'Indistinguishable' Creatures Doing Things

[Cheesegear]

A lot of creatures have an ability called False Appearance. Which means that as long as they remain motionless, they are indistinguishable from a normal thing.
(Yep, it's impossible to spot them, even if you roll over 30 on your Investigation/Perception.)

I recently attacked the party with a few Galeb Duhrs (Duhri?), who animated their boulders and then did a surprise round.

My party argued that either:
a) They should have spotted them when they animated their boulders, or
b) They used their Surprise to animate boulders.

I ruled 'No.'

When a Galeb Duhr animates boulders, it doesn't say how; There's no verbal or somatic components. The Duhrs just do it. That is, they remain motionless, and obviously they don't say anything. When I read it, I didn't feasibly see how the party could stop the attack, or perceive* the attack, until it happened. That's part of why I made the encounter in the first place. My players...Disagreed.

*Obviously there's Ranger and Paladin abilities to sense for Elementals, and Detect Thoughts, etc. Suffice to say, none of those happened.

[elyktsorb]

My only note would be that the Galeb Duhr's 'Animate Boulder' mentions that they concentrate on keeping the Boulder's Animated as if they were casting a spell, to me this would imply that they had to do the whole 'spell casting motions' part of casting it.

OR it could be implying the opposite, that this ability, while spell like in nature, is an ability, but has a concentration requirement.

Vague creature ability is vague.

[Lunali]

Either the animate boulders is their first action in initiative, or you should roll initiative as if neither side is surprised because the party knows something's up so they aren't flatfooted.

[Unoriginal]

A lot of creatures have an ability called False Appearance. Which means that as long as they remain motionless, they are indistinguishable from a normal thing.
(Yep, it's impossible to spot them, even if you roll over 30 on your Investigation/Perception.)

I recently attacked the party with a few Galeb Duhrs (Duhri?), who animated their boulders and then did a surprise round.

My party argued that either:
a) They should have spotted them when they animated their boulders, or
b) They used their Surprise to animate boulders.

I ruled 'No.'

When a Galeb Duhr animates boulders, it doesn't say how; There's no verbal or somatic components. The Duhrs just do it. That is, they remain motionless, and obviously they don't say anything. When I read it, I didn't feasibly see how the party could stop the attack, or perceive* the attack, until it happened. That's part of why I made the encounter in the first place. My players...Disagreed.

*Obviously there's Ranger and Paladin abilities to sense for Elementals, and Detect Thoughts, etc. Suffice to say, none of those happened.

Your ruling is what I would have ruled too, and it's fitting the RAW perfectly.

IF the Galeb Dhurs had summoned creatures that could be spotted, then your players would have been correct, but the Galeb Dhurs' boulders share the False Appearance ability of their elemental masters.



Vague creature ability is vague.

Abilities don't have a list of all the things that aren't happening in order to use them. If it's not mentioned that you need magic motions for an ability, you don't need them.

Obviously if you use an ability that usually needs something, but for some reason you don't (ex: some monsters's Innate Spellcasting), then the exception is mentioned.


Either the animate boulders is their first action in initiative, or you should roll initiative as if neither side is surprised because the party knows something's up so they aren't flatfooted.

Why? They didn't do anything that the party could perceive with the capacities they had.

There is no way for the party to "know something's up" in that case.

[Lupine]

I think it’s a fine ruling. Note that the Galeb Duhr does not say that they “cast animate objects” they cause the boulders to become temporary galen Duhrs. I would say that it is kind of uncool to start off an encounter balanced for creatures, and effectively doubling it without an action resource cost.

So, to make it fair for the players, you have to make them aware of the danger. But how to do this with a creature that is, as you mentioned, indistinguishable?

What says that the process of animation must be silent and immobile? Maybe, one of the players sees a rock shift: a boulder animated. Or, since the rocks have int1, they could just attack the players outright, without stealth. After the party kills one, another boulder animated and attacks. Say you have an encounter balanced for 6 galeb duhrs. I would put one, and spread out five boulders for it to use. Galeb has int11. If it does not need to put itself in danger, it won’t.

So, they watch as a boulder moves, and another one. They kill one, and another moves in. The players either kill 5 galeb durhs and leave (allowing future attacks), or they figure it out, they fight six and no longer get attacked.
And if a player figures it out early, and attacks the real threat, good for them! They get to feel smart for figuring it out early.

[Unoriginal]

I think it’s a fine ruling. Note that the Galeb Duhr does not say that they “cast animate objects” they cause the boulders to become temporary galen Duhrs. I would say that it is kind of uncool to start off an encounter balanced for creatures, and effectively doubling it without an action resource cost.

So, to make it fair for the players, you have to make them aware of the danger. But how to do this with a creature that is, as you mentioned, indistinguishable?

False Appearance and Animate Boulders are the Galeb Dhurs' signature moves. I don't see the point in nerfing their powers by making them actually-totally-noticeable-by-normal-humanoid-capacities.

It's like saying "The Psionic Mind Flayer can cast a buff on themselves with no way for the PCs to notice before the ambush start, but to make it fair for the players you need to let it be noticeable".


Or, since the rocks have int1, they could just attack the players outright, without stealth.

Sure, that's what the boulders would likely do when the PCs are Surprised. Still leave the Galeb Dhurs free to do what they want during that time.

[Cheesegear]

I would say that it is kind of uncool to start off an encounter balanced for creatures, and effectively doubling it without an action resource cost.

I know, right? That's what makes it a challenge. :smallwink:


So, to make it fair for the players

Of course it's fair for the players. It's not like I'm throwing them at Level 4 babies who don't have magic weapons.
Besides, Galeb Duhrs are CR6 - they're meant to be tough.


you have to make them aware of the danger.

Do I?


What says that the process of animation must be silent and immobile?

That's kind of what my OP is asking; Where does it say that it isn't?
If I the DM, rule that it isn't silent and immobile...Fine. Game continues.
If I the DM, rule that it is silent and immobile...Prove me wrong, I guess.


Say you have an encounter balanced for 6 galeb duhrs. I would put one, and spread out five boulders for it to use. Galeb has int11. If it does not need to put itself in danger, it won’t.

...I did not think of that, and it's an excellent idea.
You cannot find the 'original' Elemental, if it doesn't want you to, and it summons copies of itself to do its fighting for it.

...I know where my adventure is going, now. Of course, it would all fall apart if my players used their class abilities. :smallamused:

[Unoriginal]

Now, while they can't be distinguished from normal rocks when they don't move, it's possible a Galeb Dhur leaves tracks or other traces of them walking from where they were to their current hiding spot. So, depending on the environment and the PCs' WIS (Survival), they could still found where the Galeb Dhur is.

Of course that's also why Galeb Dhurs prefer ambushing in natural stone caves with little in the way of places where they could leave footprints, as opposed to forests with soft ground.

[Cheesegear]

Of course that's also why Galeb Dhurs prefer ambushing in natural stone caves with little in the way of places where they could leave footprints, as opposed to forests with soft ground.

You hear* the words of a Terran spell; Roughly translated "Transform and roll out!"
*If, you are of course ruling that Animate Boulders isn't silent.

[Tanarii]

You skipped a step.

1) determine surprise
2) roll initiative
3) creatures take actions

[MaxWilson]

A lot of creatures have an ability called False Appearance. Which means that as long as they remain motionless, they are indistinguishable from a normal thing.
(Yep, it's impossible to spot them, even if you roll over 30 on your Investigation/Perception.)

I recently attacked the party with a few Galeb Duhrs (Duhri?), who animated their boulders and then did a surprise round.

My party argued that either:
a) They should have spotted them when they animated their boulders, or
b) They used their Surprise to animate boulders.

I ruled 'No.'

When a Galeb Duhr animates boulders, it doesn't say how; There's no verbal or somatic components. The Duhrs just do it. That is, they remain motionless, and obviously they don't say anything. When I read it, I didn't feasibly see how the party could stop the attack, or perceive* the attack, until it happened. That's part of why I made the encounter in the first place. My players...Disagreed.

*Obviously there's Ranger and Paladin abilities to sense for Elementals, and Detect Thoughts, etc. Suffice to say, none of those happened.

IMO Indistinguishable is a bad ability. When creatures mimic other creatures, it's both realistic and healthy for the game if there is some kind of a pattern which lets knowledgable individuals spot the mimicry. "Aha, that's a stick bug! It looks like a stick but do you see how the <technobabble>?"

Frankly I think this is a perfect place for passive Nature or Survival checks (in the case of somewhat natural creatures) or passive Arcana or Survival checks (in the case of magical creatures or aberrations).

Instead of pointing to the MM here, I would say, "examine whether the MM rules are giving a good game experience."

As for the boulder animation itself, I'd say something similar: examine whether boulder animation is more fun as an overt action (the Galeb Duhr breathes on the boulders and they start to animate) or a covert action (the boulders suddenly animate and it's not obvious why, although the reality is that it was caused by the Galeb Duhr "doing nothing" on its turn). IMO overt is usually more fun, because the more information players have about the game world, the more easily they can participate.

It is unfortunate that the MM isn't more explicit about what "taking an action" actually consists of, in diegetic (narrative) terms. That's 5E for you though.


That's kind of what my OP is asking; Where does it say that it isn't?
If I the DM, rule that it isn't silent and immobile...Fine. Game continues.
If I the DM, rule that it is silent and immobile...Prove me wrong, I guess.

As the DM you have the right to do either. Players have no right to make you change it, but they have the right to tell you when they aren't having fun. You don't have to agree (sometimes un-fun stuff in the short term, like PC death, is a necessary part of fun in the long term, like a challenging game where consequences are real) but you should listen with an open mind.

[Cheesegear]

Players have no right to make you change it, but they have the right to tell you when they aren't having fun.

My problem is that I find that a lot of times, 'I'm not having fun', means 'My loss aversion is being triggered'. In which case I don't care.

As I said previously; My players are currently Tier 2, and most of them have magic and/or magic weapons. Galebs shouldn't be a problem, in the long term.
...Except on the first round of combat, with Surprise, where all of them - including their duplicates - can Charge & Slam. Subsequent rounds are much less difficult because the Galeb's damage output is severely diminished. Especially if you target the 'original' Galeb, and force it to lose Concentration so its summons turn back into rocks.

My players weren't allowed to respond. Yes, that's how Surprise works. My players are always upset when they're surprised, because loss aversion. They constantly make Perception checks all session long. That's why I'm always drawn to creatures with False Appearance. It's a very powerful ability, and it even works against paranoid parties. Ropers can do the same thing. One minute you're walking through the cave, 6 seconds later...Half the party is Grappled and being pulled.

My players were upset, because this particular creature (Galeb Duhrs) appeared to have an ability that the players can't replicate...And it's not even that strong. It appears to effectively simply be Subtle Spell from Hide, except the results of the 'Spell' is to create more False Appearance creatures. Of course that's strong - but it's not insurmountable.

[DeadMech]

IMO Indistinguishable is a bad ability. When creatures mimic other creatures, it's both realistic and healthy for the game if there is some kind of a pattern which lets knowledgable individuals spot the mimicry. "Aha, that's a stick bug! It looks like a stick but do you see how the <technobabble>?"

I'm fully in agreement. My first 5e DM was fond of stuff like this and a third of the people in attendance in the first session didn't bother returning for a second. Of course he was an awful DM for a variety of reasons beyond this. My first 5e monster encounter was with piercers. Dm describes how we come to a cavern. From the entrance we look around make perception checks, rolled well. Most of the other players have never played any dnd before so I mention to look up as well. Nothing but stalagmites says the dm. We walk in and get surprised by a dozen piercers dropping on our heads. Somehow all but one of them miss putting the wizard low.

This was a pretty frustrating encounter but also underwhelming. Since once they are on the ground the only thing they can do is very slowly crawl back towards the walls and try to get back to the ceiling and initially I hadn't thought much of it. Okay ambush predators must have a sneak bonus or something.

Looking at it a few days later I was kinda appalled. There is no way to find these things aside from just shooting every stalagmite in every cave we ever travel through? That's stupid. Is this really the behavior you want to encourage a party of new players to learn. To slow every underground journey to a crawl as we pop every random rock formation we come across with a firebolt or eldritch blast? Oh and since it's cr 1/2 and it's damage is based on drop height instead of a fixed value, a level 1 party might run into a group of these and have someone outright killed from full health to negative full health even before crits get involved. Who thought this was a good idea? The risk of death should be a part of the game. But no one should be dying with 0 agency.

[Edea]

My players weren't allowed to respond. Yes, that's how Surprise works. My players are always upset when they're surprised, because loss aversion. They constantly make Perception checks all session long.

...that's a red flag. The call you made is correct from a rules perspective, but that ain't the problem here.

For starters, you taking care of their passives should be sufficient; if they're constantly calling for active checks then they clearly don't trust you -at all-. I mean maybe that's what you want, but then if that were really the case then you wouldn't have made this topic.

Is what they're displaying the 'temporary gamer's salt followed by casual ribbing and dropping it/laughing about it afterwards' kind of resentment, or the 'we are genuinely angry and are starting to kinda not like you/grow tired of you' kind? I don't know, since this could just be an isolated incident or this might've been going on for months of playtime.

You definitely have a "Players vs. DM" situation set up, now; just unsure if that's your intention or not (and 5e's not very good for that kind of play).

[MaxWilson]

My problem is that I find that a lot of times, 'I'm not having fun', means 'My loss aversion is being triggered'. In which case I don't care.

As I said previously; My players are currently Tier 2, and most of them have magic and/or magic weapons. Galebs shouldn't be a problem, in the long term.
...Except on the first round of combat, with Surprise, where all of them - including their duplicates - can Charge & Slam. Subsequent rounds are much less difficult because the Galeb's damage output is severely diminished. Especially if you target the 'original' Galeb, and force it to lose Concentration so its summons turn back into rocks.

My players weren't allowed to respond. Yes, that's how Surprise works. My players are always upset when they're surprised, because loss aversion. They constantly make Perception checks all session long. That's why I'm always drawn to creatures with False Appearance. It's a very powerful ability, and it even works against paranoid parties. Ropers can do the same thing. One minute you're walking through the cave, 6 seconds later...Half the party is Grappled and being pulled.

My players were upset, because this particular creature (Galeb Duhrs) appeared to have an ability that the players can't replicate...And it's not even that strong. It appears to effectively simply be Subtle Spell from Hide, except the results of the 'Spell' is to create more False Appearance creatures. Of course that's strong - but it's not insurmountable.

On the one hand, I'm sympathetic. Sometimes you just need to tell players to suck it up.

On the other hand, I'm an evil DM, and I like stabbing the players from an unexpected direction. I don't know exactly what it means that these players are "constantly [making] Perception checks" but I assume you mean someone is always listening for movement, searching the room to see if there are any creatures hiding there, etc. They're very focused on the idea of hidden creatures, and then when the DM hits them with a creature that was hidden anyway, they get upset and blame the DM. I'd rather hit them with something they weren't expecting, and I'll know I succeeded if afterwards they are kicking themselves instead of the DM.

For example, show them some creatures, just don't show all the creatures. For instance, three mummies rise from sarcophagi to the north and begin to attack the players. Presumably they cast some spells, move squishies to the back and front-liners to the front, and engage the mummies. Simple and easy for a 10th level party, right? Barely a Medium encounter. But on round 2, after they've cast their Spiritual Weapons and Walls of Stone and whatnot, spent their concentration, and positioned themselves to face north, a wraith and six specters phase through the wall to the south and hit the party from behind. Now the guys who spent a round moving north may have to waste a round Dashing south to protect the squishies, and the gals who spent their concentration and spell slots on an anti-mummy spell may have to drop it and switch to an anti-wraith spell instead, and the players are surprised instead of just the PCs. (Or maybe they're not, maybe they were ready for it all along, in which case good job folks!)

A variation on the above is to show them some creatures, have a fight, make the players think they won and the enemy is running away and the players are chasing them down to make sure none of them get away... and then they walk right into a pit trap with a Black Pudding at the bottom, and now the real enemies show up and start pouring arrow fire into whoever fell in the pit. Kobolds and goblins are famous for these kinds of tactics but anyone can do it. You'll know you're succeeding in your evil plan if your players become reluctant to chase fleeing enemies.

Or you could show them creatures, but show them the wrong creatures: show them zombies but oops, it's really Githyanki and their Gish knows the Seeming spell, which explains why those zombies were jumping through the air like fleas. Remember that your goal is for the players to be kicking themselves afterward, so the clue is important, if you want to maximize your evilness.

You could show them creatures, but make them uncertain whether they're really hostile or friendly. (Maybe they're only hostile under certain conditions.) This is especially good if they are also uncertain who's really stronger, the PCs or these creatures. If the chief of the Fire Giants invites you into his milk hall to have a milk-chugging contest with him and his six guards, do you really want to start a fight, or will you cautiously accept his invitation? But what if he takes offense to something you say, and now you're in a milk hall (possibly locked) surrounded by Fire Giants? On the other hand, what if you can get him to actually help somehow with your mission?

Anyway, that's my approach. They're already paranoid about hidden monsters, so for the most part I'd let them have that work, and for the most part they can spot all of the actually hidden monsters. "There's two ghouls hidden under the bed." "You notice there's an Efreet in the Fire Giant King's firepit, apparently sleeping." "You notice a trail of slime leading to a stalagmite. Roll Intelligence (Nature). [roll] You're pretty sure that's a Roper." Let the players have their little Perception victories, but make it interesting for them in other ways.


I'm fully in agreement. My first 5e DM was fond of stuff like this and a third of the people in attendance in the first session didn't bother returning for a second. Of course he was an awful DM for a variety of reasons beyond this. My first 5e monster encounter was with piercers. Dm describes how we come to a cavern. From the entrance we look around make perception checks, rolled well. Most of the other players have never played any dnd before so I mention to look up as well. Nothing but stalagmites says the dm. We walk in and get surprised by a dozen piercers dropping on our heads. Somehow all but one of them miss putting the wizard low.

This was a pretty frustrating encounter but also underwhelming. Since once they are on the ground the only thing they can do is very slowly crawl back towards the walls and try to get back to the ceiling and initially I hadn't thought much of it. Okay ambush predators must have a sneak bonus or something.

Looking at it a few days later I was kinda appalled. There is no way to find these things aside from just shooting every stalagmite in every cave we ever travel through? That's stupid. Is this really the behavior you want to encourage a party of new players to learn.

