Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 8594937" data-attributes="member: 22779">See, this right here is a particularly good example of what Collville is talking about.4e stealth rules are, IMO, the best stealth rules that have ever existed in 5e.&nbsp; Hands down.&nbsp; To the point where I interpret 5e stealth through that lens.&nbsp; All you have to do is add a &quot;Hidden&quot;status effect to the 5e rules and you have the 4e stealth rules.&nbsp; Something that is obscured, but, not actively hiding, can't be seen, but can still be targetted - typically with disadvantage.&nbsp; Something that is Hidden (as in actively hiding and beating all passive Perception checks (or active ones if someone takes the action) cannot be detected at all and you can only guess at a location.Easiest to rule at the table and works fantastically well with 5e stealth rules.&nbsp; But, here's the point I was trying in a roundabout fashion to make.&nbsp; To me, these are simple, clear, easy to adjudicate rules that work extremely well.&nbsp; To [USER=6877472]@James Gasik[/USER], looking at exactly the same rules, he thinks they are &quot;Profoundly bad&quot;.&nbsp; Now, there is no way either of us is going to convince the other, most likely.&nbsp; Which means that any player who moved from my table to his or vice versa, would be playing under significantly different rules, even though we both have 5e books sitting on the table.So, how can you design for both of our tables?&nbsp; And, how can [USER=6877472]@James Gasik[/USER] and I have a rational conversation about stealth when we're not even playing using the same rules?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 8594937, member: 22779"] See, this right here is a particularly good example of what Collville is talking about. 4e stealth rules are, IMO, the best stealth rules that have ever existed in 5e. Hands down. To the point where I interpret 5e stealth through that lens. All you have to do is add a "Hidden"status effect to the 5e rules and you have the 4e stealth rules. Something that is obscured, but, not actively hiding, can't be seen, but can still be targetted - typically with disadvantage. Something that is Hidden (as in actively hiding and beating all passive Perception checks (or active ones if someone takes the action) cannot be detected at all and you can only guess at a location. Easiest to rule at the table and works fantastically well with 5e stealth rules. But, here's the point I was trying in a roundabout fashion to make. To me, these are simple, clear, easy to adjudicate rules that work extremely well. To [USER=6877472]@James Gasik[/USER], looking at exactly the same rules, he thinks they are "Profoundly bad". Now, there is no way either of us is going to convince the other, most likely. Which means that any player who moved from my table to his or vice versa, would be playing under significantly different rules, even though we both have 5e books sitting on the table. So, how can you design for both of our tables? And, how can [USER=6877472]@James Gasik[/USER] and I have a rational conversation about stealth when we're not even playing using the same rules? [/QUOTE]

Verification