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
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Stealth Revamp
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="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7027453" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>Let's also acknowledge the issue here that there are in fact <strong>four</strong> different things that we are expecting characters to do that right now all are falling under the umbrella of 'Stealth'. But the question to be asked is whether or not that is how we want the rules to be? One skill to rule them all, and what mechanically should we be getting out of it? Or should these become different skills? Because all four are accomplished by a character via different methods... *and* require the blocking or confusion of the different senses of the people who want to find them. </p><p></p><p>The four things are:</p><p></p><p>Hiding (without moving) from people purely to avoid being seen/noticed/attacked.</p><p></p><p>Hiding <em>during combat</em> in order to gain Advantage on a subsequent attack.</p><p></p><p>Moving silently out in the open to move across the landscape or dungeon and not be heard or noticed.</p><p></p><p>Shadowing/following someone at a distance without them noticing you.</p><p></p><p>These are all different because they use different mechanics, and they give different results. For example... to hide from someone to avoid being seen you need to choose cover (either LOS blocking or Heavily Obscuring) and if the person looking for you comes around the object or terrain that is blocking or obscuring you, they automatically see you. However... if you are trying to shadow someone, narratively-speaking you aren't behind cover the entire time. You oftentimes are out in the open but are making yourself unnoticed or unremarkable. You can't use the same rules for "hiding" in these two cases because they expect two different things-- one requires the character to always remain behind blocking terrain, the other falls into that nebulous term the Errata put out there of "not being seen clearly".</p><p></p><p>And of course obviously if you and your group is trying to walk silently through a dungeon to avoid notice... that again uses a different skillset "narratively" and different mechanical game rules. Now it's not about avoiding sightlines (because there's no one in the area to see you) but instead it's entirely about sound and how far sound travels and how much noise you make as you walk. And currently there are little to no rules governing this (other than the one rule about Medium and Heavy Armor giving you Disadvantage on Dexterity (Stealth) checks.) </p><p></p><p>Then finally of course there is Hiding In Combat-- which is a whole different beast. Because this is <em>purely</em> a mechanical expression done specifically for the purpose of gaining a mechanical bonus during combat. The <strong>story</strong> of what's happening in the world isn't important-- no one at the table cares narratively how or why you are ducking behind stuff and then popping out a few moments later to fire a ranged attack-- what's important to everyone is that you are gaining a mechanical Advantage on your attack. That's the <strong>only reason</strong> why Hiding In Combat is a thing. If you didn't get a bonus to your attack roll for doing it, nobody would. And thus, the question to be asked for this part is whether this strictly mechanical set of rules to gain a strictly mechanical bonus should or need to have much more concrete mechanical rules? Moreso than the other three?</p><p></p><p>The other three methods are all about the narrative-- "We're trying to avoid an encounter by not being noticed." Whereas Hiding In Combat obviously *is* the encounter and thus has no narrative. It's purely "I want Advantage on my next attack!" Thus... should Hiding In Combat be it's own thing separate from the other three? It's own ruleset? It's own skill? And if so... then we need to ask whether any of the other three are different enough from the rest of the group that they too should have it's own skill or it's own ruleset for adjudication (and how complex or simple should that be mechanically?)</p><p></p><p>It's this kind of dichotomy that inspired the creation of both "Hide In Shadows" and "Move Silently" in the first place. Because they realized that if you're trying to navigate a dungeon without being noticed, you're not Hiding, you're Moving Silently. But likewise, if you are ducking behind a wall to avoid being seen by the beholder flying by, you aren't Moving Silently (because you ain't moving at all) but are Hiding instead. But then of course there's the fourth option, which is trying to follow someone and tail them, and that turns out you really aren't doing <em>either</em> Hiding or Moving Silently-- you're instead trying to avoid notice by blending into the crowd or the background of the scene. And that should almost be represented by a <strong>Charisma</strong> check moreso than any Dexterity one.</p><p></p><p>This is why the whole Stealth thing is so convoluted, and I really think is why WotC threw up their hands and said "Here's Dexterity (Stealth) to use and some minor basics for avoiding being seen or heard, but really people-- do whatever you want that works for you." Because with all four of these different things being so different narratively, requiring such different skillsets, and such different skills on the part of the <strong>perceiver</strong> to notice the characters... trying to create rules that both mechanically *and* narratively make sense AND are simple to adjudicate at the table... is pretty much impossible.</p><p></p><p>I mean, we could have mechanical rules for all these types of Stealth that also take into account all of the narrative aspects of the hiders and the seekers and what they are doing and trying to accomplish... but I think we'd end up with a set of rules that would be like the equivalent of Grappling in 3E. Narratively and mechanically cohesive, but WAY MORE TROUBLE than they are worth.