PAID SPONSOR: GRIM HOLLOW bit.ly/30jEV97 Apparently, according to Jefford Crawdady. The thing everybody screws up in 5th edition is Passive perception. (including me, in this video)
Well shit! A few things to respond to haha **I guess group checks exist! Page 175 of the PHB.** (I did not know this, and I like it) Basically if you all roll and at least half the group makes the check: you succeed. **reliable talent** Yes, yes I know but by then your rogue has probably been outvoted on taking the stealthy approach ever again after the incident at griffons keep. **passive skills exist already! ** Again, yes I know, but they aren't often used to actively do a thing, and they don't represent a floor for the roll, which is where passive perception seems to have a bit more oomf. **Monsters can't hide from the PC that spent all of their class features to be able to find monsters** Yep. I mean, that sounds fair to me haha **Crits don't exist outside of combat** _sigh_ yes, ok, fine, true, but, like... They do in our hearts. I usually run autonegative/autopositive, as opposed to necessarily an auto success. That said I made an effort not to say "crit." _But I think we all heard the dice whisper it._
You should just do a whole episode on Passive Skills (yes, passive stealth can exist under those rules) and Group Checks. I run tons of Adventurers League and as a DM you have to use Group Checks effectively to give parties a fair shake in lots of modules.
ok, i have to read these books more closely, because i also didn't know that group checks were an official rule in this edition, and I had been busting out a calculator to get the average result of my player's stealth rolls and good lord just checking if half the goobers succeeded would make that shit so much easier
One rule that people often forget about are group rolls. In order to stave off the “only one person has to roll badly for the group to fail,” there’s a rule stating that if the entire group rolls for one ability, only half of the rolls need to succeed for the group to succeed
That's how I run group stealth too; the entire group rolls and if it at least half succeed, it works out until they have to switch between moving silently and hiding. My only caveat is that they convince me they're taking reasonable precautions to stay away from enemies that could potentially detect the worst of them (ie the character with nothing in the skill and an armor penalty).
Yeah, I always roll group Stealth just so the plate wearing Pali doesn't screw up everyone surprise round. If I REALLY don't want a group to get the drop on the enemies I'll throw in a monster with Truesight or Blind-sight, something like that.
On the other hand group rolls may make it easier to pass then sneaking as an individual. That seems also wrong. It should be easier to sneak through one person then the entire thiefs guild.
@@Random2 he's also wrong about passives. Technically, IIRC, every stat had a passive. They just really come into play. Also, passive isn't technically a floor for a roll, because that would entirely negate a rogue's Reliable Talent.
@@YamiYaiba I agree, he's wrong about a lot. The passive floor thing is straight from Crawford, though. There's just no actual rule about it in game so most people don't bother
@@YamiYaiba The floor rule is straight from Crawford, like Ethan said, *but* there is some evidence from LMoP that the passive perception is not 1:1 with active perception. The passive DC to locate a hidden door there is 15, iirc, and 10 DC for the active check. That leads me to tend to run the floor as 5 below your passive
@@YamiYaiba IIRC the Rules are extremely vague on this, the verbatim text is "A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the DM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster." With this workding for example a pasive stealth is not really a thing (wich woudl equate to good old taking 10), since sneaking cant be done over and over, until you succeed, and it inherently an avtive activity. I would simply advocate to reintroduce the take 10 rules, that you can take a 10 instead of rolling, if there is no immediate threat pressuring you.
The idea of giving the party a one turn clock while enemies switch from passive to active Perception is really good. It makes it seem more like the dungeon or whatever is a living space, populated by fallible people, rather than a mechanism that starts spawning bots on top of the party as soon as they fail their arbitrary dice roll. It also creates tension - as the players scramble to assess their surroundings and rush to cover - rather than disappointment at having their infiltration sabotaged by a single bad random result. If Stealth fails initially, monsters should signpost their alertness in some fashion. The now memetic "What was that noise?" is always an option, as is the complete cession of ambient noise in the environment.
