Would you guys say that if an enemy is fighting a rogue and the rogue decides to somehow stealth in front of the enemy, would the enemy not need to do a perception roll, have one chance to do a perception roll as a reaction, or the rogue just hides if it is above the enemy's passive perception?
Public Mod Note
(Sedge):
Moved from Tips & Tactics
Technically the passive perception is always on, even in battle. So the rogue hides if the roll is higher than the passive perception. If the character decide to do a Perception roll, it must use his/her the Search action.
Also, don't forget that the rogue can't just "go into stealth" while standing infront of their foe mid-combat.
There needs to be some plausible thing to hide behind where the foe doesn't see them enter the cover. Even with the Wood Elf ability "Mask of the Wild" - that just means they need lighter coverage - it still needs something to break line-of-sight.
Also, don't forget that the rogue can't just "go into stealth" while standing infront of their foe mid-combat.
There needs to be some plausible thing to hide behind where the foe doesn't see them enter the cover. Even with the Wood Elf ability "Mask of the Wild" - that just means they need lighter coverage - it still needs something to break line-of-sight.
Yes, this is important. It took a bit of explaining with some of my players that this isnt like Skyrim or WoW, clicking the stealth button doesn't automatically hide you, even if you roll a 20. You have to actually hide behind something (i.e. run around a corner and duck behind a barrel -- being in plain view then just ducking behind a barrel in front of the opponent isn't hiding, they saw where you went)
Being hidden doesn't mean they don't know where you are. It means they can't perceive you in any way. If you go behind a tree and hide then they can't tell for sure that you are still there without changing positions to look. So if you go into heavy foliage or in an area of shadow you can attempt to hide, even if they saw you go into the obscured area.
Personally I have a bit of hate for stealth in combat, because it feels to me it's often one of the most immersion breaking moments. I really like Dawnforgecast's review of Stealth in 5e.
He covers the fact that stealth isn't magical. If the Rogue ducks behind cover (ie: small wall) she can hide, but if the enemy literally just walks around the cover (ie: small wall), but small wall no longer provides cover and she is automatically detected.
He covers that popping out to shoot a ranged weapon negates the hiding, and so loses Adv on the attack... because she is no longer hiding.
That said it does provide a very good use: stops the enemy from returning fire!
I would disagree with you Filecat. I don't think the Stealth check would be vs Passive.
1) Think creates a stupidly simple DC to meet.
2) Passive perception is for before the fight, not during the fight.
2a) It would be slower, but I'd do opposed check vs every enemy in the room.
Well, at the end of the day, it is up to the DM to decide when active roll or passive score apply for perception. Depends on the circumstances.
In combat, the passive score can be useful when the DM doesn't want the players know that there is someone or something hiding.
Also, from a probability point of view, the stealth check has exactly the same likelihood to succeed whether it is compared with an active roll or a passive score.
Also, from a probability point of view, the stealth check has exactly the same likelihood to succeed whether it is compared with an active roll or a passive score.
Not quite. The passive is the average, rounded down. Monster damage is done the same way.
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
Also, from a probability point of view, the stealth check has exactly the same likelihood to succeed whether it is compared with an active roll or a passive score.
Not quite. The passive is the average, rounded down. Monster damage is done the same way.
Yes, rounded down. But in case of passive score, the stealth roll succeeds even if it is equal to the passive score, because it is like a DC.
On the other hand, in case of active perception roll, stealth roll and perception roll are in contest, and a tie in contest dictates that the situation before the contest remains the same.
Probability-wise, the two situations are the same.
This can easily be narrated as the hiding creature finding an opportunity to shoot while the target isn't looking their way.
I would disagree with you Filecat. I don't think the Stealth check would be vs Passive.
1) Think creates a stupidly simple DC to meet.
2) Passive perception is for before the fight, not during the fight.
2a) It would be slower, but I'd do opposed check vs every enemy in the room.
Respectfully, what you propose isn't just incorrect (with regards to the rules), it's also a really bad idea.
The hiding rules need to be simple and fast because hiding is one of the core combat actions every creature can take, and an entire class is built around being able to hide as a bonus action. Rolling VS every enemy is slow and also makes hiding borderline impossible. It's like giving the enemy side super-advantage; the more enemies there are, the more likely they'll roll close to 20.
