D&D (2024) New stealth rules.

[FrogReaver]

What are you, the thread police?

The history of the game, specifically stealth rules, was brought up. @pemerton correctly pointed out the fact that it's most similar to the 4e stealth rules, so not such a huge departure, historically speaking.

At least he's on topic; what do you think you're contributing with this?

Nope. Was just a question so I could determine how I wanted to proceed.

 

[mellored]

There where issue with 4e.
Like inflated attack and defense, inflated HP, everyone having the same power set.

But there where also good rules too. Stealth rules worked well. And 5e nearly has the same rules.


It's just missing 1 sentence, that most people in this thread assumed was already there. And I expect the vast majority of tables will play with regardless.


If you no longer have any cover or concealment against an enemy, you don’t remain hidden.

 

[MarkB]

@DavyGreenwind was kind enough to give us a screen shot of the Hiding rules in the Exploration section.

View attachment 375266

This does clear up one question that was raised a couple of times in the thread, which is whether the Hide action is only intended to be used in combat. This entry makes it pretty clear that whenever you want to try and hide, you do so by taking the Hide action.

 

[Seramus]

1. There is no ongoing hiding in 2024 5e rules. You hide once and gain the invisible condition. One can colloquially call having the invisible condition hiding, but if that’s what was meant they would have specified ‘the dm can determine the circumstances appropriate for invisible condition.’

2. The immediate context in this rule tells you exactly what hiding means in the last sentence. ‘When you try to hide you take the hide action’.

I can certainly see how you've arrived at that conclusion and think it's one valid approach, but I can also see the alternative. This whole thing is kind of an odd case because that interpretation results in some pretty bizarre circumstances (salsa dancing), despite being the more obvious interpretation.

To be fair, I don't have an immediate dog in the race either way. I want to see if the DMG goes into further detail.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think it is also important to consider the Rogue's (or other character's) perception of their own roll.

Nobody is ever happy or satisfied with a 10 or 11 on their stealth check. Those sorts of rolls are always followed by grimaces of "well crap, I failed". You don't start getting into more hesitantly okay with it until you hit 13's. 15 is usually where people intuitively feel like they succeeded.

So, setting aside the actual math of success, emotionally, this fits with what people have come to expect from 5e DCs.

This is why hide rolls should IMO be done blind. You can't be uncomfortable about a 10 or 11 if you don't know that's what you rolled.

 

[Remathilis]

And what if you're under the effects of the invisibility spell?

The illusion cloaks you, allowing you to hide without cover or concealment.

 

[MarkB]

This is why hide rolls should IMO be done blind. You can't be uncomfortable about a 10 or 11 if you don't know that's what you rolled.

But neither can you apply features or abilities which would allow you to modify or re-attempt that check.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The illusion cloaks you, allowing you to hide without cover or concealment.

But that was not the question. If you're under invisibility spell, and walk into the line of sight of a guard like in the example, do they see you?

 

[mamba]

The illusion cloaks you, allowing you to hide without cover or concealment.

all it does is give you the invisible condition, anything beyond that is your ‘wishful thinking’

 

[Micah Sweet]

But neither can you apply features or abilities which would allow you to modify or re-attempt that check.

I'm fine with that.