D&D (2024) Thoughts on Stealth and D&D2024

[Parmandur]

If a hidden character approaches a monster while there's mist about (lightly obscured), does their hidden state automatically end, require an active Search action, or rely on passive Perception to end?

It's that sort of in-between area that I'd rather like better rules for.

I can see why one might want that, but as written the rules seem pretty clearly meant to allow a DM to make a snap judgement on the conditions and how to resolvea roll, same as other Skill checks.

 

[Charlaquin]

A creature under the magical Illusion of the Invisibility Spell has the Invisible condition that "ends early immediately after the target makes an attack roll, deals damage, or casts a spell", while someone who has the Invisible condition from mundane hiding should be covered by common sense DM rulings. Doesn't seem thwt difficult in practice.

If this ruling is such common sense, what’s the problem with the rules text just saying it explicitly, for the benefit of those whose sense is not so common?

 

[Parmandur]

If this ruling is such common sense, what’s the problem with the rules text just saying it explicitly, for the benefit of those whose sense is not so common?

I mean, stricter rules are not going to help a problematic DM-player dynamic. The rules as presented seem to provide a good framework for quick resolution based on judgement calls. If players and DMs cannot trust that judgement, the rest of the game is going to be a problem too...?

Out of curiosity, does anyone know how Baldur's Gate 3 or that one 3rd party game implement 5E stealth rules...?

 

[MerricB]

I'm not familiar with PF2, but reading these rules it sounds like it would be impossible to hide from someone and then move out of cover to backstab them during a fight... which makes me not like those rules at all. Stealth needed a buff for the sake of rogues, and the fantasy of being the sneaky attacker. I'm glad 2024 is more permissive here. If it takes the invisible condition for them to let it work then so be it.

I've played a LOT of Assassin's Creed & The Last of Us part 2 in the last couple of years. Yeah, I agree entirely.

The thing is, that I think that just adding the text that says "or if the DM rules the creature is distracted or not looking in your direction" would do massive things to fix it.

That text is sort of there, but it could be emphasized differently.

Cheers!

 

[Ebony Dragon]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know how Baldur's Gate 3 or that one 3rd party game implement 5E stealth rules...?

BG3 uses facing so you have to stay behind or far enough away from a creatures vision cone during stealth. Combined with the precise depiction of the environment it makes it something that won't really work for most D&D games that are simply narrated and not controlled moment to moment.

 

[Charlaquin]

I mean, stricter rules are not going to help a problematic DM-player dynamic. The rules as presented seem to provide a good framework for quick resolution based on judgement calls. If players and DMs cannot trust that judgement, the rest of the game is going to be a problem too...?

I’m not interested in trying to help a problematic DM-player dynamic, I just think the rules should actually say how they’re obviously meant to work.

Out of curiosity, does anyone know how Baldur's Gate 3 or that one 3rd party game implement 5E stealth rules...?

Not sure about the 3rd party game, but BG3 handles it in a way that a human couldn’t reasonably reproduce. You can press a button to crouch, and while crouching move much more slowly and you cN see a radius around enemies representing the range of their vision. While crouching inside that radius, the enemies don’t react to you but game automatically makes constant stealth checks for you (I think it’s like one per second or something) and when you fail one you automatically stop crouching.

 

[MerricB]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know how Baldur's Gate 3 or that one 3rd party game implement 5E stealth rules...?

Opaquely.

More clearly: see this thread on reddit:

• Vision Cone
  Now let's get the obvious out of the way. When you're outside of everyone's vision cone, you can stay stealthed as long as you want without any check -- everybody knows that. Now the weird part is when you're standing within someone's vision cone. Sometimes you need to do a stealth check and sometimes the game just rip you out of stealth and provides no explanation in the log whatsoever except that you have lost the condition "stealth". One key to determine whether you need the check is: obscurity.
  
  
• Obscurity
  It's simple, if you're heavily obscured, you don't need a check; If you're lightly obscured, then you need a check; if you're not obscured, you will immediately exit stealth without check. Even knowing that, it still sometimes feels funky and the reason is: unlike the Sharran equipments where you need to be obscured in respect to the world, stealth cares about your obscurity in respect to the creatures who are looking at you. As you can see in the screenshot, Karlach is standing barely 3m in front of the human guard and he doesn't notice the big burning lady crouching as tall as he is standing right in front of him.

 

[Charlaquin]

BG3 uses facing so you have to stay behind or far enough away from a creatures vision cone during stealth. Combined with the precise depiction of the environment it makes it something that won't really work for most D&D games that are simply narrated and not controlled moment to moment.

It’s been a minute since I played, but I thought it used radii rather than cones.

 

[Charlaquin]

Opaquely.

More clearly: see this thread on reddit:

• Vision Cone
  Now let's get the obvious out of the way. When you're outside of everyone's vision cone, you can stay stealthed as long as you want without any check -- everybody knows that. Now the weird part is when you're standing within someone's vision cone. Sometimes you need to do a stealth check and sometimes the game just rip you out of stealth and provides no explanation in the log whatsoever except that you have lost the condition "stealth". One key to determine whether you need the check is: obscurity.
  
  
• Obscurity
  It's simple, if you're heavily obscured, you don't need a check; If you're lightly obscured, then you need a check; if you're not obscured, you will immediately exit stealth without check. Even knowing that, it still sometimes feels funky and the reason is: unlike the Sharran equipments where you need to be obscured in respect to the world, stealth cares about your obscurity in respect to the creatures who are looking at you. As you can see in the screenshot, Karlach is standing barely 3m in front of the human guard and he doesn't notice the big burning lady crouching as tall as he is standing right in front of him.

Well, I stand corrected. That’s way more complex than I thought it was.

 

[MerricB]

Can we rewrite the Stealth rules to be clearer while still allowing DM's to use their judgement? Yeah, definitely.

I do think there's a trend in the 2024 rules for making rules simpler (see monster attacks with saves, for instance), but in certain cases the results have not been good.

So, the next step is seeing what wording makes this clearer to everyone.