Agreed, that's stupid. Piercers in isolation are dumb and boring. At minimum there should be skeletons or something (of cows, humans, whatever the piercers have been eating) piled in the cavern or in front of the cavern or something, but really I'd just rather not use Piercers at all because as you say they're boring once they make their one attack. Maybe I'd use Piercers for flavor, one or two at a time, just so that when the players discover Ropers they can realize that hey, "Maybe these are the grown-up versions of Piercers!"

Actually I take that back--I would also use Piercers to make a more dynamic environment, if I wanted the players to be able to use the Piercers against monsters as well. I wouldn't make the Piercers indistinguishable from normal stalactites though--at minimum they are unusually large stalactites, and if a player wants to simply walking under any unusually large stalactites I'd be totally fine with that. But it's also bad news for the player if a player gets a monster to chase him under an unusually large stalactite... which just turns out to be an unusually large stalactite, totally useless to him. :) Maybe I'd make 50-70% of the large stalactites Piercers and the rest just rocks. Yeah, I'd do that, in a rare case. Otherwise I wouldn't use Piercers.

[Cheesegear]

I'm fully in agreement. My first 5e DM was fond of stuff like this...

I'm fond of it, in isolation.
Every so often, an encounter should be challenging, if not hard.


Looking at it a few days later I was kinda appalled. There is no way to find these things aside from just shooting every stalagmite in every cave we ever travel through? That's stupid. Is this really the behavior you want to encourage a party of new players to learn.

No. It's not. You shouldn't be throwing those kinds of stupid/unfair encounters at new players.
However, at a certain point (usually, post-Tier 2), straight up 'You and him fight' scenarios get old, fast. CR becomes unreliable, and as such, combat encounters become tricky to manage based on how hard the players are optimising their builds and their party.

Sometimes, a creative DM will engineer terrain to be different. The hostiles will play slightly smarter. Statblocks will be altered. Sometimes the DM will use specific hostiles that they know the party might be able to deal with (e.g; Galeb Duhrs). But in that kind of play, you're definitely not playing with new players. You might have a jerk DM, but you wont have new players.


For starters, you taking care of their passives should be sufficient; if they're constantly calling for active checks then they clearly don't trust you -at all-.

What's the difference between making Perception checks for ambushes at every canyon, and making Investigation checks on every chest for traps?
At a certain point it becomes routine, because you only need to not check, once, for it to be a problem.

If you assume that the DM can set up an ambush, or can set traps. Then why not assume that everywhere is a potential ambush, and all chests are trapped?

It only has to happen once.


Is what they're displaying the 'temporary gamer's salt followed by casual ribbing and dropping it/laughing about it afterwards' kind of resentment

That's it.
The first round of combat, with the Galebs - and their summons - moving 20 ft. and doing Charge + Slam damage, from Surprise. Was surprising - to them, as players. The rest of the combat, post-Surprise round, as I've implied, went relatively smoothly.

Some players were very salty, because they didn't believe that the creatures could do what I said they did. That is:
"Animate Boulders is effectively Subtle Spell, and the summons, have False Appearance, too."

My players disagree on a ruling that I made. I wrote a post, asking if that's how other DMs would have played it. That's it.

As we know, Galeb Duhrs are CR6. They're not exactly easy to fight, especially if there's more than one.
But, as I've written above, in order to prevent "The caster wins initiative, and fires off their highest damaging AoE spell; All the hostiles are on half HP." sometimes, not all the time. But sometimes, you gotta keep your players on their toes.

Do my players hate me for making hard encounters? Sometimes. No.
Are my players whiny babies? Sometimes. No.


You definitely have a "Players vs. DM" situation set up, now

...Sometimes, encounters just go that way.
I'm not willing to say "I'm the DM, so I win. Even if that's not the RAW, I'm making the ruling anyway. Or, better yet, I Rule 0'd the monster's ability, because I'm allowed to." because I absolutely don't like that style of DMing, because it really does mean that the DM is allowed to do anything they want and the players can never challenge them...Or, rather, the only action they can take, is to leave the table.


I don't know exactly what it means that these players are "constantly [making] Perception checks" but I assume you mean someone is always listening for movement, searching the room to see if there are any creatures hiding there, etc. They're very focused on the idea of hidden creatures...

I mean that in two and half years, the player/party has been ambushed a few times, and they use meta-game knowledge in order so that it doesn't happen again.
After all, when the party isn't expecting it, is the perfect time for an ambush.
So always be expecting one.

As I said, as a player, if you get ambushed or hit by a trap once, you - as a player - now know that the DM is willing to do that - and why shouldn't they be? Once you know that the DM is at least willing to ambush or trap you...Then they're willing to do so at all times - even if they're not.
That is...They wont ambush you all the time, but they can ambush you any time.

Now, as the DM, you absolutely shouldn't ambush and trap them at all times, because that will get old, fast (for you, and the players). But once you have That Player at the table, what can you do?

[MaxWilson]

(A) As we know, Galeb Duhrs are CR6. They're not exactly easy to fight, especially if there's more than one.

(B) I mean that in two and half years, the player/party has been ambushed a few times, and they use meta-game knowledge in order so that it doesn't happen again.
After all, when the party isn't expecting it, is the perfect time for an ambush.
So always be expecting one.

As I said, as a player, if you get ambushed or hit by a trap once, you - as a player - now know that the DM is willing to do that - and why shouldn't they be? Once you know that the DM is at least willing to ambush or trap you...Then they're willing to do so at all times - even if they're not.
That is...They wont ambush you all the time, but they can ambush you any time.

Now, as the DM, you absolutely shouldn't ambush and trap them at all times, because that will get old, fast (for you, and the players). But once you have That Player at the table, what can you do?

(A) Oddly enough, Galeb Duhr are weaker in most ways than CR 5 Earth Elementals, especially once action economy and concentration are taken into consideration. This is mostly because Earth Elementals are overpowered for their CR but it's interesting, especially for summoners.

(B) You can give the player even more things to be paranoid about, until he can't keep track of them all. Both threats and missed opportunities. (Like, what if you get invited to the gazillionaire's archwizard's 200th birthday party, but weapons and armor aren't allowed, including magical items? Do you skip the party because you're afraid of an ambush? Do you take off your armor and leave your weapons behind because you're afraid to miss out on presents and exotic diplomatic contacts and secret lore? Do you leave a PC behind to guard the stuff?)

Rival NPC groups racing for the same objectives, secret societies, body snatching mind flayer cults taking over civic institutions, pickpockets, cursed magic items, overly familiar groupies who turn into awkward stalkers, amazing treasure guarded by fierce monsters who after you kill them turn out (oops!) to have been important checks on other monstrous threats which you've now freed (Nice Job Breaking It, Hero)... there's almost no end to the things they can worry about once they know you're willing to do it. Try to play those worries off against each other.

If you want to be evil(er), that is. You did ask.

[stoutstien]

"Got you" style encounters and mechanics are not challenging nor will they ever be.
if the party can't look back and immediately tell why and how they screwed up then it was a bad encounter. If a DM ever tries to use active camouflage or infallible mimic abilities without some form of foreshadowing and from that point on the party destroys every object they describe in a scene as a precaution that DM better not cry foul.
it's the same logic that a DM can't complain that party tapped every floor panel with a 10-foot pole because they use random traps because they think they're a good additions the game.

[Yakk]

A surprise round makes encounters 1 notch tougher. A round to prepare, probably another notch.

So an encounter of 3 of these (CR 6 each) has difficulty 21 (or roughly a CR 15 encounter), or a medium encounter for 5 level 12 PCs.

With surprise, hard. With prep, deadly.

[Yakk]

(B) You can give the player even more things to be paranoid about, until he can't keep track of them all. Both threats and missed opportunities. (Like, what if you get invited to the gazillionaire's archwizard's 200th birthday party, but weapons and armor aren't allowed, including magical items? Do you skip the party because you're afraid of an ambush? Do you take off your armor and leave your weapons behind because you're afraid to miss out on presents and exotic diplomatic contacts and secret lore? Do you leave a PC behind to guard the stuff?)
Yes, gotcha DMs result in many players being trained to consider being in a disarmed state as a sign of ambush incoming.

And you treat it as a mortal threat, often with violence.

Then DMs get annoyed that players are murder hobos.

[MrStabby]

I go by the principle that it is good to let the players use their abilities.

So perception is good, but I dont think it is right here. There are loads of opportunities to use perception effectively - it doesnt happen every time.

Nature skill to identify that this kind of pattern of rocks is high risk for being a GD, survival (as suggested) to see the tracks and so on. Find ways to make the ability make sense and be powerful but also for the players to have an edge. Making it not always the same PCs who spot the enemy is pretty special for the PCs given the opportunity.

[Tanarii]

...that's a red flag. The call you made is correct from a rules perspective, but that ain't the problem here.

For starters, you taking care of their passives should be sufficient; if they're constantly calling for active checks then they clearly don't trust you -at all-. I mean maybe that's what you want, but then if that were really the case then you wouldn't have made this topic.
It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what passive checks are. There's no "calling for active checks". If the players don't know something is there, passive is the check.

Player: "I look again"
DM: "okay, that's using your passive perception again"

[Lunali]

So here's a question from the other side, if a sorc with subtle spell cast animate objects while hidden, (clearly intending to use them to attack in the future) would you have both sides roll initiative?

[MaxWilson]

It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what passive checks are. There's no "calling for active checks". If the players don't know something is there, passive is the check.

Player: "I look again"
DM: "okay, that's using your passive perception again"

In the case of Perception there is actually the Search action.

When you take the Search action, you devote your attention to finding something. Depending on the nature of your search, the GM might have you make a Wisdom (Perception) check or an Intelligence (Investigation) check.

Seems reasonable to use it out of combat as well as in.

[Tanarii]

In the case of Perception there is actually the Search action.

When you take the Search action, you devote your attention to finding something. Depending on the nature of your search, the GM might have you make a Wisdom (Perception) check or an Intelligence (Investigation) check.

Seems reasonable to use it out of combat as well as in.
If you don't know it's there, the search action also results in using passive perception. That's one of the two things pp is for.

Now if something just successfully hid from you, so you know it's around somewhere, that's a check.

[MaxWilson]

If you don't know it's there, the search action also results in using passive perception. That's one of the two things pp is for.

Now if something just successfully hid from you, so you know it's around somewhere, that's a check.

Well, that's a valid ruling, and if you were the DM I'd accept it. I wouldn't use that ruling myself however. It makes ten guards looking out for trouble no better than one guard eating a sandwich.

[Tanarii]

Well, that's a valid ruling, and if you were the DM I'd accept it. I wouldn't use that ruling myself however. It makes ten guards looking out for trouble no better than one guard eating a sandwich.
Yeah, that's a general problem with the passive system being a fixed value. In the other direction, it means a scout with passive perception and passive investigation always finds fixed DC traps, doors etc lower than their DC, and never finds ones higher.

Setting aside that one guard eating a sandwich should take disadvantage for being distracted. Or maybe even lose perception entirely (as another activity) if it's a really good sandwich.

[Lunali]

Yeah, that's a general problem with the passive system being a fixed value. In the other direction, it means a scout with passive perception and passive investigation always finds fixed DC traps, doors etc lower than their DC, and never finds ones higher.

Setting aside that one guard eating a sandwich should take disadvantage for being distracted. Or maybe even lose perception entirely (as another activity) if it's a really good sandwich.

This is why there should always be a roll involved, either roll perception/investigation on the things to spot or roll to determine the DC to spot it

As for the guard eating the sandwich, that's why you rolled 20 on your stealth roll.

[MaxWilson]

Yeah, that's a general problem with the passive system being a fixed value. In the other direction, it means a scout with passive perception and passive investigation always finds fixed DC traps, doors etc lower than their DC, and never finds ones higher.

I find it preferable to just roll a dozen d20s and choose the highest. You want better detection, use more manpower (guards), though there are natural diminishing returns since you can't roll over 20.

Passive perception is also too low, too easy to beat. It gives an untrained nobody pretty good odds of sneaking past a dozen guards based just on an above-average d20 roll, but it takes real luck or real skill to beat the highest of a dozen Wisdom (Perception) checks.

[Tanarii]

I find it preferable to just roll a dozen d20s and choose the highest. You want better detection, use more manpower (guards), though there are natural diminishing returns since you can't roll over 20.

Passive perception is also too low, too easy to beat. It gives an untrained nobody pretty good odds of sneaking past a dozen guards based just on an above-average d20 roll, but it takes real luck or real skill to beat the highest of a dozen Wisdom (Perception) checks.
Eh, just give them +5 to passive for advantage for helping each other when there's sufficient coverage in lookout manpower. That's a solid bonus and at some point there's diminishing returns on watchers anyway.

[Chaosity]

Party is surprised because of false appearance
Everybody rolls initiative
Partymembers skip their first turn and lose "surprise"
The Duhr use their action to animate boulders and cause it doesn't say they roll initiative you can assume they act on the same turn
They get advantage on every party member that didn't get their turn yet
The party can avoid this situation next time by saying they keep an eye out for moving boulders, in which case i would make the Duhr roll a stealth check to detirmine if they surprize the party

That's how i would rule it anyway

[Cheesegear]

So here's a question from the other side, if a sorc with subtle spell cast animate objects while hidden, (clearly intending to use them to attack in the future) would you have both sides roll initiative?

Sorcerers with Subtle Spell are really strong. If the spell has no noticeable and immediate effects (hidden or not). Is Animate Object, one of those spells?

Well, counter question; Do Animated Objects explicitly have False Appearance?

In the Monster Manual they do.
From the spell from the Player's Handbook, they don't explicitly have it by RAW.

So you would have to make a case for why the Sorcerer doesn't have to roll initiative yet:
Well, in the Monster Manual, Animated Objects have False Appearance, and, since the spell is literally called 'Animate Objects', you would think it makes the same stuff, right? It's not explicitly RAW, but it's not explicitly not, either.

...What's the situation?

[Sharur]

Yeah, that's a general problem with the passive system being a fixed value. In the other direction, it means a scout with passive perception and passive investigation always finds fixed DC traps, doors etc lower than their DC, and never finds ones higher.


My solution to the fixed DC problem has been to scrap the fixed DCs (more accurately, limit them to opposing the PCs search efforts), and turn it into the opponent/trap rolling against the passive score. DC-8 = the opposing creature's bonus (treating traps here as creatures), then have them roll against the PCs passive score.

[MaxWilson]

My solution to the fixed DC problem has been to scrap the fixed DCs (more accurately, limit them to opposing the PCs search efforts), and turn it into the opponent/trap rolling against the passive score. DC-8 = the opposing creature's bonus (treating traps here as creatures), then have them roll against the PCs passive score.

Isn't that just functionally equivalent to a normal Perception roll?

Who here remembers back when it was customary for DMs to ask you what your death magic saving throw/Constitution score/whatever is and then roll dice and tell you what happens to you, instead of telling the players to make a roll? There's absolutely nothing wrong with DMs rolling dice and then narrating a result.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Eh, just give them +5 to passive for advantage for helping each other when there's sufficient coverage in lookout manpower. That's a solid bonus and at some point there's diminishing returns on watchers anyway.

Seems weird to rule that they can be actively helping each other passively look around. If you rule that they're helping each other, an active check makes more sense, in line with a group skill check.

[Asisreo1]

A lot of creatures have an ability called False Appearance. Which means that as long as they remain motionless, they are indistinguishable from a normal thing.
(Yep, it's impossible to spot them, even if you roll over 30 on your Investigation/Perception.)

I recently attacked the party with a few Galeb Duhrs (Duhri?), who animated their boulders and then did a surprise round.

My party argued that either:
a) They should have spotted them when they animated their boulders, or
b) They used their Surprise to animate boulders.

I ruled 'No.'

When a Galeb Duhr animates boulders, it doesn't say how; There's no verbal or somatic components. The Duhrs just do it. That is, they remain motionless, and obviously they don't say anything. When I read it, I didn't feasibly see how the party could stop the attack, or perceive* the attack, until it happened. That's part of why I made the encounter in the first place. My players...Disagreed.

*Obviously there's Ranger and Paladin abilities to sense for Elementals, and Detect Thoughts, etc. Suffice to say, none of those happened.
The monsters were indistinguishable. There's nothing to argue there.

The players don't even know their abilities. They should have just accepted it. I understand getting jumped can feel sour but that's how it works, especially with false appearance enemies.

I'm not going to ask permission from my players whether this next chest should be a mimic or not.

BAM! It's a mimic. Deal with it or die. I balance my encounters so a mimic surprise won't kill you unless you absolutely mess up.

If you want to search, cool. You have to explain where you're searching. Otherwise, I'm using Passive Perception to notice something is off and it's up to you to deal with it. You did want agency over your character and for your choices to matter. Well, here's a situation where you get to react and make critical choices. Go ahead. It's like dark souls, being careless gets you killed. Except combat in D&D isn't even nearly as punishing.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Everybody rolls initiative

Stop here.

If players beat every single initiative of the ambushing monsters, they can take the Ready action because they have no targets. If a player chooses, they can take their action to perceive/investigate.

Ambushers are hidden and attack with advantage, even if against a Ready action to attack/shoot back. Resolve any reaction attacks and then resolve the ambusher's attack. Remember, only the first attack is advantaged. And players who don't get their Ready trigger lose their action for one round, making it almost exactly like surprised.

Giving the ambushers complete surprise without a chance of the party spotting the ambush in any way is kinda bad DMing. IMHO.

[Naanomi]

It does make me ponder a little bit about how a creature can have a completely infallible disguise that can never possibly be noticed. For normal people, sure that is fine... no yahoo (or low level adventurer) will ever notice them.

But a level 20 Investigative Rogue with passive perception (and passive investigation) in the mid 30s? A literally epic world-saving hero totally dedicated in their archetype and development into noticing things? Seems like at some point (and I don't know where that point is) that disguise would be a little less absolute

[Keravath]

I think I disagree with the DM in this case. Here's why.

If your players see a group of enemies who are unaware of them .. do you let them make an attack before initiative is rolled? Do you let them use abilities that only last a minute before intiative is rolled?

If you do, then allowing the Galeb Duhr to animate their boulders before combat starts is fine since that is the way you play at your table. You allow attacks and other preparatory actions to occur out of initiative order.

However, as I understand it, that is a house rule. If that is how you play then fine.

----

Actions are typically taken in combat inside initiative though it may or may not fit the narrative you want to tell.