I use background music and ambient sounds at my table and the sudden cessation or change of background sounds or music that my players were familiar and comfortable with immediately grabs their attention. If they’re at camp surrounded by the sounds of nocturnal wildlife like crickets and night birds and then the sound suddenly stops and it’s just the crackling of the fire, AND the player on watch fails their perception check, I can practically SEE their blood pressure spike.
@@gbuglyoclose, that minimum stealth roll op is talking about refers to reliable talent which treats a roll below 10 as a 10. So cleric can spot the rogue if the rogue gets below average on the d20
@@Charles-dg2gkYou're right, I forgot about that one. But it could still go either way, so I'm sure nobody will laugh until after the roll is made. :)
The group check rules exist precisely for this reason. Making the entire group do individual stealth checks mathematically guarantees that stealth fails. It's one of the most underused rules in D&D.
I also see a lot of people interpreting each player's roll in the group check as how well that specific PC does in the group check. For instance, I saw a comment somewhere above that said if half succeed and half step on twigs, the party still succeeds but it doesn't make sense with RP because half stepped on twigs. But this is a misinterpretation of what the rolls for a group check represent. The rolls of a group check are literally just ROLLS used to determine if the whole GROUP succeeds or fails. It also streamlines play so you aren't rolling 6 times around the table and RPing how every PC sneaks past the guards. So if the group check is a success, even the pally player who rolled a 1 still scoots by without making too much noise. The 1 doesn't mean the pally tumbled down the stairs but the guards still don't hear it somehow. Roleplay comes into account AFTER the result has been determined. It's the same as any other skill or ability check EXCEPT the condition for success has to be met by more than one roll.
@@30noir no, it's not dumb. The scout still serves its purpose. It's easier for the rogue with +7 to stealth to pass his check than to pass the group checks with the paladin and STR-fighter, who both wear heavy armor with disadv. To stealth and +0 to the roll. So scouts still serve their purpose.
@@GibsonGiddeon Agreed, though as I recall even in the rule entry the idea is the people who roll poorly are covered by the people who roll well, so you could role play that the Paladin was about to fall down the stairs or step on the twig, but the highrollers caught them, or warned them. It makes the scene more interesting without cluttering things up too much. (I like it when after a group check I get all the numbers, pause a minute, then basically describe a little vignette of how they work together, using the rolls to describe each person's actions.)
My current DM has continually ruled the individual check in the wilderness setting to avoid combat, instead of the group (which is how I rule when I DM) and I after the fact took the liberty to calculate it for our 4 characters, we had a 94% chance to fail (after costumes), it was basically a 1 in 20 shot to succeed. I made the argument (after game had ended) in the chat, that we should not have wasted any time preparing elaborate undersea costumes (I wore rocks as a warforged to look more like... the floor?).
I was thinking this myself. You basically do get passive stealth and it is very powerful, so it makes sense why it isn't just given to everyone. Also low light imposes a -5 penalty for most races and sneaking in bright light should be hard.
Yeah, that's why I'm against "passive skill checks" (other than perception/investigation/insight), because this devalues the rogue's class ability that they needed 11 levels to get.
@@Poopulan I mean, it's powerful, but it's also at level 11, while spell casters are getting spells, and at this point barbs can just say "no" when they die, it's pretty good for a class based on skills.
a person in my 18th level group is a rogue with a modifier of 15 in stealth... We just let her do her stealth thing in most cases since even her modifier itself is high enough to not be detected by most creatures
Also: Use the hecking darkness rules! Pay attention to who has darkvision! Use cantrips to snuff out candles and lights. Lure alert seekers into darker areas!
The problem there is that the 5e darkness rules are weird (light in an area helps people in that area, but if you’re outside it you don’t see anything in the light. It’s weird) One should use lighting to help their stealth, along with other obscuring things. One should absolutely not use the raw darkness rules
@@urieldaluz250 The rules state that you can't see (are effectively blinded to) something that is in darkness / heavily obscured. I couldn't find a rule that states that you're blinded when in an area of darkness. Edit: PHB p. 183 in Part 3 > Chapter 8: Adventuring > The Environment > Vision and Light
Don't forget; darkvision let's you see in total darkness as if it were dim light. That means disadvantage on your perception / investigation checks. And lack of colors means you might be missing that dried up blood on the cave wall..