The current hiding rules work perfectly fine: the hider has to beat every creature's passive Perception which means they have to beat their best Perception. If you think that's too easy, try hiding from a CR 1/4 wolf, which has a total passive Perception of 18 (13 + advantage from Keen Hearing and Smell). Wolves and dire wolves can continue to be relevant at higher levels, because goblins and hobgoblins love them, and their Pack Tactics and ability to knock prone makes them incredibly dangerous even if they can be killed easily. Many other humanoids can also plausibly have them as pets, and enemy druids can wild shape into them. At higher levels, try hiding from an adult red dragon - they can frighten, have passive Perception above 20, and can Search outside their turn as a Legendary Action if you still succeed.
Ruining a hiding character's ability to hide is easy. Besides simply taking away the places they can hide or moving to a position where they can be seen, all you have to do is give them disadvantage on Dexterity checks and/or give your best Perception guy advantage on Wisdom checks. If the Rogue gets poisoned, frightened, gains a level of exhaustion, or gets targeted with Hunter's Mark or Hex (which are level 1 spells with no save), they're in trouble. If someone grapples them, they can't get to a hiding place.
Everyone on the enemy side can also take the Search action on their turn to get an active Perception check and try to find the Rogue. If even just one of them succeeds, the Rogue is no longer hidden.
Balance-wise, reliable hiding is what makes non-crossbow/TWF Rogues competitive with TWF/Crossbow Expert Rogues; gaining Advantage on the one attack per round they get is almost as good as being able to get a second attack as a bonus action. If you make hiding any harder than it already is, Variant Human Crossbow Expert Rogue becomes the best Rogue build by a long shot. Having one optimal build is boring.
Also, from a probability point of view, the stealth check has exactly the same likelihood to succeed whether it is compared with an active roll or a passive score.
Not quite. The passive is the average, rounded down. Monster damage is done the same way.
Yes, rounded down. But in case of passive score, the stealth roll succeeds even if it is equal to the passive score, because it is like a DC.
On the other hand, in case of active perception roll, stealth roll and perception roll are in contest, and a tie in contest dictates that the situation before the contest remains the same.
Probability-wise, the two situations are the same.
Stealth roll has to BEAT passive perception, it was very specifically mentioned by Jeremy Crawford in a podcast.
I did find that Sage Advice article you cited. That is the official ruling, I'm not going to argue that it isn't the rule, but I still think it's a terrible ruling and let me explain why.
Combat is a 2 way street, and NPCs can always be better then PCs at any game.
Lets say you have a group of goblins, in a forest with plenty of heavy obscured dense foliage about.
The goblins ambush the PCs their actions are as follows
Action: attack +4 to hit with Adv on the attack dealing 1d6+2 damage per attack.
Bonus Action: Hide in the foliage. (+6 to hide Vs. the Passive Perception of the party, possibly with a -5 due to the lightly obscured foliage causing DisAdvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.
Move: Re position to a different part of the foliage
This combat will be a frustratingly endless game of "wak-a-mole". Even if a PC uses their Standard Action to detect goblin(s) and their Move to get into melee. Then only that 1 PC will have detected the goblin(s). The goblins freely move after hiding as long as they stay in foliage, so the PCs can't just move blindly hoping to stumble upon a Goblin. This means the PCs will never have a chance of dealing damage to the goblins.
The Goblin can if detected
Action: Disengage from combat
Bonus Action: Hide in the foliage (+6 to hide Vs. the Passive Perception of the party, possibly with a -5 due to the lightly obscured foliage causing DisAdvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.
Move: Re position to a different part of the foliage
This also argues that if a Rogue is behind a short wall. They can stand up, attack with Adv. and somehow they are still "Hidden" even if there is no place to hide since to attack they have to: Regain Line of Sight (which to me should break hiding, but I concede it doesn't), Perceive the Target (they do automatically because they weren't hiding), Aim their Weapon, Fire their Weapon... and in all of that time the Target never just SEES the Rogue. In addition they can do this over and over and over again? No matter how often the Target is LOOKING at the wall, they are always "surprised"? Saying just "just walk past the wall" presumes a lot about the terrain.
That's just breaks credulity to me and reminds of Shadow Dancers trying to hide in the shadow of the person they are backstabbing.
...Even if a PC uses their Standard Action to detect goblin(s) and their Move to get into melee. Then only that 1 PC will have detected the goblin(s)...
