Favourite Out of Combat Abilities?

[Kvess]

I am just starting an Out of the Abyss game as a Warlock with a Genie as my Otherworldy patron and I have never been more excited by a class feature than a 1-bedroom apartment and storage locker that I can carry around with me.

The feature is Bottled Respite. As an action I can enter an extradimensional space that spans a 20-foot radius cylinder which is 20-feet tall and store items left behind. This has minimal use in combat, except maybe to get me out of harm’s way, but I love that I always have a keep that I can return to once a day.

What is your favourite class feature that has nothing to do with combat?

[Mastikator]

I suspect this thread will be full of cantrips, rightfully so: they're really good.

My top 3 list?
1. Minor Illusion (insanely powerful out of combat if you use it creatively)
2. Prestidigitation (ditto but less)
3 Guidance (basically a +1d4 to whatever skill)

[sayaijin]

Reliable Talent
If you can slog through that many levels of rogue, you get an ability that makes all the spellcasters in the party stop preparing skill-related spells like Knock.

[MrStabby]

It might not be "nothing to do with combat" but it is more non combat focussed for me: divine intervention.

Whether it be raising the dead or raising a new catherdral to one's god this ability lets you have a huge and flexible influence on the world (DM permitting). It is not only impactful but lets you really express what your deity is about and your relationship with them.

And it is an almost literal "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. No locks, no antimagic field can stop a word of recall to whisk you out of even the deepest dungeon, if you have time to take enough shots at getting it off.

When things go South in combat it can be used as a last ditch attempt to turn things round as well.

I love this ability.

[Sparky McDibben]

Scrying. It's something all my Tier 2+ bad guys have access to, if for no other reason than the rampant paranoia from my players when I ask for Wisdom saves at random.

[neonchameleon]

The artificer's decanter of endless mayonnaise (or whatever it's called)

[sithlordnergal]

Panache, you have the ability to charm any creature that can understand you, you don't have a limit on how many times you can use it, and it doesn't require any form of Concentration. You can basically keep using it every 30 seconds to keep up an indefinite Charm effect on a creature. To make it even stronger, it uses a Charisma (Persuasion) versus Wisdom (Insight) check to use, meaning you can apply Expertise to it and in 1 level you get Reliable Talent. As long as your Rogue gets an 18 in Charisma, and why wouldn't they if they're a Swashbuckler, we're talking a +12 to Persuasion checks once you get the ability. And once you have Reliable Talent, your minimum for that check is going to be a 22.

[OldTrees1]

Reliable Talent
If you can slog through that many levels of rogue, you get an ability that makes all the spellcasters in the party stop preparing skill-related spells like Knock.

Yes. All the yes.

Here is my top 8 out of combat features.
#1 Reliable Talent
#2 Aura of Protection
#3 Mage Hand Legerdemain
#4 Cunning Action
#5 Guidance
#6 Find Steed / Find Greater Steed / Find Familiar
#7 Minor Illusion
#8 Mending

[ff7hero]

I have big love for a lot of things mentioned in this thread, but I'm shocked no one has mentioned Mold Earth yet.

[Lunali]

Reliable Talent
If you can slog through that many levels of rogue, you get an ability that makes all the spellcasters in the party stop preparing skill-related spells like Knock.

Having played with it as a rogue, it's now among my least favorite. It's immensely powerful, but it makes the game feel weird. Either something's so easy you succeed automatically, or it's hard enough that you fail more often than you succeed, with nothing in between.

[OldTrees1]

Having played with it as a rogue, it's now among my least favorite. It's immensely powerful, but it makes the game feel weird. Either something's so easy you succeed automatically, or it's hard enough that you fail more often than you succeed, with nothing in between.

That weird feeling is part of why I love Reliable Talent. Before 11th level there are times when my Rogue hoped their modifier was high enough that they could "Take 1" and still pass. Anything that fell in the category of "automatic success" was now a task the Rogue could count on themselves being able to do every time. Once I got to 11th level the "Take 1" upgraded to "Take 10".

Basically the Rogue becomes reliable instead of luck based. Any check they were likely to pass, they now will automatically pass.

