D&D 5E Toll the Chest

[Maxperson]

Yeah, if it ends up attacking you. If not, it doesn't matter because we're not determining surprise at that point.

Right, if it ends up attacking you didn't notice a threat before combat(because it wasn't a threat then), you only noticed a potential threat before combat. Surprise is determined once combat begins and that means that surprise must key off of potential threats noticed.

Sorry you keep being confused about what I mean when I write words. This keeps happening, so maybe it's not me.

No. I think the confusion lies elsewhere. We're just looking at these situations very differently it seems.

That doesn't say anything about being surprised by a threat while noticing other threats. What about that claim which was supposedly backed up by the designers?

No, I misread the tweet the first time. What I wrote still means that the cleric can't be surprised, no matter if you roll stealth, roll disguise or just accept the perfect imitation ability. The cleric is on guard against anything the chest might possibly do(or be) and RAW requires you to be caught off guard.

 

[Hriston]

Right, if it ends up attacking you didn't notice a threat before combat(because it wasn't a threat then), you only noticed a potential threat before combat. Surprise is determined once combat begins and that means that surprise must key off of potential threats noticed.

No, it doesn't, because by the time you determine surprise, you know what the threats are, and you can check to see if any of them were noticed.

ETA: Your "potential threats" houserule is unworkable because, as was clarified in 2015, if you notice even one threat, you are not surprised.

No. I think the confusion lies elsewhere. We're just looking at these situations very differently it seems.

Agreed.

No, I misread the tweet the first time. What I wrote still means that the cleric can't be surprised, no matter if you roll stealth, roll disguise or just accept the perfect imitation ability. The cleric is on guard against anything the chest might possibly do(or be) and RAW requires you to be caught off guard.

And I would say that according to that quote from the Sage Advice Compendium, the cleric is caught off guard because he "failed to notice [the mimic] being stealthy".

 

[Maxperson]

No, it doesn't, because by the time you determine surprise, you know what the threats are, and you can check to see if any of them were noticed.

It seems like you are saying that if they notice a non-threat prior to it becoming a threat, then that counts as noticing a threat under the surprise rules. It that correct.

And I would say that according to that quote from the Sage Advice Compendium, the cleric is caught off guard because he "failed to notice [the mimic] being stealthy".

Stealth is not a function of the Mimic's ability, though. RAW has no roll involved as the ability itself says it is perfect. Also, the entire ability revolves around a disguise, which would use deception before it ever used stealth.

In any case, being on guard against a specific thing isn't a function of what you notice or not. It's purely, I am on guard against this one thing. There's nothing, literally nothing that the Mimic can do to surprise a cleric(or any other class) that is on guard for the chest to do something.

You're literally arguing that if the chest was trapped with a magical arm that reached out to attack the cleric with an adhesive touch, the cleric wouldn't be caught off guard, but since it's a Mimic doing the exact same thing........................surprise!

 

[Quickleaf]

Wouldn't the mimic need Arcane knowledge or Spellcraft, etc. to even recognize that the spell the player is casting is offensive in nature? If it can't recognize the spell being cast, why would the chest automatically assume it's cover is blown? These mimics don't have a very high intelligence level or any arcane training at all.
.....;D

So this gets into how a DM conceives of spellcasting. For me, the act of hefting a longsword and the act of casting a fire bolt have a similar level of manifested intent in terms of threatening body language.

Because of that interpretation, intelligence really doesn't factor into it at all. In a world of magic, a dog could equally tell there's something dangerous about someone hefting a longsword as there is about someone pointing aggressively at the dog, incanting loud staccato words, while sparks flare at their fingertips.

But YMMV, that's one of the great things about D&D – there are lots of "grey areas" like this where a DM can interpret however suits their gaming group's style.

 

[Maxperson]

Because of that interpretation, intelligence really doesn't factor into it at all. In a world of magic, a dog could equally tell there's something dangerous about someone hefting a longsword as there is about someone pointing aggressively at the dog, incanting loud staccato words, while sparks flare at their fingertips.

This is where I have to ask..............what does pointing aggressively look like? Pointing is pointing is pointing as far as I can tell. To a creature with an Int of 5 and that probably doesn't even speak a language, how is it going to tell the difference between Toll the Dead and pointing(if it even requires pointing) and loudly saying, "Look at that ugly chest over there!" and pointing.

A weapon being raised to be swung at the creature seems very much different.

But YMMV, that's one of the great things about D&D – there are lots of "grey areas" like this where a DM can interpret however suits their gaming group's style.

This I totally agree with.

 

[Hriston]

It seems like you are saying that if they notice a non-threat prior to it becoming a threat, then that counts as noticing a threat under the surprise rules. It that correct.

There is no "becoming a threat". If a creature is going to get into combat with another creature, then it is a threat to that creature, and it always was a threat. So noticing a threat is just noticing a threat. A threat can also be hidden, which is sometimes referred to as a stealthy creature.

