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

[Maxperson]

I am a programmer, and it's really easy until you go into the land of VTTs and whatever Project Sigil is.

For a game like BG3? Really easy.

Cheers!

Interesting. Why are VTTs and Project Sigil so different?

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm not a programmer, but how hard is it to have the computer roll a number and use that number instead of 15. It doesn't seem like such a difficult thing to ask in the age of AI and the computing power computers have these days.

Yeah, I’m not a programmer either, but… I mean, imagine you’re playing on a virtual tabletop that has a “hide” button that executes an automated check. If there’s a minimum DC, you have the potential to fail, even if there aren’t any enemies around to hide from. If there isn’t, you can succeed on a very low roll, and reasonably deduce that there are no enemies to hide from. So the DC 15 acts as kind of an anti-metagaming feature in a digital environment where the Hide system is automated.

 

[MerricB]

Interesting. Why are VTTs and Project Sigil so different?

Level of automation, I believe. Roll20 doesn't automatically apply conditions to your character when you make a Hide check, for instance.

I'm not sure what level of automation Project Sigil is going for.

But I know that people keep telling me Foundry is awesome since it automates various tasks.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, IMO you just make the check and that is the total. The DC 15 part is nonsense.

Of course, if you are behind a rock, you're already out of line of sight, and hidden by default. The Stealth check is really do determine if they hear you since they cannot possibly see you.

I've come to the sad conclusion that Stealth in 5E is literally useless, or at least pointless.

You cannot do it if you can be seen, and only being Heavily Obscured means you cannot be seen, but if you cannot be seen, why are you hiding?

Total Cover breaks line of sight, so you cannot be seen, so like heavily obscured... why are you hiding? Then there are cases like wall of force, which provides total cover, so you can hide, but the wall is invisible, so you can be seen--and thus you cannot hide after all.

Three-Quarters Cover doesn't break line of sight, so you're seen. Can't hide.

This is why I think proper stealth rules would have you roll when you leave cover or obscuration, rather than while you’re still behind it. If you succeed, you stay hidden until the end of your turn, or until you take a sufficiently noisy action (attacking, speaking, and casting spells with verbal components seems like a good starting point to me). That makes it possible to move from one position in which you can’t be seen to another, sneak up to melee attack an enemy that you started your turn hidden from, or pop out of cover to make a ranged attack and pop back behind it, without being spotted in the intervening time while you’re not behind cover or obscured.

Trust me, the computer can just as easily determine the maximum passive score to set the DC, with lightning speed.

I’m sure it can. I’m more thinking about how not having a base DC could cause such an automated system to accidentally reveal metagame information.

 

[Guest 7037866]

This is why I think proper stealth rules would have you roll when you leave cover or obscuration, rather than while you’re still behind it. If you succeed, you stay hidden until the end of your turn, or until you take a sufficiently noisy action (attacking, speaking, and casting spells with verbal components seems like a good starting point to me). That makes it possible to move from one position in which you can’t be seen to another, sneak up to melee attack an enemy that you started your turn hidden from, or pop out of cover to make a ranged attack and pop back behind it, without being spotted in the intervening time while you’re not behind cover or obscured.

Sure, that is what the rules should do, or something similar IMO.

Of course, it would be better if Stealth allowed you to move / hide while in shadows... otherwise known as LIGHT obscurement, when a creature might see you but has disadvantage on Passsive Perception as such.

I think I will work on that tomorrow and maybe get some useful Stealth rules.

 

[Charlaquin]

Sure, that is what the rules should do, or something similar IMO.

Of course, it would be better if Stealth allowed you to move / hide while in shadows... otherwise known as LIGHT obscurement, when a creature might see you but has disadvantage on Passsive Perception as such.

I think I will work on that tomorrow and maybe get some useful Stealth rules.

In the 2014 rules you could do that with the Skulker feat, and wood elves could do it with light obscuration due to natural phenomena, which… I guess you could argue shadows are?

 

[Selas]

I'm curious as to why you think the design intent is for the person to remain unseen when out in plain sight, rather than it being an oversight or mistake? Not trying to argue. Just trying to see the other perspective here.

Like Charlaquin said, the intent is most likely to enable the fantasy of assassin rogues and sneaking in a fight during the fog of combat to attack an enemy where combatants can be hard to track. I believe this is supported by the required Perception check used to "find you"--which the DM which has to roll for the creature--and the removal of the line about being always alert in all directions in combat from 2024. I think this is why they added this line in the Perception section of the DMG: "Noticing a hidden creature is never trivially easy or automatically impossible, so characters can always try Wisdom (Perception) checks to do so."

