Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7798607" data-attributes="member: 6779196">I don’t know why I would need more specificity either, which is exactly why it’s important. I can’t know if the approach would make a difference unless the player tells me what their approach is.RAW says to “Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard,” which I believe covers your suggestion of setting a DC to account for the scenario as a whole.It also says that, “Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check's total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence.” So, if one of the orcs searches for the character, that’s the total they have to beat to find them. This might happen, for instance, if the player fails the initial check and sets the camp on alert as a consequence.Additionally, it says that, “When you hide, there's a chance someone will notice you even if they aren't searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the DM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature's passive Wisdom (Perception) score. which equals 10 + the creature's Wisdom modifier, as well as any other bonuses or penalties. If the creature has advantage, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5.” This might be a good way to set the DC for that initial check. This might also be relevant if there are certain creatures in the encampment with better Wisdom (Perception) than the orcs; maybe their chief has higher Wisdom, or maybe they have guard dogs that might have advantage due to Keen Smell, putting their passive Perception much higher than the orcs’.Personally, I do t run Stealth 100% RAW, in part because I don’t run passive checks 100% RAW.Well that’s nice, but unconvincing.</blockquote>

Verification