D&D (2024) New stealth rules.

[Chaosmancer]

Well to be fair, this happens IRL and to large extent is the point. Ambush hunters will lie perfectly still for hours until unsuspecting prey strolls right up to them, and I mean right up to them.

BUT that kind of stealth usually involves being motionless in a great deal of cover. As it turns out, moving around the open isn't a great recipe for not getting noticed. Now, D&D isn't even trying to go for realism, obviously, and that's being used as creative license to "simplify" the rules. We're going for the Hollywood version of stealth, fine. FWIW I'm not against simplicity, so I'm all for D&D trying to make this simpl-er.

I just don't think these are good rules. To your point, I can see all sorts of scenarios where these mechanics lead to nonsensical outcomes. That's just me, though.

Yeah, and how many action movies do we have, where some grunt walks down a hallway... then the hero steps out of a dark nook, or flips down from the ceiling, having completely hidden from the grunt?

Technically, the darkness could count as being obscured, and maybe people would say that being in the rafters of a hallway counts as cover, but these could also be argued as not counting as those things, yet in the scene, the character is literally not visible until after the grunt passes.

 

[OB1]

It can't just be line of sight, because 3/4 cover doesn't block line of sight, so stealth wouldn't actually be possible in 3/4 cover.

This is exactly the point of taking the Hide action! It allows you to effectively block line of sight when they otherwise could see you while keeping an eye on them.

 

[Stalker0]

This is exactly the point of taking the Hide action! It allows you to effectively block line of sight when they otherwise could see you while keeping an eye on them.

sure....and so why doesn't that work in open areas with no cover just as it works with 3/4 cover?

If the purpose of hide is to take a situation that does not block line of sight, and "make it" block of sight, than rules wise it seems to work when there is no cover as well.

 

[OB1]

Where are people getting the notion that hide is a combat action only? This is just listed one of the many actions in the game. Same as use an object or the magic action....and no one is suggesting those can only be used in combat. Hide is....hide....not "combat hide"

It's not that hiding is only a combat action, it's that the rule being discussed is specifically a kind of codified action you take when in combat. Same with Search and Influence. Note that with all of these, the DM could still ask you to make a Stealth Check or a Perception Check or a Persuasion check IN combat, it just wouldn't cost your character an action to do so then. What it does do is codify that if you want to Hider or Serach or Influence in combat, then you can use your action to do so (whether the DM asked for the check or not) and the results are more codified than when outside of combat.

 

[mellored]

Quick poll.
Which do you like better.

• Stealth breaks immediately after you lose cover / obscurement
• Stealth breaks at the end of your turn if you don't have cover / concealment
• Stealth doesn't break irrelevant of cover / concealment.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I really hope that's the case, but would love to see more clarity from the rules. Right now we're not working from a full deck, just from a few rules excerpts.

Basically, I'd just like an answer to the following two scenarios:

View attachment 375025

A and B are enemies who met each other in this corridor and immediately rolled initiative. B won, and retreated around the corner on his turn then made a successful Hide check, rolling a 17. A's passive perception is 14, so it doesn't come into play here.

Scenario 1: On her turn A walks to the bend of the corridor and turns right, looking southward directly at B. Does she automatically find B, removing his invisible condition, or does she need to spend an action and make a successful DC 17 Perception check to see him?

So, for Scenario 1... it would depend in my opinion.

If the hallway is a bare stone tube, and B simply says "I hide" or "I press against the wall and hide" then when A walks around the corner, they find B because there is no plausible way they do not find B.

If B says "I run around the corner, then kip up and hide against the ceiling" or if the hallway has things in it and B says something like "I race around the corner and hide behind the tapestry" or "I dart around the corner, and slide behind the chest" Then I would say A needs to make a search action, because there are plausible ways for B to be hidden.

Scenario 2: On her turn A readies an action to shoot B as soon as she can see him. Then, on his turn, B quietly walks 30 feet around the turn and up to the square adjacent to A, intending to stab her. At what point does A see B and get to take her readied action?

If B is not doing something particularly clever, like crawling along the ceiling, then as soon as they move around the corner, they have nothing to hide behind, and A can take their readied action. Because there is no plausible way for B to get down the hallway that is being actively watched in that manner.

 

[OB1]

sure....and so why doesn't that work in open areas with no cover just as it works with 3/4 cover?

If the purpose of hide is to take a situation that does not block line of sight, and "make it" block of sight, than rules wise it seems to work when there is no cover as well.

Specific beats general. When behiind 3/4 cover (which normally doesn't block line of site) take the hide action to potentially block it. It doesn't work with no cover because the rule doesn't say that.

Outside of combat, it might still be possible (ie Nearly Impossible) but would be about timing your sprint out in the open while everyone is looking somewhere else (DC could be lower if you created some kind of distraction, like a Bard playing a lute while you sneak into Castle Neverwinter, at least until the Sorcerer get's his foot stuck in a crack and the illusion starts to go wild, ie bad stealth check).

 

[Charlaquin]

Honestly? I'm fine calling it a poorly written rule. Okay, fine. It was poorly written.

What is frustrating is that people are saying it is a non-functional rule because [Insert insane interpretation that no one would have, backed by a player attempting a set of actions they would clearly never attempt because it is utterly nonsensical]. No. None of that is going to happen. No player who is playing in good faith is going to say "since I hid in a bush three years ago, I cannot be seen, so I will make faces at the King because I am forever invisible". That is clearly not how it is meant to function, because it is nonsense.

And frankly, it all is coming from a single point. Because Treantmonk added that red text saying that it took an action to find a stealthed character. Without that, no one would have this insane interpretation. Because that clearly is not what was meant by the search action being needed.

It’s not coming from Treantmonk. Many of us came to this interpretation from UA6, and pointed it out both here and in our UA survey feedback many times since then.

 

[Stalker0]

Specific beats general. When behiind 3/4 cover (which normally doesn't block line of site) take the hide action to potentially block it. It doesn't work with no cover because the rule doesn't say that.

Except the rules do say that. Because the specific rules you quoted very specifically tell me when that condition ends. And its not when I leave 3/4 cover.

If a spell gives me an effect....and says it ends if I use athletics check DC 15 as an action....I don't suddenly assume a dexterity saving throw will also get rid of the effect or a perception check or a religion check, etc. The effect ends when the condition that are specified tell me the effect ends, its just that simple.

 

[Charlaquin]

Quick poll.
Which do you like better.

• Stealth breaks immediately after you lose cover / obscurement
• Stealth breaks at the end of your turn if you don't have cover / concealment
• Stealth doesn't break irrelevant of cover / concealment.

I’m fine with either the first or second option. Kinda prefer the second, but it’s not a strong preference.