Stealth in obscured areas.

[Godrednu]

Just wondering if I handled something right as the DM. I had some goblins waiting in a heavily obscured area, not moving or making a sound. The players walked by in an open path making normal noises. I rolled perception for the goblins to see if they heard the party (since the goblins were in a heavily obscured area and therefore 'blind' to the party) then I had the party roll perception to see if they noticed the goblins. Would that roll even matter since the goblins were silent and in a heavily obscured area? If so, what would it be against? The goblins stealth? If that's the case, what should I have done for the goblins stealth since they were in a heavily obscured area and silent, waiting in ambush?

[hymer]

As the DM you made a ruling, so you're in the right already.

That said, I'd have handled it slightly differently. Since the PCs weren't trying to be stealthy, there should be no need for the gobbos to roll perception to notice the party coming by.

In the first goblin ambush in (IIRC) Mines of Phandelver, the PCs don't get to roll to notice the goblins in advance. They only get to roll to avoid being surprised. I don't agree with that ruling; there should be some chance that someone notices the ambush before it's sprung. But it's official as far as it goes. If one of the PCs beat the gobs' stealth by 5, I'd have let them notice that ambush before it happens.

In the end, the important thing is probably to be fair and consistent about your rulings.

[Godrednu]

They only get to roll to avoid being surprised.

How did this work?

[Joe the Rat]

Roll perception vs stealth to notice, if they succeed they are not surprised during the first round of combat. Presumably.

[Godrednu]

Roll perception vs stealth to notice, if they succeed they are not surprised during the first round of combat. Presumably.

Would you give the goblins any advantage since they're heavily obscured, silent, not moving, and have been waiting for they're next ambush?

[Joe the Rat]

heavily obscured = not readily visible (can Hide)
silent and not moving = Using Stealth to hide <-- that's what the players are "perceiving" against - do they hear something, do they notice a bush move the wrong way when a goblin bumps it getting his bow ready, etc. If you think there are sufficient distractions (wind make movement and noise in foliage, animals... I set up an ambush from just upstream of a waterfall. Hearing was worthless), then you can put disadvantage on it.

But ultimately it's how you call the situation. If the goblins are really dug in well, then yeah, make 'em extra hard to find.

[RSP]

As stated above, and nicely put by the way, you're the DM so roll with whatever ruling you like.

i wouldn't give advantage to the goblins on their stealth for being heavily obscured or staying silent; whether they are silent or not is why you roll stealth and not being seen (i.e. heavily obscured) is a necessary condition to be able to hide in the first place. That said, the DM determines when a situation has advantage/disadvantage.

One minor point about Perception, I believe in these situations, RAW, Passive Perception is to be used. It makes it quicker and easier for the DM to roll the goblins stealth and just check it against the player's Passive Perception. "Does anyone's Passive Perception beat an 18? No? Okay you guys are surprised by goblins. Roll initiatives."

I believe Perception rolls are only meant to be used when a character is using an action to find something (like searching for where the invisible, hidden being is in combat), per RAW. Though if you prefer active rolling at your table, dismiss Passive Perception and just have the party roll.

[Plaguescarred]

I had some goblins waiting in a heavily obscured area, not moving or making a sound. The players walked by in an open path making normal noises. I rolled perception for the goblins to see if they heard the party (since the goblins were in a heavily obscured area and therefore 'blind' to the party)You shoudn't have rolled to see the PCs since a blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight. But since the PCs hadn't made any effort to conceal themselves the goblins should have detected them coming.


then I had the party roll perception to see if they noticed the goblins. Would that roll even matter since the goblins were silent and in a heavily obscured area? If so, what would it be against? The goblins stealth? If that's the case, what should I have done for the goblins stealth since they were in a heavily obscured area and silent, waiting in ambush?You'd compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of the hiding goblins with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each PC. Any PCs that failed to notice all goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter.

[RSP]

Plaguescarred,
just a quick clarification: RAW, a character is only surprised if they fail to notice any enemies. Generally at our table, the DM rolls group stealth checks for opponents so the PCs either notice all or none of a group.