Stealth is not a function of the Mimic's ability, though. RAW has no roll involved as the ability itself says it is perfect.

No, it doesn't. It says, "While the mimic remains motionless," so if the mimic doesn't remain motionless, guess what? It doesn't work!

Also, the entire ability revolves around a disguise, which would use deception before it ever used stealth.

No, because the mimic doesn't need to interact with you to try to convince you it's really a chest. The False Appearance takes care of that. All the mimic needs to do is remain motionless, which is exactly what an unseen or invisible creature might need to do to try to hide.

In any case, being on guard against a specific thing isn't a function of what you notice or not. It's purely, I am on guard against this one thing. There's nothing, literally nothing that the Mimic can do to surprise a cleric(or any other class) that is on guard for the chest to do something.

The Sage Advice Compendium, that you quoted, literally says you can "be caught off guard, ... because you failed to notice foes being stealthy" which is the exact opposite of what you're saying here.

You're literally arguing that if the chest was trapped with a magical arm that reached out to attack the cleric with an adhesive touch, the cleric wouldn't be caught off guard, but since it's a Mimic doing the exact same thing........................surprise!

I've made no such argument. I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[Maxperson]

There is no "becoming a threat". If a creature is going to get into combat with another creature, then it is a threat to that creature, and it always was a threat. So noticing a threat is just noticing a threat. A threat can also be hidden, which is sometimes referred to as a stealthy creature.

No. A troll isn't channeling schrodinger. It's not simultaneously a threat and not a threat until it is determined whether a combat will happen. It is either a threat the entire time, even while peacefully walking by or it isn't a threat the entire time and becomes a threat if circumstances lead to combat.

No, it doesn't. It says, "While the mimic remains motionless," so if the mimic doesn't remain motionless, guess what? It doesn't work!

No. Between the ability and lore, it's clear that a mere +5 on stealth is not even remotely sufficient to keep it from being discovered in the vast majority of instances. Hell, that's barely sufficient to be above 50%. Assuming an average roll of 11, it would take a proficient PC with a meager +1 wisdom bonus a roll of 13 or higher to detect the mimic. That doesn't jive with...

"Imitative Predators. Mimics can alter their outward texture to resemble wood, stone, and other basic materials, and they have evolved to assume the appearance of objects that other creatures are likely to come into contact with. A mimic in its altered form is nearly unrecognizable until potential prey blunders into its reach, whereupon the monster sprouts pseudopods and attacks."

and...

"False Appearance (Object Form Only). While the mimic remains motionless, it is indistinguishable from an ordinary object."

A mimic would need at a minimum +10, and probably higher to match that lore. If it needed to roll anyway, which it doesn't. Nowhere in the mimic rules does it say that it has to make a stealth check to be indistinguishable. That's a homebrew rule that you are adding to the mimic stat block.

The mimic has literally evolved to be able to alter its shape and remain motionless. It doesn't need to roll to be still.

No, because the mimic doesn't need to interact with you to try to convince you it's really a chest. The False Appearance takes care of that. All the mimic needs to do is remain motionless, which is exactly what an unseen or invisible creature might need to do to try to hide.

Yes it does. Vision is interacting when it comes to deception. I quoted it earlier in the thread, but deception requires nothing more than appearance. Inaction is an action. It's trying to fool you with its disguise, not with its stealth.

The Sage Advice Compendium, that you quoted, literally says you can "be caught off guard, ... because you failed to notice foes being stealthy" which is the exact opposite of what you're saying here.

You have yet to prove that stealth is anything a mimic needs to engage in to fool people. You've assumed it a whole lot, but there's nothing in the mimic write-up to back you up on this.

 

[Hriston]

No. A troll isn't channeling schrodinger. It's not simultaneously a threat and not a threat until it is determined whether a combat will happen. It is either a threat the entire time, even while peacefully walking by or it isn't a threat the entire time and becomes a threat if circumstances lead to combat.

Huh? I think you're making a big deal out of nothing here. Threat just has its natural language meaning. I.e. a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger. For the purpose of determining surprise, a threat is any creature who participates in the first round of a combat encounter on the opposing side from the creature who might be surprised. There's no "Schrodinger" about it. The Sage Advice Compendium you quoted refers to the same concept with the words foes and enemies.

No. Between the ability and lore, it's clear that a mere +5 on stealth is not even remotely sufficient to keep it from being discovered in the vast majority of instances. Hell, that's barely sufficient to be above 50%. Assuming an average roll of 11, it would take a proficient PC with a meager +1 wisdom bonus a roll of 13 or higher to detect the mimic.

