Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Stealth - Streamlined PEACH
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="MyISPHatesENWorld" data-source="post: 4393671" data-attributes="member: 65684"><p>It is quite obviously not RAI. "Stealth: Part of whatever action you are trying to perform stealthily" in no way invokes any intention that it costs an additional action whenever you do it as... um... "Part of whatever action you are trying to perform stealthily"...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As a player of a rogue in two seperate campaigns, with a third coming soon, and having played another class in a party with a rogue, I can say that you're definitely not speaking about all players. Or all DMs, as no DM I'm playing with or planning to play with has expressed any need to reduce the use of stealth, particularly via fun-sapping action penalties. And, I won't be doing anything like this to my players in my campaign.</p><p></p><p>Being able to get some group of players to put up with stuff doesn't make it RAI or a good rule. Some people put up with arbitrary nerfings and fun-sapping house rules that make me think they answer game postings with D/S and S/M tags from the personals section of an alternative newspaper.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's a house rule. It's a good house rule if you and all of your players like it.</p><p></p><p>If it were not a house rule, and were used to replace the exisisting rules on stealth, it would be a bad rule. It needlessly limits how players can use stealth, robbing characters of offensive and defensive benefits from a combination of having or gaining access to the skill, a good score in the requisite ability, and possibly abilities/powers/feats related to the skill and/or prohibits the use of other abilities/powers/feats/actions they may be able to take on a turn. Adding an action cost to anything is a big deal. Adding an action cost to something that is expected to be used frequently, and you've acknowledged stealth is intended to be used frequently...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>...is a bigger deal. Particularly when you consider that one of the classes most affected, rogues, has bonuses that encourage the use of different weapons in different situations. For multiclass rogues that use an implement or non-rogue weapon in one or both hands sometimes, it is even worse.</p><p></p><p>What you say you think about stealth in the quote above, combined with your previous statement of...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>...make it really plain that you know you're making a set of house rules to address an issue that you have with the current rules as written and intended.</p><p></p><p>This...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>...combined with your twisted use of the general skill mechanic as a way to limit when player's use stealth (something you actually repeated twice, in a short span, in your earlier posting), gives the impression that in addition to nerfing stealth and by extension the classes it most benefits (without any compensation for lost offense, defense, and actions), you want more control.</p><p></p><p>And making things less fun for one of the players so you can have more control is pretty much contrary to my understanding of the RAI in every way. In 4e, players can do cool, fun, stuff by default. Your house rules would shift it to your players (at least the ones that benefit from stealth) doing cool, fun, stuff with your special dispensation or being penalized for doing cool, fun, stuff. As DM, you're free to add any limitation that you want to what players do in your campaign, but I don't want to play a game that works that way. </p><p></p><p>Maybe this skill (<a href="http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dusg/20080721" target="_blank">http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dusg/20080721</a>) is really the one that needs work...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MyISPHatesENWorld, post: 4393671, member: 65684"] It is quite obviously not RAI. "Stealth: Part of whatever action you are trying to perform stealthily" in no way invokes any intention that it costs an additional action whenever you do it as... um... "Part of whatever action you are trying to perform stealthily"... As a player of a rogue in two seperate campaigns, with a third coming soon, and having played another class in a party with a rogue, I can say that you're definitely not speaking about all players. Or all DMs, as no DM I'm playing with or planning to play with has expressed any need to reduce the use of stealth, particularly via fun-sapping action penalties. And, I won't be doing anything like this to my players in my campaign. Being able to get some group of players to put up with stuff doesn't make it RAI or a good rule. Some people put up with arbitrary nerfings and fun-sapping house rules that make me think they answer game postings with D/S and S/M tags from the personals section of an alternative newspaper. It's a house rule. It's a good house rule if you and all of your players like it. If it were not a house rule, and were used to replace the exisisting rules on stealth, it would be a bad rule. It needlessly limits how players can use stealth, robbing characters of offensive and defensive benefits from a combination of having or gaining access to the skill, a good score in the requisite ability, and possibly abilities/powers/feats related to the skill and/or prohibits the use of other abilities/powers/feats/actions they may be able to take on a turn. Adding an action cost to anything is a big deal. Adding an action cost to something that is expected to be used frequently, and you've acknowledged stealth is intended to be used frequently... ...is a bigger deal. Particularly when you consider that one of the classes most affected, rogues, has bonuses that encourage the use of different weapons in different situations. For multiclass rogues that use an implement or non-rogue weapon in one or both hands sometimes, it is even worse. What you say you think about stealth in the quote above, combined with your previous statement of... ...make it really plain that you know you're making a set of house rules to address an issue that you have with the current rules as written and intended. This... ...combined with your twisted use of the general skill mechanic as a way to limit when player's use stealth (something you actually repeated twice, in a short span, in your earlier posting), gives the impression that in addition to nerfing stealth and by extension the classes it most benefits (without any compensation for lost offense, defense, and actions), you want more control. And making things less fun for one of the players so you can have more control is pretty much contrary to my understanding of the RAI in every way. In 4e, players can do cool, fun, stuff by default. Your house rules would shift it to your players (at least the ones that benefit from stealth) doing cool, fun, stuff with your special dispensation or being penalized for doing cool, fun, stuff. As DM, you're free to add any limitation that you want to what players do in your campaign, but I don't want to play a game that works that way. Maybe this skill ([url]http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dusg/20080721[/url]) is really the one that needs work... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Stealth - Streamlined PEACH
Top