D&D (2024) Creating good stealth rules for 2024 5e

[sevenbastard]

I think this is important and necessary work.

I think adding one condition is probably better than adding two. Otherwise we have three very similar conditions, hidden, stealthed, and invisible we need to track.

Stealth is always going to be hard as it has a lot of corner cases, good luck

 

[Stalker0]

Before I answer let me ask you this: is your goal to keep it as close to 2024 rules as possible?

For the most part, trying to remove the silly aspects of the 2024 rules but the spirit is meant to be the same.

 

[KYRON45]

Is the problem with Stealth that it has to account for both maps and theatre of the mind (a phrase i will outlaw when i come to power)?

If you're using a map, just look at the map. Seems to me that if the other guy can see you based on the physicality of the situation then that's that. I'm both not a rules guy and a little naïve it would seem.

If you're using...thea....(sigh)....your imagination then the DM needs to make a call (the side effect of this whole theatre of the mind schtick). Seems to me that if you are playing with the "not map" version of the game then you are placing an immense amount of faith in the DM to start with. Where do you draw the line on what you just roll with and what you need a 1500 post conversation to decide?

I'll go back to shooing kids off of my frozen lawn and watching....what is the Gen X equivalent of Matlock?

 

[Charlaquin]

Here’s how I would do it. Get rid of the idea of a hide action. It only ever makes you “hidden” in situations where you wouldn’t be able to be seen anyway, so who needs it? If you have total cover or heavy obscuration from a creature, or a creature has the blinded condition, it obviously doesn’t see you. What we need stealth rules for is trying to leave a hiding place without being seen. So, here I present the Sneak action:

Sneak
When you try to leave a position where a creature can’t see you without that creature noticing, you can take the Sneak action and make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. You remain hidden from any creature who’s passive Perception is lower than the result of the check until the end of your turn, you make an attack roll, cast a spell with a verbal component, make a sound louder than a whisper, or a creature that can see you uses its reaction to alert those creatures to your presence.

 

[Guest 7037866]

Here’s how I would do it. Get rid of the idea of a hide action. It only ever makes you “hidden” in situations where you wouldn’t be able to be seen anyway, so who needs it? If you have total cover or heavy obscuration from a creature, or a creature has the blinded condition, it obviously doesn’t see you. What we need stealth rules for is trying to leave a hiding place without being seen. So, here I present the Sneak action:

Sneak
When you try to leave a position where a creature can’t see you without that creature noticing, you can take the Sneak action and make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. You remain hidden from any creature who’s passive Perception is lower than the result of the check until the end of your turn, you make an attack roll, cast a spell with a verbal component, make a sound louder than a whisper, or a creature that can see you uses its reaction to alert those creatures to your presence.

I like where you're heading with this but remember Hide is also about being quiet, something with IME too often gets overlooked.

For example, if you are behind someone, you are obviously not in their line of sight so they cannot see you. Any attempt to "hide" is really an attempt to move quietly.

In this respect, I think the term "Sneak" is more appropriate. I understand the designers' desire to simplify things and not require separate checks to hide and move silently, but it creates a lot of issues IMO.

 

[Charlaquin]

I like where you're heading with this but remember Hide is also about being quiet, something with IME too often gets overlooked.

For example, if you are behind someone, you are obviously not in their line of sight so they cannot see you. Any attempt to "hide" is really an attempt to move quietly.

In this respect, I think the term "Sneak" is more appropriate. I understand the designers' desire to simplify things and not require separate checks to hide and move silently, but it creates a lot of issues IMO.

Right, but do we really need a “don’t make a bunch of noise” action? You could just say your character is being quiet, and not take any actions that would make a bunch of noise.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

"The DM decides when the situation is appropriate to hide and when to call for a stealth check."

Don't thank me for that.

 

[Charlaquin]

"The DM decides when the situation is appropriate to hide and when to call for a stealth check."

Don't thank me for that.

