D&D 4E Stealth and Perception checks in 4e

[pwnedd]

Hello,

I know this has been a pretty popular topic of discussion with a lot of confusion about how the rules work. After reading the forums and other sites I still am a bit unclear on a few things, however, and was wondering if someone could help clear things up.

Here are my questions:

1) Should passive checks always be used if a player is not explicitly requesting a check? Or are there certain times when a player or players should make an active check even if they didn't ask to? For example, during exploration, are the players taking ten the whole time? Or are they considered to be alert and on-guard?


2) How many characters/monsters from each group should make perception/stealth checks? Just the one with the highest perception or lowest stealth? all of them? Or just a couple from each group?

3) What about "random" encounters where a group of characters and a group of monsters are wandering the halls? Do both sides make opposed passive perception vs. stealth checks? If only one side detects the other can they then make a stealth check to hide?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[Black Knight Irios]

Hello,

I know this has been a pretty popular topic of discussion with a lot of confusion about how the rules work. After reading the forums and other sites I still am a bit unclear on a few things, however, and was wondering if someone could help clear things up.

Here are my questions:

1) Should passive checks always be used if a player is not explicitly requesting a check? Or are there certain times when a player or players should make an active check even if they didn't ask to? For example, during exploration, are the players taking ten the whole time? Or are they considered to be alert and on-guard?

If a player doesn't say he is actively looking for something use the passive score. If a player says, "I want to examine x" then let him roll.

2) How many characters/monsters from each group should make perception/stealth checks? Just the one with the highest perception or lowest stealth? all of them? Or just a couple from each group?

Generally: all - on both sides.

EDIT:
DMG1 suggests to only roll stealth checks in a group for the monster/char with the lowest stealth modifier to save time. If monsters/chars from the same group are more than 10 squares away from each other they can roll a seperate stealth check, like when 1 player scouts ahead/etc.

3) What about "random" encounters where a group of characters and a group of monsters are wandering the halls? Do both sides make opposed passive perception vs. stealth checks? If only one side detects the other can they then make a stealth check to hide?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

If both groups use stealth both roll stealth. Then check those results against the passive perception scores of the other party. If one notices the other they can get a surprise round on the unaware party (if they want to start combat).

If an unstealthed party notices other enemies unaware, for whatever reasons, of their presence they could use stealth to hide if they fulfill the requirements for using stealth.

 

[Zaran]

I actually have had a GM ask for perception checks. We usually just tell him our passive. But yes, if the player doesn't volunteer the use of Perception just use their passive value.

If they do make a Perception check and roll less than 10 , I'll give them their passive score instead.

 

[nightwyrm]

I ususally just have my players roll perception/stealth checks and take 10 for my monsters' perception/stealth for the DC to beat.

 

[KarinsDad]

The Stealth and Perception check rules are not that good.

Here's what I do:

1) Instead of the cover or concealment rules of the PHB, or the superior cover or total concealment rules of the PHB II, I use the cover / concealment rules of the PHB with the caveat that in order to steath and use cover, the opponent must be unable to see 2 of the 4 squares of the creature trying to use stealth. The original rules were too generous and the new rules are too strict. It's nearly impossible to hide with the new rules.

2) With regard to perception, I have the players roll most of the time. The entire mechanics of one player has +12 and another has +2, so if you make it within the range of the second player, the first player automatically spots it every time is just lame. Passive Perception is also a good way to ruin surprises and such. I don't mind the players ruining a surprise as long as it is not automatic. I use Passive Perception for mundane stuff. If I don't want the players to know that they are making a perception roll and hence alert them to danger, I will make the Active Perception rolls in private.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If my players don't ask to make a Perception check, I use their Passive Perception. However, I also roll Stealth checks for anything that is hidden in order to create the DCs for those Passive Perception checks. I never just assign arbitrary numbers. This includes things like traps... where normally a DM would just create a target number to for the PCs to beat, but then already knows beforehand whether or not his players can or cannot make the number using their Passive Perception. In a case like this, I decide on the difficulty level of the trap, subtract 10 from the target number given on the DC chart, then roll a d20 and add it to the remainder. This way I'll never know whether the PCs may or may not notice them until they approach it.

I never create situations where a PC's pre-established number goes against a DM pre-established number. I always make at least one side or the other roll a check in order to create some variability.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Well, what you really want to do is just assign your required Perception DCs in such a way as to get what you want. So for a trap for instance it could be 'obvious' (DC is low enough that any party which isn't blind will see it with a passive check). It could be 'hidden' (DC is high enough that only the high Perception character will detect it and may even need an active check). It could be impossibly well hidden such that nobody can find it even with an active check. The trick is for the DM to understand which of these choices serves the particular purpose of the plot which said trap was intended for.

In terms of monsters the best thing to do is note the max Perception bonus of a group of monsters. If they have no reason to be alert then add ten and let the party try to beat that with their worst check (remember doors and distance make detection harder). If the monsters are alert then have the best monster make an active check, if its better than his passive then use that.

For groups of PCs you can use the check of the least stealthy member of the group, or you can use a group skill check (which DMG2 suggests). Either one may be appropriate in different situations. For the most part surprise is going to be something the DM is going to heavily mediate. Most normal monsters aren't going to sneak up on a party and most parties aren't going to manage to sneak up on most monsters unless they have an idea they're there.

 

[pwnedd]

Thanks all for the suggestions and clarifications. Just to make sure I've got a grasp of things, I'm going to create a few scenarios and then describe how I might deal with them. If you have suggestions, please let me know!

Scenario 1:

A party of characters are exploring a cavern system by torchlight and are going down a long windy section. At the same time, a group of monsters is either standing still or approaching from a further down and around the corner. Neither group expects the other.

Approach:

At some point the groups come within auditory or visual (or olfactory) distance, and they have a chance to notice each other. For each group then, I could make opposed passive perception vs. stealth checks. This way a quieter group with better perception might be able to notice a louder group with lower perception before being noticed themselves.

If both groups notice each other than no one has surprise.

If neither group notices the other, they move a little closer and then can remake the checks.

Finally, if only one group notices the other, then they can either make a stealth check (if it's really dark, or if there is cover to hide behind), or they could make a surprise attack (although they may still be too far away to make an effective attack.)

Does that sound about right?

Thanks,

 

[Black Knight Irios]

At some point the groups come within auditory or visual (or olfactory) distance, and they have a chance to notice each other. For each group then, I could make opposed passive perception vs. stealth checks. This way a quieter group with better perception might be able to notice a louder group with lower perception before being noticed themselves.

There's no need for a stealth check b/c no side is said to be sneaking around.

Noticing normal conversation has a DC of 10, just walking maybe 12-15. For every 10 squares between the two groups the DC increases by 2.

Test againts passive perception.

Just assign numbers. Roll stealth if one group tries to be sneaky otherwise not.

 

[VannATLC]

I tend to use what Black Night said.. and I tend to be a bastard, when my players attack hide-outs or lairs. Sounds out of the ordinary generate lower DC's for the other Monster's passive perception, etc.

But I'm not really a fan of the idea that a group of monsters 10 squares and a standard wall away, wouldn't notice the sounds of battle between 4 pcs and a guard squad.