A Stealth check isn't something you can succeed at in a traditional sense. Even if a player hides successfully now, they might be discovered if they pass a creature with a high enough passive Perception.
I keep Stealth rolls secret so the die roll can't influence the player's decisions. That prevents situations where they decide to scout ahead or explore, see a 1 come up on their d20, and then suddenly change their minds.
I don't see a reason why a character can't or shouldn't be aware of how stealthy they are being (or not.) If they roll a 1 then they probably stepped on a twig or knocked over the display of soup cans.
I don't see a reason why a character can't or shouldn't be aware of how stealthy they are being (or not.) If they roll a 1 then they probably stepped on a twig or knocked over the display of soup cans.
Because they're making a roll now that only comes into play in the future. You roll Stealth when you begin travelling but it doesn't get used until there's creatures that might spot you, which might not happen for many miles. Letting them see the rolls is essentially telling them in advance whether they're going to get caught or not.
Because they're making a roll now that only comes into play in the future. You roll Stealth when you begin travelling but it doesn't get used until there's creatures that might spot you, which might not happen for many miles. Letting them see the rolls is essentially telling them in advance whether they're going to get caught or not.
Huh? I would have a character roll a Stealth check when it counts, at the time when there are creatures that might spot them, not miles in advance.
A DM friend of mine always rolled stealth rolls for players, in secret, so they didn't know what number they generated.
He would tell them if they rolled a 1 or 20, other than that, no clue - "As far as you're concerned, you are moving stealthily...."
I think that's fine. Personally I don't want to be rolling for players. I trust my players to follow through with their intentions regardless of the rolls.
Because they're making a roll now that only comes into play in the future. You roll Stealth when you begin travelling but it doesn't get used until there's creatures that might spot you, which might not happen for many miles. Letting them see the rolls is essentially telling them in advance whether they're going to get caught or not.
Huh? I would have a character roll a Stealth check when it counts, at the time when there are creatures that might spot them, not miles in advance.
Even if you do that, they still keep that roll until they're caught. You're just delaying the issue. If they encounter creatures, roll a 12 and manage to sneak by, they still know they're keeping that 12 moving forward.
The only way you can avoid the issue by rolling for every single encounter, which I'm guessing that's what you're doing. But that's even worse in my opinion, because it makes prolonged scouting/exploration/recon borderline impossible. The more you reroll, the more chances you're giving them to roll low and fail.
Even if you do that, they still keep that roll until they're caught. You're just delaying the issue. If they encounter creatures, roll a 12 and manage to sneak by, they still know they're keeping that 12 moving forward.
The only way you can avoid the issue by rolling for every single encounter, which I'm guessing that's what you're doing. But that's even worse in my opinion, because it makes prolonged scouting/exploration/recon borderline impossible. The more you reroll, the more chances you're giving them to roll low and fail.
Well, logically, the longer you do something the more opportunity for failure. There's nothing wrong with asking for multiple checks.
Well, logically, the longer you do something the more opportunity for failure. There's nothing wrong with asking for multiple checks.
Multiple checks are a really bad way to realize that idea. The probability of success goes to hell really fast as the number of checks increases. That's the reason powerful effects like Slow allow a save every turn.
If their chance of sneaking past 1 encounter is 60%, their chances of making it past 2, 3, and 4 encounters are 36%, 22%, and 13% respectively. For two creatures (say, a Ranger and their animal companion) that's twice as many rolls so they chance of failure goes to 0 twice as fast - they'll be at 13% success rate by the 2nd encounter. With those probabilities, scouting is pointless; there's no way you'll get away with it.
I do, and do not, tell a player when they have succeeded at a stealth check.
I say I do because I only have them roll once there is uncertainty to resolve, and the outcome becoming certain is always accompanied by the circumstances developing in a way that makes it clear that they did or did not succeed at the check. Such as their character attempting to sneak past a guard, and either I describe the guard not reacting in any way to their presence (so either the guard didn't notice them, or is a really good actor acting like he didn't notice them for some reason) which tells them they succeeded, or I describe the guard's reaction to noticing them trying to sneak along which tells them they failed.
And I say I do not because I don't give them the DC before they roll (which I admit is inconsistent, as I do tell them DCs of many other rolls before they make them, but that's as part of establishing what the roll means (in terms of what a pass result will do, what consequences there are for failure, and the odds) and that is usually already clear when it comes to stealth), and I don't respond to them telling me their check result with "You pass" or "You fail" (though I do actually let them know they've failed and the margin by which they failed if it is 6 or less because we use Hero Points and they might wish to spend one to try and turn failure into success).