To be honest, it makes sense to me that it would be more difficult for an entire group of adventurers to sneak by, rather than an individual. And it only takes one to give them away.
Sure, but realism isn't always much fun. Also, it makes the sneaky people in the group feel really cool for doing something everyone benefits from without having to leave them behind.
Late but, yeah realism isn't always = fun, if you wanna flavour it somehow, you can say for example the rogue used his expertise in sneaking and cunning to make a distraction, letting the paladin get away with the loud clanking of his armour.
@@Sorestlor thats the help action. You are describing help. For my two cents, the whole party should be detected if they decide to stick by the walking tin can
Some fun flip of the rules can be to use passive stealth versus active wisdom, if the players are in hiding from an alert enemy. Another house rule I've seen used was using passive stealth used until the player encounters an enemy and gets 'detected.' At that moment they have to roll a stealth check to quickly come up with a means to hide. If they roll well, the enemy isn't alerted at all, but it makes it very moment-to-moment. It also prevents players from being like "Oh hey I rolled a 20 on my stealth! Now I can just go around as if I were invisible." Cause that 20 would only apply to that one enemy who almost saw them.
I kinda love this rule, though the only problem I see with it is that a really good rogue may basically become invisible against dumb enemies. but maybe if you roll for enemies keeping watch, since they are actively looking for something weird. that way there is a higher chance of some moment of tension.
@@danilooliveira6580 Well, I'm pretty sure that in situations where there are no hiding places you can't hide, and that a seeker can choose to look where they want to, so that you can't become invisible in a situation where it makes no sense. that being said, dumb enemies would need to get lucky or for the hider to pick a bad spot to see them anyway.
I will say, there is a "floor" for stealth checks: Pass Without Trace. Granted, this only applies as long as you have a Ranger or Druid, but I feel like it's one of those niche yet powerful spells that Druids and Rangers kind of forget about.
I have my party play jenga, if it’s like a big stealth mission, every failed stealth check is a block, 1’s are 3. Their cover is blown when the tower falls
I actually like this. It builds tension without (hopefully) causing insta-failure. However I do see problems with remote players and players with a disability, who might need a proxy to remove the blocks.
1:23 minor correction; every skill has a passive score, it's just that the only one noted by default on your character sheet is perception (and on DnD Beyond, investigation as well). Also, funnily enough I also had this concept after getting frustrated in playing in a friend's campaign who was less well-read on the rules, and in like 5 combat encounters in a dungeon we were "surprised" even though the enemies we fought weren't sneaking. This led me to reread through the sections on hiding and passive skills and led me to have this same kind of idea.
"there is no passive stealth score" I thought every skill had a passive score, but perception gets a special spot on the sheet because it comes up so much more than the other passives.
That's more of a home-rule, but there is Passive Perception and Passive Insight, although people accept that there can be passive scores for each skill.
yes, Passive Checks are on PHB page 175 next to Group Checks. Any Skill can be allowed as a Passive Check. I'm frankly a bit disappointed that in all these videos Zee never came across these 2 topics. They are fundamental to making RAW play work.
@@jessebyrd5621 Passive scores are a way to Assume Competence. As adventurers you should always be on the lookout for danger, so Passive Perception is called out in the PHB, but if you decide to "sneak through the dungeon" the PHB absolutely wants you to just use Passive Stealth if it streamlines the storytelling.
Technically, every skill does. But you only use passive rolls when you can do it repeatedly in the same environment. "They're a special check without the dice that are used for rolls that can be repeated, or done in secret" It does state that any skill can do this. But, for most stealth rolls, you both know when you're caught, and if you fail once, there's no redemption. You can't become "unfound" without consequences. You're actively sneaking, and they're passively searching. So there's technically a passive stealth score, but not one that's often useful by RAW. It just doesn't come up much Unless you're "hiding" stationarily and someone glances at the area to check if anyone's there, but that could easily still be flipped on its head and allow the players to roll stealth vs their repetitive perception Granted, he did get group checks wrong. They basically say "if half the party is successful, so is everyone else" But also, this is a speed vid. Room for error should be allowed honestly
Imagine a passive stealth in action; it would be like a creepy kid, creeping everywhere. But instead of a kid, its an adult creeping around. Please listen to the Lonely Island song "The Creep", to realize why this is a bad idea impracticality. I'm somewhat joking...