The following is how I would typically run it based on my understanding of how it usually works ...

In this case, the Galeb Duhr are not noticed and the DM decides that they surprise the party.

Everyone rolls initiative. The players are surprised and do not get an action on their first turn and can't take reactions until after your first turn. The Galeb Duhr may use their action to animate boulders or any of their other available actions.

----

"In certain situations, particularly combat, the action is more structured and the players (and DM) do take turns choosing and resolving actions. But most of the time, play is fluid and flexible, adapting to the circumstances of the adventure."

When does combat start at your table? For example, animating boulders takes an action in combat and can only be done 1/day. This is an ability that would not be used until the party is within combat range and essentially after combat has started.


Logically, I agree with the OP ... the party sees a bunch of immobile boulders ... there may not be any indication of when the Galeb Duhr uses their ability to animate boulders ... so the party still doesn't know combat has started until the second round when boulders actually start moving and attacking.

However, in the equivalent case when the party has not been noticed ... do you allow the players to take actions (casting 1 minute duration spells on themselves for example or casting spells on the opponents that would not be noticed (e.g. bane)) or allow ALL of the players to make an attack before the first turn even starts? That is essentially what you are doing here for the Galeb Duhr.

Since I prefer to have all combat occur in initiative, I would have the animate boulders be the first action taken by the Galeb Duhr in combat. I would probably narrate it to the players as something like "the air feels eerily silent all of a sudden, there is a feeling in the air of impending trouble" ... the Galeb Duhr use the surprise round to summon boulders and combat starts normally on the next turn. The players can't tell the Galeb Duhr from the animated boulders since they have the same stats and appearance.

[Asisreo1]

It does make me ponder a little bit about how a creature can have a completely infallible disguise that can never possibly be noticed. For normal people, sure that is fine... no yahoo (or low level adventurer) will ever notice them.

But a level 20 Investigative Rogue with passive perception (and passive investigation) in the mid 30s? A literally epic world-saving hero totally dedicated in their archetype and development into noticing things? Seems like at some point (and I don't know where that point is) that disguise would be a little less absolute
I think in most scenarios, it's less of a disguise and more of just an absolute.

They're boulders. They're magical talking boulders, but they're boulders. Until they reveal a face, there's no physiology to detect. They don't need to breathe and they don't need to make noise. They can just sit there, dormant. If you're in a room full of armor, what difference would you suppose and animated armor identical to all the other ones would have?

[Keravath]

It does make me ponder a little bit about how a creature can have a completely infallible disguise that can never possibly be noticed. For normal people, sure that is fine... no yahoo (or low level adventurer) will ever notice them.

But a level 20 Investigative Rogue with passive perception (and passive investigation) in the mid 30s? A literally epic world-saving hero totally dedicated in their archetype and development into noticing things? Seems like at some point (and I don't know where that point is) that disguise would be a little less absolute

The creature looks like a boulder ... there is nothing that would tell you just by looking that it isn't a boulder unless you have a sense that reveals elementals.

I don't really see any issue with that. There are creatures that look like rocks, there are ones that look like plants, there are ones that ARE plants and there are some that look exactly like any object they like (mimic). These creatures can't be recognized just by looking at them since they LOOK exactly like a typical object that they are imitating.

[Keravath]

Stop here.

If players beat every single initiative of the ambushing monsters, they can take the Ready action because they have no targets. If a player chooses, they can take their action to perceive/investigate.

Ambushers are hidden and attack with advantage, even if against a Ready action to attack/shoot back. Resolve any reaction attacks and then resolve the ambusher's attack. Remember, only the first attack is advantaged. And players who don't get their Ready trigger lose their action for one round, making it almost exactly like surprised.

Giving the ambushers complete surprise without a chance of the party spotting the ambush in any way is kinda bad DMing. IMHO.

If the characters are surprised - they can NOT take the ready action. They can't take any action at all on their first turn.

If the players know they are in combat, are not surprised, but have no targets then they can take the ready action if they like. However, in my game, I will use initiative for all sorts of possible encounters. In fact, any encounter where the order of actions could be important then I will run using initiative.

If a character readies an attack against the first creature they see then they can turn a possibly peaceful encounter into an unexpected combat but that is on them for assuming that initiative = enemy. (I do let the players know that initiative in my game is not a guarantee combat is about to start - sometimes it only means the DM wants to resolve actions in order with a little more structure).

[Naanomi]

I think in most scenarios, it's less of a disguise and more of just an absolute.

They're boulders. They're magical talking boulders, but they're boulders. Until they reveal a face, there's no physiology to detect. They don't need to breathe and they don't need to make noise. They can just sit there, dormant. If you're in a room full of armor, what difference would you suppose and animated armor identical to all the other ones would have?
If I were fantasy-Sherlock Holmes at the absolute peak of fantasy-perceptive abilities at a 'compete with the gods' level of play? Scrape marks that indicate movement, unusual growth patterns of moss that reveal that positions have shifted in an unnatural way some time in the past, lack of local wildlife in a way that suggests a dangerous creature is being avoided, the composition of the stone being slightly off from the surrounding stones, mismatch/misalignment between the stratum lines on the boulders themselves, notcing lack of signs of impact that would show where the boulder originally fell/rolled from, etc, etc, etc

[Yakk]

Yep; a perception check to know there are dangerous creatures around, and tracks, are all possible.

You won't be able to tell it is the boulders.

In essence, being indistinguishable from boulders isn't better than being silent and invisible. And silent and invisible creatures can be detected.

Make a stealth check, opposed by player's passive perception. If the players win, they see signs of a heavy creature moving around the area. If they blow the stealth out of the water, a track leading to a boulder and disappearing.

[Doug Lampert]

If I were fantasy-Sherlock Holmes at the absolute peak of fantasy-perceptive abilities at a 'compete with the gods' level of play? Scrape marks that indicate movement, unusual growth patterns of moss that reveal that positions have shifted in an unnatural way some time in the past, lack of local wildlife in a way that suggests a dangerous creature is being avoided, the composition of the stone being slightly off from the surrounding stones, mismatch/misalignment between the stratum lines on the boulders themselves, notcing lack of signs of impact that would show where the boulder originally fell/rolled from, etc, etc, etc

Yep, not letting skills work on something like this is Guy at the Gym in spades. And, it's possible that the guy at the gym is a geologist, and that as is so often the case, Guy at the Gym isn't even letting the character do things that a guy at the gym should be able to do.

But the ability is written that way. The designers suffered from Guy at they Gym when they should have been thinking "Captain America at they Gym" for high level mundanes.

[Asisreo1]

If I were fantasy-Sherlock Holmes at the absolute peak of fantasy-perceptive abilities at a 'compete with the gods' level of play? Scrape marks that indicate movement, unusual growth patterns of moss that reveal that positions have shifted in an unnatural way some time in the past, lack of local wildlife in a way that suggests a dangerous creature is being avoided, the composition of the stone being slightly off from the surrounding stones, mismatch/misalignment between the stratum lines on the boulders themselves, notcing lack of signs of impact that would show where the boulder originally fell/rolled from, etc, etc, etc
Yeah, sure, absolutely! You'd see these weird markings and patterns and go "wow, these boulders are really strange." You'd just not be able to make sense of it all without the knowledge to back them up because they are still indistinguishable from boulders.

Perception is not investigation. You get the clues but you don't get to piece them together for free. If you want to deduce that they're hostiles, you'd need to first have knowledge of the elementals and either realize it OOC or roll investigation to piece it all together.

But I'd still think you'd be surprised if boulders with weird moss suddenly decided to slam you without you knowing that the boulders were disguised.

[Gryndle]

My problem is that I find that a lot of times, 'I'm not having fun', means 'My loss aversion is being triggered'. In which case I don't care.

As I said previously; My players are currently Tier 2, and most of them have magic and/or magic weapons. Galebs shouldn't be a problem, in the long term.
...Except on the first round of combat, with Surprise, where all of them - including their duplicates - can Charge & Slam. Subsequent rounds are much less difficult because the Galeb's damage output is severely diminished. Especially if you target the 'original' Galeb, and force it to lose Concentration so its summons turn back into rocks.

My players weren't allowed to respond. Yes, that's how Surprise works. My players are always upset when they're surprised, because loss aversion. They constantly make Perception checks all session long. That's why I'm always drawn to creatures with False Appearance. It's a very powerful ability, and it even works against paranoid parties. Ropers can do the same thing. One minute you're walking through the cave, 6 seconds later...Half the party is Grappled and being pulled.

My players were upset, because this particular creature (Galeb Duhrs) appeared to have an ability that the players can't replicate...And it's not even that strong. It appears to effectively simply be Subtle Spell from Hide, except the results of the 'Spell' is to create more False Appearance creatures. Of course that's strong - but it's not insurmountable.

I dont think the mechanics or the ruling is the actual issue here. What I got from the bolded part of your statement is that you and your players are in an escalating loop of frustration.

A-you surprise them, and they didn't like it. -Did they get rolled by an encounter because of surprise, or have you over used the tactic, or are they just being whiney?
B-they actively look for threats to the point it annoys you and slows down game
C-you look for and use creatures that sidestep their precautions
D-they get upset

Unless you find a way to break that cycle it will only get worse and you are heading towards a larger problem. The only real solution here is to talk to your players. Try to get past the galeb dur ruling and get to the heart of this competitive cycle

[Naanomi]

Yeah, sure, absolutely! You'd see these weird markings and patterns and go "wow, these boulders are really strange." You'd just not be able to make sense of it all without the knowledge to back them up because they are still indistinguishable from boulders.

Perception is not investigation. You get the clues but you don't get to piece them together for free. If you want to deduce that they're hostiles, you'd need to first have knowledge of the elementals and either realize it OOC or roll investigation to piece it all together.
Observant Feat boosts my Passive Investigation as well, and 'fantasy Sherlock Holmes' has all four knowledge skills and a High INT score I'm sure

[Maelynn]

My party argued that either:
a) They should have spotted them when they animated their boulders

When a Galeb Duhr animates boulders, it doesn't say how; There's no verbal or somatic components. The Duhrs just do it. That is, they remain motionless, and obviously they don't say anything.

I concur. The stat block says nothing about a verbal or somatic component, so it's not strange for a DM to rule that these components are not part of the ability. Although I'm certain that this is one of those rulings that really depend on the DM.

As for False Appearance, this does seem incredibly OP but it is what it is. Other monsters have other OP abilities (like immunity to just about everything, or choosing to succeed on a failed saving throw). Only thing I wonder here is if perhaps the encounter was too difficult with no less than 3 Galeb Duhrs, but I can't judge that as I've no idea what level or number the party was.


b) They used their Surprise to animate boulders.

This one's tricky, because opinions vary greatly about when exactly an encounter starts and initiative is rolled.

I would go by a few pointers:
- is the action harmful or otherwise affecting the target?
- is there anything that could give the ambusher's presence away?
- is the action something that would trigger a check or saving throw by the target?

In this situation, all of the above can be answered with 'no'. So I could see someone ruling it as not a part of the encounter.

A similar situation, turned around to favour the PCs: the party spots a monster nearby, it hasn't yet discovered them. Let's say the distance is large enough to allow some breathing room without instantly giving away your position by literally doing so much as breathe.
The casters in the party want to buff up by casting protections like Invisibility or Mage Armour (all silent because of things like subtle spell). The fighter wants to carefully draw his sword to have it at the ready (and rolls a nat20 on his stealth). The druid wants to cast Primal Savagery on herself, which has no verbal component. Would you allow all these, without having them roll for initiative? Wouldn't be fair not to, right?

[MrStabby]

If I were fantasy-Sherlock Holmes at the absolute peak of fantasy-perceptive abilities at a 'compete with the gods' level of play? Scrape marks that indicate movement, unusual growth patterns of moss that reveal that positions have shifted in an unnatural way some time in the past, lack of local wildlife in a way that suggests a dangerous creature is being avoided, the composition of the stone being slightly off from the surrounding stones, mismatch/misalignment between the stratum lines on the boulders themselves, notcing lack of signs of impact that would show where the boulder originally fell/rolled from, etc, etc, etc

I think some of it is about not just what you can detect, but when and where.

I know someone who is a world class consultant oncologist - someone right at the top of their game. Can they tell if you have a mesothelioma just by looking at you from 30ft away? No. Not at all. On the other hand with appropriate scans, biopsies and whatever kind of medical hocus pocus they use, they can.

I can see the case that an inquisitive rogue should be able to tell a GD appart from a rock, but it doesnt follow that they be able to do it from 30ft away or in less than 5 minutes.

I see parallels with the current damage vs immune enemies thread - to what extent should a really heavy investment into a theme for a class enable that class to do the impossible?

There is the issue of fun at the table as well. Some good comments about the risk of leading your players to be overly cautious and bog the game down. It's a real risk. Letting players roll or take other slowing preventative actions can be more of an issue here. If there was something they could have done, you are teaching them to do it. If there is nothing (or at least nothing in the direct lead up to combat) then you are asking them to accept that sometimes these things happen and it is possible that PCs might not tell apart a living rock from a non living one.

I would make the way of "detecting" these tie in with what you actually want to encourage. If you want to engage with NPCs, for example, then maybe have someone who could have warned the party.

Then there are sometimes two absolutes in conflict. I am guessing weapon of warning might be one. Can the weapon of warning distinguish the indistinguishable? What if the GDs are not hostile till you set foot on an area they are guarding but then they become hostile?

[Asisreo1]

Observant Feat boosts my Passive Investigation as well, and 'fantasy Sherlock Holmes' has all four knowledge skills and a High INT score I'm sure
Then yes. If you built your character with such high scores and you didn't snub a roll (it's almost certainly an arcana check to remember Galeb Duhr unless your character *knows* them off the back of their hand), you shouldn't have any problems deducing that these boulders are possibly Galeb Duhr, at which case I'd say you were expecting it. With such high certainty, if you communicate that with the rest of the party, your party should avoid surprise.

But the Galeb Duhr are still indistinguishable from regular boulders. You were just able to use the clues surrounding the boulders to logic your way into knowing something. You didn't necessarily just have a high Passive Perception or searched the general area for general things and happened to find an imperfection in the disguise itself.

[MrStabby]

Then yes. If you built your character with such high scores and you didn't snub a roll (it's almost certainly an arcana check to remember Galeb Duhr unless your character *knows* them off the back of their hand), you shouldn't have any problems deducing that these boulders are possibly Galeb Duhr, at which case I'd say you were expecting it. With such high certainty, if you communicate that with the rest of the party, your party should avoid surprise.

But the Galeb Duhr are still indistinguishable from regular boulders. You were just able to use the clues surrounding the boulders to logic your way into knowing something. You didn't necessarily just have a high Passive Perception or searched the general area for general things and happened to find an imperfection in the disguise itself.

Personally I would say that telling if something is a rock or not would be a nature check... but generally I agree with your thrust.

[Unoriginal]

It does make me ponder a little bit about how a creature can have a completely infallible disguise that can never possibly be noticed. For normal people, sure that is fine... no yahoo (or low level adventurer) will ever notice them.

But a level 20 Investigative Rogue with passive perception (and passive investigation) in the mid 30s? A literally epic world-saving hero totally dedicated in their archetype and development into noticing things? Seems like at some point (and I don't know where that point is) that disguise would be a little less absolute

For the case of the Galeb Dhurs, they literally are rocks. It's not really a disguise.

Is an undead skeleton distinguishable from other skeletons if they're in a pile of them and if the undead one is not moving?



If I were fantasy-Sherlock Holmes at the absolute peak of fantasy-perceptive abilities at a 'compete with the gods' level of play? Scrape marks that indicate movement, unusual growth patterns of moss that reveal that positions have shifted in an unnatural way some time in the past, lack of local wildlife in a way that suggests a dangerous creature is being avoided, the composition of the stone being slightly off from the surrounding stones, mismatch/misalignment between the stratum lines on the boulders themselves, notcing lack of signs of impact that would show where the boulder originally fell/rolled from, etc, etc, etc

Fantasy-Sherlock Holmes should totally be able to see the "a creature with an hard body moved in this rocky area at [time the Galeb Dhur last moved]" signs, plus the "this is the perfect setup for an ambush" signs. That would make so the character wouldn't be surprised if they're attacked by Galeb Dhurs.

However, that still wouldn't make them able to distinguish immobile Galeb Dhurs from regular rocks with regular humanoid senses.


As much as PCs can have incredible capacities, so can NPCs. A Drow Inquisitor and a Solar can immediately detect lies. No PC, no NPC, no gods nor monsters can tell a lie to them without it being found out as a lie. Is that powerful? Sure. Doesn't make it unfair that the CHA 20 lvl 20 Rogue can't tell them a lie and not be found out.

Instead, a CHA 20 lvl 20 Rogue can certainly fool them by telling the truth, like a demigod-level hero should be able to.

[Edea]

Well, another problem with this might be "edition disconnect," but I don't know if these players are used to older editions or not.

In 3.5 you'd get a Spot check, period; hell, you can outright defeat illusion spells with a good enough Spot check even if you don't interact with them. Camouflage (what the galeb dhur would effectively have, just look at the assassin vine and replace 'plant' with 'rock') is just DC 20, barely even anything to write home about. Ropers don't even have an SQ for it, it's just a raw Spot vs. Hide opposed check. I think Mimics use Disguise instead of Hide, but it's still checkable.

5e doesn't work that way. False Appearance's description is extremely loose with the rules language ('indistinguishable' is not codified anywhere), leading to issues like this. RAW, they are 100% undetectable through physical means. I have to admit, as a 3.5 player, encountering this particular instance of rules skullduggery would leave me with a distinct, hopefully temporary desire to revert editions.

[MaxWilson]

For the case of the Galeb Dhurs, they literally are rocks. It's not really a disguise.

Is an undead skeleton distinguishable from other skeletons if they're in a pile of them and if the undead one is not moving?

To Sherlock Holmes? It depends on whether the skeleton has ever moved or done anything, or if there was a reason why this skeleton in particular was animated and the others weren't. If not then no, there's no way to tell. If yes then potentially yes.

Same for the Galeb Duhr. It has a mind and a behavior pattern which led it to lie where it's lying. That potentially could be detected. "This boulder has a clear line of sight to two other equally-large boulders placed equidistant from it but closer to any approaching threats, consistent with the nesting habits of Galeb Duhr. It's also out of direct sunlight for most of the day due to the tree's shadow, and Galeb Duhr are known to prefer high ambient temperatures but low radiant temperatures, unlike humans who enjoy warm sunlight and a cool breeze together. It could be coincidence but I believe there's a chance we are looking at a Galeb Duhr."