But I believe in running the game with as much transparency as possible, so I don't try to build tension with artificial means like a forced lack of knowledge on the player's part.
It depends on situation for me and character. If someone is wearing metal armor and failed stealth check they atleast know that their armor is making noise. I usually ask only one roll and compare it with passive perceptions later but if character in a position to detect someone that can discover him, I inform like there is a dog you can see at the entrance of the corridor you are heading or such or ask for a perception check if it is someone not hiding but not plain in sight either like there is an elf at the upper floor of a building who is enjoying nightbreeze with some wine. If a character is proficient in stealth i will tell them if their roll is generally good or bad and if they have expertise they get even more information like watch to second floors of buildings as well while trying to sneak pass in an alley
As I see it, there are 4 ways to adjudicate the question of stealth.
1) Stealth rolls vs Passive perception (which, for simplicity, is always a multiple of 5). I use this when the enemy is doing something other than looking for the characters/ guarding/ patrolling. For the record, a guard, who hasn't been distracted by something is going to be guarding. Guarding is active. In this case, I ASSUME that the characters know exactly how stealthy they are being, and they will get as close as possible without being seen. This means avoiding guards where possible, using cover, where possible, thus, this is always a success (nat 1s not withstanding.) You might decide that you can only get within 1000 yards of the camp (which in turn tells me that the camp has been there for a while and the tree-line doesn't get very close to it, any encounters in the camp will require a sprint to get away), but you do make it. Now, if the player(s) decide to push their luck, we go to option 4. Basically, the stealth roll here tells me, the DM that they are moving at 50% speed, and that they are attempting to not draw attention to themselves. It preserves a surprise round.
2) Stealth rolls when it's too late to take it back. Some people prefer this style of adjudication, but I do not. "getting caught" is a very binary way of thinking, and like in negotiation, it leads to weird situations like "I cast pass without trace and 8 guys just walk into the castle and into the king's bed-chamber without being noticed." +10 to stealth is powerful, but it's not a frigging invisibility cloak.
3) DM rolls the stealth check for the players. Philosophically, I don't think a DM should ever just walk his characters into something. This technique is, in my opinion, just a hair's breath from stealing your player's agency. I understand, the practical argument of "you think you are being stealthy..." but I would counter with it's inverse. Generally speaking, you know if you are being stealthy. If you step on a twig, you hear it, if your mail is rattling, you hear it. You might not be able to control it, but you can account for it, and change your plans because of it. 2nd, as I said, this might as well be DM story hour, as your player, at this moment has no control over the outcome of this scenario. Even if he is actively making decisions, it's still little better than a choose your own adventure novel. 3rd, see option 2. Invariably, this technique leads to the same problem of a very binary outcome. Either success, or failure. Perhaps more-so.
4) My preferred method: Rolling opposed stealth checks, just like during a negotiation, at times when a player could conceivably be caught. During a negotiation, rolling a 10 doesn't end the discussion, it simply means that you attempt a different tact. Treating stealth like a negotiation allows you to think in degrees. An overwhelming success might mean the guard was distracted momentarily, but a slight failure might only mean that you stumbled and made some noise. You were forced to stop, and hold your breath... ultimately the guard did not see you. A more severe failure, The guard is now alert <-in the dnd sense of the word. Very rarely does a failed stealth roll, for me, mean that the characters are instantly spotted and a horde of baddies jumps on them. To me, if that happens, then you are probably trying to abuse the mechanic a little too much. As I said, Stealth isn't an invisibility cloak. You are still there.
Well, logically, the longer you do something the more opportunity for failure. There's nothing wrong with asking for multiple checks.
Multiple checks are a really bad way to realize that idea. The probability of success goes to hell really fast as the number of checks increases. That's the reason powerful effects like Slow allow a save every turn.
If their chance of sneaking past 1 encounter is 60%, their chances of making it past 2, 3, and 4 encounters are 36%, 22%, and 13% respectively. For two creatures (say, a Ranger and their animal companion) that's twice as many rolls so they chance of failure goes to 0 twice as fast - they'll be at 13% success rate by the 2nd encounter. With those probabilities, scouting is pointless; there's no way you'll get away with it.
Keeping 1 roll gives them a real chance at succeeding while still requiring everybody to roll higher than the highest passive Perception.