Quick note: group checks on stealth only require that half of the party pass the stealth check for the entire group to succeed at the stealth. This is true for all group rolls. Page 175 of the players handbook
Is it half, as in 2 out of 4, or above half, as in 3 out of 4? I DM a game for 2 players, so only needing half would mean that having both stealth would actually make it easier than just one person, since they get 2 dice to achieve 1 success, in contrast to your normal 1 die to 1 success.
@@XpVersusVista At least half, so only 1 would need to pass. If you want to add a little more consequence for if one of your 2 players *really* f*cks it up, you could do Nat 1 counts as 2 fails, so that say the other person passes it would be 1/3 successes, but then you should probably also make a Nat 20 count as 2 successes to make it even.
This is also why I made some homebrew rules for stealth and they have been working like a charm: -Perception Penalties: >Being more than 60 feet away imposes a -1 to their perception per 20 feet past that so a guard trying to see a rogue 200 feet away has a -7 to their perception. Characters still need cover to hide, so in a open field even with a -7 they see you. -Group Stealth: >When more than one player want to sneak as a group I ask who is leading the effort, or guiding their path. Stealth isn't just about being silent it's also about choosing the right path that has good cover, paying attention to light, etc. Then everyone rolls stealth, the results are added together with the leader of the effort having his roll added twice and then divided by the number of players +1. Little mathy but calculators are your friend. What this means is that in a small group the leader has a big impact on stealth so the rogue can guide the paladin, assuming he rolls well enough compensate for a crappy paladin roll. The larger the group the less effect the leader has. Groups can be made of up to 5 creatures with anyone above that taking group penalties. No matter how sneaky 200 goblins can't ambush the party by having good average stealth. This system allows for anyone, not just rogues to scout as at a far enough distance there is no need to roll as the penalties are too large. On the other hand sneaky characters can get far closer and far better information or even lead the party into an ambush position. I also add other conditions such as: -Heavy armor only imposes disadvantage on stealth if moving within hearing distance. Heavy armor is noisy, not necessarily shiny. So a paladin that wants to stand still has no disadvantage. -Being stationary for more than 1 minute adds advantage on stealth. Predicting a path and laying in ambush is way easier than sneaking up on a guarded camp. -Failing by less than 5 doesn't mean instantly spotted just that something was noticed. If hiding in bushes this generally means a blur of movement or the crack of a twig. This is mainly for players to give them a chance to remedy the situation and add tension, such as using minor illusion to create a deer to dispel suspicions. -Guards have states of alertness that affect their passive perceptions and reactions: >Negligent: -5, ignores major problems such as a friendly guard missing his post for long times, or unimportant objects missing. >Relaxed: -2, ignores minor problems such as a small object being moved out of place without notice. >Normal: standard perception, usual investigations of occurrences. >Alert: +2, investigations of suspicious activities is done in groups, guards communicate positions or actions and anyone not accounted for is quickly noticed. Even minor problems are reported and investigated. >Paranoid: +5, investigations of suspicious activities is instead reported as a potential threat. Guards always have their weapons at the ready in expectation of an attack. Even minor disturbances are thoroughly explored, a missing guard is treated as an attack. DM's should have the guards periodically conduct perimeter searches or give off false alarms as the guards are paranoid. Periods without incident can make guards relaxed and long times of boredom and low pay can make them negligent. Likewise disciplined guards, well payed or loyal are alert and continuous attacks or intruders can make them paranoid. These bonuses also apply to DCs to bribe guards for entry at relaxed and negligent states. Alert or paranoid guards normally are immune to bribes without a very convincing reason. Alertness can change quickly if evidence is found, such as a dead guard or intruders being spotted.
