If some monsters try to surprise the party. Do I roll stealth for each of them and compare the lowest stealth result with the passive perception of each member of the party? or Do I perform one roll for all the monsters and compare it with the passive perception of each member of the party? If the second answer is the right one, what do I do when monsters have different stealth values?
Also (less important) If a character tries to hide. Do I compare his stealth score with the passive perception of the monsters or with their perception rolls?
For my part I think it makes more sense to roll stealth for each monster, as in reality if someone really screw up in an ambush it would compromise the whole party, even if the rest of the party is hiding really well. Also, as many party characters will not be able to use their passive perception (due to them being busy searching for food, drawing a map or similar) I think i would also be more fair for the party.
Put, reading the rules i get the feeling it's the other way, so I'm not sure.
You can roll stealth for each one if you wish, but it might be quicker to roll a group stealth check for the monsters. Compare their stealth check with the party's passive perceptions. On the first round of combat, have everybody roll initiative. If the monster's stealth check is higher than a specific party member's passive perception, they are considered surprised and cannot act on their first turn of combat and they cannot take reactions until their turn passes. If the stealth check is lower than a specific party member's passive perception, then that party member can act normally on the first round of combat.
If a character tries to hide, you compare it to the enemy's passive perception. Making a perception check in combat requires an action to do.
Also, do not punish your players for foraging or doing other downtime things. Passive scores are always active, this is why they are passive. A rogue with a passive perception of 16 is going to have that no matter what and it will always be active (although it will take a -5 penalty if they have disadvantage on perception checks).
For my part I think it makes more sense to roll stealth for each monster, as in reality if someone really screw up in an ambush it would compromise the whole party, even if the rest of the party is hiding really well. Also, as many party characters will not be able to use their passive perception (due to them being busy searching for food, drawing a map or similar) I think i would also be more fair for the party.
Put, reading the rules i get the feeling it's the other way, so I'm not sure.
Isn't the point of passive perception that it represents the characters ability to notice things around them even while doing other activities?
That said... if this was, say... a videogame or something where a computer can do all the calculations for you, it would make sense to roll stealth for each individual enemy and check each one against each party member's passive perception, then determine which party members are surprised at the start of combat and which aren't. But I don't think anyone would complain if you just do a check on whichever enemy has the lowest stealth stat and just compare it to your party's passive perception to see how it goes.
Passive perception and passive stealth should have been a part of each monster. In most cases it makes much more sense that the players roll against as passive stat of the monster than the DM rolling against a passive stat of the PC's. There are exceptions, but generally it's best to let the players do as much of the rolling as possible to speed up play.
I prefer simplicity. Make one roll for all the monsters. It's easier this way, and is exactly what the Starter Set suggested a (new) DM to do in Lost Mines of Phandelver.
Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check for the goblins: roll one d20 for all of them, add their Stealth skill modifier (+6) to the roll, and compare the total to the characters’ passive Wisdom (Perception) scores. A character whose score is lower than the goblins’ check total is surprised and therefore can’t do anything on his or her first turn in the combat (see “Surprise” in the Basic Rules).
For your second question, when a character hides, compare their stealth roll to the passive perception of the bad guys. And what I might do... As an action, on the bad guy's turn, he can roll a perception check to notice where the character has hidden, negating the advantage from the characters attack should his perception roll be high enough.
Well, now i regret not doing a poll. It seems the topic of how to roll in a surprise was pretty poorly written. It seems also that the advantages and disadvantages of searching threats stance are unclear, as this stance's relation with combat.
I'm thinking of asking help to Jeremy Crawford, as I like to keep very close to the rules in combat.
Yeah, it's a little vague as written. The rules do say that surprise is determined on a character-by-character basis, so some party members can be surprised, and others not.
I think I'd split the difference - if all the monsters are traveling in one group, it makes sense just to make one stealth roll for the whole group. If there are a few distinct groups of monsters (say, a main group of goblins plus a separate lookout patrol) I'd do separate stealth rolls for each group. I wouldn't do individual rolls for each monster unless they're all actually acting independently at the start of the encounter.
