D&D (2024) Expert Classes - Rules Glossary

[UngainlyTitan]

I shouldn't have to keep shouting I AM BEING ALERT GM I AM LOOKING AROUND for my paranoid scout character to be aware of their surroundings.

To be honest the DM that requires that is being an asshat anyway. One of the things that passive perception did provide to prevent the player from receiving metagame knowledge from being asked to make a perception check.

 

[Olrox17]

While I do admit that we overestimate the degree that armour makes noise.
And the environment is generally not taken into account enough for hearing (wind in particular). However there are two issues with your position. Making noise while moveing and covering clear ground.

Under the current rules it is impossible to cover clear ground. The movie trope of sneaking up on the sentry is impossible under the UA as the sentry will spot you once you are close enough to be no longer be obscured.

Oh hey, it's the Metatron. Excellent channel.
Agreed, under the current rules it's technically impossible to sneak up on a sentry to dispatch them in melee unnoticed. Another failure of the current iteration, let's add it to the pile.

 

[Stalker0]

A subtle but powerful change: The Help action requires you to be proficient in the skill you are assisting with. This prevents the horde of players trying to help on every knowledge check or investigation.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

I'm glad to see the hiding rules cleaned up, but they still seem a little wonky. How about something more like this?

HIDING
To hide, you must roll a Dexterity (Stealth) check, which varies depending upon the conditions:

DC 10: Total cover or total darkness
DC 15: ¾ cover or heavy obscurement
DC 20: ½ cover or light obscurement

To spot you, other characters must make a Wisdom (Perception) check, which varies upon the conditions:

DC 10: ½ cover or light obscurement
DC 15: ¾ cover or heavy obscurement
DC 20: Total cover or total darkness

I'm not quite sure how invisibility would interact with this approach.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I'm glad to see the hiding rules cleaned up, but they still seem a little wonky. How about something more like this?

HIDING
To hide, you must roll a Dexterity (Stealth) check, which varies depending upon the conditions:

DC 10: Total cover or total darkness
DC 15: ¾ cover or heavy obscurement
DC 20: ½ cover or light obscurement

To spot you, other characters must make a Wisdom (Perception) check, which varies upon the conditions:

DC 10: ½ cover or light obscurement
DC 15: ¾ cover or heavy obscurement
DC 20: Total cover or total darkness

I'm not quite sure how invisibility would interact with this approach.

Too complicated the proposed rule is fine it just needs a line that explains about movement while hidden. Can you break concealment if no one is looking at you.
Invisibility needs something that does not give disadvantage if the target is seen by "See Invisibility" or other effect.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Good catch. I like that it is no vs passive perception anymore (which is hopefully gone), but I don't like the fixed DC. I would love an "awareness defense" instead, even if it is just 12 + prof bonus.
I'd even more like 8 + prof bonus + int or dex, whicheveris better.
Maneuver defense would be 8 + prof bonus + dex or str.

Now we need a defense that is 8 + prof bonus + cha or con. Maybe some kind of resilience vs exhaustion.

Please no grid filling design, ever. Please.

I think fixed attitude categories and DCs are inevitably going to run into issues. Friendliness and hostility occur on a spectrum, as do levels of risk and sacrifice (and any number of additional personality traits could come into play). I'd say the game would be better off encouraging the DM to evaluate difficulty on a case by case basis, perhaps with some examples provided for guidance.

I think sample DCs with normal risks and rewards listed, like they have it, is sufficient.

The only one that really sticks out to me is the DC 10 letting you shut down attack mode, that seems a bit too easy.

Reads more to me as meaning they don’t respond with violence to your attempt to influence them, not that they won’t attack you for other reasons.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Perhaps they're back to rules over rulings and player supremacy again for 6e.

Or, it could be a minor course correction to see if the community reaction meets expectations based on feedback over the last 8 years, and hopefully find a better balance between rules and rulings.