Taking tokens off the board?

[Bizorro]

Hi guys, I'm just getting into D&D with an inexperienced DM, and I think he's making a big mistake. During a battle, when a monster passes out of sight from the PCs (like moving around to the other side of a wall), my DM takes its token off the board. The idea is that if the characters can't see the monster, the players shouldn't be able to either. Does this make any sense? It seems to me there are rules governing how the players are affected when the monsters are outside our characters' sight.

If our DM is incorrect here, I am curious about how invisibility works. I've read In Targeting What You Can't See, they suggest that you're supposed to attack where you think the monster might be, which would suggest the players actually don't know where the monster is. For cases of invisibility, does the DM actually take the token off the board? I feel like there must be really obvious answers to these questions but I couldn't find any relevant threads. I hope you can help me clear them up.

 

[Kingreaper]

The DM taking it off the board is one way to handle it.

The players all pretending that they can't see it is the other way.

The first one is easier for the players (apart from cheaters, and who wants to make things easier for them anyway?)

The second one is easier for the GM.

Sounds like your GM has decided to shoulder the burden.

 

[On Puget Sound]

It's a matter of DM style, not rules. It's how your DM has chosen to illustrate invisibility (it's also how I do it) but isn't actually addressed as a rule. Most players can't realisitcally "not know" something that is in front of them, so this makes it easier on you to not have to "guess the square" when you know something your character doesn't. You can make perception checks to hear the monster and know what square it is in, but otherwise, if you can't see it... then you shouldn't see it.

Another way to do it would be to leave the figure on the map, but secretly record its actual position, which might or might not be a square or two away. Or he could leave it where it actually is, and make you roll randomly for which square you guess when you attack it.

The board and figures are there to simulate something that is happening in the group's imagination; the DM has a lot of latitude in finding the best way to accomplish that.

 

[Bizorro]

Wow, thanks for all the great, quick responses. I'm glad to hear this is a legitimate choice. Hew does this effect the role of Stealth checks, though? As a PC, it seems that when I go behind a building and the enemy can't see me, I still have to roll a Stealth check before he actually doesn't know where I am—otherwise I'm just concealed/covered/out of his LoS. Right?

Whereas, the monsters seems to be going into hiding as soon as they leave our LoS. Do any of you run things that way or would it make sense for the monsters to have to roll a Stealth check before our DM actually takes them off the board? In which situations do you actually remove the tokens? I'm especially obsessed with Stealth since I'm playing as a Rogue and I need every shot at Combat Advantage I can get. Thanks.

 

[Legildur]

The whole player versus character knowledge thing needs to be handled maturely by players and DM.

I like that your DM takes the tokens/figures off the board when the enemy leaves LOS. But it does introduce some tricky questions like what if only half the party have lost LOS to the enemy?

It's easier if the players just 'pretend' the tokens aren't there until they use a move action to go around the corner etc and then determine what their actions are based on what they can now see.

 

[Samir]

Hi guys, I'm just getting into D&D with an inexperienced DM, and I think he's making a big mistake. During a battle, when a monster passes out of sight from the PCs (like moving around to the other side of a wall), my DM takes its token off the board. The idea is that if the characters can't see the monster, the players shouldn't be able to either. Does this make any sense? It seems to me there are rules governing how the players are affected when the monsters are outside our characters' sight.

You usually know where a nearby creature is as long as it's not hidden from you.

Being outside of line of sight, invisible, or otherwise totally concealed from you doesn't automatically make you hidden from everybody else. Your loud clomping around tells everyone else where you are, unless you attempt to suppress it by making a stealth check.

If your DM makes you roll stealth checks to become hidden (as he should), I think it makes perfect sense that the monsters stick to the same system. Having monsters suddenly disappear because they ducked around a corner turns Brutes into Lurkers and completely devalues the Perception skill.

If our DM is incorrect here, I am curious about how invisibility works. I've read In Targeting What You Can't See, they suggest that you're supposed to attack where you think the monster might be, which would suggest the players actually don't know where the monster is. For cases of invisibility, does the DM actually take the token off the board? I feel like there must be really obvious answers to these questions but I couldn't find any relevant threads. I hope you can help me clear them up.

The Stealth rules were updated (see the pages labeled 50 and 54 for Stealth and Targeting What You Can't See). You only have to guess a square when the invisible monster is also hidden from you. Invisibility gives a creature total concealment (amongst other useful things), which enables it to roll a Stealth check to attempt to become hidden. If it rolls Stealth and it is higher than your passive Perception, and you also failed to detect it with a minor action Perception check on your turn, then the DM should take it off the board and you have to start guessing squares to attack.

Otherwise, you know exactly which square the invisible creature is in, though you will take a -5 penalty to melee and ranged attacks against it since it has total concealment against you (see PHB 282 for more information).

 

[Bizorro]

I agree with Samir's post the most so far. It makes sense to me that characters would stay on the board when they've left LoS but they would disappear when they've actively hidden themselves through Stealth or Invisibility. Since those effects are actually meant to disorient the player, they really can't be realized through dice penalties, while something like cover or concealment is more abstract and needs a numerical answer. Does that make sense to you guys?

 

[redboxrazor]

I run my games the same way: if the characters can't see it, neither can the players. Just because a monster isn't stealthing/hidden doesn't mean characters can see them through the wall. Sure, the monsters may be making loud bits of noise, and I'll be glad to remind you of the general vacinity of their locations. But until the characters actually turn that corner, they can't possibly know exactly where the monster is.

 

[DracoSuave]

I run my games the same way: if the characters can't see it, neither can the players. Just because a monster isn't stealthing/hidden doesn't mean characters can see them through the wall. Sure, the monsters may be making loud bits of noise, and I'll be glad to remind you of the general vacinity of their locations. But until the characters actually turn that corner, they can't possibly know exactly where the monster is.

Until that monster rolls Stealth vs Passive Perception successfully, they very possibly know exactly where any monster is.

That's how it works. No stealth = I know where you are, within a five foot square area more or less.

 

[OnlineDM]

I will say that this is one area where running an online game in MapTool has an advantage over in-person gaming. If the board and tokens are electronic, the DM can hide the token from the players' view but the DM can still see exactly where it is on the board.