Well I hope he notices me, I posted the tweet but don't want to spam it here.
Greetings @JeremyECrawford. Players that aren't noticing threats (for example, they are foraging) are automatically surprised in an ambush? If not, what are the advantages of noticing threats stance? also, Do I roll stealth for each indivual ambusher or for all of them?
My main worry, apart from the stealth check of the monsters, is that I don't know if the notice threat stance is needed for players to be able to use their passive perception in surprise fase or if it's use to allow players to avoid that surprise round, by detecting the ambush before it happens..
Pineirin, players always have their passive perception, unless they are subject to either the Petrified/Unconscious conditions (unaware of surroundings), or if they are Blinded/Deafenedand if the ambushers could only be detected via the senses currently blocked--a Blinded creature can still hear twigs snapping, and a Deafened creature can still see someone running at them.
In general, the process for determining how an ambush plays out is designed to have each individual ambusher roll their own stealth checks. Nineteen out of twenty ambushers may be completely undetected, yet just one creature tripping down a hill into the party's campsite means that each PC whom notices it is not surprised. The other nineteen ambushers remain hidden, but there is probably not going to be a surprise round depending on how everyone reacts.
A DM can certainly choose to use a rule variant wherein they roll for an entire side's stealth, breaking it up into smaller groups within the side, etc. It's officially supported just not the default.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Well, now i regret not doing a poll. It seems the topic of how to roll in a surprise was pretty poorly written. It seems also that the advantages and disadvantages of searching threats stance are unclear, as this stance's relation with combat.
I'm thinking of asking help to Jeremy Crawford, as I like to keep very close to the rules in combat.
I don't think that the consensus is the rules, 100% as Written are confusing... just that it's rather time consuming, especially if a large group is attempting an ambush where each individual creature has different stealth and perception values.
One thing you have to realize about “the rules” is that outside of AL, the rules are “more what you would call guidelines.” -Cap. Barbossa.
In other words, every DM adjusts things to suite themselves, their players, and the type of game style they all prefer as a group. Some of those things change as different players jon/leave each group, some don’t.
I personally use the “average passive stealth” of the enemies and compare it to either the PC’s passive perception scores, or sometimes I’ll have them roll depending on what comes next.
If the thing/group is about to jump out and ambush them anyway I’ll usually tell them to roll, then I tell the group which characters notice something and how much they notice depending on how well they rolled. I expect them to properly role play out the knowing/not knowing properly.
If I want it to be super, extra dramatic for one reason or another I’ll use passive perception, have the ambush happen, and then tell the group which characters were not surprised.
If it’s gonna be a stealth and pursue situation instead of an ambush I always use passive perception, but I’ll roll stealth for the enemy/monster/NPC periodically to see if they mess up and a character(s) perceived them, and then I’ll tell the appropriate players in secret. That way they have the opportunity to role play out telling their comrades (or not telling them).
All of that is just to keep a balance between pacing and drama. You don’t want the game to get bogged down, you don’t want spoilers, you do want drama. (tension + resolution = drama) If it gets bogged down with a lot of pointless die rolls the ”tension” shifts to boredom, like a really slow act 2 that ruins a movie. Spoilers ruin tension too, that’s why “passive perception and insight” exist, because having players roll all the time for everything tips them off that something is happening.
I’m not sure why passive investigation exists, how the frag one “investigates” something “passively” is beyond me. My best guess is so characters with high INT and low WIS can still be clever and notice the thing too, but to me that kind of defeats the purpose.... Maybe someone else here can explain that one.
Isn't the point of passive perception that it represents the characters ability to notice things around them even while doing other activities?
No, the point of passive ability checks is to avoid rolling dice. It has nothing to do with what the character is doing.
If the GM wants to avoid alerting off the players by asking for a die roll then they can use the passive calculation.
If the GM wants to avoid rolling lots of dice ("roll a Wisdom check for each 10 ft of passageway, for the next half a mile…") then they can use the passive calculation.