Ok, so your characters cast pass without trace. +10 stealth. Barring magic, the highest PP you are likely to get from any guard or sentry is 15, which means that, for the duration of PWT (up to 1hr, and they can probably cast it at least 2x) assuming everyone in the party rolled a 5 or better, they are guaranteed to pass every check. Furthermore, they KNOW that the lowest stealth in the party is a 22 (12+10)... which is pretty good. Even if they have dogs (Keen Senses PP+5) they are safe.
Please explain to me how you keep this encounter even remotely interesting? I can only think of 3 ways. 1) DM hijacking that prevents characters from taking certain actions because they aren't realistic 2) magical Macguffins like helms of true sight or anti-magic field traps 3) deus ex machina. The king's sorcerer appears just as you reach the heavily guarded captain's tent (without issue). He has dragon's blood in him and instantly identifies you.
I much prefer the player agency of the push your luck approach, to the heavy-handedness of the above.
Well, logically, the longer you do something the more opportunity for failure. There's nothing wrong with asking for multiple checks.
Multiple checks are a really bad way to realize that idea. The probability of success goes to hell really fast as the number of checks increases. That's the reason powerful effects like Slow allow a save every turn.
If their chance of sneaking past 1 encounter is 60%, their chances of making it past 2, 3, and 4 encounters are 36%, 22%, and 13% respectively. For two creatures (say, a Ranger and their animal companion) that's twice as many rolls so they chance of failure goes to 0 twice as fast - they'll be at 13% success rate by the 2nd encounter. With those probabilities, scouting is pointless; there's no way you'll get away with it.
Keeping 1 roll gives them a real chance at succeeding while still requiring everybody to roll higher than the highest passive Perception.
Ok, so your characters cast pass without trace. +10 stealth. Barring magic, the highest PP you are likely to get from any guard or sentry is 15, which means that, for the duration of PWT (up to 1hr, and they can probably cast it at least 2x) assuming everyone in the party rolled a 5 or better, they are guaranteed to pass every check. Furthermore, they KNOW that the lowest stealth in the party is a 22 (12+10)... which is pretty good. Even if they have dogs (Keen Senses PP+5) they are safe.
Please explain to me how you keep this encounter even remotely interesting? I can only think of 3 ways. 1) DM hijacking that prevents characters from taking certain actions because they aren't realistic 2) magical Macguffins like helms of true sight or anti-magic field traps 3) deus ex machina. The king's sorcerer appears just as you reach the heavily guarded captain's tent (without issue). He has dragon's blood in him and instantly identifies you.
I much prefer the player agency of the push your luck approach, to the heavy-handedness of the above.
You can always roll perception for guards the pp is just a set number assumed you took 10 on dice to speed up the process but stealth vs perception is originally an opposed check. Also passive perception is only mentioned in hiding not sneaking around so by RAW you should be rolling perception for any guard if people are trying to sneak past them anyway.
Well, logically, the longer you do something the more opportunity for failure. There's nothing wrong with asking for multiple checks.
Multiple checks are a really bad way to realize that idea. The probability of success goes to hell really fast as the number of checks increases. That's the reason powerful effects like Slow allow a save every turn.
If their chance of sneaking past 1 encounter is 60%, their chances of making it past 2, 3, and 4 encounters are 36%, 22%, and 13% respectively. For two creatures (say, a Ranger and their animal companion) that's twice as many rolls so they chance of failure goes to 0 twice as fast - they'll be at 13% success rate by the 2nd encounter. With those probabilities, scouting is pointless; there's no way you'll get away with it.
Keeping 1 roll gives them a real chance at succeeding while still requiring everybody to roll higher than the highest passive Perception.
Ok, so your characters cast pass without trace. +10 stealth. Barring magic, the highest PP you are likely to get from any guard or sentry is 15, which means that, for the duration of PWT (up to 1hr, and they can probably cast it at least 2x) assuming everyone in the party rolled a 5 or better, they are guaranteed to pass every check. Furthermore, they KNOW that the lowest stealth in the party is a 22 (12+10)... which is pretty good. Even if they have dogs (Keen Senses PP+5) they are safe.
Please explain to me how you keep this encounter even remotely interesting? I can only think of 3 ways. 1) DM hijacking that prevents characters from taking certain actions because they aren't realistic 2) magical Macguffins like helms of true sight or anti-magic field traps 3) deus ex machina. The king's sorcerer appears just as you reach the heavily guarded captain's tent (without issue). He has dragon's blood in him and instantly identifies you.
I much prefer the player agency of the push your luck approach, to the heavy-handedness of the above.