...
This also argues that if a Rogue is behind a short wall. They can stand up, attack with Adv. and somehow they are still "Hidden" even if there is no place to hide since to attack they have to: Regain Line of Sight (which to me should break hiding, but I concede it doesn't), Perceive the Target (they do automatically because they weren't hiding), Aim their Weapon, Fire their Weapon... and in all of that time the Target never just SEES the Rogue. In addition they can do this over and over and over again? No matter how often the Target is LOOKING at the wall, they are always "surprised"? Saying just "just walk past the wall" presumes a lot about the terrain.
You're misunderstanding something crucial: if anyone finds you, you're no longer hidden. As soon as one PC finds a goblin, all PCs have found the goblin. Additionally, the PCs don't search for one goblin at a time; if they roll a Perception of 18, they find every goblin that rolled 17 or lower. This is part of what makes the hiding rules simple; you're either hidden or you're not, no "I'm hidden from this guy but not that guy."
The PCs can use the same tactics the goblins are using and hide in the foliage too. Heavy obscurement cuts both ways. Or they can do what Filcat suggested and ready ranged attacks for when they pop out. Or they can just burn down the foliage. A humble torch or Fire Bolt cantrip will do the trick.
As for the Rogue behind the wall, they can "do this over and over again" at the cost of their bonus action and provided they roll high enough. Every turn is another opportunity to fail a Stealth check, which means the enemy just happened to notice them that time. Compare that to a two-weapon fighting or Crossbow Expert Rogue - they get to roll a second d20 with their bonus action every turn, unconditionally.
There's nothing incredulous about the Rogue being able to snipe someone that's not dedicating their full attention to them. As long as the enemy is using their action on something other than Search or Ready, they're not staring continuously at the wall. The enemy could easily catch the Rogue in the act with the Ready action if they're willing to divert attention away from the rest of the battle. Or they can just walk over there. Or any one of their friends can succeed on a Search check and find the Rogue.
Note that attack-then-hide is better defensively but worse offensively because you're giving the enemy opportunities to find you on their turns. If they don't find you, you're safe, but if they do, you don't start your next turn hidden. Hiding and immediately attacking is better offensively because no one is getting turns between you hiding and attacking, but you end every turn not hidden.
Also, don't forget that the rogue can't just "go into stealth" while standing infront of their foe mid-combat.
There needs to be some plausible thing to hide behind where the foe doesn't see them enter the cover. Even with the Wood Elf ability "Mask of the Wild" - that just means they need lighter coverage - it still needs something to break line-of-sight.
Yes, this is important. It took a bit of explaining with some of my players that this isnt like Skyrim or WoW, clicking the stealth button doesn't automatically hide you, even if you roll a 20. You have to actually hide behind something (i.e. run around a corner and duck behind a barrel -- being in plain view then just ducking behind a barrel in front of the opponent isn't hiding, they saw where you went)
Technically, if you hide in front of them behind a barrel it IS hiding and you CAN stealth. But as soon as you leave the cover, your stealth is off. But a sneak attack / hidden attacker bonus is plausible because the enemy can't see you preparing the attack, what attack you prepare or what kind of other action you might take. They KNOW you are behind the barrel, but they can't see what you are doing. If you fail the stealth roll it just means that the enemy is just too perceptive or you botched the "surprise" attack. Because, you know, you have to aim or see the target too, in which case they can see you as well.
To my understanding, in the pop out of hiding to shoot, as long as you don’t move from your 5’ square or make a shit ton of noise, the standing up bit is part of your attack. The rule specifically says that hiding ends when an attack hits or misses so that the process of attacking itself does not end being hidden.
As for the Rogue behind the wall, they can "do this over and over again" at the cost of their bonus action and provided they roll high enough.
Thread necromancy here.
My biggest problem with Stealth is that any rogue past level 5 will almost never be "not hidden" when using his cunning action. "Roll high enough" isnt much of a factor since any old rogue with expert in stealth (which let's be real they all take), with only 16 dex (which could be 18 at 5th level) will have +9 (or +10) to stealth. The amount of creatures with more than 12-13 Passive perception is abysmal. This gets exponentially worse as we get higher in levels.