[Unoriginal]

To Sherlock Holmes? It depends on whether the skeleton has ever moved or done anything, or if there was a reason why this skeleton in particular was animated and the others weren't. If not then no, there's no way to tell. If yes then potentially yes.

Same for the Galeb Duhr. It has a mind and a behavior pattern which led it to lie where it's lying. That potentially could be detected. "This boulder has a clear line of sight to two other equally-large boulders placed equidistant from it but closer to any approaching threats, consistent with the nesting habits of Galeb Duhr. It's also out of direct sunlight for most of the day due to the tree's shadow, and Galeb Duhr are known to prefer high ambient temperatures but low radiant temperatures, unlike humans who enjoy warm sunlight and a cool breeze together. It could be coincidence but I believe there's a chance we are looking at a Galeb Duhr."

Sure, I agree that it's perfectly reasonable for a perceptive genius to look and notice the signs that a stone creature walked through an area, and that the area is set up like said creatures would do in order to wait for intruders.

But that still doesn't mean they'd be capable of distinguishing which of the boulders is a Galeb Dhur and which is a rock suitable for boulder animation. The perceptive genius can make an educated guess on this, of course, but to them the two of them are just as indistinguishable as they are to anyone else.

Same way as said Fantasy Sherlock Holmes could be perfectly able of determining where Lord Downer is standing despite Downer being 100% invisible, thanks to tracking the details of someone walking in the building plus being aware of Downer's behavioral habits, but without magic Fantasy Sherlock Holmes would still be unable to *see* Downer.


It reminds me of a situation kinda similar to this in an episode of Doctor Who. The Eleventh Doctor has been working to erase all traces of the Doctor's existence in the universe, when the malevolent parasitic cyber-entity who is trying to take over his mind, Mr Clever, points out that it's still possible to retrace where he was by the absence he's leaving behind when he does the edit. The Doctor realizes Mr Clever is correct and presumably works to obfuscate the holes left by his edits once he's done with the mind-takeover thing.

[MaxWilson]

Sure, I agree that it's perfectly reasonable for a perceptive genius to look and notice the signs that a stone creature walked through an area, and that the area is set up like said creatures would do in order to wait for intruders.

But that still doesn't mean they'd be capable of distinguishing which of the boulders is a Galeb Dhur and which is a rock suitable for boulder animation. The perceptive genius can make an educated guess on this, of course, but to them the two of them are just as indistinguishable as they are to anyone else.

So far I'm with you on this, but 5E is apparently not. At least, it seems to be guiding DMs away from ever letting PCs know that that boulder seems suspiciously Galeb Duhr-ish in placement, and the OP certainly seems to feel it was impossible to detect.


Same way as said Fantasy Sherlock Holmes could be perfectly able of determining where Lord Downer is standing despite Downer being 100% invisible, thanks to tracking the details of someone walking in the building plus being aware of Downer's behavioral habits, but without magic Fantasy Sherlock Holmes would still be unable to *see* Downer.

I agree. I just don't necessarily think that's what the players are objecting to.

[Naanomi]

But that still doesn't mean they'd be capable of distinguishing which of the boulders is a Galeb Dhur and which is a rock suitable for boulder animation
Presuming those boulders had been animated before maybe. If they were 'fresh' natural boulders than I would guess the signs of which had previously moved and which had not would be... elementary?

[tKUUNK]

Since I prefer to have all combat occur in initiative, I would have the animate boulders be the first action taken by the Galeb Duhr in combat. I would probably narrate it to the players as something like "the air feels eerily silent all of a sudden, there is a feeling in the air of impending trouble" ... the Galeb Duhr use the surprise round to summon boulders and combat starts normally on the next turn. The players can't tell the Galeb Duhr from the animated boulders since they have the same stats and appearance.

Nice post, which I trimmed.

I would add that when combat starts in your example, any player who acts first in initiative- BEFORE any of the Galeb / animated rocks attack or move- still doesn't know what they're fighting, and can at best only draw weapons, move, buff, ready actions, and do other things that don't require targeting enemies.

As a player, I would respect a lot of different DM rulings on this scenario.

It's totally possible that the Galeb Duhr notice the PCs approaching, and animate boulders as a precaution outside combat, but then allow the players to pass by peacefully without any need to roll initiative. The players wouldn't even know they avoided the encounter.

[Tanarii]

Seems weird to rule that they can be actively helping each other passively look around. If you rule that they're helping each other, an active check makes more sense, in line with a group skill check.
That's not what passive check means. It means the player is passive and doesn't roll any dice.

[MaxWilson]

That's not what passive check means. It means the player is passive and doesn't roll any dice.

This doesn't seem right to me. If the DM rolls your Perception check secretly, it's still not a passive check. Ref: PHB 175, definition of passive checks.

[Cheesegear]

I concur. The stat block says nothing about a verbal or somatic component, so it's not strange for a DM to rule that these components are not part of the ability. Although I'm certain that this is one of those rulings that really depend on the DM.

I'll admit, that if I ran the encounter again (why would I run the same encounter twice with the same group? ...Lame), I might do things differently. But the first time I rand the encounter, I don't think I did anything that wasn't RAW, I didn't use 'DM Powers' to grossly favour myself. The fact is, as-written, Galeb Duhrs seem pretty powerful if you use them even remotely intelligently...


As for False Appearance, this does seem incredibly OP but it is what it is.

...And that's the thread. A lot of people have spun the encounter to be something it wasn't. A lot of others have suggested ways that they would run it. But the question is answered:
1. Does 'indistinguishable' mean what it says on the tin? Yes.
2. Does Animate Boulders require the indistinguishable creature - and its summons, who are also 'indistinguishable' - to move and/or speak, thus, giving away their position? No.

Did I make a wrong ruling?
...Nope. Everything I did was RAW. My players have nothing on me.

Did I make a fair ruling?
...Perhaps not. But that wasn't necessarily my intention.
...But if it wasn't fair, doesn't that make it a wrong ruling? REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Lots of monsters have False Appearance. Someone explicitly mentioned Mimics.
Would you tell the party that the item is a Mimic? **** no. That's not the point of Mimics. The point of Mimics, is to surprise the party - both in-game and IRL. Ergo, False Appearance is just a really strong (some might say, unfair) ability that some creatures have. It just appears that RAW, Galeb Duhrs, can 'do a thing' without losing their False Appearance... Heeeyyy that's pretty good.


I would go by a few pointers:
- is the action harmful or otherwise affecting the target?
- is there anything that could give the ambusher's presence away?
- is the action something that would trigger a check or saving throw by the target?

Another poster described my thought process - or close enough to it.

1. The Galeb Duhrs see the party, the party does not see Galeb Duhrs. Combat has not started.
2. The Galeb Duhrs Animate Boulders, just in case. The party does not see - or sense - them do this. Combat has still not started.
3. The party moves towards the 'protected area'. YOU DUN GOOF'D, KID. Galeb Duhrs activate guardian mode, and guard.

I also want to make it clear - in case I haven't - the party had abilities/items at their disposal that would have let them sense Elementals. They just didn't use them.
I expected them to use their items/abilities; They just didn't.


The casters in the party want to buff up by casting protections like Invisibility or Mage Armour (all silent because of things like subtle spell). The fighter wants to carefully draw his sword to have it at the ready (and rolls a nat20 on his stealth). The druid wants to cast Primal Savagery on herself, which has no verbal component. Would you allow all these, without having them roll for initiative? Wouldn't be fair not to, right?

A lot of NPCs have Mage Armour or Barkskin built-in to their statblock.

But yes, all the time.

The party knows that 'a fight' is on the other side of the door.
Cleric casts Bless, Paladin goes Shield of Faith, Wizard casts Haste. Combat has not started.
Kick open the door; "Roll Initiative, nerds!" Bless, Haste and SoF have 9 rounds to go.
All. The. Time.

[Lunali]

This doesn't seem right to me. If the DM rolls your Perception check secretly, it's still not a passive check. Ref: PHB 175, definition of passive checks.

No one said anything about the DM rolling dice, passive checks are generally for when the player is passive but the character is not.

A common example would be the DM rolling a stealth check vs the character's passive perception. The character is actively looking around at their surroundings, but the player doesn't know anything about it unless the NPC fails their stealth.

[Maelynn]

1. The Galeb Duhrs see the party, the party does not see Galeb Duhrs. Combat has not started.
2. The Galeb Duhrs Animate Boulders, just in case. The party does not see - or sense - them do this. Combat has still not started.
3. The party moves towards the 'protected area'. YOU DUN GOOF'D, KID. Galeb Duhrs activate guardian mode, and guard.

This aligns with how I see encounters. If you take an action that has no effect on someone else, and the other doesn't notice your action, then there is no encounter (yet). My reasoning: when you take the initiative* to confront an enemy, or do something that alerts the enemy so they can take the initiative* to confront you, that's when the encounter starts and all parties involved roll for initiative to determine the order.

* the actual word, not the game term


I also want to make it clear - in case I haven't - the party had abilities/items at their disposal that would have let them sense Elementals. They just didn't use them.
I expected them to use their items/abilities; They just didn't.

Yes, the players are responsible for knowing what their characters can do and when they should use their abilities/items. It's not up to the DM to constantly remind them of their options, or compensate for their forgetfulness. Of course it can happen that people forget about something, but they shouldn't put the blame with the DM or consider a fight unfair because they didn't think of using something they should be aware they have.

However.

Can you expect someone to have these kinds of buffs up all the time? Can you expect them to have their guard up when they're not in a situation that one could logically expect it? I think that's the part your players have issue with. They wouldn't have Sense Elementals up, because they're not in an area where it would make sense to use it. If you spend the night at an inn you generally don't wear your armour in bed, so an ambush would seem unfair if you say "well, you did have armour, you just didn't wear it".

Y'know, I think it would've helped (hindsight, I know, but an idea for future reference) is if you dropped a hint. Like villagers telling them how some folk claim to have seen 'moving rocks', or strange markings or tracks in the area that could be investigated to hint at the presence of living beings. Then, if they ignore such hints and don't think to use their Sense Elementals, can you safely put the full blame with the players. Now, they had no premise to use that ability. And I think the lack of premise could be the main objection here.

I wonder, could it be that a similar situation has led to their constant rolling for Perception? Because I can see this event resulting in them constantly using Sense Elementals from now on. And you don't want your players to become that paranoid.


The party knows that 'a fight' is on the other side of the door.
Cleric casts Bless, Paladin goes Shield of Faith, Wizard casts Haste. Combat has not started.
Kick open the door; "Roll Initiative, nerds!" Bless, Haste and SoF have 9 rounds to go.
All. The. Time.

Exactly my point. If characters can do certain things, they shouldn't be surprised that NPCs/monsters can also do them. In this case, buffing before a fight. Reminds me a bit of those players who constantly heal and gulp down potions, and then get mad when the BBEG gets a heal from a lackey during the boss fight.

[Reynaert]

Another poster described my thought process - or close enough to it.

1. The Galeb Duhrs see the party, the party does not see Galeb Duhrs. Combat has not started.
2. The Galeb Duhrs Animate Boulders, just in case. The party does not see - or sense - them do this. Combat has still not started.
3. The party moves towards the 'protected area'. YOU DUN GOOF'D, KID.

And there is your problem. "YOU DUN GOOF'D, KID"
How did they goof? They did not. There was NO WAY they could have known it but you still gleefully go "you goof'd". BIIIG red flag there. THAT is why your players were angry. You set them up to fail and then somehow made it their fault.

[Cheesegear]

They wouldn't have Sense Elementals up, because they're not in an area where it would make sense to use it.

Y'know, I think it would've helped (hindsight, I know, but an idea for future reference) is if you dropped a hint. Like villagers telling them how some folk claim to have seen 'moving rocks', or strange markings or tracks in the area that could be investigated to hint at the presence of living beings.

I think at this point you're just asking me to explain the backstory to the encounter, 'Gifts of Earth' people would often present, 'cause, y'know...The legends...the Scroll of Tongues you might want to use when you enter the area to parley with hidden guardians, etc. Sometimes we go there, and then we come back a week later, and the rocks have moved formations...

It was all there.


Now, they had no premise to use that ability. And I think the lack of premise could be the main objection here.

There was plenty of premise. It's just that that wasn't the point of the thread. Because I was asking about RAW rulings, not roleplaying.

I've already explained why my players are angry. They don't like being surprised (if I roll a 28 on my Stealth, and the Ranger only has +7 on Perception (pp 17), the party is still Surprised). They never have, and likely never will. Surprise is literally a round where the hostiles can do anything they want, and the players, can't. ...But isn't it just so much fun when the players get Surprise, instead? Part of it, was that.

But the explicit part of why they were angry, was that even if the Galebs did have surprise, they should have spent that surprise round, Animating, not attacking.
As you've correctly pointed out, hostiles can do pre-combat buffs, too.

Players were upset because Surprise + Animate. My players afterwards, when they asked me how that happened, cried BS. They should've had one or the other. As per the OP
1. You can have Surprise, and Animate, or
2. You can Animate, but we see that.
I argued but why not both? Hence the thread.

My players aren't arguing that False Appearance isn't a real ability.
My players are arguing that False Appearance means that you can't take Actions without breaking it. Therefore, I cheated.
I disagree. Rather, I believe, RAW, Galeb Duhrs can take that, specific Action, without breaking False Appearance.

My players are arguing rules. Not roleplaying. Because if my players tried to argue that there weren't hints, and if my players tried to argue that they had 'no way to counter', they would lose. Hence the head-tabling at the...Table.

They had the hints.
They had the items, spells and abilities.
They knew - even if they didn't remember that they knew (but that's not my problem).

The problem is that combat was needlessly difficult. And it was needlessly difficult because either:
a) I abused my power as DM and forced the encounter, or
b) I am bad at reading rules and/or I cheated.

Neither of which is true.


Reminds me a bit of those players who constantly heal and gulp down potions, and then get mad when the BBEG gets a heal from a lackey during the boss fight.

Players deal 60 damage to [monster].
[Monster] runs.
Players have a Short Rest and heal up.
Players run into [Monster] again, and get upset when I count its HPs up from 27, not 60.
"But we dealt 60 damage before!"
...Yeah. It healed. Remember those d10s I was randomly rolling while you guys were doing short rest bookkeeping? ...They weren't random.
"FFS."

[Maelynn]

It's just that that wasn't the point of the thread. Because I was asking about RAW rulings, not roleplaying.

I'm aware of that, but it does happen that DMs/players are fixated on the rules part when it turns out there's some deeper sentiments and I wanted to see if the problem could possibly lie there. Just to be clear: I don't disagree with your ruling. At most I was bringing up some points to see if the players's outcries can be explained by something other than disagreement over the rules, which you now made clear wasn't the case. :)


My players are arguing that False Appearance means that you can't take Actions without breaking it. Therefore, I cheated.
I disagree. Rather, I believe, RAW, Galeb Duhrs can take that, specific Action, without breaking False Appearance.

Agreed. But we already determined that. And even if I didn't: you made a ruling as DM, gave solid arguments to support it, and they should accept it. The best they can do is keep it in mind for whenever there's a time they might use it to their advantage.


The problem is that combat was needlessly difficult. And it was needlessly difficult because either:
a) I abused my power as DM and forced the encounter, or
b) I am bad at reading rules and/or I cheated.

Or c) the CR of the combined monsters is too high for the party's level/number, but I cannot judge that. If the difficulty level was anything lower than deadly, then we can rule out that option as well. Then it's difficult, yes, but not 'too' difficult and certainly not 'needlessly' so. Sometimes fights are hard, deal with it.

[Tanarii]

This doesn't seem right to me. If the DM rolls your Perception check secretly, it's still not a passive check. Ref: PHB 175, definition of passive checks.
The DM shouldn't be rolling your perception check. Or any check for a player. That's the entire point of passive checks. It's for when the DM wants to secretly determine wether the characters succeed at something without the player rolling dice. (Edit: I mean do it if you want to and your players are cool. But a lot aren't. Which is one of two reasons why passive checks exist.)

Speaking of referencing the definition of passive checks on PHB 175, it tells us exactly why it's a passive check in the very first line:
A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls.

Then it goes on to explain the (character active) things the (player passively) not rolling dice covers:
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.

D&D 5e has been out for years now. At this point, it's starting to amaze me that anyone still manages to get wrong that passive check has nothing to do with character passiveness, and that the non-existent term "active check" is incorrectly conflated with in-universe activity. :smallconfused:

[ProsecutorGodot]

D&D 5e has been out for years now. At this point, it's starting to amaze me that anyone still manages to get wrong that passive check has nothing to do with character passiveness, and that the non-existent term "active check" is incorrectly conflated with in-universe activity. :smallconfused:

It's not wrong to label it as passive activity, the checks are made for routine activities, this implies some level of passive behavior in that you perform these activities regardless of whether you may be prompted or not.

A guard standing watch would be a passive check, guards performing a manhunt would likely involve a roll, as (I assume) it's not normally routine. It's not "wrong" to rule out one way or another though.

A good example for PC would be taking watch during rest, the one taking watch rolls and those asleep use a passive check with applicable penalties.

[ThatoneGuy84]

1 - I Love it, and have had DMs throw these at us the same way, and its great from a player perspective to be the ones affected by suprise instead of the ones always attempting to "suprise".

2 - if your players dont want to be suprised or affected by suprise, they have ways/probably know the ways to accomplish this *** Alert feat, Weap of warning, ect ect *** which costs resources they clearly arent willing to sacrifice so that's on them.

3 - When I dm players only roll the checks I ask them to roll, they dont ask to roll checks, they tell me what they are doing. If someone is actively trying to keep watch ect then I might allow them to roll instead of using passive perception. But rules at my table include not wasting my time asking to roll checks, I'll tell you when a check is needed based on what your currently doing.

4 - Slow down thier speed for travel if they are actively looking for threats all the time, I would impose a 50% movement travel reduction if they want to specifically be scouting/attempting to perceive everything instead of paying passive notice to stuff.

[MinotaurWarrior]

The only thing I think I'd do differently is give the players a chance to know boulders are potentially dangerous, such as by comparing their passive knowledge (nature?) to something like 10+CR.

