Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 8402253" data-attributes="member: 2629">RAW - The Group Checks rules may be used, but that is subject to DM interpretation.  Is the group trying to accomplish something as a group when they're sneaking around, or is it more of each of them trying individually to be sneaky?  Does being sneaky prevent them from coordinating their efforts enough to prevent a group check?The example in the PHB for group checks is whether a group can avoid traps while searching for them together.  In a real world situation, people can interact much more freely when looking for trouble than if a group of people is trying to sneak someplace. When applied to stealth, it often does not serve the fiction well either.  In a party of 6 PCs, with a super stealthy rogue, ranger and monk you're going to make all your group stealth rolls even if the other three PCs are all 8 dexterity in platemail.  Yes, you can try to adjust your fiction to account for how the stealthy folks help the unstealthy ones ... but that fiction is not endlessly elastic. My Special Rule: I am pretty quick with the math, so I go a little complex when it really matters.  If it doesn't really matter, I just use the group check rules.  It matters when the result will have a major impact on the game.When it matters, I set a DC (usually based upon passive perceptions) and then have everyone roll, with PCs being able to take disadvantage on their roll to give advantage to an ally (but they must be adjacent to that ally.  I then tell them the DC they were trying to beat.  People then tell me how much they succeeded or failed by.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If anyone failed by 10, they were detected.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I add up the amount by which any individuals failed and then double it.  Then I subtract the amount by which individuals succeeded.  If the success outweighs the double failure, they succeed collectively.  If the double failure outweights the success, at least one PC was heard.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">To determine who was detect (if it matters), I roll a d10 and subtract it from the DC.  Anyone that had a stealth roll beneath that amount was detected.  If none are beneath that amount, then the lowest was detected.</li> </ul>The presence of the special rule is more important than the effect of it.  It encourages people to be creative in how they are sneaky to prevent the chances of detection.  It makes the PCs that are least sneaky come up with solutions to allow them to not ruin the stealth, such as climbing into a bag of holding, using pass without trace, silence spells, etc...  When players know that they can't just brute force the stealth and be guaranteed of success, they put more effort into being stealthy.</blockquote>

Verification