I actually think this is quite likely the only set of stealth rules that will work for every table. People will complain about the designers making them do all the work, sure, but… let’s be honest, they’re gonna do the work anyway, because everyone who cares about stealth rules knows how they want it to work and will run it that way regardless of what the books say. May as well just tell them “go ahead and do it your way.”

 

[Guest 7037866]

Right, but do we really need a “don’t make a bunch of noise” action? You could just say your character is being quiet, and not take any actions that would make a bunch of noise.

Well, that is part of the issue. Whenever someone tries to move quietly, they hope they are, but cannot know it. If a sentry is looking down a hallway and I want to cross an intersection behind him, I am already out of his line of sight. Any "hide" check is to be quiet, not to be unseen. I focus entirely on being quiet, hope I am, and that he doesn't just turn around stretching or something and sees me.

When I was just starting college, as a lark, we had my girlfriend go to her living room, sit in a chair, and close her eyes. We each then took turns trying to sneak through the room without making any noise. The TV was on, but at a lower volume, to simulate people talking nearby. If she heard us, she would point in the direction of the noise. If she pointed at the person sneaking, we told her and she "won". If she pointed but was wrong, we would say nothing and the person sneaking continued. If the person managed to make it across the living room without alerting her, they "won".

Out of the six of us, only two made it. Now, one was close, the other three a bit more clumsy, etc. It isn't always easy to sneak if someone is on the alert--such as a guard should be.

So, the rules focus a LOT on the unseen aspect, but want you to be out of line of sight (makes sense) but then also have three-quarter cover, total cover, or be heavily obscured. Well, if you are Heavily Obscured, LoS doesn't matter (barring special circumstances maybe) and Total Cover seems to imply (?) you have an obstacle completely covering you... so there is no LoS, either. With 3/4-cover it is a bit odd... can they see you? Is there LoS or not???

Generally, other than 3/4-cover, you are "unseen" in all the other options---so what are you rolling for in those cases if not to be quiet???

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, that is part of the issue. Whenever someone tries to move quietly, they hope they are, but cannot know it. If a sentry is looking down a hallway and I want to cross an intersection behind him, I am already out of his line of sight. Any "hide" check is to be quiet, not to be unseen. I focus entirely on being quiet, hope I am, and that he doesn't just turn around stretching or something and sees me.

When I was just starting college, as a lark, we had my girlfriend go to her living room, sit in a chair, and close her eyes. We each then took turns trying to sneak through the room without making any noise. The TV was on, but at a lower volume, to simulate people talking nearby. If she heard us, she would point in the direction of the noise. If she pointed at the person sneaking, we told her and she "won". If she pointed but was wrong, we would say nothing and the person sneaking continued. If the person managed to make it across the living room without alerting her, they "won".

Out of the six of us, only two made it. Now, one was close, the other three a bit more clumsy, etc. It isn't always easy to sneak if someone is on the alert--such as a guard should be.

Right, but all of this is a matter of moving quietly, and is therefore covered by my proposed rule of using stealth checks only when you leave a suitable hiding place.

So, the rules focus a LOT on the unseen aspect, but want you to be out of line of sight (makes sense) but then also have three-quarter cover, total cover, or be heavily obscured. Well, if you are Heavily Obscured, LoS doesn't matter (barring special circumstances maybe) and Total Cover seems to imply (?) you have an obstacle completely covering you... so there is no LoS, either. With 3/4-cover it is a bit odd... can they see you? Is there LoS or not???

Yeah, I’m personally not a big fan of being able to hide with 3/4 cover. I think it’s only really there to facilitate situations where you hide, pop out to make a ranged attack, and pop back into cover to hide again, which full cover would prevent. But, again, my “stealth is for when you leave cover” approach would allow for this application without needing to let you hide behind only 3/4 cover.

Generally, other than 3/4-cover, you are "unseen" in all the other options---so what are you rolling for in those cases if not to be quiet???

Exactly. Hence my proposal that you shouldn’t need to roll to become hidden initiatially, you should need to roll to stay hidden while you dart from one hiding place to another, or pop out to make a qick ranged attack, sneak up to an enemy to backstab them.