Making Stealth Fun

[Bladeyeoman]

Hey guys! Several of my players have fairly stealthy characters, and so far stealth tasks have felt pretty lackluster. They've mostly revolved around "Yup, you try to be stealthy. Make a roll." Failure generally means detection, success means they're hidden until I make them make another roll. If the players are creative I might give them advantage or not require the check, but it feels like there's not a lot of room for cool tactical decisions or interesting challenges - at least, not with a consistent structure where the player can predict the consequences of a success or a failure for a given tactical decision.

I've done a bit of googling, and didn't find anything that seemed satisfying (although I'm very open if someone has links to something cool). So I'm working on small subsystem that modifies stealth to make it more interactive and strategic. I'd love input, particularly ways to simplify things.

The basic goals are: (a) provide spatial variation in stealth success, much like we have in combat, (b) provide multiple meaningful actions/instrumental goals players can choose from, and (c) try to prevent the "any failed roll means it's all over". (this mirrors the overarching structure of combat: Players generally can use movement and positioning in the environment their advantage, have different viable choices for what to do with their action, and usually don't die from a single hit). And then, hopefully make the rules as simple as possible while achieving those three goals.

My nascent system:

Making Space matter:

NPCS have a field of vision (generally a cone, though for special NPCs like beholders, they have a circle of vision all around them). The field of vision can be blocked by objects that provide at least partial cover. If players cross an NPC’s field of vision, NPC gets to make a perception check with +5 (without +5 if lightly obscured). If the PC is within X feet (50, half if lightly obscured?), a success from the NPC pushes to Aware regardless of current state (see below).
If a PC is not in the field of vision of an NPC, that NPC cannot detect the PC unless that PC moves (at which point the PC makes a stealth check).
Regions that are poorly lit are lightly obscured. Regions that are unlit are heavily obscured.

NPC States. NPCs generally start Unaware (although NPCs on guard may be alert - describe narratively).

Unaware: NPCs behave as if players aren’t there, and use passive perception against stealth checks. If a PC fails a stealth roll, the NPC transitions to the Alerted state (unless the PC is in the NPC's field of vision and very close, in which case NPC transitions to Aware).
Alerted (I-III) - NPCs use perception actively (contested rolls), behavior is to investigate near location of the failed PC stealth attempt. If attacked while investigating, the PC gain no surprise advantage unless the attacker also succeeds on a stealth check vs passive perception + 5. As a reaction, alerted NPCs that succeed on a perception check outside of their field of vision can turn their field of vision towards the source.
If an NPC who is Alerted makes a successful perception check in their field of vision, regardless of distance, they become aware of the PC(s) in question. If the NPC makes a successful perception check outside of their field of vision, they increment up one alerted state. If that puts them into Alerted III, they will Sound the Alarm on their next turn even though they are unaware of PC locations. (distractions can be useful, but repeated distractions tell the NPC something weird is happening).
Aware - the NPCs has detected one or more of the PCs, and knows where they are (they are no longer hidden). The NPC may investigate to look for more PCs. No surprise at the start of combat. An aware NPC is likely to Sound the Alarm on his turn (if he has allies).

Sounding the Alarm. The NPC that sounds the alarm points out PCs they are aware of. Allies with line of sight are aware of those PCs. If the NPC that sounded the alarm wasn’t Aware of PCs or the allies don’t have line of sight to the PCs the alarming NPC is Aware of, allies are alerted. Sounding the alarm may attracted additional NPCs from nearby.


This definitely adds some complexity to the game, but seems like it provides a consistent framework in which players can know the benefits of providing distractions, creating/using cover, moving versus staying still, manipulating light sources, etc. The steps between stealth'd and detected feel like they provide opportunities for tension and shifting strategies. The rules above really seem like they require maps to function well, and probably use cut out paper pie-charts beneath minis to represent the field of vision. So it will definitely be a bit more work for me to prep and run, but no more than for combat (I usually have combat on a grid).

I'd love some feedback or alternatives. Does this seem like overkill? Are there tricks to simplify this? Do you have something else you do that makes stealth fun and interesting?

Thanks in advance!

[Armored Walrus]

Its pretty fiddly and complex imo, and risks making stealth tedious rather than the current problem of it being too binary.

