Again, all I'm trying to say is that justifications for keeping Stealth rolls secret could just as easily be extended to other rolls, but ultimately that there shouldn't be any reason to keep rolls for character ability checks secret. Right or wrong, that's the last I'll say on the matter.
I will say though that I fully agree with you that there isn't really any reason to keep die rolls secret from players. I use, and encourage the use of, full transparency when running games (i.e. letting the players know everything about the game rules content - basically everything about the game and how it works except for the story developments that will be coming up in the campaign's future).
I've had too much experience with the act of attempting to keep player knowledge limited to only what the character knows resulting in counter-intuitive and counter-productive results (along the lines of players intentionally playing their characters as complete ignorant buffoons that seem oblivious to any and all clues or common sense in the in-game world, because the player knows a particular bit of info and has chosen to do what they know will be a stupid choice (to ironically not realize they are actually doing the opposite of) proving that they didn't use player knowledge) to continue trying to force players to separate what they know from what their character knows, instead choosing to have the players just do what they believe their character would do, no matter why they as a player believe the character would do that - and the result has been that there are rarely any issues, since the players basically never do anything that it isn't fully believable a person would do in the given circumstances.
Again, all I'm trying to say is that justifications for keeping Stealth rolls secret could just as easily be extended to other rolls, ...
I disagree, for one important reason: out of combat Stealth rolls work differently from every other roll.
Imagine if, when the Rogue entered a dungeon, you rolled a d20 and declared "There. The next time you try to disable a trap (possibly triggering it), that's the roll you'll use. Oh, but act like I didn't tell you that." That's silly, right? Even if you trust them to act in good faith, why would you put that in their heads in the first place?
There's no need to keep other checks secret because it doesn't change the outcome; they've already finished the task and suffered the consequences. That's not true for Stealth. You roll before you've encountered any creatures. You're peeking into the future, like when using a divination wizard's Portent dice.
You can roll Stealth the open, ruin the suspense and force your players to pretend they don't know what's going to happen, or you can just roll in secret and save everybody the trouble.
That's not the only possible interpretation of the stealth rules. I definitely don't have anyone roll anything, stealth included, before the results of their roll actually matter.
So there is no need to keep stealth check results secret, because they too happen when knowing the result doesn't change the outcome.
That's not the only possible interpretation of the stealth rules. I definitely don't have anyone roll anything, stealth included, before the results of their roll actually matter.
So there is no need to keep stealth check results secret, because they too happen when knowing the result doesn't change the outcome.
That works fine for the first time they encounter creatures, but if they succeed in sneaking past them, they're keeping the totals they just rolled until they're caught or stop being stealthy (which they have little reason to do during non-dungeon travel without any deadlines.)
That works fine for the first time they encounter creatures, but if they succeed in sneaking past them, they're keeping the totals they just rolled until they're caught or stop being stealthy (which they have little reason to do during non-dungeon travel without any deadlines.)
Again, that's not actually the only possible interpretation of the rules. There is no more reason to assume the same stealth check would apply against a new set of creatures or in a new circumstance than their is to roll one attack roll and use that result for every attack made until one manages to miss.
That works fine for the first time they encounter creatures, but if they succeed in sneaking past them, they're keeping the totals they just rolled until they're caught or stop being stealthy (which they have little reason to do during non-dungeon travel without any deadlines.)
Again, that's not actually the only possible interpretation of the rules. There is no more reason to assume the same stealth check would apply against a new set of creatures or in a new circumstance than their is to roll one attack roll and use that result for every attack made until one manages to miss.
That's explicitly what the rules say.
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.
@15:07: "When you want to hide, you typically make a Dexterity (Stealth) check, ... and it's opposed by the Wisdom (Perception) checks of anyone who might be actively looking for you." Then there's some discussion on passive Perception, and then @17:13: "So another part of this rule is that as soon makes that check - that Dexterity (Stealth) check - they keep that result - whatever the total is from that check - they keep it until someone discovers them, or they decide they're gonna stop hiding."
I've never seen anything pointing to the contrary.
It's not about text saying some other thing, it's about what the text you quote can be interpreted as meaning. Specifically the "...or you stop hiding..." part. A character can be interpreted as having stopped hiding as soon as there is nothing for them to be hiding from (by which I mean to say that moving down a hallway stealthily is not necessarily the same thing as hiding in a hallway).
The section on Movement in PH Chapter 8: Adventuring refers you to the Hiding rules I cited earlier.
While traveling at a slow pace, the characters can move stealthily. As long as they’re not in the open, they can try to surprise or sneak by other creatures they encounter. See the rules for hiding in chapter 7 "Using Ability Scores."
Chapter 9: Combat refer you to the same hiding rules, so it's the same rules whether you're out and about or hiding in combat.