Although it helps that my intiution understands Reliable Talent has no effect on checks that require a roll of 11+. That helps the checks that are likely to fail to feel normal when they are likely to fail.

[Lvl45DM!]

I am just starting an Out of the Abyss game as a Warlock with a Genie as my Otherworldy patron and I have never been more excited by a class feature than a 1-bedroom apartment and storage locker that I can carry around with me.

The feature is Bottled Respite. As an action I can enter an extradimensional space that spans a 20-foot radius cylinder which is 20-feet tall and store items left behind. This has minimal use in combat, except maybe to get me out of harm’s way, but I love that I always have a keep that I can return to once a day.

What is your favourite class feature that has nothing to do with combat?

Whisper Bard's Words of Terror ability. For the low cost of 1 minute of chatting and a failed Wisdom save you can make that annoying merchant leave you alone, get the evil vizier off your back, or save the damsel in distress before shes ever in distress.

Or, in a pinch, use it to keep your terrified-of-intimacy-and-social-interaction bard safe from overly chummy party members.
"Leave me alone or I'll talk at you for a bit" was a common threat from my creepy halfling.

[Yakmala]

Copying spells to a spell book. It’s my main reason for playing a Wizard. To any other class, finding a spell book as part of an adventure’s treasure is anywhere from useless to an extra gold boost when you sell it. To a Wizard though, it can mean a huge boost to your spell repertoire, especially when the spell book contains some of the more obscure or situational utility spells that most players skip when leveling up because there are more important spells to learn.

[Unoriginal]

I love Background abilities.

[JellyPooga]

Reliable Talent
If you can slog through that many levels of rogue, you get an ability that makes all the spellcasters in the party stop preparing skill-related spells like Knock.

I'm not sure whether to feel offended at the "slog through" element of this post about my favourite class :smallbiggrin:, but either way I...kinda disagree. Reliable Talent is A1 material in combat; ensuring you don't botch that attempt to pick a lock in a hurry, make that acrobatic swing off a chandelier or to raise the floor of your grapple game. Outside of combat, on the other hand, Rogues are generally proficient enough in the skills they're using that many GMs, in my experience, handwave many, if not most checks that RT would help with. And they should. Simply put, if you're getting a ton of out-of-combat use from Reliable Talent, then someone is probably doing something wrong.

[sayaijin]

I'm not sure whether to feel offended at the "slog through" element of this post about my favourite class :smallbiggrin:, but either way I...kinda disagree. Reliable Talent is A1 material in combat; ensuring you don't botch that attempt to pick a lock in a hurry, make that acrobatic swing off a chandelier or to raise the floor of your grapple game. Outside of combat, on the other hand, Rogues are generally proficient enough in the skills they're using that many GMs, in my experience, handwave many, if not most checks that RT would help with. And they should. Simply put, if you're getting a ton of out-of-combat use from Reliable Talent, then someone is probably doing something wrong.

It's also my favorite class, but largely because it is so middling. It's not a bad class, but if you want to optimize any one thing (besides skills), you're better off with another class.

I love reliable talent because the rogue should be the master of skills. Also, the name is exactly what you get: reliability. It also requires the DM to actually put some work into their world. Has there ever been such a high level thief before? The kind that can open virtually any mundane lock? If so, their cities will start having other defenses besides locks - dogs, magical charms, etc. If not, then their world is about to change because they can just hand the rogue player a list of every valuable in every city.

But as was said, it takes the luck out of rolling to an extent kinda like the divination wizard's potent - auto successes for you. I don't think spellcasters should be the only ones with abilities that reshape the world.

[Rukelnikov]

Awakened Mind in my GOOlock is the ability I have enjoyed the most in and out of combat, Voice of the Chain Master is close though

[Chronos]

Rogue's my favorite class, too (has been since I started, way back in 2nd edition days when it was called thief). And 11th level is when you finally get to multiclass from the Striker class to the Rogue class.

