I recently ran a lair that the players were trying to sneak into. As they proceeded to sneak up to a group of guards. The bard in the group started doing combat shouts. Which alerted the entire lair of gnolls into activity. My players were a bit upset but I was like hey you started shouting out loud while trying to be sneaky.
Whats a GM to do in this type of situation? Anyway The group had to run and try to sneak in again at a later time due to the fact they suddenly have 40 gnolls running up ramps from different directions to take out the intruders.
I mean come on combat shouts while trying to be sneaky isnt a good thing to do is it?
(Actually, minions might be the best option in such stealth mission scenarios, as they can be one-shotted stealthily and without raising an alarm.)
To play devil's advocate for a moment, doesn't a rule that noise brings down the whole dungeon on the player's heads kind of defeat the purpose of a dungeon with discrete encounter areas? Look at "Rescue at Rivenroar" for example. Would it be fair to the party if the sounds of fighting (all of which, not just the bard's ability, makes noise: clashing swords, shouts or pain and alarm from the monsters, magical explosions) in the entry area brought reinforcements from the adjacent rooms? If so, then you almost have to make it all one encounter area, which means using minions instead of full monsters.
That's a good point, I love when those come up. I don't think we're advocating that every single monster in the dungeon Hulks out whenever someone steps on a really displaced twig. It's a situation where a group of enemies became alert when the group which had been trying to stealth its way through was given away by one dude shouting; it shouldn't make everything hostile, but whatever you were trying to sneak up on sure as hell should know you're there after that. Loud noises, combat sounds, big flashy spells, etc., do draw attention, but the issue here is this: who would reasonably be alerted to a disturbance like that? Who can hear or see, or sense those disturbances? It's up to the DM to decide if it's just the gnolls in the same room, or the gnoll wizard on the other side of a thin wooden door, or the gnoll baron two floors down in a soundproofed recording studio cutting his EP. Within reason, of course.
A skill challenge might be appropriate here, with one character using Stealth to get close to the minions (so he can rise up behind them like a shadow and one shot, like in a commando movie), while the other characters use other skills to distract, separate, lure, etc. Success in the skill challenge means that the characters can take on the monsters in rooms on either side of this room as individual easy encounters, while a failure results in monsters from both rooms piling into the present room, resulting in a hard encounter.
The challenge here, though, is setting up an encounter where you aren't completely cutting one player off from meaningful participation. For example, if you are just telling the bard character that he isn't allowed to use the powers that he has, then you need to give him something else that he can do that is useful.
A skill challenge might be appropriate here, with one character using Stealth to get close to the minions (so he can rise up behind them like a shadow and one shot, like in a commando movie), while the other characters use other skills to distract, separate, lure, etc. Success in the skill challenge means that the characters can take on the monsters in rooms on either side of this room as individual easy encounters, while a failure results in monsters from both rooms piling into the present room, resulting in a hard encounter.
I totally agree; it shouldn't be completely shut down, but in a situation like that, there needs to be a unique challenge when using an ability that would be counterproductive to the goal. Perhaps another way to let the Bard use his shouts while trying to be stealthy is to involve some sort of check when he actually uses the shout; maybe he makes a caster check or whatever the 4E equivalent is (if it's different; I play 3.5E so I don't know) based on the level of the desired effect, the sensitivity of the enemies to sound, proximity, or whatever else. If he succeeds, then he can "shout" in a low voice or a whisper and make it possible to maintain the element of surprise. If he fails, depending on the level of failure, he could alert any number of nearby enemies, he might not get the effect, or some similar setback. It's not fair to deny him the ability, but when the ability is intrinsically countered to what you're trying to do, make it difficult to reflect the reality of shouting when trying to sneak up on enemies.
"Shout of Triumph" deals thunder damage and pushes/slides the targets. This can just as easily be themed as a supersonic concussive effect that is only barely 'audible' as a momentary hum. In fact, that's exactly how the power was themed with one of the bards I played - being a researcher or obscure lore rather than a performer, he didn't sing or shout all all.
The fluff of 4E powers is flexible. Even if the power's name includes "shout", there's no reason why he has to shout as part of it. "Shout of Triumph" deals thunder damage and pushes/slides the targets. This can just as easily be themed as a supersonic concussive effect that is only barely 'audible' as a momentary hum. In fact, that's exactly how the power was themed with one of the bards I played - being a researcher or obscure lore rather than a performer, he didn't sing or shout all all.
I agree with this; most things in any D&D game regardless of the edition are flexible. Of course, I think it's better to let the players figure that all out for themselves.
Just be careful about punishing players for letting their characters give you an opportunity to make interesting things happen, though, especially when it's in character for them to do so - you want to discourage the players from being silly and disruptive, but you don't want to discourage them from acting in character and building an interesting story with you.