So like I said, not perfect, but keep in mind it's only a CR 2 creature. Also, I think its chances are a little better than you state. That character has a passive Perception of 13 which means the mimic only needs to roll an 8 to successfully hide. That's a 65% chance against a PC who's proficient in Perception after all and at least has an average Wisdom for a PC.

That doesn't jive with...

"Imitative Predators. Mimics can alter their outward texture to resemble wood, stone, and other basic materials, and they have evolved to assume the appearance of objects that other creatures are likely to come into contact with. A mimic in its altered form is nearly unrecognizable until potential prey blunders into its reach, whereupon the monster sprouts pseudopods and attacks."

It says "nearly", so again, not perfect.

and...

"False Appearance (Object Form Only). While the mimic remains motionless, it is indistinguishable from an ordinary object."

Only while it remains motionless, otherwise it can be distinguished, so not perfect.

A mimic would need at a minimum +10, and probably higher to match that lore. If it needed to roll anyway, which it doesn't. Nowhere in the mimic rules does it say that it has to make a stealth check to be indistinguishable. That's a homebrew rule that you are adding to the mimic stat block.

Not at all. I haven't added anything.

The mimic has literally evolved to be able to alter its shape and remain motionless. It doesn't need to roll to be still.

Of course not. As always, it's the DM's decision whether to call for an ability check. You're free to decide there's no uncertainty about whether the mimic succeeds in its attempt to remain motionless and just say it succeeds or fails at your discretion, no check required. I prefer to go with uncertainty because it gives the players a chance to notice the mimic is not what it appears to be.

Yes it does. Vision is interacting when it comes to deception. I quoted it earlier in the thread, but deception requires nothing more than appearance. Inaction is an action. It's trying to fool you with its disguise, not with its stealth.

Okay, so if the mimic isn't being stealthy, why doesn't it make noise that would give away its position as a creature?

You have yet to prove that stealth is anything a mimic needs to engage in to fool people. You've assumed it a whole lot, but there's nothing in the mimic write-up to back you up on this.

Okay, but you're still wrong about being on guard not depending on whether you notice something.

 

[Maxperson]

Huh? I think you're making a big deal out of nothing here. Threat just has its natural language meaning. I.e. a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger. For the purpose of determining surprise, a threat is any creature who participates in the first round of a combat encounter on the opposing side from the creature who might be surprised. There's no "Schrodinger" about it. The Sage Advice Compendium you quoted refers to the same concept with the words foes and enemies.

How does a troll just walking by meet the definition of "a person or thing likely to cause damage or danger."? It doesn't. Just because you fear it or feel like it's a threat, doesn't make it one. Until the party starting insulting it, it wasn't a threat. Then it attacked and became one.

RAW requires that "notice threat" = "notice potential threat" or the surprise rules break down.

So like I said, not perfect, but keep in mind it's only a CR 2 creature. Also, I think its chances are a little better than you state. That character has a passive Perception of 13 which means the mimic only needs to roll an 8 to successfully hide. That's a 65% chance against a PC who's proficient in Perception after all and at least has an average Wisdom for a PC.

They are looking at it suspiciously. That's active, not passive perception. Passive is for when you aren't paying attention and might just happen to get lucky as you pass something. Also, if that cleric is proficient in perception, his passive is very likely 15 or 16. People seem to feel the need to start with a 16 or 18 in their primary stat.

It says "nearly", so again, not perfect.

That "nearly" is contradictory to the perfect ability in the mechanics. It's an instance where the lore and mechanics don't mesh, but in the lesser case it is nearly perfect, which +5 very much fails to accomplish. If a 2nd level cleric can detect it half or more of the time, the mechanic has failed to come close to the lore.

Not at all. I haven't added anything.

Then you can show me where in the ability it explicitly requires a stealth check. Please quote it, because I have not been able to find it.

Of course not. As always, it's the DM's decision whether to call for an ability check. You're free to decide there's no uncertainty about whether the mimic succeeds in its attempt to remain motionless and just say it succeeds or fails at your discretion, no check required. I prefer to go with uncertainty because it gives the players a chance to notice the mimic is not what it appears to be.

My way matches RAW and lore. Your way trivializes both the mimic's ability and the lore to the point where neither one is remotely close to being true.

Okay, so if the mimic isn't being stealthy, why doesn't it make noise that would give away its position as a creature?

Why doesn't a rock make noise as it sits on the ground? Is it trying to be stealthy, too? The mimic is sitting there not moving, so like a rock it doesn't make noise by default.

Okay, but you're still wrong about being on guard not depending on whether you notice something.

The cleric noticed the chest and was on guard for it to do literally anything. Being a mimic doesn't change that.

 

[Imaculata]

It is surprising to me that people draw such hard lines in the sand over this particular minor issue.

As a DM, I would always ask myself "what sort of ruling is in the best interest of fun to the whole group?". I can imagine the priest-player being pretty bummed out if I didn't allow him to cast the spell on the mimic.