May I suggest a simpler potential fix? How about on a failed stealth check the player has a split second to react. What they choose to do in that moment can save their bacon or result in them being caught. They might use that moment to cause a distraction, cast a bonus action spell make a sound like a cat or whatever. Some action to try to mislead or evade the search before they are flat out discovered. You wouldn't need to add any rules and would simply need to make sure your environments are rich enough to provide options.

You can always add further complexity a layer at a time if you still feel it's warranted.

[strangebloke]

I think the stealth rules are already complicated enough, really. Adding facing rules is something I really can't recommend in 5e, since there are so many things this would change. Additionally, your rules don't account for sound, smell, and other senses.

If you want things to be a little more interactive, I'd suggest you implement partial success and succeed with style as options.

if:
dexterity(stealth) >= Passive Perception - 3
then:
partial success. Guard makes an active wisdom(perception) check with advantage opposed by the character's dexterity(stealth) check to avoid being caught.

if:
dexterity(stealth) >= Passive Perception AND dexterity(stealth) < Passive Perception +3
then:
normal success.

if
dexterity(stealth) >= Passive Perception +3
then:
succeed with style. You get to move at normal speed, and ifyou attack someone your first attack will be with advantage.

There's also some good ways to handle group checks.

For group passive perception, it's the highest PP in the group + 1 for each assembled person on watch, up to a +3.
Then for stealth, if a majority of the group succeeds, they all succeed. (you can combine this with partial success, etc. by making success=1, partial success=0, failure=-1, and success with style = 2, then adding it all up and if they get a net positive score, they succeed.)

[Lombra]

Facing is an optional rule in the DMG, you may want to give it a look.

[Bladeyeoman]

Its pretty fiddly and complex imo, and risks making stealth tedious rather than the current problem of it being too binary.

May I suggest a simpler potential fix? How about on a failed stealth check the player has a split second to react. What they choose to do in that moment can save their bacon or result in them being caught. They might use that moment to cause a distraction, cast a bonus action spell make a sound like a cat or whatever. Some action to try to mislead or evade the search before they are flat out discovered. You wouldn't need to add any rules and would simply need to make sure your environments are rich enough to provide options.

This all makes sense. It feels like it lacks a bit in the way of proactive choices, but maybe I just need to be better about handling those more narratively.


I think the stealth rules are already complicated enough, really. Adding facing rules is something I really can't recommend in 5e, since there are so many things this would change. Additionally, your rules don't account for sound, smell, and other senses.

If you want things to be a little more interactive, I'd suggest you implement partial success and succeed with style as options..


Lots of good things here. I think we could probably improve on the partial failure, though - we're rolling twice, which doesn't really provide interesting decisions from the players. But that would be a good place for Armored Walrus's suggestion.


Facing is an optional rule in the DMG, you may want to give it a look.
Great point - I hadn't realized that it was there. Page 252, in case anyone else wants to check it out.

[Armored Walrus]

This all makes sense. It feels like it lacks a bit in the way of proactive choices, but maybe I just need to be better about handling those more narratively.

It's really what 5e is about. If you want a mechanic for everything then changing editions might be an easier fix. Not to say it isn't fun to mess with the mechanics. I think all of us do. But before you add huge chunks of complexity it's helpful to ask if your problem is truly a mechanical one. If the resolution is uninteresting then it may simply be that the roll is unnecessary or that the environment isn't rich enough to make the resolution interesting.

The idea of having a moment to react isn't mine, by the way. That comes straight from theangrygm.com. he has a few posts where he talks about ways to make hiding interesting.

Edit: and a few posts about how to go about adding mechanics if your game needs them.

[Bladeyeoman]

The idea of having a moment to react isn't mine, by the way. That comes straight from theangrygm.com. he has a few posts where he talks about ways to make hiding interesting.

Edit: and a few posts about how to go about adding mechanics if your game needs them.

I'm a pretty avid reader of his stuff. His recent post on "The Xenosis" is what got me to re-examine stealth. :)

[Armored Walrus]

Then you're familiar with this post (http://theangrygm.com/tick-tock-the-weird-clock-speed-of-dd/). Probably worth a reread for your exact situation. Thanks for posting the topic, because it's something I need to reread, too.