However, if rolling for individuals, or rolling for different groups of opponents, noticing any of the enemy means you are not surprised.

Any threats not noticed would get the advantage of being unseen, however they would not induce surprise barring a creature being unaware of all threats.

Not sure if you meant this or not in your write up, but i just wanted to clarify for others.

[Plaguescarred]

Plaguescarred,
just a quick clarification: RAW, a character is only surprised if they fail to notice any enemies. Generally at our table, the DM rolls group stealth checks for opponents so the PCs either notice all or none of a group.

However, if rolling for individuals, or rolling for different groups of opponents, noticing any of the enemy means you are not surprised.

Any threats not noticed would get the advantage of being unseen, however they would not induce surprise barring a creature being unaware of all threats.

Not sure if you meant this or not in your write up, but i just wanted to clarify for others.Yes, hence why i said;

"Any PCs that failed to notice all goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter."

[RSP]

Had you stated "any" instead of "all" you would be correct.

"Any PCs that failed to notice all goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter."

Jim notices 5 out of 6 goblins, so he failed to notice "all" goblins. By your sentence he would be surprised. By the rules, he is not, as he succeeded in noticing at least 1 goblin.

Not trying to be annoying just pointing out the difference.

[Kornaki]

You are just arguing about the ambiguous nature of the sentence, not actual content.

[RSP]

Kornaki,
Not arguing about anything; just stating what the rules are as the OP had questions about the rules and I'm hoping to provide clarity.

I don't want anyone to read a post and then say "oh that's how the rules work?" and get mis-information.

Again not trying to arguing anything, just doing my best to clarify the rules for those seeking help.

[Vogonjeltz]

Just wondering if I handled something right as the DM. I had some goblins waiting in a heavily obscured area, not moving or making a sound. The players walked by in an open path making normal noises. I rolled perception for the goblins to see if they heard the party (since the goblins were in a heavily obscured area and therefore 'blind' to the party) then I had the party roll perception to see if they noticed the goblins. Would that roll even matter since the goblins were silent and in a heavily obscured area? If so, what would it be against? The goblins stealth? If that's the case, what should I have done for the goblins stealth since they were in a heavily obscured area and silent, waiting in ambush?

If the players were making no effort to be stealthy, the Goblins should automatically notice them once they come within visual or auditory range.

If the Goblins are trying to hide, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check for them which is opposed by the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of the players. (per PHB 175, 177)

Characters should only roll a Wisdom (Perception) check if they're actively looking for something. Otherwise the Passive score (10 + normally applying modifiers) is what gets used.

If the Goblins are hiding in foliage, for example, which provides a heavily obscured area, the players are effectively blinded when trying to see them. The goblins, assuming they are looking out at a non-heavily obscured area, would be laboring under no ill effects. However, if they tried to see something else in the same heavily obscured area (i.e. they're in dense underbrush, and trying to look at another thing in that same underbrush) then they would have the same problems as anyone outside the area trying to look in.

As to your question on the roll: Yes, the two rolls (or one roll and score comparison) represent two things: 1) The aptitude of the Goblins hiding and 2) The aptitude of the players at searching for (active) or noticing (passive) the hiding monsters.

So they most definitely do matter.

Heavily obscured is just the default precondition for hiding when someone might otherwise be able to observe the characters:
PHB 177: "You can't hide from a creature that can see you, and if you make noise (such as shouting a warning or knocking over a vase), you give away your position. An invisible creature can't be seen, so it can always try to hide."

Some feats and racial features also allow a creature to hide while only lightly obscured (Halfling, Wood Elf, Skulker Feat). Bear in mind this applies to attempts to hide when in the presence of another creature. Once hidden you remain so until you come out of hiding or someone beats your check. Even then, if they don't inform their allies, only that creature would actually notice you. (So you could be hidden from all but one Orc in a group, for example, although most of the time it's safe to assume creatures would inform their allies).


Would you give the goblins any advantage since they're heavily obscured, silent, not moving, and have been waiting for they're next ambush?

