Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7483352" data-attributes="member: 16814">Absolutely, you do you, but... didn't you just sidestep the question about how your take on hiding is breaking your verisimilitude is a matter of narration?  I'm interested in how people play games based on their perceptions of things rather than the thing itself.  Here, the thing is hiding and the rules make it so that it's not really that big of a deal, even if the hider does the same thing over and over.  It doesn't break play at all, in fact, it brings it closer to the assumptions the rules were built upon.  So, then, the problem is really what each of us brings to the table ourselves in our perceptions of 'hiding'.  You bring 'someone cannot pull off the same trick the same way back to back to back, that doesn't make sense to me, so I rule it doesn't happen."  And that's totally cool.  I used to do pretty much the same thing.  I changed my mind because I examined why I thought that and made a different determination -- that bringing in my assumptions resulted in a game experience where we were often arguing about how hiding worked and if the rogue did this or that, would that work.  So, I dropped it and let the rogue hide liberally.  Now, to me, I dislike static games, so I added 'if you make a hidden attack from the same place the next round, your stealth check is at disadvantage.'  I also moved the check to the point where it mattered -- ie, you don't roll stealth when you hide, you roll stealth at the point where you might be noticed.  These two changes, while mechanically mostly irrelevant (stealth for focused hiders rapidly outpaces perception for almost everything, so usually stealth checks are formalities and disadvantage rarely is one), alters the perception of risk at the table, and suddenly the hiding characters made efforts to be more mobile and to change things up.  I achieved my goals not through denial, but gentle nudging towards the goal I actually wanted -- more mobile and dynamic combats.So, my question is really to try and understand why you want to limit hiding -- what's the end goal.  It's likely you have a well founded reasons, or, maybe, you look at it again and find there may be a better choice to be made to achieve your goals.  I've lately taken to examining what goals I want out of play and it's improved my play quite a bit.  Not saying you haven't done that, just talking about my journey through the hobby and looking for fellow travelers.  If you've already done this, I'd like to hear about your journey.BTW, the choice to only roll stealth (or other things like disguise, etc) when it's actually contested in play has made a huge difference in tension and feel at the table.  If you roll when you hide and get a 20+, you feel safe and don't worry much.  If you're waiting until you pop out or the bad guy tries to target you, then you're nervous as heck while waiting and pay attention.  It's worked yugely.</blockquote>

Verification