For so much of what a rogue does that makes them distinctively a rogue, you need to roll checks. And in so many situations, a single failed check spells disaster. In, say, 3rd edition, this meant you needed to have a really good modifier to your checks. In 5th edition, this isn't allowed, because it violates the sacred Bounded Accuracy, which we're assured is for some reason a good thing. Which kind of maybe works OK for combat, that's decided by the cumulative effect of many rolls, but doesn't work for skills, where a single failure can get you captured, killed, or worse. With the net result that a low-level rogue can't afford to play like a rogue, because if they try, sooner or later (i.e., before they can even reach 11), they'll fail and die.

At 11th level, though, they finally give up on that Bounded Accuracy nonsense, and allow the player to be good at what they're supposed to be good at.

[Cicciograna]

The immense utility a Familiar brings to the table. In the past, I had to willingly limit myself in the use of my Familiar because otherwise I would have overshadowed other party members.

[stoutstien]

Rogue's my favorite class, too (has been since I started, way back in 2nd edition days when it was called thief). And 11th level is when you finally get to multiclass from the Striker class to the Rogue class.

For so much of what a rogue does that makes them distinctively a rogue, you need to roll checks. And in so many situations, a single failed check spells disaster. In, say, 3rd edition, this meant you needed to have a really good modifier to your checks. In 5th edition, this isn't allowed, because it violates the sacred Bounded Accuracy, which we're assured is for some reason a good thing. Which kind of maybe works OK for combat, that's decided by the cumulative effect of many rolls, but doesn't work for skills, where a single failure can get you captured, killed, or worse. With the net result that a low-level rogue can't afford to play like a rogue, because if they try, sooner or later (i.e., before they can even reach 11), they'll fail and die.

At 11th level, though, they finally give up on that Bounded Accuracy nonsense, and allow the player to be good at what they're supposed to be good at.

More of a flaw of the nature of the swingy single die rather than bounded accuracy. Using multiple rolls per check with more reasonable values or switching the D20 for a softer curve addresses it nicely.

Personally I don't see a divide of combat/non-combat but My favorite shenanigans ability is the artificer's magic tinkering.

[sayaijin]

The immense utility a Familiar brings to the table. In the past, I had to willingly limit myself in the use of my Familiar because otherwise I would have overshadowed other party members.

Good call! Someone mentioned the Warlock invocation that allows you to scout much further, but even without that the familiar is like having an extra PC when it comes to the exploration pillar.

[Gignere]

Ritual casting everytime I’m out of combat I’m ritual casting something, when I’m playing a class with it.

[loki_ragnarock]

Awakened Mind in my GOOlock is the ability I have enjoyed the most in and out of combat, Voice of the Chain Master is close though

I came here to say that Awakened Mind - pre errata - was probably my favorite.

[JellyPooga]

I love reliable talent because the rogue should be the master of skills. Also, the name is exactly what you get: reliability. It also requires the DM to actually put some work into their world. Has there ever been such a high level thief before? The kind that can open virtually any mundane lock? If so, their cities will start having other defenses besides locks - dogs, magical charms, etc. If not, then their world is about to change because they can just hand the rogue player a list of every valuable in every city.

For so much of what a rogue does that makes them distinctively a rogue, you need to roll checks. And in so many situations, a single failed check spells disaster. [snip] With the net result that a low-level rogue can't afford to play like a rogue, because if they try, sooner or later (i.e., before they can even reach 11), they'll fail and die.

If, per the quoted, a GM isn't doing as sayaijin suggests or if they are doing as Chronos suggests...as I suggested, someone is doing something wrong.

The existence of Reliable Talent doesn't mean high-level Rogues don't exist, nor any of the myriad possible defences that can be employed against Rogues, high level or otherwise. A detailed world is the product of an attentive GM, not one who is panicking over the existence of a single Class Feature. Having to compensate for a class feature in the way you suggest is poor planning at best and bad GMing at worst.