You can always roll perception for guards the pp is just a set number assumed you took 10 on dice to speed up the process but stealth vs perception is originally an opposed check. Also passive perception is only mentioned in hiding not sneaking around so by RAW you should be rolling perception for any guard if people are trying to sneak past them anyway.
I agree, but inquisitive coder seems to think that this is wrong and/or impossible, so I'm curious how he does it without "rolling every encounter" which is a "bad way to realize this idea" and "rolling once so they have at least a chance of success"... Going back, I see that he's in favor of keeping stealth secret, so I suppose there is some degree of tension, but still...
Well, logically, the longer you do something the more opportunity for failure. There's nothing wrong with asking for multiple checks.
Multiple checks are a really bad way to realize that idea. The probability of success goes to hell really fast as the number of checks increases. That's the reason powerful effects like Slow allow a save every turn.
If their chance of sneaking past 1 encounter is 60%, their chances of making it past 2, 3, and 4 encounters are 36%, 22%, and 13% respectively. For two creatures (say, a Ranger and their animal companion) that's twice as many rolls so they chance of failure goes to 0 twice as fast - they'll be at 13% success rate by the 2nd encounter. With those probabilities, scouting is pointless; there's no way you'll get away with it.
Keeping 1 roll gives them a real chance at succeeding while still requiring everybody to roll higher than the highest passive Perception.
Ok, so your characters cast pass without trace. +10 stealth. Barring magic, the highest PP you are likely to get from any guard or sentry is 15, which means that, for the duration of PWT (up to 1hr, and they can probably cast it at least 2x) assuming everyone in the party rolled a 5 or better, they are guaranteed to pass every check. Furthermore, they KNOW that the lowest stealth in the party is a 22 (12+10)... which is pretty good. Even if they have dogs (Keen Senses PP+5) they are safe.
Please explain to me how you keep this encounter even remotely interesting? I can only think of 3 ways. 1) DM hijacking that prevents characters from taking certain actions because they aren't realistic 2) magical Macguffins like helms of true sight or anti-magic field traps 3) deus ex machina. The king's sorcerer appears just as you reach the heavily guarded captain's tent (without issue). He has dragon's blood in him and instantly identifies you.
I much prefer the player agency of the push your luck approach, to the heavy-handedness of the above.
You can always roll perception for guards the pp is just a set number assumed you took 10 on dice to speed up the process but stealth vs perception is originally an opposed check. Also passive perception is only mentioned in hiding not sneaking around so by RAW you should be rolling perception for any guard if people are trying to sneak past them anyway.
I agree, but inquisitive coder seems to think that this is wrong and/or impossible, so I'm curious how he does it without "rolling every encounter" which is a "bad way to realize this idea" and "rolling once so they have at least a chance of success"... Going back, I see that he's in favor of keeping stealth secret, so I suppose there is some degree of tension, but still...
I think he thinks it is a bad idea because he is misunderstanding that sneak checks are done vs passive perception not against another roll. In that case his statistics is correct but if both sides are rolling each time it is another story.
Just a quick note to all - you don't need to quote the entire conversation above you when replying - it makes the discussion a lot harder to read through. :)
Just a quick note to all - you don't need to quote the entire conversation above you when replying - it makes the discussion a lot harder to read through. :)
I was on phone hardly can pick up the proper part of convo when i replied :P
Just a quick note to all - you don't need to quote the entire conversation above you when replying - it makes the discussion a lot harder to read through. :)
It also makes the discussion easier to keep track of, if there are multiple conversations going in the same thread, which is why I think it's a good habit to be in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
I know people do a little of both, they will either tell the players they succeeded at the stealth check, or they won't to keep the tension up.
What do you do?
A Stealth check isn't something you can succeed at in a traditional sense. Even if a player hides successfully now, they might be discovered if they pass a creature with a high enough passive Perception.
I keep Stealth rolls secret so the die roll can't influence the player's decisions. That prevents situations where they decide to scout ahead or explore, see a 1 come up on their d20, and then suddenly change their minds.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I don't see a reason why a character can't or shouldn't be aware of how stealthy they are being (or not.) If they roll a 1 then they probably stepped on a twig or knocked over the display of soup cans.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
A DM friend of mine always rolled stealth rolls for players, in secret, so they didn't know what number they generated.
He would tell them if they rolled a 1 or 20, other than that, no clue - "As far as you're concerned, you are moving stealthily...."
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The Forum Infestation (TM)
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I do, and do not, tell a player when they have succeeded at a stealth check.
