D&D 5E Moving out of concealment to attack - when is stealth broken?

[Rabulias]

That’s not really stealth though.

It was more to demonstrate impaired Perception and that something could be in plain view and people could still fail a Wisdom (Perception) check if they are focused on something else (like combat).

 

[Reynard]

No, the relevant rule is that by default, a creature in combat is aware of their surroundings, which is nonsense. It takes effort, active focus, and usually training, to be aware of your surroundings in a fight. The default is exactly opposite reality.

I think you might do well to watch any team sport in action. People whose job it is to be cognizant of their surroundings as people move with dangerous purpose around them have a pretty good sense of where everyone is. Do folks sometimes get blindsided? Sure. But that is what the GM is for in this situation.

If I had to make a rule for it, i would say this: characters engaged in melee have a choice as to whether to take disadvantage on their perception checks versus incoming "blindside" attacks, or to suffer disadvantage to their own attacks. It actually models quarterbacks trying to survive in the pocket pretty well. You could flip it too, if you wanted.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think you might do well to watch any team sport in action. People whose job it is to be cognizant of their surroundings as people move with dangerous purpose around them have a pretty good sense of where everyone is. Do folks sometimes get blindsided? Sure. But that is what the GM is for in this situation.

If I had to make a rule for it, i would say this: characters engaged in melee have a choice as to whether to take disadvantage on their perception checks versus incoming "blindside" attacks, or to suffer disadvantage to their own attacks. It actually models quarterbacks trying to survive in the pocket pretty well. You could flip it too, if you wanted.

That would be a reasonable and believable rule, yeah. And it’s dead simple.

I’m gonna put it to my group, maybe try it out.

 

[Flamestrike]

The game has two options - either implement a complex 'facing' rule or simply leave it down to DM discretion when a monster is aware of its entire surroundings (defaulting to a general awareness of your surroundings in the absence of the DM choosing to exercise that discretion).

Once you accept that as the case, it then just becomes a question for the DM of when to exercise that discretion.

As a general rule the creature is assumed to be aware of you when you leave your hiding spot, but if the creature is engaged in a swirling melee with 2 of your buddies on the other side of where you are, it's more than likely the creature is looking at them (and not in your general area) and you can approach the creature while remaining hidden.

It's a question of common sense and DM discretion really.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The game has two options - either implement a complex 'facing' rule or simply leave it down to DM discretion when a monster is aware of its entire surroundings (defaulting to a general awareness of your surroundings in the absence of the DM choosing to exercise that discretion).

Nope. The game can easily implement non-complex facing rules (you are facing the last person you attacked unless you state otherwise), and/different defaults (you’re aware of creatures that aren’t trying to avoid your notice within 60ft, who aren’t under any concealment).

 

[jgsugden]

Nope. The game can easily implement non-complex facing rules (you are facing the last person you attacked unless you state otherwise), and/different defaults (you’re aware of creatures that aren’t trying to avoid your notice within 60ft, who aren’t under any concealment).

Facing rules in D&D don't make sense. A round is 6 seconds. When you implement facing rules, you end up facing in one direction for almost that entire time despite the fact that you're engaged in combat and moving around during that round.

 

[Mistwell]

Rogues shouldn't try and hide in battle.

Uh, it's kinda specifically their thing, with a special power built-in to the class just for that, and highlighted by the creator of the rules as something they are definitely intended to do.

 

[Maxperson]

I think your concerns are a bit... exaggerated.

The PHB (p177) says:

I certainly don't read that as "360 degree field of vision at all times". Does anyone?

Right. It only says that you have 360 vision at almost all times. All times was an exaggeration. It's still a ridiculous idea. Someone who has his focus that scattered in combat also has his brains scattered in the same combat.

 

[Li Shenron]

If Rogues were supposed to Sneak Attack every round, then Sneak Attack would have been written without any advantage requirement.

 

[Flamestrike]

Nope. The game can easily implement non-complex facing rules (you are facing the last person you attacked unless you state otherwise)

Requiring the DM to track the last creature each monster attacked, each turn, for every monster in each encounter.

That extra level of book-keeping is not worth the pay off, when it can be simply handled with a case by case ruling.