When you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check in an attempt to hide, following the rules for hiding. If you succeed, you gain certain benefits, as described in the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section later in this chapter.
*The section on Unseen Attackers and Targets says this:
If you are hidden — both unseen and unheard — when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
Ok, you're absolutely right about that. Listening to that sage advice podcast I understand more where you're coming from. But, I still think you're taking the whole notion of "one roll" to an extreme. It seems to me that the intent is so that players don't need to roll a stealth check every round. But if the situation or "process" changes i.e. whether it be different observers, different environment or conditions, then a new check would be warranted. Crawford emphasizes that Stealth is one check that really, more than most other checks, relies on DM adjudication. There are many factors that influence when a Stealth check is required. I don't think it should be treated like flicking on the "stealth mode" button.
But, I still think you're taking the whole notion of "one roll" to an extreme. It seems to me that the intent is so that players don't need to roll a stealth check every round. But if the situation or "process" changes i.e. whether it be different observers, different environment or conditions, then a new check would be warranted. Crawford emphasizes that Stealth is one check that really, more than most other checks, relies on DM adjudication. There are many factors that influence when a Stealth check is required. I don't think it should be treated like flicking on the "stealth mode" button.
I can understand rerolling if, say, the characters were forced to move out into the open during a portion of their travel. I'm really not keen on rerolling whenever a new observer arrives, though. I beat this to death earlier in the thread but the short version is that every reroll is a new opportunity to fail, and having to roll higher than everyone's passive Perception two or three times in a row is much harder than having to do so once. (And it's even harder in a group since any one person failing means the encounter happens.) It's kind of like asking them to roll with increasing levels of disadvantage. In my opinion it's much more dangerous to err on the side of rerolling than on the side of not rerolling.
I'm also fairly sure based on all of Crawford's interviews and tweets that writing the rules this way was a deliberate decision, because he's mentioned multiple times that simplicity and speed of play are very important. He's tried to keep the number of rolls for any given mechanic to a minimum (that's part of why monster grapples have a fixed DC). Making "stealth mode" a binary state is also much simpler than having to track whether you're hidden from monsters X and Y but not Z.
If even with all of that taken into consideration you prefer to reroll, that's fine. That's a matter of preference and DMing style. I just wanted to make sure the RAW and the potential downsides of deviating from it are clear. I think the rules as written strike a really good balance of simplicity, speed, and scaling gracefully no matter how many creatures you're trying to sneak past.
But it's not just a matter of giving the players a new opportunity to fail - it's also a matter of giving them a new chance to succeed. That 10 they rolled might get them past the goblins, goblin boss, and most hobgoblins as they sneak through camp. When the Hobgoblin Devastator comes up, suddenly that 10 doesn't work anymore. I'd take the higher passive perception into consideration when trying to determine whether to ask for a reroll or not - especially when the rogue is dragging the average down with his roll of natural 1 - expertise giving him a 10 with his +5 Dex and +4 prof bonus (lvl 4, spent his ASI to level up his Dex after rolling 18 in Char Creation. I run the Old Ways{dice roll stats, no point-buy at my table}).
But it's not just a matter of giving the players a new opportunity to fail - it's also a matter of giving them a new chance to succeed. That 10 they rolled might get them past the goblins, goblin boss, and most hobgoblins as they sneak through camp. When the Hobgoblin Devastator comes up, suddenly that 10 doesn't work anymore. I'd take the higher passive perception into consideration when trying to determine whether to ask for a reroll or not - especially when the rogue is dragging the average down with his roll of natural 1 - expertise giving him a 10 with his +5 Dex and +4 prof bonus (lvl 4, spent his ASI to level up his Dex after rolling 18 in Char Creation. I run the Old Ways{dice roll stats, no point-buy at my table}).
I think fromshus meant rerolling unconditionally when the Hobgoblin Devastator shows up, which could ruin their Stealth if they had originally rolled high enough to sneak past it.
I never considered your approach before. It's more generous than the RAW since you'd only be rerolling when a new creature would cause Stealth to fail. I could see that working well if you prefer your group to sneak around instead of charging in guns blazing.
It depends, I play theater of the mind. If there is no obvious enemies and the player plans to scout ahead of the party then I will roll in secret. If it's alert enemy that the player knows about, I would have the player roll when I feel the enemy could logically notice them. No btb but exciting!
But it's not just a matter of giving the players a new opportunity to fail - it's also a matter of giving them a new chance to succeed. That 10 they rolled might get them past the goblins, goblin boss, and most hobgoblins as they sneak through camp. When the Hobgoblin Devastator comes up, suddenly that 10 doesn't work anymore. I'd take the higher passive perception into consideration when trying to determine whether to ask for a reroll or not - especially when the rogue is dragging the average down with his roll of natural 1 - expertise giving him a 10 with his +5 Dex and +4 prof bonus (lvl 4, spent his ASI to level up his Dex after rolling 18 in Char Creation. I run the Old Ways{dice roll stats, no point-buy at my table}).