I can't distinguish the difference between infected water and safe water, but I know that some water can kill me, and so I'll be wary of, for example, a pool of standing water in the forest, even though I could not possibly see the dangerous microorganisms.

Similarly, someone who knows about elementals should know to be on edge while within striking distance of a bunch of boulders, and would be no more surprised by them then they would be by a clearly visible unarmed humanoid turning out to be a Monk and attacking them. The GD would still get to animate boulders for free, but when they took an overtly hostile act, the knowing pcs wouldn't be surprised.

[Chaosmancer]

The only thing I think I'd do differently is give the players a chance to know boulders are potentially dangerous, such as by comparing their passive knowledge (nature?) to something like 10+CR.

I can't distinguish the difference between infected water and safe water, but I know that some water can kill me, and so I'll be wary of, for example, a pool of standing water in the forest, even though I could not possibly see the dangerous microorganisms.

Similarly, someone who knows about elementals should know to be on edge while within striking distance of a bunch of boulders, and would be no more surprised by them then they would be by a clearly visible unarmed humanoid turning out to be a Monk and attacking them. The GD would still get to animate boulders for free, but when they took an overtly hostile act, the knowing pcs wouldn't be surprised.

See, I think this gets into the problem though.

Why would they suspect these boulders to be something other than boulders?

I get what people are saying with the passive nature checks, but at the same time, there are assumptions being made. Why should we assume the Ghaleb Dhur are not made of the same stone as the surrounding area? Why are we assuming they have moved any time in the last month to leave tracks? Why is your character looking at boulders and thinking of a Ghaleb Dhur ambush?


I think an earlier poster said it best about the False Appearance feature. If you are standing in a hallway full of suits of armor, what could possibly tell you just by looking that some of them can move? They aren't moving, they aren't any less covered in dust than their companions, they look like exactly what they are. Suits of Armor.


And, with how paranoid certain players are, giving them "hints" like "Three of these suits of armor are clear of dust, and their pedestal look scuffed" might as well be the equivalent of saying "Three suits of animated armor stand in the hall and brandish their weapons, roll initiative" because the jig is up. So what is the point of even trying to have them set up to use their ability? You are just going to give away the trick anyways.

[Tanarii]

A guard standing watch would be a passive check, guards performing a manhunt would likely involve a roll, as (I assume) it's not normally routine. You assume incorrectly. If they're making perception checks over and over again, that is exactly what passive perception is for.


A good example for PC would be taking watch during rest, the one taking watch rolls and those asleep use a passive check with applicable penalties.
Another bad example. Thhe one keeping watch uses passive perception, because he or she is actively looking around and keeping watch, making perception checks repeatedly, throughout the watch

[Naanomi]

See, I think this gets into the problem though.

Why would they suspect these boulders to be something other than boulders?

I get what people are saying with the passive nature checks, but at the same time, there are assumptions being made. Why should we assume the Ghaleb Dhur are not made of the same stone as the surrounding area? Why are we assuming they have moved any time in the last month to leave tracks? Why is your character looking at boulders and thinking of a Ghaleb Dhur ambush?


I think an earlier poster said it best about the False Appearance feature. If you are standing in a hallway full of suits of armor, what could possibly tell you just by looking that some of them can move? They aren't moving, they aren't any less covered in dust than their companions, they look like exactly what they are. Suits of Armor.


And, with how paranoid certain players are, giving them "hints" like "Three of these suits of armor are clear of dust, and their pedestal look scuffed" might as well be the equivalent of saying "Three suits of animated armor stand in the hall and brandish their weapons, roll initiative" because the jig is up. So what is the point of even trying to have them set up to use their ability? You are just going to give away the trick anyways.
I think this undervalues investment in knowledge skills and the like... if my ranger has favored enemy: elemental and natural explorer: mountain... it seems like I invested a whole level's worth of abilities in what should exactly pertain to this exact situation... but without the possibility of a roll, it just doesn't... no elemental hunter in the entire universe could ever even possibly hunt these elementals unless they intentionally reveal themselves, no amount of training and dedication could modify the odds even in the slightest.

[ProsecutorGodot]

You assume incorrectly. If they're making perception checks over and over again, that is exactly what passive perception is for.


No, routine behavior for passive checks isn't listed by skill, it's listed by action.

Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again
So like I said, the type of searching involved in a manhunt is almost certainly not the same as routine guard duty. In fact a manhunt could very well be a series of checks not all perception. The process isn't as simple as just looking around.

This is a huge tangent from the OP though, in regards to that I actually agree, they shouldn't be constantly rolling for checks, they've done it often enough to be routine behavior, it should be assumed that they're always searching as a group. At this point, I'd only suggest an active check in exceptional cases.

[MinotaurWarrior]

See, I think this gets into the problem though.

Why would they suspect these boulders to be something other than boulders?

I get what people are saying with the passive nature checks, but at the same time, there are assumptions being made. Why should we assume the Ghaleb Dhur are not made of the same stone as the surrounding area? Why are we assuming they have moved any time in the last month to leave tracks? Why is your character looking at boulders and thinking of a Ghaleb Dhur ambush?

Because they know some boulders contain Ghaleb Dhur the same way I know some water contains micro-organisms. I agree that the PCs shouldn't have any way of knowing that a particular indistinguishable monster is a monster, not an ordinary object. Same as I can't know (with my innate senses) that particular water is host to dangerous micro-organisms. But I have a low-level wariness to the point where I won't be surprised if water makes me sick. And if a clearly visible boulder attacks a PC who knows about Ghaleb Dhur, they won't be surprised, because they knew, "sometimes boulders attack people".

[MaxWilson]

I'll admit, that if I ran the encounter again (why would I run the same encounter twice with the same group? ...Lame), I might do things differently. But the first time I rand the encounter, I don't think I did anything that wasn't RAW, I didn't use 'DM Powers' to grossly favour myself. The fact is, as-written, Galeb Duhrs seem pretty powerful if you use them even remotely intelligently...



...And that's the thread. A lot of people have spun the encounter to be something it wasn't. A lot of others have suggested ways that they would run it. But the question is answered:
1. Does 'indistinguishable' mean what it says on the tin? Yes.
2. Does Animate Boulders require the indistinguishable creature - and its summons, who are also 'indistinguishable' - to move and/or speak, thus, giving away their position? No.

Did I make a wrong ruling?
...

Oh, my mistake. I believed that the OP was a request for DMing observations about the scenario, not a question about RAW.

If this thread is strictly about "did I break any rules?" the answer is no, of course you didn't.

[NaughtyTiger]

Because they know some boulders contain Ghaleb Dhur the same way I know some water contains micro-organisms. I agree that the PCs shouldn't have any way of knowing that a particular indistinguishable monster is a monster, not an ordinary object. Same as I can't know (with my innate senses) that particular water is host to dangerous micro-organisms. But I have a low-level wariness to the point where I won't be surprised if water makes me sick. And if a clearly visible boulder attacks a PC who knows about Ghaleb Dhur, they won't be surprised, because they knew, "sometimes boulders attack people".

The adventurers walk to the base of a mountain in front of a cave entrance with 10 boulders scattered about. A grove of trees starts 10 ft to the left of the cave entrance.

Dangerous things live in caves, so anything attacking from inside the cave doesn't get surprise round.
Dangerous things hide in tree groves, so anything attacking from the grove doesn't get a surprise round.
Random rocks could be elemental, so any animated boulder doesn't get a surprise round.

The party sneaks up on a band of orcs by the campfire. The party has +10 stealth (pass without trace), but the orcs know the woods are teaming with dangerous beasts, boulders, and adventurers, so the party doesn't get a surprise round.

a GD is a CR 6, relatively rare, even for someone who specializes in them.

[MaxWilson]

The adventurers walk to the base of a mountain in front of a cave entrance with 10 boulders scattered about. A grove of trees starts 10 ft to the left of the cave entrance.

Dangerous things live in caves, so anything attacking from inside the cave doesn't get surprise round.
Dangerous things hide in tree groves, so anything attacking from the grove doesn't get a surprise round.
Random rocks could be elemental, so any animated boulder doesn't get a surprise round.

In world where everything could be dangerous, how do you get a surprise round?

One way that works against anyone who isn't Alert is to proactively catch the adventurers when they're relaxed: reading a book, working on an invention, trying to fall asleep, etc. You can't do those things effectively when you're on high alert, ergo the characters must not be in high alert at those times.

Other than that I'd say you have to play it by ear based on player and PC behavior. Do they seem to be anticipating a threat?

[NaughtyTiger]

One way that works against anyone who isn't Alert is to proactively catch the adventurers when they're relaxed: reading a book, working on an invention, trying to fall asleep, etc. You can't do those things effectively when you're on high alert, ergo the characters must not be in high alert at those times.

Other than that I'd say you have to play it by ear based on player and PC behavior. Do they seem to be anticipating a threat?

I edited the quoted text while you were typing...
Many folks (including the person i quoted) on this thread are saying that the PCs always anticipate a threat.
Thus they would contend that failing a perception check should not result in surprise.

I do not agree with that because you can't be on alert (without the feat) during an 8 hour hike.

[MaxWilson]

I edited the quoted text while you were typing...
Many folks (including the person i quoted) on this thread are saying that the PCs always anticipate a threat.
Thus they would contend that failing a perception check should not result in surprise.

I do not agree with that because you can't be on alert (without the feat) during an 8 hour hike.

I don't agree with that either. It's mentally fatiguing and breaks are necessary. If the players say they're on alert for threats then as far as I'm concerned, they can't be surprised at that time, but that doesn't mean they can't be surprised an hour later. It's similar to how I will let a player cast Guidance whenever they want, but if someone tries to claim that they are continuously casting Guidance several times every minute of every day I'll just say, "Really? Every minute of every day?" You can't do that, it would drive you psychotic.

However, the more serious consequence of failing to spot a specific threat is that the threat gets to take the initiative (I don't mean initiative in the game jargon sense), assess the threat, make preparations, and choose whether or not to engage. IME surprise is more deadly than surprise (game jargon), so it's still worth cautiously scouting around to mitigate nasty surprises before they wind up in your face.

[Lunali]

Another poster described my thought process - or close enough to it.

1. The Galeb Duhrs see the party, the party does not see Galeb Duhrs. Combat has not started.
2. The Galeb Duhrs Animate Boulders, just in case. The party does not see - or sense - them do this. Combat has still not started.
3. The party moves towards the 'protected area'. YOU DUN GOOF'D, KID. Galeb Duhrs activate guardian mode, and guard.

I also want to make it clear - in case I haven't - the party had abilities/items at their disposal that would have let them sense Elementals. They just didn't use them.
I expected them to use their items/abilities; They just didn't.

How many rounds passed between step 2 and 3? I suspect zero, but I could be wrong. If it is in fact zero, they were effectively already in the protected area when the galeb duhrs cast their spell.

[NaughtyTiger]

If the players say they're on alert for threats then as far as I'm concerned, they can't be surprised at that time, but that doesn't mean they can't be surprised an hour later.

i dont understand this.
I think you said that if a PC says, "Im on alert" then you say they can't be surprised.
So, every time the DM narrates a scene, the PC just has to say, "Im on alert"... she doesn't have to say it for the times you don't narrate a scene.

I guess you could just say "you are surprised, roll init" then narrate the scene...

[Man_Over_Game]

So, to make it fair for the players, you have to make them aware of the danger.
Do I?

Bingo is a game where your decisions don't matter.

Chess is a game where your decisions matter a lot.

Both are a game, but they don't really have the same kind of "gamer".

More and more game developers are learning the value of telegraphing and interactivity in games. However, those that don't instead leverage that fact as a means of intentionally increasing the difficulty (think Dark Souls or Street Fighter) through filtering out the players' options (usually through reaction time).

The lesson is, the less information your players can use, understand, or react to, the fewer choices you're giving them.

In Bingo, that's fine. In Chess, less so.

And then there's the simulation element, where you and the players are there to enjoy a world, not a game, and what's realistic in that world takes precedence over "balance" or "game theory". Sometimes, the plot is the fun.

So if your players like to be surprised as it forces them to act in unprepared situations, or if they see DnD as mostly a growing story, I think you made a great call.

But as to whether or not you have to give them ample reason to detect the ambush if they prioritize the gaming elements of DnD?

Do I?

Yeah, you do.


My players...Disagreed.
The evidence is the players, not the rules.

I'll be honest, the fact that you're looking for justification through us rather than your players implies that you're rejecting change through asking "Am I good enough?" In this instance, your players already gave you an answer.



Ambushes and puzzles are really friggin' complicated to talk about in this system. You have to give players enough to strangle themselves with, without actually giving it to them, and then we're left to figure out to do that by combining a bunch of random numbers on paper with random numbers on dice.

Sure, once upon a time, getting ambushed by a bunch of invisible enemies that you couldn't have detected were "fun", because we didn't actually know what was in a good game or not. Now we do, we're pickier, and people realized they would rather fail because of their choices instead of yours.

The mentality of a player in this situation probably goes something like this:
"So there's nothing we could have done about being Surprised here? Was that something the game decided based on rules? Aren't you the one in charge of controlling the rules if they need modified for a situation?... So you chose for us to be Surprised as effectively DM fiat?"


TLDR: If the player can't blame themselves, they'll blame you or the game. Justifying it by making the punishment managable doesn't counter the fact that you chose to ignore their input on whether the players were Surprised or not. You decided their choices didn't matter while yours did, and that leaves a strong bitterness.

[MinotaurWarrior]

The adventurers walk to the base of a mountain in front of a cave entrance with 10 boulders scattered about. A grove of trees starts 10 ft to the left of the cave entrance.

Dangerous things live in caves, so anything attacking from inside the cave doesn't get surprise round.
Dangerous things hide in tree groves, so anything attacking from the grove doesn't get a surprise round.
Random rocks could be elemental, so any animated boulder doesn't get a surprise round.

The party sneaks up on a band of orcs by the campfire. The party has +10 stealth (pass without trace), but the orcs know the woods are teaming with dangerous beasts, boulders, and adventurers, so the party doesn't get a surprise round.

a GD is a CR 6, relatively rare, even for someone who specializes in them.

If you think they are rare even for someone who specialized in them, then up the DC for the passive nature check.

But the difference between what I'm saying, and your facetious examples, is this:

A character clearly sees something that is not hidden, and knows that it is a potential threat.

Something hidden in the cave gets a surprise round, because it is hidden. Something hidden in the grove gets a surprise round, because it is hidden. Adventurers sneaking up on the orcs get a surprise round, because they were obscured and rolled higher than the orcs passive perception scores to successfully hide.

If an NPC approached the party on the road, clearly visible, but without weapons drawn, and then, within close distance, drew a weapon and stabbed a party member, they wouldn't be surprised, because they know, "some humanoids are dangerous".

If a PC who knows some medium-sized boulders are dangerous (up to DM fiat - I'd personally do Passive Nature => 16), and those boulders are clearly visible, they won't be surprised by those boulders attacking.

[MaxWilson]

i dont understand this.
I think you said that if a PC says, "Im on alert" then you say they can't be surprised.
So, every time the DM narrates a scene, the PC just has to say, "Im on alert"... she doesn't have to say it for the times you don't narrate a scene.

I guess you could just say "you are surprised, roll init" then narrate the scene...

I don't necessarily run the kinds of location-based (dungeon-crawling) narratives you seem to be imagining here. (Though often I do! It depends.)

If we're in the middle of resolving a long-running action declaration then yes, it would be totally legitimate for me to cut to a different scene using my "it came to pass" procedure, and in that scene they might or might not be surprised. (I'll describe a scene twice, once to the players outlining what comes next in DM-to-player terms, and at that point they have the chance to correct me and say, "No, I wanted to do XYZ first" or "I don't think I would do that." Then I'll finalize it by re-describing the scene following the words, "And it came to pass..." and at that point it actually happens.)

Example:

Party leader: We go back to the Modron capital to ask the Guvernator if he knows anything about the Fire Giant presence in this area.

DM: So what I think would happen next is that you've been in the Guvernator's waiting room for an hour, surrounded by civilians, when suddenly someone walks in the door and starts throwing knives at you. It's very surprising.

Player B: I don't think I would be surprised because I'm claustrophic, and crowds make me feel threatened anyway.

DM: Okay. [pauses] And it came to pass... that the heroes found themselves in a claustrophic waiting room surrounded by dozens of morbidly obese dwarves screaming in panic as goblin assassins threw poisoned knives into the crowd. Bob, you're not surprised. Everybody else roll a DC 15 hearing check to see if you heard the groan of the receptionist crumpling to the ground outside.

In a dungeon crawl you'd probably be safe assuming that I just rule that the PCs are just never surprised (game jargon) unless they are resting, because I wouldn't expect them ever to be relaxed during a dungeon crawl (except while resting, because you can't rest without being relaxed). That doesn't mean they'll never be surprised, though. It just means I reserve surprise for truly surprising violence.

And again, remember that surprise in my opinion is deadlier than surprise.

[NaughtyTiger]

A character clearly sees something that is not hidden, and knows that it is a potential threat.

I guess this is where we disagree.

A GD is a potential threat.
An animated boulder is a potential threat.
A boulder is not a potential threat.

Therefore, the PC clearly sees the boulder, but she does not clearly see the GD or the animated boulder


The favored enemy in favored terrain is a good argument.
Being paranoid about water and rocks and fire and ... is not.

[MaxWilson]

snip

DM: So what I think would happen next is that you've been in the Guvernator's waiting room for an hour, surrounded by civilians, when suddenly someone walks in the door and starts throwing knives at you. It's very surprising.
Player A: I am not surprised because I invested in the Alert feat
Player B to Player A: (A) that was dumb, ....
Player B: I don't think I would be surprised because I'm claustrophic, and crowds make me feel threatened anyway.

(B) I didn't understand any of this section.

(A) Player B would be wrong to say this to player A. The Alert feat is a terrific feat, and never being surprised while not incapacitated is only a tiny fraction of it. Player B is either sometimes going to be surprised or is going to have other players rolling their eyes at Player B's constant phobias and paranoia (and Bob the PC may experiences consequences as well), but Player A never will... and yet surprise is rare enough that that probably isn't why Player A took Alert anyway.

