Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Publisher Forums
Bad Axe Games Hosted Forum
[SPELLS and MAGIC] Design Discussion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5077826" data-attributes="member: 957"><p>I was on the side that wanted the skills to remain separate. But I've pretty much come around on that not because I changed my mind on the mechanics so much as I am forced to admit that so many characters always had the same number of ranks in both Hide and MS, that blending them ends up making no difference. </p><p></p><p>That said, I strongly think it is the DM's responsibility to keep the practical distinctions in mind. Hiding behind a tree at night and creeping across dried leaves are both Sneak vs. Perception checks now. But the DM should consider modifiers based on the interaction. According to a strict reading of TB the guy trying to quietly creep across the dry leaves gets vastly better at being quiet if he is invisible. Obviously, that is silly. In that case the Sneak vs. Perception check should have no modifier whatsoever resulting from the invisibility. Now, assuming the guard hears you, you are still invisible. He knows he heard something, but he probably doesn't know what. And another check is in order, and for this one the +20 bonus is appropriate. </p><p></p><p>I suppose the argument may be that two rolls defeats the purpose of merging the skills. But, to me, this circumstance needs the two rolls to provide a quality resolution. In some circumstances under old D&D there would be cases in which sneaking across a room would require both a hide and move silent in order to remain undetected. I'm fine with just using one master roll for those type scenarios. But this is different.</p><p></p><p>For hiding behind the tree, yeah the rogue is better than the wizard, but the +40 bonus makes the rogue's +55 not really meaningfully better than the wizard's +42 unless you have some really intense Spot checks coming. and that makes sense. You are standing still and invisible. This qualifies as hard to spot.</p><p></p><p>The bottom line is, just because you only have Sneak and Perception as skills, you don't get away from situations that demand Hide/Move Silently/Spot/Listen. You just use a simplified system for establishing the modifiers for the check.</p><p></p><p>Back on the real topic: Fenris said </p><p></p><p>Maybe I'm reading to much into that. But taken literally he is saying Invisibility should "move" from where it is now, to a simple mechanical skill modifier. To that idea, I am strongly opposed. Invisibility should first and foremost make the target invisible. Adding in a clear guideline for modifying skills (Stealth) as appropriate makes total sense. But only as a supplement to the main rule.</p><p></p><p>If you just go with modifiers, then you get into silly situation that compare to 3.5 Darkness. You have a spell that doesn't do what it says. I honestly found Darkness to be a perfectly sound and defensible 2nd level spell. It just had the wrong name.</p><p></p><p>If you want a spell that gives a Stealth modifier, that sounds cool. Call it Rouge's Obscurement and stat it up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5077826, member: 957"] I was on the side that wanted the skills to remain separate. But I've pretty much come around on that not because I changed my mind on the mechanics so much as I am forced to admit that so many characters always had the same number of ranks in both Hide and MS, that blending them ends up making no difference. That said, I strongly think it is the DM's responsibility to keep the practical distinctions in mind. Hiding behind a tree at night and creeping across dried leaves are both Sneak vs. Perception checks now. But the DM should consider modifiers based on the interaction. According to a strict reading of TB the guy trying to quietly creep across the dry leaves gets vastly better at being quiet if he is invisible. Obviously, that is silly. In that case the Sneak vs. Perception check should have no modifier whatsoever resulting from the invisibility. Now, assuming the guard hears you, you are still invisible. He knows he heard something, but he probably doesn't know what. And another check is in order, and for this one the +20 bonus is appropriate. I suppose the argument may be that two rolls defeats the purpose of merging the skills. But, to me, this circumstance needs the two rolls to provide a quality resolution. In some circumstances under old D&D there would be cases in which sneaking across a room would require both a hide and move silent in order to remain undetected. I'm fine with just using one master roll for those type scenarios. But this is different. For hiding behind the tree, yeah the rogue is better than the wizard, but the +40 bonus makes the rogue's +55 not really meaningfully better than the wizard's +42 unless you have some really intense Spot checks coming. and that makes sense. You are standing still and invisible. This qualifies as hard to spot. The bottom line is, just because you only have Sneak and Perception as skills, you don't get away from situations that demand Hide/Move Silently/Spot/Listen. You just use a simplified system for establishing the modifiers for the check. Back on the real topic: Fenris said Maybe I'm reading to much into that. But taken literally he is saying Invisibility should "move" from where it is now, to a simple mechanical skill modifier. To that idea, I am strongly opposed. Invisibility should first and foremost make the target invisible. Adding in a clear guideline for modifying skills (Stealth) as appropriate makes total sense. But only as a supplement to the main rule. If you just go with modifiers, then you get into silly situation that compare to 3.5 Darkness. You have a spell that doesn't do what it says. I honestly found Darkness to be a perfectly sound and defensible 2nd level spell. It just had the wrong name. If you want a spell that gives a Stealth modifier, that sounds cool. Call it Rouge's Obscurement and stat it up. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Publisher Forums
Bad Axe Games Hosted Forum
[SPELLS and MAGIC] Design Discussion
Top