Well I got this answer in my tweet from a guy that expends his day asking question to jeremy crawford so I hope he has big knowledge in the rules.
PH 183 "... don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats." PCs engaged in other activities are automatically surprised by foes who are trying to be stealthy. For expediency,I would have enemies do a group check(PH 175).
So, a character that doesn't look for threats (because he is foraging or tracking or drawing a map) would be automatically surprised if the enemies are stealthy.
Also, the ambusher party would do a group check to see their combined stealth wich seems fair to me (I know that one roll would be faster, but surprise os so brutal that a fairly small party of monster could destroy adventurers if they are incredibly lucky in one stealth roll). At first i thought a group check was a bad idea, as if one ambusher screw up it would screw the whole ambush, but, thinking it better, I suppose good ambushers could help bad ones cover their weakness.
For our group, stealth is like that scene in Jurasic Park with the Velociraptor... Perception succeed in seeing the raptor 'hiding' in front of you, but you did *not* notice the other two flanking and coming at you from the sides. Whomever is stealthing, (party or monsters) rolls for all in the party...Passive check for the opposing. If both are trying to stealth it's a double roll off to see if you can hide and whether you notice the other. Then surprise round starts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi guys
If some monsters try to surprise the party.
Do I roll stealth for each of them and compare the lowest stealth result with the passive perception of each member of the party?
or
Do I perform one roll for all the monsters and compare it with the passive perception of each member of the party?
If the second answer is the right one, what do I do when monsters have different stealth values?
Also (less important)
If a character tries to hide. Do I compare his stealth score with the passive perception of the monsters or with their perception rolls?
Thanks for any help.
For my part I think it makes more sense to roll stealth for each monster, as in reality if someone really screw up in an ambush it would compromise the whole party, even if the rest of the party is hiding really well. Also, as many party characters will not be able to use their passive perception (due to them being busy searching for food, drawing a map or similar) I think i would also be more fair for the party.
Put, reading the rules i get the feeling it's the other way, so I'm not sure.
You can roll stealth for each one if you wish, but it might be quicker to roll a group stealth check for the monsters. Compare their stealth check with the party's passive perceptions. On the first round of combat, have everybody roll initiative. If the monster's stealth check is higher than a specific party member's passive perception, they are considered surprised and cannot act on their first turn of combat and they cannot take reactions until their turn passes. If the stealth check is lower than a specific party member's passive perception, then that party member can act normally on the first round of combat.
If a character tries to hide, you compare it to the enemy's passive perception. Making a perception check in combat requires an action to do.
Also, do not punish your players for foraging or doing other downtime things. Passive scores are always active, this is why they are passive. A rogue with a passive perception of 16 is going to have that no matter what and it will always be active (although it will take a -5 penalty if they have disadvantage on perception checks).
Isn't the point of passive perception that it represents the characters ability to notice things around them even while doing other activities?
That said... if this was, say... a videogame or something where a computer can do all the calculations for you, it would make sense to roll stealth for each individual enemy and check each one against each party member's passive perception, then determine which party members are surprised at the start of combat and which aren't. But I don't think anyone would complain if you just do a check on whichever enemy has the lowest stealth stat and just compare it to your party's passive perception to see how it goes.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
A little on the side, but related:
Passive perception and passive stealth should have been a part of each monster. In most cases it makes much more sense that the players roll against as passive stat of the monster than the DM rolling against a passive stat of the PC's. There are exceptions, but generally it's best to let the players do as much of the rolling as possible to speed up play.
Ludo ergo sum!
I prefer simplicity.
Make one roll for all the monsters. It's easier this way, and is exactly what the Starter Set suggested a (new) DM to do in Lost Mines of Phandelver.
For your second question, when a character hides, compare their stealth roll to the passive perception of the bad guys.
And what I might do...
As an action, on the bad guy's turn, he can roll a perception check to notice where the character has hidden, negating the advantage from the characters attack should his perception roll be high enough.
...cryptographic randomness!
Well, now i regret not doing a poll. It seems the topic of how to roll in a surprise was pretty poorly written.