I think fromshus meant rerolling unconditionally when the Hobgoblin Devastator shows up, which could ruin their Stealth if they had originally rolled high enough to sneak past it.
I never considered your approach before. It's more generous than the RAW since you'd only be rerolling when a new creature would cause Stealth to fail. I could see that working well if you prefer your group to sneak around instead of charging in guns blazing.
Well, what it comes down to with me, is "have the circumstances changed" and "does the outcome of a roll in this situation make things more interesting if it succeeds or fails?" Sneaking past creatures with close passive perception and similar CR ratings? Let the original roll ride. Could it lead to a more interesting outcome if it fails? Roll again - if the players succeed they feel like bad-asses, if they fail you get a good encounter.
It's similar with Survival. Roll at the beginning to see if your Ranger can track the orcs that took your halfling friends prisoner after a fresh rain and through open plain. Roll again once terrain changes, Exhaustion starts setting in, and so on (say your friends escaped the horde, and managed to find a friendly Treant). So long as the DC stays close, your players are on the same course, etc, by all means let the original roll go on. Once things start switching up, it gets harder, and success means your players have found the "up, up, down, down, left, right, left, right, 'b', 'a'" that could ruin your plans for the evening? Reroll - and have a good backup encounter ready.
That said, I often use rules that encourage my players to "break" the game and think outside the box. I use passive skills as a baseline for when to call for a roll in most cases, and group checks for when they're all trying the same thing (yes, even stealth. My clanky fighter/paladin/cleric only alerts the enemies when the average roll is lower than the passive perception of the current enemies {assuming the enemies aren't actively searching}). It's less about my preferences "stealth vs guns blazing" and more about making sure my players have every possible opportunity to do something other than "I hit the ogre with the sword" - though when those dice fail, I'm more than happy to have the ogre mop the floor with the party.
Allow me to offer another alternative, one which preserves tension while keeping it simple for all involved.
1) Decide what the characters are hoping to achieve with their stealth. (Climb onto a roof, move unnoticed through a gnome encampment, travel through 20 miles of forest.)
2) Have 1 roll for that entire event.
3) If the roll fails, then roll percentile dice to see how much of that time they are hidden/stealthy/incognito.
After any combat, or event that might draw attention to the characters, a new stealth roll is made.
"Having removed the silver tongue of Jebidiah from it's display case, Bart hears the returning footsteps of the museum guard. He ducks further under the table, hoping the nearly floor length cloth will conceal him. (Roll stealth VS guard's perception roll)
"For ten minutes he crouches while the guard paces the room. Finally the guard settles in a chair and opens his book. Bart waits a whole minute longer, then creeps towards the main door. (Roll stealth - gets less than guard's PP. Roll Percentile for failure - 85, so Bart will be at the door and opening before the guard notices.) As he pulls back the bolt securing the door, he nervously applies too much strength to the rusty mechanism and slams the metal rod into it's cup. The guard drops his book and looks up just as Bart yanks the door open and dashes outside. Numerous bushes and shady nooks beckon, but Bart decides he's had enough sneaking for one night and dashes for the ten foot wall at the edge of the manor."
So, 2 checks, one of which can be opposed (doesn't need to be, but it means the player can see his roll while still retaining suspense) and the possibility of a third as Bart would be unseen for a few moments while the guard rushes to the doorway. For this third roll I might have allowed the player to roll and then decide if he thinks the bush he chooses to hide in is good enough to risk the guard's active scan of the area.
I just wish I could think of elegant* solutions like this while actually DMing live!
*Well, I think it's elegant.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Roleplaying since Runequest.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I will say though that I fully agree with you that there isn't really any reason to keep die rolls secret from players. I use, and encourage the use of, full transparency when running games (i.e. letting the players know everything about the game rules content - basically everything about the game and how it works except for the story developments that will be coming up in the campaign's future).
I've had too much experience with the act of attempting to keep player knowledge limited to only what the character knows resulting in counter-intuitive and counter-productive results (along the lines of players intentionally playing their characters as complete ignorant buffoons that seem oblivious to any and all clues or common sense in the in-game world, because the player knows a particular bit of info and has chosen to do what they know will be a stupid choice (to ironically not realize they are actually doing the opposite of) proving that they didn't use player knowledge) to continue trying to force players to separate what they know from what their character knows, instead choosing to have the players just do what they believe their character would do, no matter why they as a player believe the character would do that - and the result has been that there are rarely any issues, since the players basically never do anything that it isn't fully believable a person would do in the given circumstances.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
That's not the only possible interpretation of the stealth rules. I definitely don't have anyone roll anything, stealth included, before the results of their roll actually matter.
