| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1abs1nthOct 03, 2014 2:56:47 | I was quite annoyed by the hiding rules or lack thereof. Super vague, with half contradictory information and mechanics that didn't necessarily make that much sense to me so I decided to come up with a consistent set of easy to understand rulings of my own instead. These rules are given under the assumption of using "Hide" during combat.
The success chance of the hiding person depends on how well he's hidden and on where the enemy is looking.
In cover: +1 In shadows: +1
Enemy has back to hiding person: +0 Enemy only sees the hiding person in his periphery vision: -1 Enemy looks toward the hiding person: -2
Add all the modifiers that apply together and change the stealth check according to this:
+2 -> hiding suceeds without a roll +1 -> advantage 0 -> normal roll -1 -> disadvantage -2 -> hiding is impossible
With my rules you don't roll at the time of the hiding but instead in these two circumstances:
Immediately before the stealthed attack: The hiding person rolls stealth vs the target's passive perception. On a sucess, he gains advantage for the attack. Attacking then ends hiding.
During an enemy's turn: An enemy can attempt to find a hiding person once per turn for free by contesting his active perception with a new stealth roll from the hiding person. If he was attacked by the hiding person he has advantage on his roll. On a success, he can choose to attack the hiding person without disadvantage.
If you question the necessity of this, this explains exactly why I believe it to be needed:
|
| #2Thank_DogOct 03, 2014 3:57:26 | The standard rules are simple, consistent and very clear. Now, if you don't like them then that's one thing, but stating that they're not simple, consistent or clear is entirely another. On top of that, all your rules do is make things more complex, more inconsistent and very unclear. I don't see the point of them. |
| #3Danny_MontannyOct 03, 2014 4:24:26 |
|
| #4abs1nthOct 03, 2014 4:35:23 |
|
| #5Danny_MontannyOct 03, 2014 5:07:54 | You can always attempt to attack from hiding whenever you want. Attacks at range when hiding are usually successful. The target is unaware of your location, you pop out, boom. For melee, it depends on the target's level of awareness. In combat, their awareness is heightened and it will make it a lot harder to sneak up on them. Just remember that you are unable to be stealthy unless you're moving at a slow pace, which is 20 ft. per round, unless you have an ability that states otherwise.
A creature actively searches if they're actively being cautious. If they're not, or otherwise distracted, then they would use their passive score. Always check vs. the passive score first anyways. If the passive beats it, the Stealth check fails, no need for an active roll. Active checks requre an action. The inability to take actions would prevent an active check. |
| #6abs1nthOct 03, 2014 5:17:58 |
|
| (Reply to #6)Timborama |
|
| #8abs1nthOct 03, 2014 5:30:45 |
|
| #9abs1nthOct 03, 2014 6:26:42 |
|
| #10Danny_MontannyOct 03, 2014 6:16:57 | There's nothing wrong with giving advantage and disadvantage. It's your preview to do so, however you come to that conclusion. The same goes with automatic success and failure. If you need a bunch of +/- modifiers to come to your conclusion, that's fine. It doesn't make it any easier or clearer, though.
Yes, being unseen is what gives you the advantage to your attack roll. But the knowledge that there is a threat is a whole nother story and will alter the target's tactics.
Making it to where the opposed check is done before an attack is not the nature of the skill challenge. The check is made when a creature can perceive the hiding creature.
"I want to sneak up on the sentry. I'm going to stay out of the torchlight until I get around to his back, sneak up behind him, then stab him in the back." Does the sentry hear you sneaking around in the dark (opposed check)? Are you moving slow enough to maintain stealth (20 ft. per round)? If the answer to the first question is no, and the second yes, then you succeed. Could you impose additional checks for every 20 ft. of movement out of the dark? Absolutely, but that's up to you on how dramatic you want the challenge to be. |
| #11Danny_MontannyOct 03, 2014 6:33:32 | Also, by your formula, a creature can attempt to hide in shadows from a creature even if that creature is looking directly at the creature attempting to hide. Without an ability to let you do so, the creature couldn't even attempt this feat. |
| #12AaronOfBarbariaOct 03, 2014 7:01:35 | I'm sorry... you call your house-rule more consistent, but I have to ask, more consistent by what measure?
I mean, you have assigned modifiers such that if I am walking around inside a courtyard, whether the guard notices that I there is influenced by that not only is his back turned to me - he is at the gate, facing out to the street so as to notice anyone attempting to approach the gate, while I am within the gate already - but by whether or not this courtyard happens to also be shadowy.