More likely it was for the initiative bonus, for the ability to go later in the declaration order during combat [relates to the initiative variant (https://www.enworld.org/threads/concurrent-initiative-variant-everybody-declares-everybody-resolves-was-simultaneous-initiative.513971/#ixzz4Uey0HvAn) I use], for combinations like Pyrotechnics + Alert for concentration-free Blur equivalent (or Darkness + Alert on an EK for evocation-based Blur equivalent), etc. It's not just useful in the first round of combat to prevent being surprised (game jargon), it's useful every round to reduce the chance of being surprised (real-world term).

Basically it means that you have a shorter OODA loop than normal, and it gives some nifty bonuses against unseen attackers too.

(B) I'm not sure how to respond to this since I don't know what aspects you found confusing.

[Chaosmancer]

I think this undervalues investment in knowledge skills and the like... if my ranger has favored enemy: elemental and natural explorer: mountain... it seems like I invested a whole level's worth of abilities in what should exactly pertain to this exact situation... but without the possibility of a roll, it just doesn't... no elemental hunter in the entire universe could ever even possibly hunt these elementals unless they intentionally reveal themselves, no amount of training and dedication could modify the odds even in the slightest.

Well, first off, I would say there is a big difference between "I am actively hunting for Ghaleb Dhur" and "I am wandering through these mountains where Ghaleb Dhur happen to be"

And that is the thing I am thinking about. Even if you happen to be an expert on Ghaleb Dhur, if you have no reason to suspect they are nearby, then why would you be looking for clues? And if you aren't looking for clues, then Indistinguishable is indistinguishable.

Unless you actively examine every single boulder just in case it happens to be a Ghaleb Dhur? And do you examine every puddle of water to see if it contains elementals? Every Icicle for Mephits?

Sure, I might give you something if you are actively hunting them, but that was not the situation presented. The party was passing through, and happened upon them.


And, I'm not sure if Nature is made useful by letting you do this very specific thing that negates a monster's abilities.




Because they know some boulders contain Ghaleb Dhur the same way I know some water contains micro-organisms. I agree that the PCs shouldn't have any way of knowing that a particular indistinguishable monster is a monster, not an ordinary object. Same as I can't know (with my innate senses) that particular water is host to dangerous micro-organisms. But I have a low-level wariness to the point where I won't be surprised if water makes me sick. And if a clearly visible boulder attacks a PC who knows about Ghaleb Dhur, they won't be surprised, because they knew, "sometimes boulders attack people".


I know guns are a thing. I've even shot them before.

If I am walking down a street and suddenly gunfire erupts around me I'm not going to be "unsurprised" just because I know sometimes people shoot each other.

Surprise is literally a six second delay before combat readiness. So sure, after the fight the PCs might be like "Oh right, Ghaleb Dhur are a thing" but the second those inanimate objects start flying at their faces they aren't going to be like "Ah, exactly as expected."



If you think they are rare even for someone who specialized in them, then up the DC for the passive nature check.

But the difference between what I'm saying, and your facetious examples, is this:

A character clearly sees something that is not hidden, and knows that it is a potential threat.

Something hidden in the cave gets a surprise round, because it is hidden. Something hidden in the grove gets a surprise round, because it is hidden. Adventurers sneaking up on the orcs get a surprise round, because they were obscured and rolled higher than the orcs passive perception scores to successfully hide.

If an NPC approached the party on the road, clearly visible, but without weapons drawn, and then, within close distance, drew a weapon and stabbed a party member, they wouldn't be surprised, because they know, "some humanoids are dangerous".

If a PC who knows some medium-sized boulders are dangerous (up to DM fiat - I'd personally do Passive Nature => 16), and those boulders are clearly visible, they won't be surprised by those boulders attacking.


By this logic, the Indistinguishable trait might as well not exist. Because everyone kn knows that mimics can be anything, so they will never be surprised by any object being a mimic. Ever. And if you accept the arguement that "Well, obviously we aren't surprised by the tattered tapestry coming to life and attacking us from behind, mimics are a thing that exists and we would know to be careful" Then I would fully expect you to agree with "Well, obviously we aren't surprised by the arrows flying out of the woods. Goblins and Elves often attack from hiding in the forest and we would know to be careful."

In fact, I'd say the woods example is more compellingly logical than expecting inanimate objects to animate. Goblins and Elves are far more common than mimics.

[MaxWilson]

(A) By this logic, the Indistinguishable trait might as well not exist. Because everyone kn knows that mimics can be anything, so they will never be surprised by any object being a mimic. Ever. And if you accept the arguement that "Well, obviously we aren't surprised by the tattered tapestry coming to life and attacking us from behind, mimics are a thing that exists and we would know to be careful" Then I would fully expect you to agree with "Well, obviously we aren't surprised by the arrows flying out of the woods. Goblins and Elves often attack from hiding in the forest and we would know to be careful."

In fact, I'd say the woods example is more compellingly logical than expecting inanimate objects to animate. Goblins and Elves are far more common than mimics.

By MinotaurWarrior's logic, statement (A) is still not true. Let's say there's no such thing as surprise. Indistinguishable still gives you license to lie to the players about what they are seeing! In a hall full of statues, when attacked by Star Spawns, Indistinguishable is what prevents the party wizard from simply walking away from the Gargoyles because casting his Hypnotic Pattern on the Star Spawns--because you told him they were just "statues", and because the hypothetical Gargoyles are experts at heeding the advice, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is in the process of making a mistake," so they didn't give themselves away by moving on Round 1.

[Naanomi]

Well, first off, I would say there is a big difference between "I am actively hunting for Ghaleb Dhur" and "I am wandering through these mountains where Ghaleb Dhur happen to be"

And that is the thing I am thinking about. Even if you happen to be an expert on Ghaleb Dhur, if you have no reason to suspect they are nearby, then why would you be looking for clues? And if you aren't looking for clues, then Indistinguishable is indistinguishable.

Unless you actively examine every single boulder just in case it happens to be a Ghaleb Dhur? And do you examine every puddle of water to see if it contains elementals? Every Icicle for Mephits?
Not actively hunting but...

Let’s put it this way. As a DND player, a casual thing that I have done for 30+ years... I am cautious on some level that any classic treasure chest may be a mimic, Will I guess right every time I see one? No... but me personally (not my character) will never be ‘surprised me when a classic treasure chest attacks me.

A ranger who wanders the mountains and has enough knowledge about both the terrain and elementals to have an *entire level* where those are the only class features he got? Every boulder he passes... even if he doesn’t expect it... on some level I bet in his kind there is a ‘is it a hidden elemental? Is that rock the right size for that?’... not enough to find every one he walks past, but enough that he will ever be ‘shocked’ when one leaps up to attack him

[NaughtyTiger]

Not actively hunting but...

Let’s put it this way. As a DND player, a casual thing that I have done for 30+ years... I am cautious on some level that any classic treasure chest may be a mimic, Will I guess right every time I see one? No... but me personally (not my character) will never be ‘surprised me when a classic treasure chest attacks me.

A ranger who wanders the mountains and has enough knowledge about both the terrain and elementals to have an *entire level* where those are the only class features he got? Every boulder he passes... even if he doesn’t expect it... on some level I bet in his kind there is a ‘is it a hidden elemental? Is that rock the right size for that?’... not enough to find every one he walks past, but enough that he will ever be ‘shocked’ when one leaps up to attack him

I think that reworking the natural enemies description to be something like, you can't be surprised by a natural enemy would make perfect sense. make it an explicit effect of the feature, rather than a "but, my character should know better." after she gets hit...

[Cheesegear]

A ranger who wanders the mountains and has enough knowledge about both the terrain and elementals to have an *entire level* where those are the only class features he got? Every boulder he passes... even if he doesn’t expect it... on some level I bet in his kind there is a ‘is it a hidden elemental? Is that rock the right size for that?’... not enough to find every one he walks past, but enough that he will ever be ‘shocked’ when one leaps up to attack him

A Ranger uses Primeval Awareness, and learns that there are, indeed, Elementals within 1 or 6 miles of his current location.
"This feature doesn't reveal the creatures' location or number."

So, the DM, simply says "Yes, there are Elementals, somewhere between you and a radius of six miles."
Ranger: ...That's...Not helpful. But okay.

Does the Ranger:
a) Constantly make active and/or passive Perception checks to find Elementals,
b) Start hitting every rock he comes across with his magical weapon,
c) Keep an eye out. Surprise will come. We don't know when, we don't know how...But it is coming. Make sure party formation isn't dumb and stupid and dumb. Maybe we move Stealthily. Maybe we explicitly tell the DM what we are looking for and/or how. Maybe he'll give us some hints - but also he doesn't have to,
d) Tell the party's Divine Casters to fire up Detect Evil and Good?

[MinotaurWarrior]

I guess this is where we disagree.

A GD is a potential threat.
An animated boulder is a potential threat.
A boulder is not a potential threat.

Therefore, the PC clearly sees the boulder, but she does not clearly see the GD or the animated boulder


The favored enemy in favored terrain is a good argument.
Being paranoid about water and rocks and fire and ... is not.

I'd really like to hear how you'd rule on the NPC approaching the party. Because again, you keep resorting to facetiousness instead of actually engaging in the argument.

You don't need to be paranoid to clearly see a medium boulder and recognize, "it could attack me" if you know medium boulders attack people sometimes. A medium boulder is just another thing you don't expect to attack you, but know it could.


Well, first off, I would say there is a big difference between "I am actively hunting for Ghaleb Dhur" and "I am wandering through these mountains where Ghaleb Dhur happen to be"

And that is the thing I am thinking about. Even if you happen to be an expert on Ghaleb Dhur, if you have no reason to suspect they are nearby, then why would you be looking for clues? And if you aren't looking for clues, then Indistinguishable is indistinguishable.

You're not looking for clues to discern inanimate boulders from animate ones because there are none.


Unless you actively examine every single boulder just in case it happens to be a Ghaleb Dhur? And do you examine every puddle of water to see if it contains elementals? Every Icicle for Mephits?

Sure, I might give you something if you are actively hunting them, but that was not the situation presented. The party was passing through, and happened upon them.

Again, you're wrong here. You cannot derive any benefit from examining indistinguishable monsters. You shouldn't give the PCs any benefit if they are actively hunting them.


And, I'm not sure if Nature is made useful by letting you do this very specific thing that negates a monster's abilities.

It doesn't negate their ability. The GD still get to animate the boulders for free, choose their time to strike, etc.


I know guns are a thing. I've even shot them before.

If I am walking down a street and suddenly gunfire erupts around me I'm not going to be "unsurprised" just because I know sometimes people shoot each other.

Surprise is literally a six second delay before combat readiness. So sure, after the fight the PCs might be like "Oh right, Ghaleb Dhur are a thing" but the second those inanimate objects start flying at their faces they aren't going to be like "Ah, exactly as expected."

Your example omits the specific RAW important element - was the gunman hidden?

A bank security guard knows armed robbers exist, and are less than one in a million people who enter the bank. But when a clearly visible person draws their weapon, revealing that they weren't an ordinary nonviolent customer, but rather the incredibly rare dangerous sort of humanoid, the guard isn't surprised.


By this logic, the Indistinguishable trait might as well not exist. Because everyone kn knows that mimics can be anything, so they will never be surprised by any object being a mimic. Ever.

No, it's DM fiat who knows mimics, animate objects, etc exist. My personal rule of thumb is Passive (knowledge skill) vs 10+CR, so only extremely smart (Int 14, 2 standard deviations from the mean) or specifically studied people (proficient in the relevant skill) know about even CR2 monsters. If you want any creature to be more obscure, that's up to you - there are no binding rules on knowledge of monsters. If, in your games, everyone knows about mimics, that's up to you.


And if you accept the arguement that "Well, obviously we aren't surprised by the tattered tapestry coming to life and attacking us from behind, mimics are a thing that exists and we would know to be careful" Then I would fully expect you to agree with "Well, obviously we aren't surprised by the arrows flying out of the woods. Goblins and Elves often attack from hiding in the forest and we would know to be careful."

In fact, I'd say the woods example is more compellingly logical than expecting inanimate objects to animate. Goblins and Elves are far more common than mimics.

No, because the elves or Goblins are actually hidden. They were sufficiently obscured and then rolled higher than the party's PP on a dexterity (Stealth) check. Even if the party knew specifically "ten Goblins are going to attack us tonight" or if those Goblins knew "five adventurers are going to attack us tonight", you inflict the surprise condition by being hidden (not clearly seen + success on a Stealth check).

To be clear, RAW succeeding on the Stealth check is the only way to inflict surprise. I think the vast majority of DMs would also allow a few other variants (e.g. this GD ambush, PC disguises, etc) but RAW it's strictly Stealth vs PP.

Mimics in particular have +5 to Stealth, presumably to facilitate this. But what indistinguishable gives monsters RAW is a benefit while not hidden that allows them to, for example, animate those boulders and choose their time to strike (when pcs are in perfect charging distance).

[Tanarii]

To be clear, RAW succeeding on the Stealth check is the only way to inflict surprise. I think the vast majority of DMs would also allow a few other variants (e.g. this GD ambush, PC disguises, etc) but RAW it's strictly Stealth vs PP.
Hotly debated.

Some people read the surprise conditions as two separate and unrelated clauses, one of which is "The DM determines who might be surprised." and the other which describes a specific mechanic that can be used.

Other read it as a prefatory remark followed by the requirement of how of the DM does so. So separate but related clauses.

In other words, for some people it's "DM chooses or (roll stealth)" and for others it is "DM determines by (roll stealth)".

[MinotaurWarrior]

Hotly debated.

Some people read the surprise conditions as two separate and unrelated clauses, one of which is "The DM determines who might be surprised." and the other which describes a specific mechanic that can be used.

Other read it as a prefatory remark followed by the requirement of how of the DM does so. So separate but related clauses.

In other words, for some people it's "DM chooses or (roll stealth)" and for others it is "DM determines by (roll stealth)".

No, that's fine. I'm in no way denying that the DM determines surprise and said so in that message you quoted. But the only explicit RAW method is Stealth. Everything else is just DM fiat.

A DM can rule that a clearly visible herbivore such as an Elk attacking the party inflicts surprise. But appeals to DM fiat, no matter how far they are from the nearest reminder of rule zero, aren't RAW arguments.

[NaughtyTiger]

I guess this is where we disagree.
A GD is a potential threat.
An animated boulder is a potential threat.
A boulder is not a potential threat.
Therefore, the PC clearly sees the boulder, but she does not clearly see the GD or the animated boulder


The favored enemy in favored terrain is a good argument.
Being paranoid about water and rocks and fire and ... is not.
I'd really like to hear how you'd rule on the NPC approaching the party.
How would I rule an NPC coming up on a party?
roll stealth for NPC, compare to PP the awake members of the party. determine which PCs failed the perception test (and are surprised), roll initiative.


Because again, you keep resorting to facetiousness instead of actually engaging in the argument.
I am not sure which part you think is sarcastic.
I am not sure what you think the argument is.

I thought you were saying that:

because your PC knows that boulders could be animated and come to life, that she would be paranoid about them to such a degree that
that she would be wary of every rock she saw on a hike. Same with water elementals hiding in a puddle or fire elementals hiding in a bonfire. Or earth elementals springing up from underneath your feet.
or that,

a wizard catapulting a visible boulder at the PC while hiding in a cave is more surprising that that same boulder animating and attacking the PC.




You don't need to be paranoid to clearly see a medium boulder and recognize, "it could attack me" if you know medium boulders attack people sometimes. A medium boulder is just another thing you don't expect to attack you, but know it could.

See, this sounds sarcastic.

[Naanomi]

Does the Ranger:
a) Constantly make active and/or passive Perception checks to find Elementals
Wouldn't matter anyways, no amount of paranoia and careful observation (or good rolling, even with class-granted highly circumstantial advantage and expertise) can defeat the flawless CR6 indistinguishability

[Man_Over_Game]

Maybe the answer is to give players the means of always "being on watch" for surprise, but in a way that's....less than ideal.

Like Madness. If you're really checking if all of your furniture for Mimics all the time, wouldn't it be reasonable that you're a bit paranoid?

So take that a step further. Yes, you can make yourself immune to Surprise, but it comes with Paranoia (which comes with XYZ penalty).

Obviously not a solution in all games, but it IS a solution that I think both sides could agree on.

[Naanomi]

I think the 'solution' would have been to make Indistinguishable more like a massive stealth bonus (akin to Pass Without Trace or higher) so as to not completely negate the perceptive abilities of PCs who chose to invest heavily in them but also put it out of the range of most PCs to expect to notice them until it is too late; or more clearly state that it is a visual-only ability (akin to Invisibility) that doesn't preclude detection by other senses or methods

[NaughtyTiger]

Maybe the answer is to give players the means of always "being on watch" for surprise

Like they could be Alert or something...


I think the 'solution' would have been to make Indistinguishable more like a massive stealth bonus
Naanomi has a point, but her solution would still benefit the average rogue more than an elemental focused ranger
I don't like that...

[deljzc]

Another long thread about surprise :-)

It's one of the poorest rules in 5e. The transition from non-combat into combat is very clunky.

I wish there was a better way to do it but I just haven't wrapped my head around it yet or seen a good solution.

For me as a DM, it's also how you NARRATE the time between non-combat and combat. The introduction of the "scene" right before initiative. How to create suspense within the framework of passive checks and surprise. And how to have a monster in the room without immediately going into initiative. Because once initiative is rolled, it inevitably becomes a match to the death. The nuances of pre-combat are often lost in my group.

I am still working all these small details out, but I am finding it difficult to DM correctly (or well).

[Naanomi]

[COLOR="#0000CD"]Naanomi has a point, but her solution would still benefit the average rogue more than an elemental focused ranger
I don't like that...
Would it? Advantage and 'expertise' can come from Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy; the Ranger probably has comparable or better Wisdom and proficiency in Perception. The mechanical weakness of ranger features is well documented but this at least orients the task towards them at least a bit
.

[Unoriginal]

I think the 'solution' would have been to make Indistinguishable more like a massive stealth bonus

False Appearance IS a massive stealth bonus. As long as they don't do anything to reveal their presence, the DC to distinguish a creature with False Appearance from the real object is "you don't roll for impossible tasks".

I honestly can't see the issue.

Is the argument that there should be no impossible tasks for PCs?

[MinotaurWarrior]

How would I rule an NPC coming up on a party?
roll stealth for NPC, compare to PP the awake members of the party. determine which PCs failed the perception test (and are surprised), roll initiative.

No, the situation I proposed is an NPC not hiding (since the GD aren't hiding) but approaching the party in the open, appearing to be a normal nonviolent humanoid before attacking from close range.