Fast forward to my level 14 group in Dungeon of the Mad Mage. The rogue 9/fighter 5 has a WHOOPIN +15 to stealth from expertise and 20 dex. NOTHING ever percieves him because even on a Nat 1 (I remind everyone that automatic failures on a 1 only applies to attacks, RAW) he still gets 16. The best Passive Perception i've seen on a monster thus far in that campaign i think is a 19 or 20 and even that gets bear 75% of the time which is insane. Thank GOD they never found a cloak of elvenkind and even then i dont think he would use an attunement slot for it.
I still havent found homebrew rules to cull this a little without making stealth impossible for the rest of the party which would be a bigger issue and is the reason i havent implemented any house rule to balance other than "if you hide in the same place twice you get disadvantage" which again let's be real doesnt impose much chance of a failure on a 80 to 100% success rate.
I really have gripes with PP as a DC for stealth because theres the whole 11 to 20 range which you never hit while the rogue always has that chance. Stealth in 5e is too easy for any character with expertise (And i dont wanna hear any "Oh but thats what the character does!" , he is basically untargettable in combat and can dish out a ludicrous amount of damage on his own from getting the unseen attacker advantage). I REALLY hope i one day learn we're playing it wrong and it should be harder (not impossible) but so far every time i check we're doing pretty much everything by the book, especially hiding in plain sight being impossible but just a corridor corner is enough or a doorway even if the room is flat empty...
Thanks for coming to my ted talk.
-A DM of 8-years on this game frustrated by stealth since its inception.
It isn't. The hider has to beat PP to be hidden relative to that observer.
because theres the whole 11 to 20 range which you never hit while the rogue always has that chance.
The Search action exists, and then that NPC can alert its allies where the PC Rogue is.
Stealth in 5e is too easy for any character with expertise (And i dont wanna hear any "Oh but thats what the character does!" , he is basically untargettable in combat and can dish out a ludicrous amount of damage on his own from getting the unseen attacker advantage). I REALLY hope i one day learn we're playing it wrong and it should be harder (not impossible) but so far every time i check we're doing pretty much everything by the book, especially hiding in plain sight being impossible but just a corridor corner is enough or a doorway even if the room is flat empty...
Thanks for coming to my ted talk.
-A DM of 8-years on this game frustrated by stealth since its inception.
Other than apparently making Stealth checks too easy by 1 point, I'd guess the primary thing you're doing "wrong" (take this with a grain of salt, because the 5E Stealth rules are genuine mess with not nearly as much content as people think) is that RAW you can't use Stealth to become unseen. All hiding does is render you unheard, because after hiding you're unseen and unheard, but you can't hide while seen, meaning you must be unseen. Pretty much everyone - including WOTC employees when they DM a game on YouTube - disregards this RAW, of course, and lets creatures use Stealth to become unseen while seeing their enemy to Sneak Attack.
Stealth is primarily a defensive tactic. You need to not be seen clearly to attempt to Hide (total cover, heavily obscured, invisible, blind etc) which means you usually already enjoy the benefits from Unseen Attackers & Targets; you have advantage to attack those who can't see you and they have disadvantage to attack you. All Stealth does more to you in this case is not knowing your location and having to guess it.
It becomes more of an offensive tactic when you can attempt to Hide when seen, such as a Halfling's Naturally Stealthy, an Elf's Mask of the Wild or feat like Skulker for exemple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Would you guys say that if an enemy is fighting a rogue and the rogue decides to somehow stealth in front of the enemy, would the enemy not need to do a perception roll, have one chance to do a perception roll as a reaction, or the rogue just hides if it is above the enemy's passive perception?
Technically the passive perception is always on, even in battle. So the rogue hides if the roll is higher than the passive perception. If the character decide to do a Perception roll, it must use his/her the Search action.
For more info
http://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/2793-stealth-advice-from-jeremy-crawford
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersAlso, don't forget that the rogue can't just "go into stealth" while standing infront of their foe mid-combat.
There needs to be some plausible thing to hide behind where the foe doesn't see them enter the cover. Even with the Wood Elf ability "Mask of the Wild" - that just means they need lighter coverage - it still needs something to break line-of-sight.
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!"🔊
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
Being hidden doesn't mean they don't know where you are. It means they can't perceive you in any way. If you go behind a tree and hide then they can't tell for sure that you are still there without changing positions to look. So if you go into heavy foliage or in an area of shadow you can attempt to hide, even if they saw you go into the obscured area.