Does this guard literally have eyes in the back of his head? |
| #13abs1nthOct 03, 2014 7:32:30 |
|
| #14AaronOfBarbariaOct 03, 2014 7:42:21 | Maybe it is you separating "those two" in your head that is causing the issue? I don't separate out "hiding in combat" and "hiding outside combat" and everything works fine with the rules in the book (which are intentionally vague so that my judgement of a situation can be used, rather than the rules having specifically written conditions that miss some corner case and actively create a ridiculous event). |
| #15Danny_MontannyOct 03, 2014 7:52:46 | "You can't hide from a creature that can see you." You can be seen in shadows, and they only make you lightly obscured. You normally need to be heavily obscured to attempt to hide. |
| #16abs1nthOct 03, 2014 8:04:17 |
|
| (Reply to #16)AaronOfBarbaria |
|
| #18abs1nthOct 03, 2014 8:39:04 |
|
| #19AaronOfBarbariaOct 03, 2014 10:26:39 | I'm sorry, abs1nth, but all I can reply to your post with is this: Nope. What you are saying your system adds is already in the standard rules, and as DM you should trust yourself more in being able to make a call on each situation - especially because you think you can actually write a rule that covers all situations universally, which, how could it possibly cover them properly if you couldn't make the right call for a particular situation?
You have over thought things, and are now seeking an overwraught solution to a nonexistent problem. |
| #20abs1nthOct 03, 2014 12:07:31 |
|
| (Reply to #20)AaronOfBarbaria |
|
| #22Pelican12Oct 03, 2014 13:34:49 | Just a note. 5e is about simplified rules. One of those simplifications is doing away with tons of modifiers. If you plan on making rules modifications, I'd suggest staying with the spirit of the game. |
| #23abs1nthOct 03, 2014 14:39:59 |
|
| #24Danny_MontannyOct 03, 2014 15:15:47 | So you get advantage in hiding in the shadows if the guy isn't looking in your direction. An automatic success if those shadows are behind some boxes. With absolutely no regard as to how much noise you're making...
Your rule is inherently flawed, because you don't understand how hiding works.
To attempt to hide, first you must be unseen (barring special abilities). Next, you must remain quiet. The Stealth check is for ALL factors that would reveal your position, not just sight.
You're trying too hard to quantify something that's already simple and elegant. The rules are in place to work for the system, not against it. This isn't D&D the table top MMO anymore. |
| #25abs1nthOct 04, 2014 2:23:17 |
|
| #26Danny_MontannyOct 04, 2014 9:37:37 | You're only taking a part of the rules that fit into your box.
"When you attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the attack roll. This is true whether you’re guessing the target’s location or you’re targeting a creature you can hear but not see. If the target isn’t in the location you targeted, you automatically miss, but the DM typically just says that the attack missed, not whether you guessed the target’s location correctly. When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it. If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses."
Thus unseen, but not hidden. If your Rogue wants to hide in combat, that's all well and fine, but they'll still need to succeed on a Stealth check. Can their target see them? Yes? Well then they can't hide unless they have a special ability that allows them to. Seen by some enemies, but unseen by others? Then they can attempt to hide from the ones that can't see them. Generally you would need total cover or to be heavily obscured from the target you're trying to hide from. Once you're out of sight, your Stealth check determines if your hide attempt was successful. The details of the success or failure is only limited by the DM's imagination.
As to your advantage and disadvantage rules. Why would bring unseen give you advantage on the Stealth check when its the sole limiting factor in even attempting said check? So everyone gets advantage or automatic success if the try to hide in the manner the rules dictate that you'd need to follow to even attemp the action? You wanna talk about far fetched, that's a concept that's extremely far fetched.
No more in depth rules are needed. Rule 1: Can the target you're attempting to hide from see you? 1a: Yes. You can not attempt to hide from the target. 1b: No. You can attempt to hide from the target. Rule 2: Did you succeed on your Stealth check? 2a: Yes. You are hidden from the target. 2b: No. You are not hidden from the target. Rule 3: Once hidden, you will remain hidden until discovered (see Rule 1) or you stop hiding.
If an ability specifically alters the conditions of Rule 1, then proceed to Rule 2 if the conditions of the ability are met.
Ultimately it's up to you to do whatever you want. To say that the simple rules are too complex because of your misunderstanding, however, doesn't make them so. |
| #27Sword_of_SpiritOct 04, 2014 12:44:49 | Rules are clear?
Except that pass without trace grants an incredible +10 bonus to Stealth checks (which can stack with advantage/disadvantage)...while by contrast standing motionless completely behind a wall in total darkness allows hiding, but at most grants disadvantage on Perception to notice the hiding creature.
Rules are clear?
I'm sorry, but I've made multiple attempts to reconcile all the various rules statements, from the Basic rules/PHB, compared to the examples in the Starter Set, monster abilities, spells, etc, and one thing I can say for certain is that the rules are not clear and consistent. They are outright contradictory, and DM houseruling (or circumstance ruling) isn't an option, it is a given.
|
| #28DrycanthOct 04, 2014 15:45:28 | http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17gg47nmzwa51jpg/original.jpg
|