence. That's quasi-godlike. A passive 20 means that he will automatically notice every bug, pine cone in the leaves, rock, animal, hidden person, etc. hidden with a DC of 20 or less. It's inhuman perfection for everything hard or lower in difficulty.
Competence is succeeding a lot more at a DC 20 than the guy with a +5.
Last edited:
Arial Black
Adventurer
Since the 'DC' in question is the result of a Stealth check (d20+Stealth modifier) then it is by definition variable. Even a creature with a lowly +1 Stealth mod will generate a result of 21 5% of the time. Beating an untrained person 95% of the time is hardly 'godlike'.
The guy with Stealth +5 generates a DC of 21 or higher 25% of the time. If he does then he beats the passive Perception of our competent hero, but our hero then gets to roll a Perception check to beat that DC (of 21-25). Our hero hits that DC anywhere from 50% of the time if ithe DC is 21 to 30% if the DC is 25.
Out of the 400 possible outcomes, the +5 Stealth guy gets perceived 340 times and our competent +10 Perception guy fails 60 times. A ratio of 5 and two-thirds to one.
Nearly six out of seven times our competent hero beats the +5 guy. I'm okay with calling that 'competent', especially since the +5 guy is no slouch himself!
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Walking into a stretch of forest and spotting 20 hidden people with a DC of 20 or less within 6 seconds is, though. And I said "quasi" godlike
It's not the part where he has to roll to beat a DC of 21 or higher that's the issue. It's the absolute, ridiculously unrealistic ability to be 100% perfect at anything 20 or lower. Nobody is even remotely that perfect without something divine happening.
That's too high for a +5 advantage.
Arial Black
Adventurer
Walking into a stretch of forest and spotting 20 hidden people with a DC of 20 or less within 6 seconds is, though. And I said "quasi" godlike
Well, walking into a forest with a passive Perception of, say, 12 would also spot 20 hidden people in six seconds (if their Stealth check results were 12 or less, which is an average for average people); are you saying that because the +2 Perception guy spots 20 hidden people in six seconds that he is also quasi godlike?
This doesn't make sense. If you were to roll a 10 on the d20 when rolling a Perception check for our competent +10 guy, then he also has the 'absolute, ridiculously unrealistic ability to be 100% perfect at anything 20 or lower'!
If you view the fact that he rolls a d20 therefore not always being successful in spotting the baddies, this is equally true when using passive Perception because the baddies roll a d20 to see how well they hide, so our hero doesn't absolutely, unrealistically, 100% spot the baddies even with a passive Perception of 20.
The randomness is still there, but only one d20 is rolled instead of two. I'll point out that attack rolls, saving throws and many skill checks only involve a single d20 roll against a static number, so whether that number is an AC, a DC or a passive score should not cause you to take umbrage about the lack of a second d20.
Joel Spanky Gray
First Post
Passive Perception is not a good rule, as has been pointed out numerous times on this thread. In my game, characters make all perception checks normally but get advantage on their check if they are using their action to actively search or stay alert. This just makes it far easier. I have modified the Observant feat so that it is just expertise with Perception and Investigation (and +1 Int or Wis). Simple and straightforward.
Walking into a stretch of forest and spotting 20 hidden people with a DC of 20 or less within 6 seconds is, though. And I said "quasi" godlike
It's not the part where he has to roll to beat a DC of 21 or higher that's the issue. It's the absolute, ridiculously unrealistic ability to be 100% perfect at anything 20 or lower. Nobody is even remotely that perfect without something divine happening.
That's too high for a +5 advantage.
Or he has a +2 perception and makes one active check and rolls 19 for a total of 21. He still spots all 20 people in 6 seconds with a single roll.
Or he rolls a 1 and can't spot any of the 20 people, not even the poorly hidden ones.
I don't think either scenario is realistic, for multiple reasons. (Humans tend to lose focus after 4+ things to track - after the 5th person it's just "a lot of people out there" and you focus on the ones nearest you.)
It's just a question of which level of unrealism you want to deal with. As long as the DM is up front about it so the players can set their expectations, it's all good.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
That's a pretty silly broad claim from this very narrow discussion.
Similar Threads
D&D 5E (2024)
Creating good stealth rules for 2024 5e