[JellyPooga]

Stealth, like any other aspect of the game, is not made fun by adding layers of rules, but rather by using the rules as a framework to tell your collective story. Of course a simple Stealth vs. Perception roll, which if failed results in the enemy knowing exactly where you are and how to react, is about as dry and boring as stale bread. Sure, that scenario is appropriate sometimes, but if you want to make stealth fun, use it as a Long Task, give the players opportunities to use another skill or change their plan. By way of example;

- GM : "Ok, you failed your Stealth roll; the guard stops his patrol and looks around as if he heard something, but misses you in his haste. He looks alert - any action might catch his eye. What do you do?"

- Bard : "I freeze for a moment, then I'll create a distraction. Can I use Deception to...er...throw a rock to make him look the wrong way"

- Rogue : "Really? Only an idiot falls for that" *shakes his head* "Fine, whatever. Whether or not that works, I'm going to try and wait him out; blend into the shadows and see if I can spot an opening to exploit and sneak past."

- GM : "Ok, sure, Bard can roll Deception, DC:15 and Rogue...you roll Insight, DC...er...10." *clatter clatter clatter* "Right, that's a success on the Deception but a fail on the Insight. Bard your plan works; you chuck a rock, the guard hears it and goes over to investigate, but doesn't find anything; the distraction worked but now he's even more suspicious. Rogue, you er, miss the opening because you were so focused on the guard and his reaction. Okay, you're still at square 1 and the guard's super suspicious now. You see him throw a thoughtful glance at a rope hanging from the darkness up in the rafters; it looks like a bell rope. What do you want to do?"

Being a GM isn't just about being arbiter of the rules, it's about utilising the rules you have to make the game fun. The skill system is great for creating tension in any lengthy task, such as stealth encounters and is an acceptable excuse for the swingyness of a d20; failure of a scene on the result of a single dice roll is boring. The combat system is predicated on multiple "failures" over the course of rounds to make it interesting; why should stealth, conversation, exploration or any other task be different?

[Bladeyeoman]

Then you're familiar with this post (http://theangrygm.com/tick-tock-the-weird-clock-speed-of-dd/). Probably worth a reread for your exact situation. Thanks for posting the topic, because it's something I need to reread, too.

Yeah, it's been at least a month or two since I read that one. I'll check it out again.


Stealth, like any other aspect of the game, is not made fun by adding layers of rules, but rather by using the rules as a framework to tell your collective story... [example, other good points]

Yeah! The funny part is that my rules were basically formalizations of the same stuff you were using for your example. So I think maybe drop the "I need a rules subsystem" approach and instead think of it as "here are some guidelines for how stealth works". And probably drop the field of view bit.

Thanks guys!

[DnDegenerates]

Make paper or clear stencils of sight distance for monsters/NPCs.

Have a color coded "alert" level markers for NPCs. Passive insight or perception to determine this unless the npc is faking it. Red yellow blue for unalert, suspicious, and alert.

Either get really good at dry marker battle mapping quickly or prepare your maps on gridded paper ahead of time (discount gridded gift paper is a commonly used resource).

Incorporate clues, even index cards will do instead of intentionally aged paper (coffee or tea for example). Riddles, notes, potentially important keys, signet rings, seals, oddly shaped candlesticks, lists, strange trinkets, etc. It'll make less combat heavy infiltrations more interesting.

Get packages of common terrain miniatures that can be used for cover. Such as crates/barrels/doors/etc. Certain common online sellers often have some good deals.

Don't forget to describe terrain. Potential handholds, ropes holding up banners, chandeliers, torch sconces, sturdy bookshelves, candlebras, low windowsills that are wider than average, desks, chairs, broom closets, large keyholes, etc.

Make things like sounds a very important part of stealth play. Get very good at sound descriptions. Seriously. Your vocabulary may be amazing, but you'll still find ways to make use of synonyms of descriptors you otherwise wouldn't. Brushing up on them can remind you of words you wouldn't normally use in those situations. A quiet dungeon may carry sounds further than you realize.

PC and NPC. Sounds that aren't identifiable at first. Or clues that may reward them should they perception well at the right time. Why does this hallway have a distant humming that's getting stronger? Why does that humming stop in this room alone? What are those vibrations in the walls?

Successfully stealth rolls may be rewarded with brief conversations that further aid missions, or are used to build suspense or terror.

There are a lot of useful tools at your disposal.