D&D (2024) New stealth rules.

[Iosue]

As I've been noting, even if 'find you' is taken to be achievable other ways than a perception check, such that 'seeing you' means you are found, that may very well fix hiding, but it breaks the invisible spell.

“Find you” has nothing to do with the Invisibility spell. It ends the Invisibility condition provided by the Hide Action.

The Invisibility spell provides the Invisibility condition as well, but has its own, different requirements for ending the condition.

 

[Scott Christian]

Crawford must be on a mission to get people to read DMG for once!

I mean, I always read the DMG but apparently nobody else does.

Good.

If skills checks (not the definition of each skill) are in the DMG, I am fine with that. It might make sense to explain to the rules arbiter how contested skill checks, open rolling skill checks, player-sided skill checks, and DM-sided skill checks work inside the DMG.

 

[Nefermandias]

The DMG should just be for guidance on how to apply PHB rules, not new rules affecting PCs that the players don't know about.

I strongly disagree with that. The more DM facing rules and subsystems we have, the less you burden the players with mechanical minutiae.

This is a good thing in my opinion. Players should strive to limit themselves to action declaration based on the fiction only. The more mechanics and hard rules you put in front of the players, the more likely they're going to engage in "button pushing" behaviour.

Spells are the only exception to this. Players should know their spell effects, casting time and components by heart or at least have Spell Cards handy.

 

[Remathilis]

I just looked at the table of contents more closely and I don't see a section for skills. Please someone tell me that they didn't put the skills in the DMG.

I've been saying this for at least the last three days.

From everything I'm hearing in the leakosphere, skills are not defined except for a chart with a few examples and the Hide, Search, Study, and Influence actions. And whenever a feature involves a skill.
Tool use seems to be likewise barely discussed, except for they actually give some DCs with the examples.
The DMG is going to have more.

 

[SpellObjectEnthusiast]

I would not be surprised if there is no expansion for skills in the DMG. Skills weren't given much definition in 5e to begin with (medicine was a single sentence!)

 

[FrogReaver]

“Find you” has nothing to do with the Invisibility spell. It ends the Invisibility condition provided by the Hide Action.

The Invisibility spell provides the Invisibility condition as well, but has its own, different requirements for ending the condition.

How do you propose they are being found? By being seen perhaps?

 

[Iosue]

How do you propose they are being found? By being seen perhaps?

Yes. What does that have to do with the Invisibility spell? Being seen under the Invisibility spell doesn’t end the condition. It can suspend some of its benefits, but it doesn’t end the condition.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yes. What does that have to do with the Invisibility spell? Being seen under the Invisibility spell doesn’t end the condition. It can suspend some of its benefits, but it doesn’t end the condition.

Well for most of us if you use the invisibility spell you shouldn’t just be seen. I’d say that’s the issue. Not sure why you don’t find it to be one. ( No pun intended )

 

[aco175]

It does seem an attempt by the designers to take away DM agency and give more to the players- a bit like a video game. If the player wants to hide he knows to roll a 15 and be behind cover. The cover part is more up to the DM just so the player knows before attempting to hide. This starts to go into combat rounds now where the player wants to jump out and move 15ft to attack and gain advantage. It seems we can go back and forth with jumping out making noise, jumping out breaks vision with the monster and now he is seen, or is the monster can only do something on its turn- which will be made moot by being attacked by the PC.

What about if the PC wanted to move from cover to go past the monster? The monster is 15ft away and the PC moves the 15ft and then another 15ft. Does the monster see him and can use its opportunity attack, or is the PC under the invisible condition until the monster's round where it sees the PC 15ft past him?

Seems to me that they want the rules to allow the PC to take his action while being 'invisible'.

The other problem is out of combat, which does not seem to be addressed much in where you give the PC 100% explored the castle and 2 hours have gone by, here is a copy of the map. Opposed by each room you want to explore requiring a check, where forcing additional rolls will eventually lead to failure.

 

[Thommy H-H]

What about if the PC wanted to move from cover to go past the monster? The monster is 15ft away and the PC moves the 15ft and then another 15ft. Does the monster see him and can use its opportunity attack, or is the PC under the invisible condition until the monster's round where it sees the PC 15ft past him?

The monster could make an opportunity attack and have disadvantage on the attack roll, as per the Invisible condition. Nothing in the Invisible condition prevents you being attacked. And after being attacked, I think it would be a fair ruling to say the PC had made a "noise louder than a whisper", and so they would lose the Invisible condition. At the very least, the monster is looking at them so they can't go and hide behind another obstacle.

On the other hand, if they had the Invisible condition from some other means - such as the Invisibility spell - being attacked in that way would not cause them to lose the condition, which is the benefit of the spell over just hiding.