Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 FrogReaver Mar 19, 2015 10:03:28	RULE:  In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you. However, under certain circumstances, the Dungeon Master might allow you to stay hidden as you approach A CREATURE THAT IS DISTRACTED, allowing you to gain advantage on an attack before you are seen.     What are rules legal ways for the DM to determine whether a creature is distracted?     On a side note:  According to the rules what "certain circumstances" are being spoken of in this rule?
#2 AaronOfBarbaria Mar 19, 2015 10:27:15	That bit of text is referring to the DM's ability to decide that what is going on while you move from a spot where line of sight is blocked, across an area where sight isn't blocked in any way, and into position to attack results in you not automatically failing to be hidden before you actually attack.   The best example, in my opinion: A stealthy character sneaks off and hides. Another character engages in conversation or battle with a creature we will designate as the target. The target has absolutely no idea that the stealthy character even exists, and has their attention focused on the character engaging them. Because there is no solid reason for the target to be looking around for additional creatures, it is then reasonable to have the target not actually look over its shoulder and spot the stealthy character crossing the distance from their hiding place to attack position. If the stealth check is high enough, the stealthy character can then get into position and attack while still benefiting from being hidden
#3 Noctaem Mar 19, 2015 10:47:18	Right, you're asking us to define via the rules a game element specifically created to fall under DM fiat.  Aaron's example is a good one, but I'm sure according to other DM's it wouldn't work.  The hidden character would be immediately spotted according to some.  Furthermore you can get into pure houseruling, like giving reactive checks to the "target" to determine if it's actually distracted or not.   Or having the hidden character roll stealth again, etc...    There's no way to answer you via "rules legal ways", it's completely subjective.  Basically, there are no rules legal ways, it's all DM fiat.
(Reply to #3) FrogReaver	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #4) AaronOfBarbaria	FrogReaver wrote:
#6 Noctaem Mar 19, 2015 11:20:55	FrogReaver wrote:
#7 Noctaem Mar 19, 2015 11:22:03	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#8 jaelis Mar 19, 2015 11:39:03	FrogReaver wrote:
#9 Noctaem Mar 19, 2015 11:47:50	5e design philosphy at work.  I would much rather have strong base rules of a system like 4e and then modify it as I see fit as the DM.  At least that way everyone in the group is on the same page and we can change the game as we want from there.  4e did this better than any previous edition and better than 5e, though the latter is still better than some of the others imo.   However, 5e has made this very difficult because it's meant to be the bridge between all the previous editions.  And when you're trying make compatible bridges with wildly different editions you have to make sacrifices it seems.
#10 Nevvur Mar 19, 2015 13:46:32	A common mechanical occurence of being distracted I house rule at my table... If the creature has suffered a critical hit, or rolled a critical miss that round, it is distracted for the purpose of a hidden creature moving in the open without being detected automatically.   edit: maybe calling it a "house rule" is inaccurate, as it's not really as cut and dry as I described.  I still take into account other factors, but I do use this frequently as a condition for a creature being suitably distracted, and to give crits a little more oomph.
(Reply to #5) FrogReaver	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#12 Noctaem Mar 19, 2015 12:05:44	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #9) Ilse	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #3) Coredump00	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #13) Coredump00	Ilse wrote:
#16 Ilse Mar 19, 2015 19:49:28	And I, in turn, agree completely with your position. You very correctly added the CRPG / MMORPG to the equation, and I believe that a lot of the inspiration for 4E came from there, with individual powers that scale and that you pick in a portfolio, with identified paths, etc. It's often here when I think about 4E, but I completely forgot it this time.   That being said, I have seen lots of excellent roleplay, not so much in CRPG because, as I you mention, there is little freedom and you only get on some pre-determined paths, but in MMORPGs. You have to go looking for it, because it's often a bit confidential, but sometimes it plays really well on the capabilities of the system. And I saw it work well on "Hybrids" like NWN in which you can use the framework of a multiplayer game and still have a handle on the environement. But it takes so much effort, to design new characters and insert them in the computer framework, whereas I can paint an NPC in just a few evocative sentences, that will be much more memorable than a few pixels on a screen.   So, in the end, it comes downn to the freedom, which is the one thing that you will never get through a computer. And it is the lack of this freedom that started fo chafe on 4E. At the start, I was really elated because it seemed like they had closed the possibility of loopholes in 3E. And for a few years it was OK. But, as you, I was yearning for the much greater freedom that can be enjoyed when the rules become really secondary to the story and the characters, and for that you need a DM in charge of the imaginative side of the game, completed by players who trust him.
#17 lawrencehoy Mar 19, 2015 21:25:00	Noctaem wrote:
#18 strider13x Mar 21, 2015 4:04:22	Yes, you are right, it IS unplayable! I would recommend you play Parcheesi, or Yatzee, better yet stick with solitaire...
#19 Noon Mar 22, 2015 2:53:36	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#20 Noon Mar 22, 2015 2:56:33	FrogReaver wrote:
#21 akaddk Mar 22, 2015 3:03:38	I sometimes wonder if RPG's will become a lost art as there seems to be a fundamental disconnect in newer generations of players where they think in binary terms. It's almost as if computer gaming has ruined their ability to think beyond a set of on/off parameters. This discussion comes up so often and explaining it seems to require the intensely brutal beating of a very dead horse.   I recommend such players play Pathfinder where the system holds their hands through every possible scenario and gives them nice and strong crutches with which to drape their limp imaginations and waddle towards an and/or solution.
(Reply to #20) FrogReaver	Noon wrote:
#23 jaelis Mar 22, 2015 9:22:33	What exactly do you mean by rules legal?
(Reply to #23) FrogReaver	jaelis wrote:
#25 Noctaem Mar 22, 2015 10:39:31	FrogReaver wrote:
#26 jonathonhawke Mar 22, 2015 10:53:38	Is the question whether the enemy is distracted, or whether the player's action (remain hidden when he leaves his hiding spot and approaches the enemy) is successful (uncertain due to the possibility of the enemy being distracted/not distracted)?   In the latter case the rules a pretty clear.  If the result of an action is uncertain, roll the dice.  The DM determines the type of roll and the DC.
(Reply to #25) FrogReaver	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #27) Coredump00	FrogReaver wrote:
(Reply to #28) FrogReaver	Coredump00 wrote:
#30 strider13x Mar 23, 2015 9:08:01	FR-   1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Uncertainty is resolved by making an ability check. The DM determines what check applies (WIS Perception would be the most common in this case). The DM also determines the DC of the check or contests the check against the players ability check (DEX Stealth commonly used in this case). The DM is also allowed to apply Advantage or Disadvantage to any ability check as they see fit. 5. See # 4.
(Reply to #30) FrogReaver	strider13x wrote:
#32 strider13x Mar 23, 2015 15:08:24	When you follow that process you are following RAW, but some folks are seeking a "one-ruling-fits-all" for Hide attempts. Every situation is unique which is why D&D uses a DM. Some DMs and players do forget the primary goal of D&D which is for everyone at the table to have fun! I say when in doubt, roll d20! That way no one can accuse the DM or player of acting/ruling unfairly. Now if the DM has stated, "the orc is guarding the door, watching for intruders who approach" I would say no need to roll, it has been made clear. Same goes for, "the orc in slumped over sleeping off a hangover" again its obvious. Now, if the DM says "the orc is standing in front of the door sharpening its axe" well we have some uncertainty. The players must look to clues given by the DM, but the DM doesn't need to spell it out, either. It takes trust on everyone part to make the game fun for all!