I think this video from Dawnforgecast does a real good job of explaining stealth.
https://youtu.be/LDfGwDuWDDU
Personally I have a bit of hate for stealth in combat, because it feels to me it's often one of the most immersion breaking moments.
I really like Dawnforgecast's review of Stealth in 5e.
He covers the fact that stealth isn't magical. If the Rogue ducks behind cover (ie: small wall) she can hide, but if the enemy literally just walks around the cover (ie: small wall), but small wall no longer provides cover and she is automatically detected.
He covers that popping out to shoot a ranged weapon negates the hiding, and so loses Adv on the attack... because she is no longer hiding.
That said it does provide a very good use: stops the enemy from returning fire!
I would disagree with you Filecat. I don't think the Stealth check would be vs Passive.
Well, at the end of the day, it is up to the DM to decide when active roll or passive score apply for perception. Depends on the circumstances.
In combat, the passive score can be useful when the DM doesn't want the players know that there is someone or something hiding.
Also, from a probability point of view, the stealth check has exactly the same likelihood to succeed whether it is compared with an active roll or a passive score.
"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)
This can easily be narrated as the hiding creature finding an opportunity to shoot while the target isn't looking their way.
Respectfully, what you propose isn't just incorrect (with regards to the rules), it's also a really bad idea.
The hiding rules need to be simple and fast because hiding is one of the core combat actions every creature can take, and an entire class is built around being able to hide as a bonus action. Rolling VS every enemy is slow and also makes hiding borderline impossible. It's like giving the enemy side super-advantage; the more enemies there are, the more likely they'll roll close to 20.
The current hiding rules work perfectly fine: the hider has to beat every creature's passive Perception which means they have to beat their best Perception. If you think that's too easy, try hiding from a CR 1/4 wolf, which has a total passive Perception of 18 (13 + advantage from Keen Hearing and Smell). Wolves and dire wolves can continue to be relevant at higher levels, because goblins and hobgoblins love them, and their Pack Tactics and ability to knock prone makes them incredibly dangerous even if they can be killed easily. Many other humanoids can also plausibly have them as pets, and enemy druids can wild shape into them. At higher levels, try hiding from an adult red dragon - they can frighten, have passive Perception above 20, and can Search outside their turn as a Legendary Action if you still succeed.
Ruining a hiding character's ability to hide is easy. Besides simply taking away the places they can hide or moving to a position where they can be seen, all you have to do is give them disadvantage on Dexterity checks and/or give your best Perception guy advantage on Wisdom checks. If the Rogue gets poisoned, frightened, gains a level of exhaustion, or gets targeted with Hunter's Mark or Hex (which are level 1 spells with no save), they're in trouble. If someone grapples them, they can't get to a hiding place.
Everyone on the enemy side can also take the Search action on their turn to get an active Perception check and try to find the Rogue. If even just one of them succeeds, the Rogue is no longer hidden.
Balance-wise, reliable hiding is what makes non-crossbow/TWF Rogues competitive with TWF/Crossbow Expert Rogues; gaining Advantage on the one attack per round they get is almost as good as being able to get a second attack as a bonus action. If you make hiding any harder than it already is, Variant Human Crossbow Expert Rogue becomes the best Rogue build by a long shot. Having one optimal build is boring.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I did find that Sage Advice article you cited. That is the official ruling, I'm not going to argue that it isn't the rule, but I still think it's a terrible ruling and let me explain why.
Combat is a 2 way street, and NPCs can always be better then PCs at any game.
Lets say you have a group of goblins, in a forest with plenty of heavy obscured dense foliage about.
The goblins ambush the PCs their actions are as follows
This combat will be a frustratingly endless game of "wak-a-mole". Even if a PC uses their Standard Action to detect goblin(s) and their Move to get into melee. Then only that 1 PC will have detected the goblin(s). The goblins freely move after hiding as long as they stay in foliage, so the PCs can't just move blindly hoping to stumble upon a Goblin. This means the PCs will never have a chance of dealing damage to the goblins.