I always just use passive skills unless something is actively resisting the player or if there's a time crunch. The rogue is going to eventually open that lock given infinite time, since the DC is within his range of success. So it takes the a number of rounds equal to the DC - (10 + Rogues Thieves Tools check) X. So if the DC is 25 and X = 17, then it takes 8 rounds for the rogue to open the chest. Then if there is someone or something putting pressure on or resisting them making the check, that's when they roll.
@@hesseldekraai Yeah, basically took this from 3.5, but without the hard and fast 1 minute - 10 minute added time from 3.5. It's (3.5) where I and most of my group started, so it just made sense to us.
I like rolling for things like picking a lock to see if a trap was set off, or if the lock was damaged and can no longer be picked. More interesting results than merely "pick till you succeed"
@@Vizaru I don't use nat 1/nat 20 auto fail/succeed on skill checks, so that kind of thing isn't common in my games. Plus if they're not rushed, they'll be careful not to ruin something. That kind of thing happens when someone fails a check by 10 or more while pressured. Say they start picking a lock that's within the capabilities while in a noble's room, there's no one around so they start leisurely opening the lock, but 3 turns into their 8 turn lockpicking attempt... "You hear a noise in the next room that sounds like footsteps approaching you, if you want this open without them finding you, you have to get it open now." "You failed by 12, you hear the unsettling sound of metal breaking inside the lock. The door behind you begins opening, pick a hiding spot and roll stealth if you want to avoid being seen." That's how it would go for my games.
Aren't there already group stealth rolls to accommodate the groups trying to sneak with a holy clanker? I always thought is was the average of the top three results or something. Edit: I dont keep my PHB on me so I can't verify but a Google seems that group stealth succeeds if more than half pass.
yes, you can already make group checks. To quote the book "To make a group ability check, everyone in the group makes the ability check. If at least half the group succeeds, the whole group succeeds. Otherwise, the group fails. Group checks don't come up very often, and they're most useful when all the characters succeed or fail as a group"
Hans Koenig with that I’d argue that a stealth check isn’t a group check. All it takes is 1 person to get seen for an enemy to know that there are people around. It’s not a strength check to see if the group can push away a boulder where one person can carry the weight of two
I have occasionally forgotten about the +/- 5 to passive perception, though as far as the skill floor: I love not having to roll perception for opponents until one of my players rolls low on stealth. It can help speed things up if my players are looking to get in and out
I just wanna say I've been watching for a good while now and by god, your animation has improved incredibly as of late. It's remarkable. Keep up the great work, Zee!
I actually love the floor for passive perception. It streamlines a lot. Using that with the PHB group checks makes stealth not take almost as long as combat does
I remember reading that all ability (skill) checks have passive values, they just aren't written on your character sheet. On one hand, I like the idea that a wizard can't roll incredibly low on arcana (since their passive will likely be at least 15), but the idea of passive skills as floors kinda invalidates reliable talent, one of the best features the rogue gets.
how do you feel about averaging the stealth of the party vs passive perception? A lot of dms I've played with use that, and it lets the sneaky +12 rogue have a chance to make up for any nat 1s.
PHB p175 has defined "group checks" where if half the party succeds, all succeed. also never forget RAW and RAI natural 1s and 20s are not automatic failes/successes repectively, this is a common, and frankly mostly bad, houserule.
@@arandombard1197 Except that doesn't gel with the roleplay aspect, because if half your party steps on a twig, the other half shouldn't rightly be able to compensate. So in that circumstance, it makes more sense to average the results. Yes, it's not very friendly to the players, but stealth is difficult, especially when moving in a group.
@@rockchewer7929 Yeah, I can see reason for doing that, but this involves, albeit farily simple, math, while the groupcheck in thr PHB exists, wich very many people, including zee as it seems, forget, and is very simple to use. also: if you have a DC of 15, and three gat exactly 15, and two get only 10, PHB rules woudl say, group passed, but averaging you wouldn't so it works both ways.
@@Brutalyte616 Of course they can compensate. "The rogue guides you through the forest. He suddenly puts out his hand in front of the Paladin. You all look down to see the Paladin seconds away from standing on a twig. The rogue puts his finger to his mouth in a shushing gesture and waves you to the right". A stealthy character guiding less stealthy characters is such a common trope.