It seems also that the advantages and disadvantages of searching threats stance are unclear, as this stance's relation with combat.
I'm thinking of asking help to Jeremy Crawford, as I like to keep very close to the rules in combat.
Yeah, it's a little vague as written. The rules do say that surprise is determined on a character-by-character basis, so some party members can be surprised, and others not.
I think I'd split the difference - if all the monsters are traveling in one group, it makes sense just to make one stealth roll for the whole group. If there are a few distinct groups of monsters (say, a main group of goblins plus a separate lookout patrol) I'd do separate stealth rolls for each group. I wouldn't do individual rolls for each monster unless they're all actually acting independently at the start of the encounter.
Well I hope he notices me, I posted the tweet but don't want to spam it here.
Pineirin, players always have their passive perception, unless they are subject to either the Petrified/Unconscious conditions (unaware of surroundings), or if they are Blinded/Deafened and if the ambushers could only be detected via the senses currently blocked--a Blinded creature can still hear twigs snapping, and a Deafened creature can still see someone running at them.
In general, the process for determining how an ambush plays out is designed to have each individual ambusher roll their own stealth checks. Nineteen out of twenty ambushers may be completely undetected, yet just one creature tripping down a hill into the party's campsite means that each PC whom notices it is not surprised. The other nineteen ambushers remain hidden, but there is probably not going to be a surprise round depending on how everyone reacts.
A DM can certainly choose to use a rule variant wherein they roll for an entire side's stealth, breaking it up into smaller groups within the side, etc. It's officially supported just not the default.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I don't think that the consensus is the rules, 100% as Written are confusing... just that it's rather time consuming, especially if a large group is attempting an ambush where each individual creature has different stealth and perception values.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
One thing you have to realize about “the rules” is that outside of AL, the rules are “more what you would call guidelines.” -Cap. Barbossa.
In other words, every DM adjusts things to suite themselves, their players, and the type of game style they all prefer as a group. Some of those things change as different players jon/leave each group, some don’t.
I personally use the “average passive stealth” of the enemies and compare it to either the PC’s passive perception scores, or sometimes I’ll have them roll depending on what comes next.
All of that is just to keep a balance between pacing and drama. You don’t want the game to get bogged down, you don’t want spoilers, you do want drama. (tension + resolution = drama) If it gets bogged down with a lot of pointless die rolls the ”tension” shifts to boredom, like a really slow act 2 that ruins a movie. Spoilers ruin tension too, that’s why “passive perception and insight” exist, because having players roll all the time for everything tips them off that something is happening.
I’m not sure why passive investigation exists, how the frag one “investigates” something “passively” is beyond me. My best guess is so characters with high INT and low WIS can still be clever and notice the thing too, but to me that kind of defeats the purpose.... Maybe someone else here can explain that one.
What do you think will work best for your group?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well I got this answer in my tweet from a guy that expends his day asking question to jeremy crawford so I hope he has big knowledge in the rules.
PH 183 "... don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats." PCs engaged in other activities are automatically surprised by foes who are trying to be stealthy. For expediency,I would have enemies do a group check(PH 175).
So, a character that doesn't look for threats (because he is foraging or tracking or drawing a map) would be automatically surprised if the enemies are stealthy.
Also, the ambusher party would do a group check to see their combined stealth wich seems fair to me (I know that one roll would be faster, but surprise os so brutal that a fairly small party of monster could destroy adventurers if they are incredibly lucky in one stealth roll). At first i thought a group check was a bad idea, as if one ambusher screw up it would screw the whole ambush, but, thinking it better, I suppose good ambushers could help bad ones cover their weakness.
For our group, stealth is like that scene in Jurasic Park with the Velociraptor... Perception succeed in seeing the raptor 'hiding' in front of you, but you did *not* notice the other two flanking and coming at you from the sides. Whomever is stealthing, (party or monsters) rolls for all in the party...Passive check for the opposing. If both are trying to stealth it's a double roll off to see if you can hide and whether you notice the other. Then surprise round starts.