D&D 5E Stealth and Illusion

[Warpiglet-7]

I was planning on playing a Glasya tiefling Eldritch Knight (I know, odd Combo, but reasons).

anyway how would this be ruled?

The character creates an illusion. Say a closed door where the door is open and stands behind it.

If the character is still and not attempting to move, would a stealth check be required? Further, if a character is not moving, would you grant advantage on stealth to hide (if a roll is required).

The character in question will be wearing armor that causes disadvantage to stealth. I am trying to work around this as the character is a paunchy criminal (not evil but definitely likes to steal).

 

[Jv_Stuchi]

I would ruled it as advantage on stealth while stopped behind the illusion and a normal roll when moving, mainly because of the disadvantage, but you should talk with your DM and see what he thinks.

 

[DND_Reborn]

First, how the illusion is crafted could impact it. More powerful illusions IIRC can also mask the sound of the character in armor.

Assuming otherwise, I would allow the illusion and standing still to cancel the disadvantage for the armor, making it a straight Dexterity (Stealth) check. I could also understand if the DM ruled further advantage because you are only trying to be quiet, not unseen, as @Jv_Stuchi suggests.

However, the DM could also use a passive Investigation comparison to see if the observer notices anything odd about the illusion, itself.

 

[Seramus]

I agree with the above. Not moving AND standing behind an illusion is absolutely grounds for advantage. Some illusions become transparent if they are discovered, though. So be wary of that.

 

[Shiroiken]

If there's no chance of success or failure, you never need to roll. In the example given, unless there's a reason why the searcher are listening at the "door," then a check shouldn't be required IMO. If a check is required, such as if they do listen at the "door," then the armor would give you disadvantage, because you need to keep still to keep the armor from making noise and giving you away. Basically the illusion would give you a good chance of not requiring a check, but if you do need the check it doesn't help you at all.

 

[Oofta]

Illusions can be tricky though. Let's say you're hiding from a patrol that walks by and you duck into an alcove and make a door. Did the alcove have a door before this? What's patrolling the hall and how familiar are they with the hall? Do they rely primarily on sight and sound or smell? If a door (or box or wall) appears suddenly how well did the cast match the environment?

So it's going to be very situationally dependent if I were DMing and you're going to need to discuss this with your DM. Some will say you still need to make a stealth check with disadvantage, I'd probably say the armor gave you disadvantage while the illusion gave you advantage. But there may also be cases where the patrol realizes something is wrong automatically.

 

[billd91]

I think a visual illusion should be a reasonable reason to give someone a chance to hide, but I don't think I'd give advantage simply because the character wasn't moving around.

 

[Umbran]

I'm good with a visual illusion being able to give you a chance to hide. However, it should not give you any more chance than you should have gotten if the object were real.

Also, please note that there's "not moving" (as in, not taking the movement part of my turn), and then there's "not moving" (as in, trying to pretend I'm a stone statue).

 

[Laurefindel]

I play illusions as perfect imitations of the things they represent.

So for me the real question is; "if the character in armour was standing behind a (real) closed door, would it require a Stealth check?"

regardless whether the answer is yes or no, the fact that the door is exclusionary should not change the situation. The illusory door will not allow the character to hide better than behind a normal door, and a normal door would not hide the character better than an illusory one.

A case could be made about sound; most illusions don't block sound while real doors do provide some level of sound insulation. Can a character stand still, unseen, without a Stealth check? The invisibility spell suggests that a check is required, but the stealth rules give it more on DM's fiat. If the DM rules that a Stealth check is in order, the invisibility spell also suggests that an unseen character has advantage on Stealth checks.

Now, illusions themselves are not perfect. Sources of light, for example, are stated to shine through illusions (low level ones at any case). There are many things that could give the illusion away, but that becomes a flaw in the illusion and affect the observer's Int check, not the character's Stealth check.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For me the question is not if a Stealth check is "required", because that assumes there is a choice in the matter.

I always take it from the POV of the person trying to find enemies. The only way they can notice people who aren't out in the open is to compare their Passive Perception to an enemy's Stealth check. That Stealth check is the DC. Which means that any person that is trying to remain unnoticed HAS to roll a Stealth check because that is the only way a DC will be generated for a person's Passive Perception to compare against.

In the illusion's case... one of the requirements for avoiding notice (to start with) is to be out of view. Being behind an illusion provides that. You then couple that with trying to avoid making noise and you have succeeded in setting up the situation where any viewer needs to use their PP to notice you. Thus at that point the character has no choice but to make a Stealth check, as that is the only way we have to figure out just how well they succeeded (by generating a DC to compare against.)