I am not sure which part you think is sarcastic.
I am not sure what you think the argument is.

I thought you were saying that:

because your PC knows that boulders could be animated and come to life, that she would be paranoid about them to such a degree that
that she would be wary of every rock she saw on a hike. Same with water elementals hiding in a puddle or fire elementals hiding in a bonfire. Or earth elementals springing up from underneath your feet.
or that,

a wizard catapulting a visible boulder at the PC while hiding in a cave is more surprising that that same boulder animating and attacking the PC.


You're confusing multiple things.

First, water elementals etc hiding in a puddle etc - they are hiding. Stealth vs PP. For certain situations (eg earth glide) there's the advantage that the PCs likely have no sense by which to perceive the earth gliding elemental and so the earth elemental automatically wins. But the GD or other indistinguishable monsters are not hiding. They are clearly visible.

The other issue is "wariness" "paranoia" and other emotions you keep adding in to a simple issue of knowledge. I am not wary, worried, or paranoid that the coworker sitting behind me right now is going to hit me. But I know he has fists, he is clearly visible (and audible), and not hiding. So in DnD terms, if he attacked me, I would not be surprised.

Similarly, I was recently within 5ft of two deer. I was totally calm and not at all worried that they would attack me. But I know deer can kick or charge. If they had attacked me, in dnd terms I would not have been surprised. However, once they were about 15ft away they properly hid behind heavily obscuring foliage and if they had charged from there, in dnd terms I would have been surprised.

The surprise condition is completely orthogonal to emotional concerns. It's just about noticing. In my game, a PC with passive nature 16 notices a medium Boulder, and then when that clearly visible non hidden Boulder starts moving right in front of their eyes, they do not have a condition inflicted on them.

[NaughtyTiger]

Would it? Advantage and 'expertise' can come from Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy; the Ranger probably has comparable or better Wisdom and proficiency in Perception. The mechanical weakness of ranger features is well documented but this at least orients the task towards them at least a bit
.

yeah, i think the average/typical rogue comes out ahead mechanically, at level 6.

every rogue takes perception expertise, most that I played with take observant.
so a passive of 10+(5obs)+2x(3percept)+2wis

the ranger focused in elementals, may encounter GD in favored terrain.
most rangers that I play with take sharpshooter,
so a passive of 10+(5elemental) + 2x(3 percept if in favored terrain) + 3 wis

so elemental ranger comes out +1 if hunting GD in her favored terrain
otherwise, the generic rogue comes out ahead. (i made assumptions based on my tables, YMMV)

[Naanomi]

False Appearance IS a massive stealth bonus. As long as they don't do anything to reveal their presence, the DC to distinguish a creature with False Appearance from the real object is "you don't roll for impossible tasks".

I honestly can't see the issue.

Is the argument that there should be no impossible tasks for PCs?
Eh... not that there should be no impossible tasks for PCs... but that 'noticing things are off about X situation' is something a character can invest in... heavily if they so choose to do so... in both class features (some of which are incredibly narrow) and through other investments (feats, magic items, etc)... that it feels off that an ability like this could just be infallible; even against very high level PCs. It means if I want to track down hiding elementals, I'm better off abandoning ranger for a casting class who has better magical assistance to overcome a challenge that is trivial for magic to defeat but no investment in mundane skills will overcome it; or just learning to wear better armor to weather the first series of attacks. If it were a +15/+20... even +25 stealth bonus... it would be out of the range of most PCs most of the time, but it would at least be conceivably possible for a highly specialized character at peak performance to at least attempt, and that feels better to me than just a 'skill-focused characters, just stop trying to do things' approach


yeah, i think the average/typical rogue comes out ahead mechanically, at level 6.

every rogue takes perception expertise, most that I played with take observant.
so a passive of 10+(5obs)+2x(3percept)+2wis

the ranger focused in elementals, may encounter GD in favored terrain.
most rangers that I play with take sharpshooter,
so a passive of 10+(5elemental) + 2x(3 percept if in favored terrain) + 3 wis

so elemental ranger comes out +1 if hunting GD in her favored terrain
otherwise, the generic rogue comes out ahead. (i made assumptions based on my tables, YMMV)
Eh... when you start factoring in what feats people are choosing to take, the comparison between class levels becomes harder to assess. 'Usually take' varies a lot from table to table

[Unoriginal]

Eh... not that there should be no impossible tasks for PCs... but that 'noticing things are off about X situation' is something a character can invest in... heavily if they so choose to do so... in both class features (some of which are incredibly narrow) and through other investments (feats, magic items, etc)... that it feels off that an ability like this could just be infallible; even against very high level PCs. It means if I want to track down hiding elementals, I'm better off abandoning ranger for a casting class who has better magical assistance to overcome a challenge that is trivial for magic to defeat but no investment in mundane skills will overcome it; or just learning to wear better armor to weather the first series of attacks. If it were a +15/+20... even +25 stealth bonus... it would be out of the range of most PCs most of the time, but it would at least be conceivably possible for a highly specialized character at peak performance to at least attempt, and that feels better to me than just a 'skill-focused characters, just stop trying to do things' approach

Well, let's imagine a different example:

The Alert feat makes it so a character can't be surprised. Do you think it should be changed into a +25 Perception bonus against ambushes?

[Naanomi]

Well, let's imagine a different example:

The Alert feat makes it so a character can't be surprised. Do you think it should be changed into a +25 Perception bonus against ambushes?
I would be totally fine with that, but there is probably an argument that the Surprise mechanic is more specific than 'noticing things exist'; Alert doesn't say 'character is immune to Stealth'. I honestly don't care so much about the combat implications and the surprise mechanic per se as much as I am about the inability to even locate them without GM assistance or magic

I also feel like there is a line to be drawn between what is normally a PC ability and what is a CR6 creature ability... I am more comfortable with PCs being able to do cool heroic things than the monster-of-the-week being able to ignore a character's investments. I recognize this is a pretty 'game-y' perspective

[NaughtyTiger]

No, the situation I proposed is an NPC not hiding (since the GD aren't hiding) but approaching the party in the open, appearing to be a normal nonviolent humanoid before attacking from close range.

ah, okay, thanks for clarifying...
if it is a lone NPC, then no, the party would not be surprised.
if it is an NPC mixed in amongst a crowd at a dinner party, then i might rule the party is surprised.



You're confusing multiple things.
as are you. real life is not DnD...
if your real life coworker attacks you, then DnD conditions don't apply.
if your PC is attacked by a bar patron, then DnD conditions apply.


The surprise condition is completely orthogonal to emotional concerns. It's just about noticing. In my game, a PC with passive nature 16 notices a medium Boulder, and then when that clearly visible non hidden Boulder starts moving right in front of their eyes, they do not have a condition inflicted on them.

again, this is where we disagree.

in your game, a boulder/chair/armor/icicle is a dangerous thing because it might come to life.
in my games, a boulder/chair/armor/icicle is just a thing until proven otherwise.

you see a 5lb rock, you are wary of it.
the rock flies at you suddenly.
does it matter if the rock moved of its own accord, or if a hidden wizard catapulted it at you?

[Naanomi]

again, this is where we disagree.

in your game, a boulder/chair/armor/icicle is a dangerous thing because it might come to life.
in my games, a boulder/chair/armor/icicle is just a thing until proven otherwise.
Probably depends at least a little on how many of those things have attacked you personally before, seasoned adventurers never trust a 'normal looking treasure chest' after all; not after the first time

[NaughtyTiger]

Probably depends at least a little on how many of those things have attacked you personally before,
minotaur isn't making this a consideration. he is explicitly basing it on knowledge that it could happen.

you are disagreeing with him, and that's okay.

[Naanomi]

minotaur isn't making this a consideration. he is explicitly basing it on knowledge that it could happen.

you are disagreeing with him, and that's okay.
Fair enough... though... I dunno, knowledge seems like a relevant metric. Reading the journal of Bob the Adventurer where he gets attacked repeatedly by common looking treasure chests probably is relevant. I've never been personally attacked by a hippopotamus, but I know enough about them to be cautious (well... terrified probably) if I ever encountered one in real life.

[MaxWilson]

Another long thread about surprise :-)

It's one of the poorest rules in 5e. The transition from non-combat into combat is very clunky.

I wish there was a better way to do it but I just haven't wrapped my head around it yet or seen a good solution.

I use an "everybody declares (in order of Intelligence, lowest first), then everybody acts, rolling initiative when the DM thinks action order is in doubt" system. You can flow smoothly into and out of combat, and "surprise" which is less than total surprise doesn't cost you a round, but does mean the other side gets to act before you even declare an action (there's an "implicit Delay action" if you were generally alert but not doing something specific against a specific known threat).

Here's what an ambush looks like: https://bluishcertainty.blogspot.com/2017/01/simultaneous-initiative-in-5e.html?m=1

The key problem with PHB "cyclic" initiative is the way it forces 50-80% of the players into inactivity when it's not "their turn," though there are other problems too like how it confuses people when they run scenarios involving surprise or hidden combatants. But the main problem is that cyclic initiative creates a notion of "turn" which is distinct from "round" and then forces players not to participate in other peoples' turns.

[NaughtyTiger]

I've never been personally attacked by a hippopotamus, but I know enough about them to be cautious (well... terrified probably) if I ever encountered one in real life.

Again, with real life.
My PC is innately afraid of large animals that outweigh me by 10x. Having never been personally attacked by one, he is apt to stay afraid.
My PC is innately afraid of small animals that have a reputation for being the extremely poisonous. Having never met one, he is apt to stay afraid.

My PC is not afraid of a rock. He heard stories of them attacking. But having climbed/broken/fallen on them for the better part of 124 years, and never being attacked by one in DnD life, his caution extends to checking for good handholds and maybe rockslides.

The point behind "Indistinguishable" is: It isn't the fear of the unknown that gets you, it is the comfort with the common.

[MinotaurWarrior]

ah, okay, thanks for clarifying...
if it is a lone NPC, then no, the party would not be surprised.
if it is an NPC mixed in amongst a crowd at a dinner party, then i might rule the party is surprised.

So the lone traveler, even though their hostile intent is indiscernible, doesn't get surprise - why? Presumably because they are not hidden, and it is known that humanoids can attack you.


as are you. real life is not DnD...
if your real life coworker attacks you, then DnD conditions don't apply.
if your PC is attacked by a bar patron, then DnD conditions apply.


Illustrative examples are not confusion. Someone else mentioned guns earlier. All of those examples are easily translate able into game terms, and demonstrate how noticing something and knowing it's potential danger isn't paranoia or even wariness. Neither of us have ever been in a dnd world, but we have noticed things calmly.



again, this is where we disagree.

in your game, a boulder/chair/armor/icicle is a dangerous thing because it might come to life.
in my games, a boulder/chair/armor/icicle is just a thing until proven otherwise.

you see a 5lb rock, you are wary of it.
the rock flies at you suddenly.
does it matter if the rock moved of its own accord, or if a hidden wizard catapulted it at you?

You continue adding unnecessary emotional language.

First off, a 5lb rock cannot move on its own in dnd. GD are specifically medium sized boulders.

But second, the wizard gets to inflict surprise if hidden because he is hidden at the start of combat. The means of his offense is totally irrelevant - what matters is his presence and the noticing thereof. The victim of his attack goes from a state of not noticing the Wizard threat to a state of noticing the Wizard threat. That's it.

In the case of the GD, the GD was not hidden at the start of combat. No RAW say it inflicts the surprised condition. Both of us, for fun, would use DM fiat to make it do so on a PC who didn't know about GD. I have a house rule (fully transparently a house rule) that a pc who invested a skill proficiency in nature to get a +6 would know about the CR 6 GD and, because of that knowledge, recognize GD as something that exists and not be surprised.

This is not because they are wary, paranoid, or even expect a GD (expectation is irrelevant - you can be surprised by a threat you are expecting if it's hidden), but because they know about them and noticed them. The exact same as any other npc they know about and notice but might assume is harmless (E.g. Deer, elk) or is indistinguishable from a non-threatening more common variant (e.g violent humanoids vs nonviolent humanoids).

[PhoenixPhyre]

One potential way of interpreting "Indistinguishable" is "the creature automatically succeeds on a Dexterity (Stealth) check to hide while remaining motionless and does not need cover to attempt this check while not in combat."

So yes, the GD could (narratively) have been interpreted as being Hidden, and thus surprise the party. And I'm fine with them having pre-animated the boulders. But it's something to talk to the party about, especially if they're showing signs of feeling like it's a DM vs Player situation or that they were gotcha'd. Because that isn't good for the game at all, even if the events leading up to it were strictly by the book.

And for those claiming that paranoia is enough to nullify ambushes...that's getting one of the big benefits of Alert for no cost. Not even having to act like a paranoiac on the verge of a breakdown all the time. Paranoia is a mental illness. And even paranoiacs are surprised a lot. You can't remain at high alert for very long--minutes at most (at least for real people). And jumping at shadows is a great way to cause you and your team to be a) unwelcome in most civilized areas and b) at substantial disadvantage. Remember the story of the Boy Who Cried Wolf.

[NaughtyTiger]

snip

welcome back.

[MaxWilson]

And for those claiming that paranoia is enough to nullify ambushes...that's getting one of the big benefits of Alert for no cost.

You don't think Madness is a cost?

[NaughtyTiger]

So the lone traveler, even though their hostile intent is indiscernible, doesn't get surprise - why? Presumably because they are not hidden, and it is known that humanoids can attack you.

you didn't push back against a dude at a party, despite party goers are not hidden and humanoids can attack you.
but he gets surprise because: it isnt expected, and even if paranoid, you don't know which party goer is going to attack you.



Illustrative examples are not confusion. Someone else mentioned guns earlier. All of those examples are easily translate able into game terms, and demonstrate how noticing something and knowing it's potential danger isn't paranoia or even wariness. Neither of us have ever been in a dnd world, but we have noticed things calmly.
In real life, you know people can attack other people. Yet, you would definitely be surprised if your coworker punched you unannounced.
That is assault, but that has nothing to do with the game. This is why comparing real-life to DnD doesn't work.

edit: in game, if your NPC ally through 8 sessions, walked up and stabbed your party wizard out of the blue at a bar or dinner party, i would prolly rule surprise on that, too.


snip
you really haven't added anything new, neither have i.

a rock is a rock. sane adventurers should not be afraid of rocks because they read it in a book once.

[Naanomi]

In real life, you know people can attack other people. Yet, you would definitely be surprised if your coworker punched you unannounced.
That is assault, but that has nothing to do with the game. This is why comparing real-life to DnD doesn't work.
Entirely dependent on your work environment, I get attacked at work every day and have to be very cautious and aware of my surroundings and the people in it.

[deljzc]

I use an "everybody declares (in order of Intelligence, lowest first), then everybody acts, rolling initiative when the DM thinks action order is in doubt" system. You can flow smoothly into and out of combat, and "surprise" which is less than total surprise doesn't cost you a round, but does mean the other side gets to act before you even declare an action (there's an "implicit Delay action" if you were generally alert but not doing something specific against a specific known threat).

Here's what an ambush looks like: https://bluishcertainty.blogspot.com/2017/01/simultaneous-initiative-in-5e.html?m=1

The key problem with PHB "cyclic" initiative is the way it forces 50-80% of the players into inactivity when it's not "their turn," though there are other problems too like how it confuses people when they run scenarios involving surprise or hidden combatants. But the main problem is that cyclic initiative creates a notion of "turn" which is distinct from "round" and then forces players not to participate in other peoples' turns.

Man, I really like that example in that link. I wish I could so smoothly handle combat like that however. And since I DM my son and his friends, it's not the most logical (or well explained) action choices.

I want to try variant initiative and there was one I liked (still turn-based) using a "choice" idea at the start of rounds and then having players roll initiative dice based on the choices they MIGHT want to do that turn. Each round becomes a different order of players that way and it's more cooperative and logical. AND it's not all based on Dexterity which is way too powerful in initiative order right now. The ability to go first in combat in current 5e rules is just so underrated (or overrated because of how much players love DEX now).

I will have to keep that and study it. Think how to create logical rules on that, but that is the way I want surprise to "feel" and how to roll play it.

[NaughtyTiger]

Entirely dependent on your work environment, I get attacked at work every day and have to be very cautious and aware of my surroundings and the people in it.

if you need to take minotaur's scenario out of context to make a point, ...

[NaughtyTiger]

Man, I really like that example in that link. I wish I could so smoothly handle combat like that however. And since I DM my son and his friends, it's not the most logical (or well explained) action choices.

I want to try variant initiative and there was one I liked (still turn-based) using a "choice" idea at the start of rounds and then having players roll initiative dice based on the choices they MIGHT want to do that turn. Each round becomes a different order of players that way and it's more cooperative and logical. AND it's not all based on Dexterity which is way too powerful in initiative order right now. The ability to go first in combat in current 5e rules is just so underrated (or overrated because of how much players love DEX now).

I will have to keep that and study it. Think how to create logical rules on that, but that is the way I want surprise to "feel" and how to roll play it.

the narrative DM style always looks so nice in those contrived examples...

I do use the variant init from DMG, where choose your actions at the start of the round. like i might cast a 5th level spell, so i take a -5 and my position is set for the round... but I can always decide to cast a level 1 instead.

but i can't say, i will hit with my dagger for a +1 init (light weapon) and swing a maul instead.

it is a little slower at the start of the round, but the round goes faster cuz folks have already decided a course of action.

[PhoenixPhyre]

You don't think Madness is a cost?

If people are willing to actually play into it and have it have effects at the table (including really bad ones like potentially not being welcome in civilized areas because you keep shooting up the bar because "Mimics are everywhere"), then it's a cost. But that's not what most people were saying. They just said that "adventurers know that there might be threats, so they can't be surprised." Which is...just no.

It's the same sort of "convenient flaw" that gets min-maxed with mechanical flaw systems that let you get benefits. "I want to be blind (and get all the benefits of that) but also have some sort of super-sense that lets me act like I can see."

Plus, there are lots of concepts that don't work with "I'm a paranoiac who is always jumping at shadows."


welcome back.

Thanks. We'll see how long it lasts.