The Goblin can if detected
This also argues that if a Rogue is behind a short wall. They can stand up, attack with Adv. and somehow they are still "Hidden" even if there is no place to hide since to attack they have to: Regain Line of Sight (which to me should break hiding, but I concede it doesn't), Perceive the Target (they do automatically because they weren't hiding), Aim their Weapon, Fire their Weapon... and in all of that time the Target never just SEES the Rogue. In addition they can do this over and over and over again? No matter how often the Target is LOOKING at the wall, they are always "surprised"?
Saying just "just walk past the wall" presumes a lot about the terrain.
That's just breaks credulity to me and reminds of Shadow Dancers trying to hide in the shadow of the person they are backstabbing.
The PCs can use the ready action to hit the goblin as soon as they come out and attack the PCs
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Technically, if you hide in front of them behind a barrel it IS hiding and you CAN stealth. But as soon as you leave the cover, your stealth is off. But a sneak attack / hidden attacker bonus is plausible because the enemy can't see you preparing the attack, what attack you prepare or what kind of other action you might take. They KNOW you are behind the barrel, but they can't see what you are doing. If you fail the stealth roll it just means that the enemy is just too perceptive or you botched the "surprise" attack. Because, you know, you have to aim or see the target too, in which case they can see you as well.
To my understanding, in the pop out of hiding to shoot, as long as you don’t move from your 5’ square or make a shit ton of noise, the standing up bit is part of your attack. The rule specifically says that hiding ends when an attack hits or misses so that the process of attacking itself does not end being hidden.
Thread necromancy here.
My biggest problem with Stealth is that any rogue past level 5 will almost never be "not hidden" when using his cunning action. "Roll high enough" isnt much of a factor since any old rogue with expert in stealth (which let's be real they all take), with only 16 dex (which could be 18 at 5th level) will have +9 (or +10) to stealth. The amount of creatures with more than 12-13 Passive perception is abysmal. This gets exponentially worse as we get higher in levels.
Fast forward to my level 14 group in Dungeon of the Mad Mage. The rogue 9/fighter 5 has a WHOOPIN +15 to stealth from expertise and 20 dex. NOTHING ever percieves him because even on a Nat 1 (I remind everyone that automatic failures on a 1 only applies to attacks, RAW) he still gets 16. The best Passive Perception i've seen on a monster thus far in that campaign i think is a 19 or 20 and even that gets bear 75% of the time which is insane. Thank GOD they never found a cloak of elvenkind and even then i dont think he would use an attunement slot for it.
I still havent found homebrew rules to cull this a little without making stealth impossible for the rest of the party which would be a bigger issue and is the reason i havent implemented any house rule to balance other than "if you hide in the same place twice you get disadvantage" which again let's be real doesnt impose much chance of a failure on a 80 to 100% success rate.
I really have gripes with PP as a DC for stealth because theres the whole 11 to 20 range which you never hit while the rogue always has that chance. Stealth in 5e is too easy for any character with expertise (And i dont wanna hear any "Oh but thats what the character does!" , he is basically untargettable in combat and can dish out a ludicrous amount of damage on his own from getting the unseen attacker advantage). I REALLY hope i one day learn we're playing it wrong and it should be harder (not impossible) but so far every time i check we're doing pretty much everything by the book, especially hiding in plain sight being impossible but just a corridor corner is enough or a doorway even if the room is flat empty...
Thanks for coming to my ted talk.
-A DM of 8-years on this game frustrated by stealth since its inception.
Other than apparently making Stealth checks too easy by 1 point, I'd guess the primary thing you're doing "wrong" (take this with a grain of salt, because the 5E Stealth rules are genuine mess with not nearly as much content as people think) is that RAW you can't use Stealth to become unseen. All hiding does is render you unheard, because after hiding you're unseen and unheard, but you can't hide while seen, meaning you must be unseen. Pretty much everyone - including WOTC employees when they DM a game on YouTube - disregards this RAW, of course, and lets creatures use Stealth to become unseen while seeing their enemy to Sneak Attack.
Stealth is primarily a defensive tactic. You need to not be seen clearly to attempt to Hide (total cover, heavily obscured, invisible, blind etc) which means you usually already enjoy the benefits from Unseen Attackers & Targets; you have advantage to attack those who can't see you and they have disadvantage to attack you. All Stealth does more to you in this case is not knowing your location and having to guess it.
It becomes more of an offensive tactic when you can attempt to Hide when seen, such as a Halfling's Naturally Stealthy, an Elf's Mask of the Wild or feat like Skulker for exemple.