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 7027453, member: 7006"] Let's also acknowledge the issue here that there are in fact [B]four[/B] different things that we are expecting characters to do that right now all are falling under the umbrella of 'Stealth'. But the question to be asked is whether or not that is how we want the rules to be? One skill to rule them all, and what mechanically should we be getting out of it? Or should these become different skills? Because all four are accomplished by a character via different methods... *and* require the blocking or confusion of the different senses of the people who want to find them. The four things are: Hiding (without moving) from people purely to avoid being seen/noticed/attacked. Hiding [I]during combat[/I] in order to gain Advantage on a subsequent attack. Moving silently out in the open to move across the landscape or dungeon and not be heard or noticed. Shadowing/following someone at a distance without them noticing you. These are all different because they use different mechanics, and they give different results. For example... to hide from someone to avoid being seen you need to choose cover (either LOS blocking or Heavily Obscuring) and if the person looking for you comes around the object or terrain that is blocking or obscuring you, they automatically see you. However... if you are trying to shadow someone, narratively-speaking you aren't behind cover the entire time. You oftentimes are out in the open but are making yourself unnoticed or unremarkable. You can't use the same rules for "hiding" in these two cases because they expect two different things-- one requires the character to always remain behind blocking terrain, the other falls into that nebulous term the Errata put out there of "not being seen clearly". And of course obviously if you and your group is trying to walk silently through a dungeon to avoid notice... that again uses a different skillset "narratively" and different mechanical game rules. Now it's not about avoiding sightlines (because there's no one in the area to see you) but instead it's entirely about sound and how far sound travels and how much noise you make as you walk. And currently there are little to no rules governing this (other than the one rule about Medium and Heavy Armor giving you Disadvantage on Dexterity (Stealth) checks.) Then finally of course there is Hiding In Combat-- which is a whole different beast. Because this is [I]purely[/I] a mechanical expression done specifically for the purpose of gaining a mechanical bonus during combat. The [B]story[/B] of what's happening in the world isn't important-- no one at the table cares narratively how or why you are ducking behind stuff and then popping out a few moments later to fire a ranged attack-- what's important to everyone is that you are gaining a mechanical Advantage on your attack. That's the [B]only reason[/B] why Hiding In Combat is a thing. If you didn't get a bonus to your attack roll for doing it, nobody would. And thus, the question to be asked for this part is whether this strictly mechanical set of rules to gain a strictly mechanical bonus should or need to have much more concrete mechanical rules? Moreso than the other three? The other three methods are all about the narrative-- "We're trying to avoid an encounter by not being noticed." Whereas Hiding In Combat obviously *is* the encounter and thus has no narrative. It's purely "I want Advantage on my next attack!" Thus... should Hiding In Combat be it's own thing separate from the other three? It's own ruleset? It's own skill? And if so... then we need to ask whether any of the other three are different enough from the rest of the group that they too should have it's own skill or it's own ruleset for adjudication (and how complex or simple should that be mechanically?) It's this kind of dichotomy that inspired the creation of both "Hide In Shadows" and "Move Silently" in the first place. Because they realized that if you're trying to navigate a dungeon without being noticed, you're not Hiding, you're Moving Silently. But likewise, if you are ducking behind a wall to avoid being seen by the beholder flying by, you aren't Moving Silently (because you ain't moving at all) but are Hiding instead. But then of course there's the fourth option, which is trying to follow someone and tail them, and that turns out you really aren't doing [I]either[/I] Hiding or Moving Silently-- you're instead trying to avoid notice by blending into the crowd or the background of the scene. And that should almost be represented by a [B]Charisma[/B] check moreso than any Dexterity one. This is why the whole Stealth thing is so convoluted, and I really think is why WotC threw up their hands and said "Here's Dexterity (Stealth) to use and some minor basics for avoiding being seen or heard, but really people-- do whatever you want that works for you." Because with all four of these different things being so different narratively, requiring such different skillsets, and such different skills on the part of the [B]perceiver[/B] to notice the characters... trying to create rules that both mechanically *and* narratively make sense AND are simple to adjudicate at the table... is pretty much impossible. I mean, we could have mechanical rules for all these types of Stealth that also take into account all of the narrative aspects of the hiders and the seekers and what they are doing and trying to accomplish... but I think we'd end up with a set of rules that would be like the equivalent of Grappling in 3E. Narratively and mechanically cohesive, but WAY MORE TROUBLE than they are worth. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Stealth Revamp
Top