| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1SilentSinJul 11, 2014 17:46:12 | Ok, so Invisibility doesn't give any bonus to stealth. I'm not sure I agree with that design decision, but whatever, lets work with that.
The stealth rules seem quite simplistic compared to previous editions, but in general the "you can't hide if you don't have any cover" rule makes most situations pretty easy to adjudicate, at least until invisibility comes into play.
Lets run through some scenarios.
A) So I'm an invisible wizard walking down an empty road. I come to the town gate, which is wide open and has a guard on either side. While trying to sneak past, I fail my stealth check. So what now? Do the guards figure out exactly where I am? Do they just get alerted that "something's there" but have no idea of my exact location? If they converge on me and I have to hurry out of the way (thus failing more stealth checks), how well can they be expected to follow something they can't see?
B) This time I'm sneaking into a castle. Because I know I'm terribad at stealth, I'll just move out of the way and stand as still as possible whenever a patrolling guard is coming (or sit down even). How would you handle this? Should I make a stealth check each round the guard is nearby? Should I only fail on a natural 1 because I couldn't resist the urge to scratch my balls? Maybe I should only have to make a new stealth check once a minute?
C) I'm still in the castle, and this time I need to sneak down a hallway past a stationary guard outside some noble's room. How do we run this? One stealth check for the approach and one more to get away? What if I move slowly, like 5ft per round or something, focussing on each individual step I take? And just for fun, what if I run past? What are the chances that the guard was dozing off and thinks he just imagined it?
Edit: some people seem to be misunderstanding the purpose of this thread. I'm not asking what the rules are. I'm asking how you would DM the above situations. |
| #2jaelisJul 11, 2014 18:09:36 |
|
| #3melloredJul 11, 2014 18:18:12 | 1: You turn invisible 2: You can spend an action to hide. (or bonus action if your a rogue). 3: You move around wherever, and hope to pass their check.
So yea, an 8 dex dwarf in heavy armor isn't going to be able to sneak by an elf cleric even when invisible.
That said, combine it with the silence spell could certainly help. Or just cast it on the rogue, who get's expertise stealth + advantage. He'll take a moment to situate himself, and then go where he pleases. |
| (Reply to #2)SilentSin |
|
| (Reply to #3)SilentSin |
|
| #6Archon007Jul 11, 2014 19:23:33 |
|
| (Reply to #4)Overpromises | A) If the wizard is failing stealth checks, then the guards can follow him just fine. It might be by hearing him, smelling him, seeing footprints, seeing dust, all of the above, or some other method.
B) I would have guessed that one stealth check every time a guard came past was sufficient. I’m afraid I couldn't find anything in the rules covering how often checks would be needed if the same guard was standing around near you. I guess that would be up to the DM.
C) One stealth check should be fine for that too. Moving 5 feet per round won't help you, you can move stealthily at at least 200 feet per minute (20 feet per round). You can stealthily move your movement rate per round if you stop doing anything else you might have been doing while exploring. Running would almost certainly be considered not using stealth.
|
| #8iserithJul 11, 2014 19:36:47 |
|
| #9PsikerlordJul 11, 2014 19:45:07 |
|
| (Reply to #9)Overpromises |
|
| (Reply to #9)SilentSin |
|
| (Reply to #6)SilentSin |
|
| (Reply to #11)Overpromises | I’ve been trying to find anything in the rules covering when a new stealth check is needed. All I can find is that a single stealth check is generally enough to either avoid or ambush another creature, but nothing about what happens if the creature hangs around near your hiding place. |
| #14E-TallitnicsJul 11, 2014 21:34:16 | Basic D&D, page 60: Hiding, "When you try to hide, make a Dexterity (Stealth) check. Until you are discovered or you stop hiding, that check’s total is contested by the Wisdom (Perception) check of any creature that actively searches for signs of your presence." So, no multiple Stealth rolls in your examples.
Other than that I'm still working on Perception vs Investigation, not to mention either one, or both, of those vs Stealth!
The playtest was rather clear, but Basic is rather unclear. That might be intentional to allow the DM/Player more leeway in determining how to adjudicate a myriad of scenarios. |
| #15pukunuiJul 11, 2014 21:56:06 |
|
| (Reply to #15)SilentSin |
|
| #17melloredJul 11, 2014 22:28:19 |
|
| #18pukunuiJul 12, 2014 0:39:03 |
|
| #19iserithJul 12, 2014 4:34:15 |
|
| #20pukunuiJul 12, 2014 5:00:47 |
|
| (Reply to #14)Overpromises |
|
| #22jaelisJul 12, 2014 6:48:09 | In some cases, you might want to have the player "take 10" and roll the monster's perception instead. But I doubt it would come up often. |
| #23Cyber-DaveJul 12, 2014 6:54:53 |
|
| #24lawrencehoyJul 13, 2014 21:28:36 |
|
| (Reply to #12)2Chlorobutanal |
|
| (Reply to #25)SilentSin |
|
| #272ChlorobutanalJul 13, 2014 22:42:16 | I pointed it out because it seems like the point was being missed. You mentioned that you didn't agree with the design decision, but the definition of the "Hide" action implies that you cannot be seen before you can attempt to hide. How would magically making yourself unseen improve your ability to be unseen, if you are already unseen?
Yes, if you render invisibily redundant, it doesn't do anything. You don't need to be invisible if you're behind a wall. You don't need a Fly spell if there is a ladder. Likewise, if you're resistant to fire, casting Protection From Energy - fire doesn't do anything. If you're in direct sunlight, casting a Light spell doesn't give any bonuses.
In what situation do you think Invisibility should confer a skill bonus? Fly doesn't give an athletics bonus; Light doesn't give a perception bonus. They alter the play space, they don't give modifiers, which is consistent with the bounded nature of probability checks in 5th Edition.
Additionally, yes- the rules for most checks have been simplified for Basic 5th Edition. I believe this is a part of their desire to make a simple set of core rules that can be detailed or modified by supplements as well as an attempt to expedite the gameplay without need for charts and tables covering a myriad of circumstances. |
| (Reply to #27)SilentSin |
|
| #29thewokJul 14, 2014 2:18:08 | I'd rule that Invisibility makes it so any Wisdom (Perception) check that relies solely on seeing something directly automatically fails.
So, on a paved/bricked road, with nothing to impede your movement, those guards 100 feet away aren't going to be able to see you coming. As you get within 20 or so feet of the guards, they might be able to hear your boots on the brick road, giving them a chance to detect you through sound. As you approach the gate further, you see that the bricks give way to dirt, which will make it so that the guards, while they can't see you, can still hear you, and they might be able to see foot prints. You stand there, trying to decide how to proceed, and it suddenly starts pouring rain. You make an interesting vision, with rain bouncing offf your invisible self, the ground under your cloak remaining perfectly dry, and now all that dirt is mud. It'll be easy to detect you as you go through the gate.
Your best bet is to have arrange a diversion. With their attention elsewhere, the guards won't see you pass, because they'll never see you out of the corners of their eyes.
it's really interesting to figure out ways to mess with people who think invisibility makes you undetectable. it doesn't. And I always keep these in mind for when I play Shadowrun. I like using Improved Invisibility there fairly frequently, but it's not always worth the possible drain to cast. |