Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8026395" data-attributes="member: 18">What games are you thinking of?I've literally never seen stealth present any kind of serious rules issue outside the last two editions of D&D, and really the issues 5E has a vastly worse than 4E had. And I've played dozens of RPGs, and in virtually all of them stealth comes up sooner or later, and it pretty much always comes up in the context of combat.I think the real problem is that 5E has quite dodgy Stealth rules AND expects people to keep "going back into Stealth" like some sort of video game, in the middle of combat, often repeatedly. That's bad design. That's not an inherent problem with stealth rules, that's an inherent problem with how they wanted 5E to work.It also puts a ton of weight on the stealth rules to work with the surprise mechanic, which produces further bad situations because I guess just having a surprise round (which would be vastly less confusing and easier to explain than the current setup, even if the current setup technically has a lower word-count than that would). I feel like the whole stealth/surprise situation in 5E illustrates a serious weakness in the Jeremy Crawford school of D&D design, which is the apparent strong belief that if you can say something with less words and make people work it out, that's always better than having a clearer but lengthier set of rules on something. Given the many-thousand-posts, massively up and downvoted discussions of this that have happened dozens of times on the 5E subreddit, I certainly don't believe this isn't a "problem". It is a problem - the rules on both are counter-intuitive and confuse people, create weird situations regularly, and come up over and over again. They also clearly confuse both new and ancient players, and even people who assert they definitely understand them get into violent arguments with each other.EDIT - Bacon was posting in 2015, I see! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> So I've got to give him that it wasn't as obvious that this was going to be an ongoing problem, back then.</blockquote>

Verification