RAW, the only thing supporting this interpretation is the line in the Hide action: "Make note of your check’s total, which is the DC for a creature to find you with a Wisdom (Perception) check", which has been associated with the Search action. However, the description of the Search action says "When you take the Search action, you make a Wisdom check to discern something that isn’t obvious"; but as this is not part of the Hide action, you shouldn't use this as a reason to not do a Perception check. Ultimately, as a DM is your call

 

[Maxperson]

Like Charlaquin said, the intent is most likely to enable the fantasy of assassin rogues and sneaking in a fight during the fog of combat to attack an enemy where combatants can be hard to track. I believe this is supported by the required Perception check used to "find you"--which the DM which has to roll for the creature--and the removal of the line about being always alert in all directions in combat from 2024. I think this is why they added this line in the Perception section of the DMG: "Noticing a hidden creature is never trivially easy or automatically impossible, so characters can always try Wisdom (Perception) checks to do so."

Okay. That's the opposite of 5e's stance, though. The 5e combat section basically said that you were automatically aware of everything in combat around you except in rare circumstances that the DM would tell you about.

I'm not convinced you two are correct, but I'm also not convinced that you two are wrong. I guess we will have to wait and see if clarification comes at some point.

RAW, the only thing supporting this interpretation is the line in the Hide action: "Make note of your check’s total, which is the DC for a creature to find you with a Wisdom (Perception) check", which has been associated with the Search action. However, the description of the Search action says "When you take the Search action, you make a Wisdom check to discern something that isn’t obvious"; but as this is not part of the Hide action, you shouldn't use this as a reason to not do a Perception check. Ultimately, as a DM is your call

The search table on page 373 says that you make a perception check to find a concealed creature or object. Looking behind a rock is searching for the person concealed behind, so I'm not certain it would count as being obvious. I think that obvious would be the desk in the room you walk into. You wouldn't have to search for that.

 

[Lazybones]

If a rogue was crouched behind a flat, upright rock, and a creature moved to a spot where they were also behind the rock, with no possible cover bonus for the rogue, I would say that the rogue is no longer "something that isn't obvious" per the words of the Search action. Of course, it depends on the situation; maybe the lighting is bad, or the creature is distracted by fighting elsewhere in the room, or the rock is big enough or irregular enough that the rogue still has a chance to evade detection. Most situations in the game world aren't 100% clear to adjudicate, so that's why the Hide action includes the words, "The Dungeon Master decides when circumstances are appropriate for Hiding." I assume that language is also inclusive of leaving stealth as well as entering it. While I might rule that the above scenario causes the rogue to lose the Invisible condition, another DM might rule that they keep it, and that's perfectly fine.

Most low-CR creatures in the Monster Manual aren't going to have a passive Perception in excess of 15, and in dim light or when Darkvision is being used, it's going to be even less. A Guard, whose entire job is keeping a sharp eye out for trouble, has a passive Perception of 12. Any rogue of 7th level or higher is going to be incapable of failing a Hide check, and will probably beat the passive Perception of 90% of the creatures that they encounter. I think that Stealth is going to work just fine for that character without overpowering the Hide action.

 

[Ebony Dragon]

If a rogue was crouched behind a flat, upright rock, and a creature moved to a spot where they were also behind the rock, with no possible cover bonus for the rogue, I would say that the rogue is no longer "something that isn't obvious" per the words of the Search action. Of course, it depends on the situation; maybe the lighting is bad, or the creature is distracted by fighting elsewhere in the room, or the rock is big enough or irregular enough that the rogue still has a chance to evade detection.

I would always err on the side of a character making a hide check to be actively hiding, and not just waiting for someone to come up to them. If it were an out of combat situation you should tell the character that someone is approaching their position and they will be seen unless they can move to a better spot (assuming they aren't being surprised by this other person), and then let them move if it is possible.

If it happens in a combat situation then you have to suspend belief a little bit and realize that the participants in the combat aren't moving 30 feet and then standing still while someone else moves 30 feet. Everything is happening at once. If a rogue made a successful hide check during combat it is assumed that they are actively trying to remain hidden even during other creatures turns. Just because someone else walked around to the other side of the tree shouldn't mean they are instantly spotted. That's a real bad way to run the rules against people hiding. Combat is broken up into turns for convenience, not as a depiction of absolute in-game reality.