Fighters? There's also the fact that a level 4 Dwarf could have Heavy Armour regardless of their class. Actually, even most Medium Armour gives Stealth disadvantage.
Not in my game. Pally would roll double 19s and pass with flying colors, while the wizard would never roll higher than a 4. Group checks (and the gloomstalker ranger's ridiculous stealth) saved his ass so many times.
Thank you for this, especially that 1-turn warning. It's a very cool mechanic, and one which I'd enjoy in reverse once players start mocking the NPCs for walking out to inspect the noise.
I seem to recall that you might be able to extend the passive skill rules to all skill checks, but perception and investigation are the only ones really called out specifically (with perception especially since it is the only one actually listed on your character sheet). Though I'm also not sure how you would generalize that to the other skills (maybe something similar to the old take 10 mechanic?).
I can't imagine this existing for all skill checks given rogues level 11 feature makes it so they always roll at least 9 in things they are proficient. Passive everything effectively makes that ability worthless.
@@HairyHariyama except the fact that if your passive succeeds you don't need to roll. So if both characters have a +5 to persuasion they have a 15 passive persuasion. Thus if that passive persuasion doesn't work the reliable talent of rogue wouldn't of worked either. They are literally the same thing except rogues you need to be proficient in the skill passive you don't. The only bonus which isn't horribly small I'll admit is that it applies to initiative rolls which passive wouldn't. But other than that having passives for all skills is still a huge undermine to the rogues ability
@@HairyHariyama SRD A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn’t involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the GM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster. Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check: 10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score. For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14. The rules on hiding in the “Dexterity” section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules. Notice the amount of times not rolling is stated.
I've been loving these last couple of videos. It's little things like this that have always frustrated me mechanically in D&D and its really nice to see it being addressed in a thoughtful way.
Fuckin' 'ey, Zee. I just gotta say, watching your continued growth is amazing. The new and varied ways you make your character look towards the screen in particular are really interesting and help make the video really pop.
Rolling a twenty is irrelevant. If a rogue with expertise in stealth rolls a 26 with bonuses, a 20 natural from a monster still won't spot the rogue sneaking. Skill checks have no critical successes.
A lot of DMs (myself included) like to implement critical successes for skill checks in order to heighten the shenanigans possible in a session, but it is definitely a different gameplay feel
Not unless you run them that way. A lot of people like to have Nat 20s mean something extra cool, so they usually mean instant success because it can spice up a session.
Yeah I have a star druid doing exacttly this in a Curse of Strahd campaign I'm running. All the other players call the druid "the security camera". I've just leaned into it at this point, I don't even bother. Every room starts with the normal description and then "Druid, you also notice...." :P
Oh, so you've played with someone like me who goes Variant Human for the Observant feat at 1st level while raising INT & WIS as high as not detrimental (my last 5e character was a V.Human rogue that did this very same schtick, my passive perception and investigation at 1st level were both 21 as I could only afford starting 14s via point-buy without seriously dumping other important stats). Edit forgot my character had expertise in both skills.
I don't see why you can't still pull it off - like maybe the druid notices something strange, but doesn't understand it as a trap? Cause usually checking for traps is investigation, right? And Monsters can still roll high stealth if that's what they're good at.
@@veggiedragon1000 At that point, I'd just try to be extra vague about the detail they notice so the player still has to work out if it's a trap or a secret door or what. I wouldn't go "You notice the hidden swinging blade in the ceiling" but instead say "You notice one of the stone tiles on the floor is slightly higher than the others around it." Not to imply that you are, but just to add onto your comment.
Not to mention it makes absolutely no sense. Stuff like this is always up to the group though and cant be seen in an objective way. Thats why its important to play with people you like and you can agree with so everybody has fun. Always be wary of public groups and stuff like that, enjoyable at times but bearing risk of disaster.
Honestly I’m so glad you’re expanding these videos on base rules that people frequently get wrong! I’d love to see something on the non-attack options for combat, like Hide, Ready Action, taunting, feinting, and more!