[Naanomi]

if you need to take minotaur's scenario out of context to make a point, ...
I didn't read their scenario actually, I'm just stating a fact... I do get attacked at work every day, it is part of the population I work with. I still get caught off guard on occasion, but I'm never surprised when it happens, I can't think of a situation in the last several years when I was truly in a situation I didn't expect or didn't know at least vaguely how to respond to (even if my responses are not always perfect). When real risk of injury is on the line (as it is for me, as it is for adventurers fighting monsters) you get pretty good situational awareness, and have good defensive instincts to default to when things go awry anyways (as they do)

[Chaosmancer]

By MinotaurWarrior's logic, statement (A) is still not true. Let's say there's no such thing as surprise. Indistinguishable still gives you license to lie to the players about what they are seeing! In a hall full of statues, when attacked by Star Spawns, Indistinguishable is what prevents the party wizard from simply walking away from the Gargoyles because casting his Hypnotic Pattern on the Star Spawns--because you told him they were just "statues", and because the hypothetical Gargoyles are experts at heeding the advice, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is in the process of making a mistake," so they didn't give themselves away by moving on Round 1.

Fair enough, but he was specifically talking about surprise. And I imagine with how upset people are with these monsters giving no clue to their identity in isolation, doing the same thing in the middle of a battle would also be frowned upon for some reason.



Not actively hunting but...

Let’s put it this way. As a DND player, a casual thing that I have done for 30+ years... I am cautious on some level that any classic treasure chest may be a mimic, Will I guess right every time I see one? No... but me personally (not my character) will never be ‘surprised me when a classic treasure chest attacks me.

A ranger who wanders the mountains and has enough knowledge about both the terrain and elementals to have an *entire level* where those are the only class features he got? Every boulder he passes... even if he doesn’t expect it... on some level I bet in his kind there is a ‘is it a hidden elemental? Is that rock the right size for that?’... not enough to find every one he walks past, but enough that he will ever be ‘shocked’ when one leaps up to attack him

I guess this comes down to how you define surprise.

If the players can't be surprised because "on some level" they are expecting trouble... then they can never be surprised outside of a town. Because literally anything can be a threat. The rocks, the trees, the water, the fog, even nothing at all (because there are quite a few invisible enemies)

I don't define surprise as "I had no idea such a thing was possible" instead I define it as "Violence is upon you with no warning"

If you are walking down the path of The Goblin Forest, and you are specfically on the look-out for goblins, but they beat your perception with their stealth, then they get a surprise round. Not because you had no idea goblins could be attacking, but because you had no idea goblins would attack right this instant.





You're not looking for clues to discern inanimate boulders from animate ones because there are none.

Again, you're wrong here. You cannot derive any benefit from examining indistinguishable monsters. You shouldn't give the PCs any benefit if they are actively hunting them.


It doesn't negate their ability. The GD still get to animate the boulders for free, choose their time to strike, etc.

I am not wrong here, I was responding to Naaomi who wants to insist that you can identify a Ghaleb Dhur from a normal Boulder, if you are enough of an expert.

I disagree with her, but I proposed there is a difference between actively searching for them, and just passing through. But, if you begin giving out clues to indicate that there is something special about that boulder, or that suit of armor, you have removed the Indistinguishable trait, and simply given them a very high stealth check.





Your example omits the specific RAW important element - was the gunman hidden?

A bank security guard knows armed robbers exist, and are less than one in a million people who enter the bank. But when a clearly visible person draws their weapon, revealing that they weren't an ordinary nonviolent customer, but rather the incredibly rare dangerous sort of humanoid, the guard isn't surprised.

I didn't omit it. By "suddenly erupts" I meant with no warning. I did not see a gunman, or a gun drawn.

But, going to your bank guard example, there are a lot of differences here.

1) Their specific job is to stand there waiting for trouble to occur. This gives them a very different state of mind. Am I, the normal customer surprised? I know bank robberies happen, but just because I know it can happen, that doesn't mean I was expecting it.

2) Are they still unsurprised if the person drawing the gun is a bank teller, or another security guard? Perhaps if the person drawing the gun was a kindly 70 yr old woman? Part of a security Guard's job is to identify people who might be risks, and if they id the person first, they are less likely to be surprised, because they were already suspicious, but if they missed the person or it comes from an unexpected angle, then they are still going to be surprised.


And to make this more accurate to the situation in DnD, this would be the ficus drawing a gun and robbing the bank. And the Guard is definitely not expecting that.




No, it's DM fiat who knows mimics, animate objects, etc exist. My personal rule of thumb is Passive (knowledge skill) vs 10+CR, so only extremely smart (Int 14, 2 standard deviations from the mean) or specifically studied people (proficient in the relevant skill) know about even CR2 monsters. If you want any creature to be more obscure, that's up to you - there are no binding rules on knowledge of monsters. If, in your games, everyone knows about mimics, that's up to you.

Even if we go by your homebrew rule (because there are no rules for what people know) It only takes one person with an Intelligence 14 or the Arcana skill to know about mimics. And then they tell the rest of the party, and now the entire party knows about mimics.

That is an incredibly low bar.

Also, your rule has a lot of very weird corner cases, so I'm glad it is a rule of thumb. Since it is easier to know demons and devils exist (CR 1/4 means if you round, everyone knows about them) than angels (CR 10 being the lowest means you need to have a 5th level bard with expertise in Religion and a 20 intellect to know anything about them)




No, because the elves or Goblins are actually hidden. They were sufficiently obscured and then rolled higher than the party's PP on a dexterity (Stealth) check. Even if the party knew specifically "ten Goblins are going to attack us tonight" or if those Goblins knew "five adventurers are going to attack us tonight", you inflict the surprise condition by being hidden (not clearly seen + success on a Stealth check).

To be clear, RAW succeeding on the Stealth check is the only way to inflict surprise. I think the vast majority of DMs would also allow a few other variants (e.g. this GD ambush, PC disguises, etc) but RAW it's strictly Stealth vs PP.

Mimics in particular have +5 to Stealth, presumably to facilitate this. But what indistinguishable gives monsters RAW is a benefit while not hidden that allows them to, for example, animate those boulders and choose their time to strike (when pcs are in perfect charging distance).


Okay, let me ask you this.

What is the difference between a mimic being indistinguishable in the center of the room and the goblin who is hidden with a check of 26 in the rafters?

Why is the mimic not considered hidden. They don't know it is there. They think it is a normal treasure chest.

Similarly, if I changed one of the party members with a doppelganger, and they drew a knife to stab the party, would that not be surprise, because they didn't expect their ally to attack them?


To pre-emptively answer the "NPC approaches the party" it would depend. If they stop 30 ft away and pull out a crossbow? No, no surprise.

If they rush up, sobbing and begging for help, and try to secretly pull a poisoned dagger, I'd roll deception and either have the party roll insight or take their passives. Surprise if they fail to realize something is wrong. Those situations are much more dynamic.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It seems Minotaur that your biggest issue is Hidden. But, to me, the "Hidden" condition simple translates into "The party is unaware that the creature is there"

A mimic disguised as a desk might be visible, but the players have no idea the mimic is there. They see a desk. To me, this is effectively identical to hidden for the mechanical purposes of surprise.


To actually pull up a comparable rule, there is a rule in Xanathar's I believe it is where if a PC targets a creature like a vampire o succubus with a spell like Charm Person, to the PCs knowledge, the target simply passed their save. They do not get to know that the target was an invalid selection.

I see this in a similiar manner. To the PCs the Indistinguishable creature counts as being Hidden.




Naaomi seems more concerned with this as it pertains to skilled martials vs casters. Which is a fair concern, but really not one I think I have a good solution to.

By RAW, no matter how perceptive you are, you can't tell the creature apart. It is that good at what it does. Similarly, no matter how deceptive you are, you can't lie to a Solar or a Drow Inquisitor. And no matter how stealthy you are, you cannot surprise a creature with the Alert feat.

I get the desire to change that, to allow skilled martial characters to pull this off, but that simply is not how the ability functions per RAW. A Suit of Animated Armor cannot be distinguished from a suit of regular armor. Perhaps there is arcane script on the inside of the breastplate, but you have to take it apart to see that, and you won't get that chance.

[Chaosmancer]

I didn't read their scenario actually, I'm just stating a fact... I do get attacked at work every day, it is part of the population I work with. I still get caught off guard on occasion, but I'm never surprised when it happens, I can't think of a situation in the last several years when I was truly in a situation I didn't expect or didn't know at least vaguely how to respond to (even if my responses are not always perfect). When real risk of injury is on the line (as it is for me, as it is for adventurers fighting monsters) you get pretty good situational awareness, and have good defensive instincts to default to when things go awry anyways (as they do)

Right, but surprise isn't "I have no idea how to respond to this situation" it is getting caught off-guard and slowing your response time.

Which you admit happens to you.

The only difference is the real-world moves faster and more simultaneously than the 6-second DnD turn. If surprise was "you cannot act for the first 1 to 2 seconds of the scene" then it would be more accurate to exactly what happened to you getting caught off guard.

[Naanomi]

Right, but surprise isn't "I have no idea how to respond to this situation" it is getting caught off-guard and slowing your response time.

Which you admit happens to you.

The only difference is the real-world moves faster and more simultaneously than the 6-second DnD turn. If surprise was "you cannot act for the first 1 to 2 seconds of the scene" then it would be more accurate to exactly what happened to you getting caught off guard.
I feel it is more like... in game terms... 'sometimes I lose initiative and get hit before I can grapple or take the dodge action'; but yes I admit the distinction is hazy at the very least

And frankly, as I stated before, the surprise attack part of this ability isn't what really bothers me about it

[MinotaurWarrior]

you didn't push back against a dude at a party, despite party goers are not hidden and humanoids can attack you.
but he gets surprise because: it isnt expected, and even if paranoid, you don't know which party goer is going to attack you.

Single.

Clearly visible.

Traveler.

Indistinguishable from a nonviolent humanoid.

That is the question.


In real life, you know people can attack other people. Yet, you would definitely be surprised if your coworker punched you unannounced.
That is assault, but that has nothing to do with the game. This is why comparing real-life to DnD doesn't work.

1st off, no I wouldn't. Nor would you. People who are attacked by clearly visible threats don't stand there dumbfounded for 6 seconds.

Second, that's not the point. The point with this, and the deer example, is that you are inserting these emotional words entirely unnecessarily. You have never experienced emotions from inside the world of DnD. But you have been a person who acknowledged potentially dangerous entitities without feeling paranoia, worry, wariness, or any other emotion you keep inserting into this.

To use a totally in game scenario:

A pc sees a clearly visible NPC humanoid stranger.

A pc sees a deer.

Are they afraid, worried, wary, or paranoid that these things might attack them?

Are they surprised if they do?


edit: in game, if your NPC ally through 8 sessions, walked up and stabbed your party wizard out of the blue at a bar or dinner party, i would prolly rule surprise on that, too.


Thats a fine exercise of DM fiat.

Where these boulders friends with the PCs for 8 sessions?


you really haven't added anything new, neither have i.

a rock is a rock. sane adventurers should not be afraid of rocks because they read it in a book once.

You haven't directly addressed a single one of my points. Instead you just assert your correctness and argue with facetious strawmen.

[NaughtyTiger]

You haven't directly addressed a single one of my points. Instead you just assert your correctness and argue with facetious strawmen.

Is this your point of view?

Your PC cannot be surprised by an animated boulder because your PC has read about or encountered them before.
I strongly disagree with this stance.

or this?

indistinguishable monsters are not hiding. They are clearly visible.
I strongly disagree with this stance.

I have tried to address all of your points.
I have done so without sarcasm (facetious) or intentionally misrepresenting your point of view (strawman).

You don't like my responses.



To use a totally in game scenario:
A pc sees a clearly visible NPC humanoid stranger.
A pc sees a deer.
Are they afraid, worried, wary, or paranoid that these things might attack them?
Are they surprised if they do?

Yes, PCs are likely afraid/worried/wary/paranoid that an NPC humanoid stranger might attack them. No they would not be surprised.
Yes, PCs are likely afraid/worried/wary/paranoid that a deer might attack them. No they would not be surprised.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Naanomi, I owe you an apology. I said you were taking Minotaur's scenario out of context.
But he clarified that he would not be surprised if his coworkers attacked him, because his coworkers are "clearly visible threats".
If my coworkers attacked me, i would definitely be surprised. I was assuming my experience mapped to his based on his description of the scenario.
Sorry about that.

[Chaosmancer]

1st off, no I wouldn't. Nor would you. People who are attacked by clearly visible threats don't stand there dumbfounded for 6 seconds.

Right, you are taking the element of the game most abstracted for the sake of ease of play (the combat round) and taking it literally.

Yes, people don't stand there dumbfounded for 6 seconds after being attacked. Period. Not even if they are caught completely off-guard. Unless they go into immediate shock or are crippled by the first blow, they start fighting back or fleeing within the span of a second or two.

But, DnD combat time is abstracted, made six-seconds long, and made to go in turn order instead of simultaneously. A fencing match in DnD looks nothing like a real Fencing match.


Presenting a case which ignores this fact, is not a good case for an argument.

[Cheesegear]

False Appearance IS a massive stealth bonus. As long as they don't do anything to reveal their presence, the DC to distinguish a creature with False Appearance from the real object is "you don't roll for impossible tasks".

This is how I've played it, and have always played it. You can sense False Appearance creatures...Just not using Perception alone. More or less, False Appearance creatures should always have Surprise, unless or until their position is explicitly revealed. It's just that my players routinely forget that because Perception works all the other times, and it's not like I spam the same creatures at my party constantly.

The problem, as I've mentioned, is that Galeb Duhrs appear to be able to take an Action - a particularly good Action, too - without losing False Appearance, and thus, maintaining Surprise. My players cried about this, and only this. I feel comfortable saying that I played by RAW, and didn't cheat (even though it can be argued that the DM can't cheat, because by virtue of being the DM, anything they do, can't be cheating).

Was it unfair? Maybe. But lots of monsters have unfair abilities and that's the point of them. Sometimes, encounters are hard - even Deadly.

My part in this thread is over.
Now the thread is talking about something else.

[MaxWilson]

Man, I really like that example in that link. I wish I could so smoothly handle combat like that however. And since I DM my son and his friends, it's not the most logical (or well explained) action choices.

It's really not all that complicated to run. You can come up with your own version of rules pretty easily. Fundamentally, you just make sure everybody declares an action (often talking with each other about how they can work together), then you tell them what the monsters are doing and what happens as a result, which may require dice rolling.

The only difference from out-of-combat is that out of combat, the DM typically resolves a given PC's action declaration immediately, and in this case you wait for all of the players to declare something. Other than that it's very similar to what you're already doing out of combat.


I want to try variant initiative and there was one I liked (still turn-based) using a "choice" idea at the start of rounds and then having players roll initiative dice based on the choices they MIGHT want to do that turn. Each round becomes a different order of players that way and it's more cooperative and logical. AND it's not all based on Dexterity which is way too powerful in initiative order right now. The ability to go first in combat in current 5e rules is just so underrated (or overrated because of how much players love DEX now).

I will have to keep that and study it. Think how to create logical rules on that, but that is the way I want surprise to "feel" and how to roll play it.

Sure. Don't feel like you need to have everything figured out before you try it out. You will learn a lot from trying, and talking with your players about what they liked or didn't like about it.

==================================


I didn't read their scenario actually, I'm just stating a fact... I do get attacked at work every day, it is part of the population I work with. I still get caught off guard on occasion, but I'm never surprised when it happens, I can't think of a situation in the last several years when I was truly in a situation I didn't expect or didn't know at least vaguely how to respond to (even if my responses are not always perfect). When real risk of injury is on the line (as it is for me, as it is for adventurers fighting monsters) you get pretty good situational awareness, and have good defensive instincts to default to when things go awry anyways (as they do)

Sounds like you work in either law enforcement/corrections or mental health.

[Naanomi]

Sounds like you work in either law enforcement/corrections or mental health.
Special Education, specializing in highschool/transition ages kids/young adults with severe/multiple disabilities (Mostly but not exclusively nonverbal and paraverbal people with ASD, my job title is technically ‘autism/behavior specialist') and aggressive, self-injurious, and/or sexually maladaptive behavior

[MaxWilson]

Special Education, specializing in highschool/transition ages kids/young adults with severe/multiple disabilities (Mostly but not exclusively nonverbal and paraverbal people with ASD, my job title is technically ‘autism/behavior specialist) and aggressive, self-injurious, and/or sexually maladaptive behavior

Yeah, sounds like you "lose initiative" sometimes but are never surprised (in the game jargon sense) by an attack at work.

[Cheesegear]

Yeah, sounds like you "lose initiative" sometimes but are never surprised (in the game jargon sense) by an attack at work.

Just because you decided to start the fight, doesn't mean you have Surprise.

This is generally what I try and get across to my players:

Two groups are standing across from each other. Situation is tense. But it has not escalated to a fight, yet.
A player will often say "I want to draw my weapon and attack! Right now!", and immediately start rolling to hit, as if the other group wasn't expecting it.
No, hang on. Roll initiative. Nobody's Surprised. One of the other group sees you going for your weapon, and goes for theirs, first.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Just because you decided to start the fight, doesn't mean you have Surprise.

This is generally what I try and get across to my players:

Two groups are standing across from each other. Situation is tense. But it has not escalated to a fight, yet.
A player will often say "I want to draw my weapon and attack! Right now!", and immediately start rolling to hit, as if the other group wasn't expecting it.
No, hang on. Roll initiative. Nobody's Surprised. One of the other group sees you going for your weapon, and goes for theirs, first.

I agree with this.
--------------
For me, this whole discussion comes down to the idea that surprise (mechanical) is negated by noticing a threat. To me, that's a concrete, active threat in your immediate environment. Not knowing that there are potential threats somewhere in the vicinity, not by being generally alert to danger, but by being able to say that thing, that person, that object is an active threat right now (or will be in the next six seconds).

If simple generalized alertness was enough, then the Alert feat is much weaker and lots of monsters no longer serve a real purpose. And features like the barbarian Feral Instinct lose a lot of their oomph (the second clause is meaningless if you can't be surprised while awake). And if the PCs have to act out their alertness (by poking every step with a 10-foot pole, whacking all the chests to make sure they're not mimics, etc), then the game bogs down tremendously. Instead, the game seems to expect that the PCs will get surprised, at least by the real sneaky things. As a tradeoff, these real sneaky things tend not to hit very hard (for their CR). A mimic that doesn't get surprise is pretty darn weak. A cloaker caught in the open is mincemeat (as a party I was in discovered).