D&D (2024) New stealth rules.

[Stalker0]

If the intent was to represent what's necessary to get past the average person, why not say that and why not set that DC as 10?

I mean they did say that....its just DC 15

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I mean they did say that....its just DC 15

Unless a 10 WIS now has a +5 bonus, that's not what it's actually modeling, though.

Hoping this is all makes more sense when the book is in front of me, but not impressed with this particular change at the moment.

The other stuff does a good job grounding Stealth back in reality (no more "hiding" behind the goliath in combat to set up future sneak attacks), but this change in particular doesn't make sense to me.

 

[MarkB]

I don't think it matters clean they end up making this. Static DCs are contradictory to the core game logic. It's devalues situational factors which are the most important parts in determining the odds of success.

On that note, the part that bugs me is breaking stealth if you "make a sound louder than a whisper", which feels like very white-room thinking that takes no account of ambient noise levels.

 

[Stoutstien]

On that note, the part that bugs me is breaking stealth if you "make a sound louder than a whisper", which feels like very white-room thinking that takes no account of ambient noise levels.

It might be the new dmg but as of now it's on the original GM screen if I recall lol.

 

[Mistwell]

Yoy

Neither points address the fact when you do roll stealth it's completely disconnected from everything else.

You need 3/4ths cover, full cover, or to be fully obscured. Or the DM, based on the circumstances, tells you that you can make the check, and whether advantage or disadvantage applies, and if it can be done with passive stealth or only actively. Doesn't seem disconnected from everything else to me.

 

[Stoutstien]

You need 3/4ths cover, full cover, or to be fully obscured. Or the DM, based on the circumstances, tells you that you can make the check, and whether advantage or disadvantage applies, and if it can be done with passive stealth or only actively. Doesn't seem disconnected from everything else to me.

"Static DCs are fine if you ignore static DCs...."

 

[Stormonu]

I think I understand what the design team was trying to do, I think they just chose the worst way to express it they could.

Characters would be in one of three states:
Visible
Obscured
Invisible

Rather than make a "Hidden" condition with a bunch of caveats, they must have went "we already have this Invisible condition, let's use that." Unfortunately, I think the caveats are needed, or at least need to be touched on in the DMG.

I don't like the DC 15 to enter the state, though. It does give some teeth to the rogue though, and in a roundabout way I am happy that being stealthed is as good as being invisible. That's definitely a glow-up for the non-magical crowd.

 

[Thommy H-H]

Haven't seen anyone mention this yet, but one point in favour of rolling what was once the nebulous "hidden" status into the Invisibility condition is that you no longer have to do that thing where anyone who is Invisible still has to take the Hide action or it's basically useless for sneaking around. I understood the logic of it (they can still hear you, see your footprints, etc.), but it was always annoying to explain. Now, successfully hiding is the same thing as being made Invisible by magic or whatever.

 

[deadman1204]

Wow, this semms really really bad. So someone can step into the bushes and "hide", then walk in broad daylight with zero cover from anything and stroll past 100 people undetected. They can't even notice the rogue, because you need to choose to make a perception action to attempt to detect them? Why would you randomly make a perception check to look for something invisible?

What a design fail

 

[Mistwell]

"Static DCs are fine if you ignore static DCs...."

You have a general rule and then an exception based on the circumstances, which is what you seemed to be advocating for?