I say I do because I only have them roll once there is uncertainty to resolve, and the outcome becoming certain is always accompanied by the circumstances developing in a way that makes it clear that they did or did not succeed at the check. Such as their character attempting to sneak past a guard, and either I describe the guard not reacting in any way to their presence (so either the guard didn't notice them, or is a really good actor acting like he didn't notice them for some reason) which tells them they succeeded, or I describe the guard's reaction to noticing them trying to sneak along which tells them they failed.
And I say I do not because I don't give them the DC before they roll (which I admit is inconsistent, as I do tell them DCs of many other rolls before they make them, but that's as part of establishing what the roll means (in terms of what a pass result will do, what consequences there are for failure, and the odds) and that is usually already clear when it comes to stealth), and I don't respond to them telling me their check result with "You pass" or "You fail" (though I do actually let them know they've failed and the margin by which they failed if it is 6 or less because we use Hero Points and they might wish to spend one to try and turn failure into success).
But I believe in running the game with as much transparency as possible, so I don't try to build tension with artificial means like a forced lack of knowledge on the player's part.
It depends on situation for me and character. If someone is wearing metal armor and failed stealth check they atleast know that their armor is making noise. I usually ask only one roll and compare it with passive perceptions later but if character in a position to detect someone that can discover him, I inform like there is a dog you can see at the entrance of the corridor you are heading or such or ask for a perception check if it is someone not hiding but not plain in sight either like there is an elf at the upper floor of a building who is enjoying nightbreeze with some wine. If a character is proficient in stealth i will tell them if their roll is generally good or bad and if they have expertise they get even more information like watch to second floors of buildings as well while trying to sneak pass in an alley
As I see it, there are 4 ways to adjudicate the question of stealth.
1) Stealth rolls vs Passive perception (which, for simplicity, is always a multiple of 5). I use this when the enemy is doing something other than looking for the characters/ guarding/ patrolling. For the record, a guard, who hasn't been distracted by something is going to be guarding. Guarding is active. In this case, I ASSUME that the characters know exactly how stealthy they are being, and they will get as close as possible without being seen. This means avoiding guards where possible, using cover, where possible, thus, this is always a success (nat 1s not withstanding.) You might decide that you can only get within 1000 yards of the camp (which in turn tells me that the camp has been there for a while and the tree-line doesn't get very close to it, any encounters in the camp will require a sprint to get away), but you do make it. Now, if the player(s) decide to push their luck, we go to option 4. Basically, the stealth roll here tells me, the DM that they are moving at 50% speed, and that they are attempting to not draw attention to themselves. It preserves a surprise round.
2) Stealth rolls when it's too late to take it back. Some people prefer this style of adjudication, but I do not. "getting caught" is a very binary way of thinking, and like in negotiation, it leads to weird situations like "I cast pass without trace and 8 guys just walk into the castle and into the king's bed-chamber without being noticed." +10 to stealth is powerful, but it's not a frigging invisibility cloak.
3) DM rolls the stealth check for the players. Philosophically, I don't think a DM should ever just walk his characters into something. This technique is, in my opinion, just a hair's breath from stealing your player's agency. I understand, the practical argument of "you think you are being stealthy..." but I would counter with it's inverse. Generally speaking, you know if you are being stealthy. If you step on a twig, you hear it, if your mail is rattling, you hear it. You might not be able to control it, but you can account for it, and change your plans because of it. 2nd, as I said, this might as well be DM story hour, as your player, at this moment has no control over the outcome of this scenario. Even if he is actively making decisions, it's still little better than a choose your own adventure novel. 3rd, see option 2. Invariably, this technique leads to the same problem of a very binary outcome. Either success, or failure. Perhaps more-so.
4) My preferred method: Rolling opposed stealth checks, just like during a negotiation, at times when a player could conceivably be caught. During a negotiation, rolling a 10 doesn't end the discussion, it simply means that you attempt a different tact. Treating stealth like a negotiation allows you to think in degrees. An overwhelming success might mean the guard was distracted momentarily, but a slight failure might only mean that you stumbled and made some noise. You were forced to stop, and hold your breath... ultimately the guard did not see you. A more severe failure, The guard is now alert <-in the dnd sense of the word. Very rarely does a failed stealth roll, for me, mean that the characters are instantly spotted and a horde of baddies jumps on them. To me, if that happens, then you are probably trying to abuse the mechanic a little too much. As I said, Stealth isn't an invisibility cloak. You are still there.
Just a quick note to all - you don't need to quote the entire conversation above you when replying - it makes the discussion a lot harder to read through. :)
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)