Zee is super reliable for explaining things or pointing out things I missed reading the DMG or even the PHB. But THIS ONE. HOLY S**T THIS ONE. I have seen the light, and it shows me an easy way to encourage my players to sneak around in the dark. THANK YOU!!
in my home games, I use a homebrew rule, its called experience (no not XP), in skills that you are experienced in you, have a minimum that you can roll when making checks using that skill, the minimum is equal to 2*your proficiency modifier if you are proficient in the skill, or just your proficiency modifier if you are not proficient in the skill. you are experienced in two skills of your choice at character creation and you become experienced in any skills that you have expertise in. you may choose a number of additional skills to be experienced in equal to your Intelligence modifier, of the modifier is a negative you lose experience in skills equal to the negative modifier. so as an example let's say I'm a rogue who has experience in stealth, and my proficiency is +3. I roll a 2 on a stealth check, which is changed to a 6, and then I add my stealth modifier which is 11. so my roll total is 17. this homebrew rule I use gives PCs the safety of having a minimum they can roll of certain skills, without making certain spells or abilities useless. and it gives a strong use to intelligence without it being as OP as giving extra proficiency. also, you can with your intelligence gained experience instead invest it into situational generalized rolls, An example would be an artificer PC who is experienced in enchanting, so any rolls to enchant things would have a minimum allowing them to never totally fail at crafting. some pcs even go for specific tools, so experienced in tinkerers tools (I usually give two artisan tool experience instead of one due to the power difference) edit: also for any non-skill experience the minimum is always 2*proficiency and the expertise rule applies as well. so an artificer that has expertise in all tool checks would also have experience in all tool checks
Your videos are really great for your ADHD viewers man. The pacing, length, everything is just perfect for quick and active engagement/education. Gotta love it.
Nice vid zee! What I tend to do in terms of sneaking in order to initiate surprise in combat, is if a player fails the stealth roll they are also surprised. This stops the paladin from making the groups plans fail, but mean he can’t get off too easy. I also allow someone to bow out of stealth and trail behind the party, meaning they don’t join combat until the second round, so the paladin doesn’t spend every stealth combat getting stabbed a bunch.
I've been using a passive stealth in my games for this exact reason. Believe it's episode 22 on my podcast EFP that I talk about. Makes things into a totally different game! Love your stuff, and keep on rocking!
Can we just take a second to appreciate that he not only kept in the blooper with the construction work, but animated it as well? Top quality stuff, my guy!
I like to use Location Alertness as a homebrew rule. Essentially, a location starts at 0 Alertness. (It can actually go negative if players take actions to sabotage the location's security, and it can also start at higher numbers if the players do something that would put the security on higher alert before the stealth section) Any time some either individually fails a stealth check or more than half the players as a group fail a stealth check AGAINST ACTIVE PERCEPTION, the alert level raises. 0 means that guards take their normal patrol and use passive perception (but passive perception only allows them to take a perception roll if someone rolls below passive perception). 1 means guards begin to deviate and "investigate" disturbances (failed checks or distractions.) They still use passive perception but can now choose to use active perception at the GM's discretion. 2 means the guards are alerted and now abandon patrols to pursue disturbances. They roll active perception aggressively as they look for an intruder. Essentially they are aware someone is here, but they don't know where they are. Guards also will have their weapons drawn and will use perception enhancing spells or abilities as necessary. 3 is full alert. Party or individual has been spotted. All guards with alert level 3 will pursue the trespasser to initiate combat. I've found it makes stealth have a sort of building tension but doesn't immediately punish players for failing a single save. There's nice, tense moments but the rogue doesn't get instantly vaporized because they rolled below someone's passive perception.
Thank you for this video! By the time I slogged through the PHB to figure out how races and classes and equipment and combat and, and, and... worked, I completely missed how passive perception worked 'as written'. Heck, to really cement in the knowledge after watching the video, I still had to flip back and forth across three to five pages to refer to all of the things that influence those situations. - It's a shame it is like that, because the rules for it could fit on an index card if it was all gathered together.
