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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6374999" data-attributes="member: 42582">I've got nothing against casual rules. But rules can be casual and precise at the same time. This is coming up on the "is a crit on a 19 an auto-hit?" thread, where simple changes in the wording would have been no harder to read, but would have eliminated doubt.AD&D used more fictional positioning rather than mechanical constructions: anyone who could see the thief did see the thief, unless a hide in shadows check succeeded while unobserved - at which point the thief is "effectively invisible" as long as s/he remains still and quiet.The problem for post-AD&D editions is the introduction of a Perception skill.I think 4e had a nice solution: high degree of cover/concealment to become hidden (basically the same as AD&D), with success on the opposed Perception check equating to noticing some tell-tale sign (eg noise, odour, something unexpectedly visible, etc). For maintaining Stealth, some cover or concealment is enough - with the same opposed Perception check applying. It is clear where the fictional positioning applies (how much cover/concealment do you have) and where the mechanics apply (once you have sufficient cover/concealment to enliven the rules, you're entitled to force the opposed Perception check to be noticed).I personally have no idea how [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION] is extracting a version of the 4e rules, only more generous to the thief (because he thinks that dim light makes the opposed Perception check take place at a disadvantage), out of the 5e rules.And I find it is the mixture of mechanical specificity and lack of detail in the 5e rules that throws me. It seems to make a fairly big difference, for instance, whether the wood elf has a special ability to become hidden (but anyone can remain hidden in light mist if s/he moves into it from heavier cover) or a special ability also to remain hidden (because elves are fey creatures of nature who can hide even in natural phenomena that does not conceal mere mortals). I assume the designers had one or the other in mind.But the rules leave it unclear: Imaro thinks the rules say that anyone in light fog, who was already hidden when s/he entered the fog, not only can remain hidden but forces the opposed check to be made with disadvantage; whereas I still find that the most natural reading of the rules is that any non-wood elf who steps into light fog becomes visible to any non-distracted person and hence is no longer hidden.</blockquote>

Verification