Yes, PHB 195: "When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it."

So the first attack from every goblin would be at advantage, assuming the players failed to notice them at the start of combat. This would also have the players be surprised for the first round (so everyone rolls initiative, on the first turn anyone surprised can't take an action on the first round, or a reaction until after their initiative comes up.

[Tanarii]

Had you stated "any" instead of "all" you would be correct.

"Any PCs that failed to notice all goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter."

Jim notices 5 out of 6 goblins, so he failed to notice "all" goblins. By your sentence he would be surprised. By the rules, he is not, as he succeeded in noticing at least 1 goblin.

Not trying to be annoying just pointing out the difference.
That is not correct. You must fail to notice all of the enemies to be surprised. If you perceive even one, you are not surprised, as you have not failed to notice a threat. PHB p189.

Edit: sorry you're right. I had what you were saying back to front. /facepalm

[Plaguescarred]

Had you stated "any" instead of "all" you would be correct.

"Any PCs that failed to notice all goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter."

Jim notices 5 out of 6 goblins, so he failed to notice "all" goblins. By your sentence he would be surprised. By the rules, he is not, as he succeeded in noticing at least 1 goblin.

Not trying to be annoying just pointing out the difference.You misunderstood it's not what i said. If Jim noticed 5 goblins ouf of 6 he did not fail to notice all of them (he noticed 5/6 as opposed to 0/6) and thus wouldn't surprised.

In other words, if you notice even one enemy among a group, you are not surprised, so you need to fail to notice all of them in order to be surprised, which is what i said.

[Tanarii]

You misunderstood it's not what i said. If Jim noticed 5 goblins ouf of 6 he did not fail to notice all of them (he noticed 5/6 as opposed to 0/6) and thus wouldn't surprised.
He's not reading "(fail to notice) all", but rather "fail to (notice all)". I read it the same way you mean it. :)

[Plaguescarred]

He's not reading "(fail to notice) all", but rather "fail to (notice all)".I don't see the different readings there's no coma or anything that could change the meaning???

To Rsp29a;


That is not correct. You must fail to notice all of the enemies to be surprised. If you perceive even one, you are not surprised, as you have not failed to notice a threat. PHB p189.

Edit: sorry you're right. I had what you were saying back to front. /facepalm

To me;


I read it the same way you mean it. :)

How can you read it as i do but think Rsp29a is right??

[RSP]

I think we're all on the same page here.

Again, my correction was not meant to be an attack on Plaguescarred or anyone, just a correction so anyone reading would understand the rules.

The way the sentence was worded, it was incorrect. See my above post regarding Jim and the goblins to see why "any" works in your sentence but "all" does not, if you want it to correctly represent the rules.

[Plaguescarred]

I think we're all on the same page here.

Again, my correction was not meant to be an attack on Plaguescarred or anyone, just a correction so anyone reading would understand the rules.

The way the sentence was worded, it was incorrect. See my above post regarding Jim and the goblins to see why "any" works in your sentence but "all" does not, if you want it to correctly represent the rules.Its all good Rsp29a i don't take it as an attack don't worry

Sorry but i think i don't get your point, may it's because i'm not english native, but if you replace ALL for ANY the sentence in my view would become incorrect rulewise

"Any PCs that failed to notice any goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter."

because failing to notice any goblins could mean that you fail to notice some of them but didn't fail to notice some others, while in order to be surprised you need to fail to notice each and every one of them. Noticing even just one of them means you're not surprised as you failed to notice all goblins. Perhaps i should have used the word every to be more clear?

"Any PCs that failed to notice every goblins would be surprised at the start of the encounter."


EDIT Ok as Tanarii said it's "[fail to notice] all goblins" VS "fail to [notice all] goblins" that give different readings. And after checking the word ANY i agree it can mean all or every and not just one or more so it'd be more appropriate thanks for the tips...

[RSP]

Yeah, English can be ambiguous sometimes. We'll go with each of us could have worded it better.

On the plus side, anyone who reads through the thread should get the rule down now.