I've always played that passive perception lets me point out something a player might notice (dust on the floor in an odd shape, a feint breeze, an odd smell) but if they want more details then they need to succeed on an active perception check to observe that thing in more detail. An example would be the players are in the woods and the watch person notices a shadow moving in the trees. They can make a perception check to either see the creature about to eat them or to chalk it up to their imagination. Using passive perception as a skill floor, while interesting, also takes away some of the intrigue from searching a room or looking for something specific since you'd never be able to get a "bad" role.
Really enjoying this narrator model! He animates well and has a really good silhouette. Also covering these wrongly assumed rules will probably be really helpful in the long-run.
This is awesome! My group and I never really knew how to work passive perception in. We did take it as, "well, you don't know its there, and you didn't ask to check. so I'm gonna use your passive." but, as good players, or at least what I thought was good, we constantly asked about the environment and if anything is out of place. So, it was hard for the DM and as a DM to effectively use it.
A point on sneaking in groups: If you've ever snuck around in real life; whoever is "on point" in your marching order should have their bonus apply to the other members of the party or at least a fraction of it. Here's the logic behind that; when you have to evade detection in a group, the furthest ahead in the group will be the one to detect what one could call "micro-obstacles" and direct those behind them in formation away from them. Shattered glass on the ground, a stray bottle or notably large stone, and even just plain ole brittle foliage isn't difficult to navigate around if the person ahead of you has already done so in eyeshot and communicated to you how to do the same. Even assuming that the group isn't moving in a single-file, it's always best to have a "point man" to feel out the thin ice ahead and direct everyone else by means of simple hand signals or whispering or other means of communication with low audibility. I like the table rule of having a round to hide before being fully detected, as even a second of hearing a clear human voice could be dismissed as "maybe that's not what I actually heard" by common guard at the end of his shift and I've had real-life close calls where even after being clearly spotted, just the act of hiding resulted in the sentry assuming that my group simply left.
The best way to work with that is if you fail a stealth roll, the seekers go on alert. “What was that?” If you fail again, then they see you and probably attack. Otherwise, it’s a “Must’ve been the wind” situation. Also, it makes sense that groups sneaking together would be louder than a single person, but you can still use the majority rule for whether the group as a whole helps cover each other’s stealth.
What my group does for group stealth is we take the average of the roll with the implication of the sneakier buggers compensating and helping the clunkier ones. Helping them out or pointing to places to sneak to. You know, like playing red light green light sort of deal. This can lead to some incredible clench moments where we've snuck through half a dungeon to ensure that we're fresh as a daisy for a boss fight and then slowly, and quietly barricading a door to not only stop reinfocements coming in but muffle sound so that we don't end up with half a dungeon dropping on us like the wrath of god. At the end of a campaign we were down to three characters and took huge advantage of this with a lightly armoured, crossbow master Champion Fighter, a Mastermind Rogue with a magic throwing knife of returning and a BURLY Hunter Ranger with a battleaxe. We ghosted through a dungeon outright lying our way through checkpoints, sending entire patrols on wild goose chases, (we had those ogres so convinced we were trustworthy we basically had them running laps) if we didn't think we could sneak it and faced off against the end boss with full hitpoints, spells and magic weapon charges. Couple that with out Champion Fighter's tendency to ALWAYS CRIT and my BRUTAL sneak attacks on top of the Rangers consistent damage and we tore that elemental prince to pieces.
I think something that could help here is found in actual ninja tactics: planning ahead. By having your scout spend a day to observe the enemy, they can use their investigation checks to observe where and when the least experienced guards are posted while noting guard rotations. Rather than try to stealth as a group, you break the taboo and have all stealthy fighters sneak in through their own path to achieve their own objective, like sneaking into the jail with a cape of the mounteback, or get the goods. 3, Use your clunky allies as an advantage. By distracting the guards and keeping them detained, your clunky battlemaster can actually provide disadvantage on passive perception and the help action to every stealth roll. Though they might get caught, the guards will believe it as a victory and throw them in jail as bait, where another ally is already waiting to bust them out.