So there is no need to keep stealth check results secret, because they too happen when knowing the result doesn't change the outcome.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Jeremy says the same thing on the Dragon Talk episode on Stealth.
@15:07: "When you want to hide, you typically make a Dexterity (Stealth) check, ... and it's opposed by the Wisdom (Perception) checks of anyone who might be actively looking for you." Then there's some discussion on passive Perception, and then @17:13: "So another part of this rule is that as soon makes that check - that Dexterity (Stealth) check - they keep that result - whatever the total is from that check - they keep it until someone discovers them, or they decide they're gonna stop hiding."
Plus this tweet: "The rules on hiding specify that your Dexterity (Stealth) check is valid until you're discovered or you stop hiding (see PH, 177)."
I've never seen anything pointing to the contrary.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I would certainly interpret hiding as concealing oneself and remaining stationary, not the same thing as stealthy movement.
Hiding just means you're keeping yourself unseen and unheard*. You definitely don't need to remain stationary.
"Stealth imposes no movement reduction in combat."
The section on Movement in PH Chapter 8: Adventuring refers you to the Hiding rules I cited earlier.
Chapter 9: Combat refer you to the same hiding rules, so it's the same rules whether you're out and about or hiding in combat.
*The section on Unseen Attackers and Targets says this:
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Ok, you're absolutely right about that. Listening to that sage advice podcast I understand more where you're coming from. But, I still think you're taking the whole notion of "one roll" to an extreme. It seems to me that the intent is so that players don't need to roll a stealth check every round. But if the situation or "process" changes i.e. whether it be different observers, different environment or conditions, then a new check would be warranted. Crawford emphasizes that Stealth is one check that really, more than most other checks, relies on DM adjudication. There are many factors that influence when a Stealth check is required. I don't think it should be treated like flicking on the "stealth mode" button.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
But it's not just a matter of giving the players a new opportunity to fail - it's also a matter of giving them a new chance to succeed. That 10 they rolled might get them past the goblins, goblin boss, and most hobgoblins as they sneak through camp. When the Hobgoblin Devastator comes up, suddenly that 10 doesn't work anymore. I'd take the higher passive perception into consideration when trying to determine whether to ask for a reroll or not - especially when the rogue is dragging the average down with his roll of natural 1 - expertise giving him a 10 with his +5 Dex and +4 prof bonus (lvl 4, spent his ASI to level up his Dex after rolling 18 in Char Creation. I run the Old Ways{dice roll stats, no point-buy at my table}).
The Forum Infestation (TM)
It depends, I play theater of the mind. If there is no obvious enemies and the player plans to scout ahead of the party then I will roll in secret. If it's alert enemy that the player knows about, I would have the player roll when I feel the enemy could logically notice them. No btb but exciting!
Allow me to offer another alternative, one which preserves tension while keeping it simple for all involved.
1) Decide what the characters are hoping to achieve with their stealth. (Climb onto a roof, move unnoticed through a gnome encampment, travel through 20 miles of forest.)
2) Have 1 roll for that entire event.
3) If the roll fails, then roll percentile dice to see how much of that time they are hidden/stealthy/incognito.
After any combat, or event that might draw attention to the characters, a new stealth roll is made.
"Having removed the silver tongue of Jebidiah from it's display case, Bart hears the returning footsteps of the museum guard. He ducks further under the table, hoping the nearly floor length cloth will conceal him. (Roll stealth VS guard's perception roll)
"For ten minutes he crouches while the guard paces the room. Finally the guard settles in a chair and opens his book. Bart waits a whole minute longer, then creeps towards the main door. (Roll stealth - gets less than guard's PP. Roll Percentile for failure - 85, so Bart will be at the door and opening before the guard notices.) As he pulls back the bolt securing the door, he nervously applies too much strength to the rusty mechanism and slams the metal rod into it's cup. The guard drops his book and looks up just as Bart yanks the door open and dashes outside. Numerous bushes and shady nooks beckon, but Bart decides he's had enough sneaking for one night and dashes for the ten foot wall at the edge of the manor."
So, 2 checks, one of which can be opposed (doesn't need to be, but it means the player can see his roll while still retaining suspense) and the possibility of a third as Bart would be unseen for a few moments while the guard rushes to the doorway. For this third roll I might have allowed the player to roll and then decide if he thinks the bush he chooses to hide in is good enough to risk the guard's active scan of the area.
I just wish I could think of elegant* solutions like this while actually DMing live!
*Well, I think it's elegant.
Roleplaying since Runequest.