It's right there in the DMG that many things outside of combat don't even require a check. Have eyes? So long as you have time and don't risk danger, it's assumed that even someone non-proficient in Perception will eventually find everything in a given area; from the socks behind the dresser to the trap on the secret door under the rug beneath the bed. It's not even a "take 20" situation from 3e; you just...find it. No check. The same goes for any other ability check; so long as there is no dramatic consequence to failure, it's generally assumed you succeed. NB - This can even include opposed checks and other activities that might otherwise appear to be "dangerous", such as picking pockets or burgling for a living. If the GM rules the activity to lack consequence to the point that the check is waived, then no check is required regardless of ability scores, proficiency or class features. Most conversations don't require Persuasion, most climbing doesn't require Athletics and so on and so forth. The "I can't act like a Rogue because I'll eventually roll low enough to get myself killed" attitude simply doesn't apply because you're not rolling enough dice for that to be an inevitability; there's a chance of it, for sure, but at the end of the day you're much more likely to get yourself killed by a stupid decision ("I'm a Rogue, so I try to sneak past the 100-eyed-sentry-of-sleepless-abandon") than fickle fortune ("Oh, I rolled a 1 on my Stealth check"), because usually the worst thing to happen as a result of out-of-combat checks is that you get to roll some more dice to see what happens next. The Player Characters have assumed competence outside of combat, so to assume the inverse and impose consequences on inconsequential activities is a failure to employ the rules as written, at best, or outright adversarial GMing at worst (and yes, adversarial GMing is absolutely a bad thing; one of the worst things a GM can employ).

[Bobthewizard]

I'm sure I'll think of more later, but here are a few.

Imp familiars, especially if you give them a fun personality
Mask of Many Faces or Changeling race with friends cantrip
Minor Illusion
Telepathy (GOO, Aberrant mind, Kalashtar, Ghostwise, Telpathic Feat)
Mage Hand Legerdemain or Telekinetic Feat
Flight
Invisibility
Suggestion
Detect Thoughts
Subtle metamagic
Scrying
Sending
Leomund's Tiny Hut
Speak with the Dead
Darkvision

[sayaijin]

Ideally, any world with verisimilitude will have cities that aren't well off and don't have many defenses against thievery by magical or mundane methods. There will also be large cities with items of extreme value that are guarded as such. These places will have more than just a single thieves tools check.

An amazing DM will employ both regardless of who is in the party, a good DM will start employing better defenses as their players level up, and a newer DM will only employ those defenses after they've been burned by the players abilities that they didn't see coming.

[Rukelnikov]

I came here to say that Awakened Mind - pre errata - was probably my favorite.

Do you mean the one way communication only? I still like it regardless, I used it half the time to make people believe they were going insane or that they were being contacted by higher powers :P It's an extremely fun ability to have.

[da newt]

Mask of Many Faces - so many shenanigans

Teleportation - Flight - Spider Climb - I'm a huge fan of other ways to move in 3D.

[MrCharlie]

For me it's tied between three spellcasting abilities: The fabricate spell, illusory reality/malleable illusion, and subtle spell.

Subtle spell is the simplest and most obvious one in terms of uses-it's great for any social caster and can be used to insane effect subverting power structures and otherwise influencing NPCs, but also have implications in regards to, for example, attacking a group of neutral NPCs with no indication you're responsible.

Fabricate and illusory reality/malleable illusion just let you make things. Making things can be surprisingly useful-it's why I like college of creation bard-but on the outside edge you may be able to do stuff like cast creation, make a cloak, then use malleable illusion to turn it into an adamantium box if anything threatens you. Or cast hallucinatory terrain and make a ditch real in front of a charging army. Fabricate is similarly useful, particularly if you can convince someone that "raw materials" can include salvaging an already extant item to make something out of it's parts, which the RAW (haha) don't really say anything about because "raw materials" is basically never defined. If you have a lot of tool proficiencies, you can rapidly conjure up any item.

[Yakmala]

One that you rarely see used in its out of combat capacity, but that will absolutely make you a hero to all the small towns you encounter, is Plant Growth. For an eight hour investment, you can make all the plants in a half mile radius (640 acres) yield twice the normal amount of food for an entire year. That's going to have a massive positive impact on the town's survival, much more than dealing with their bandit or goblin problems.

[lall]

What is your favourite class feature that has nothing to do with combat? It has something to do with combat, but Peerless Skill.

[Chad.e.clark]

Misty Visions is great. Illusion spam go!

[Chronos]

Quoth JellyPooga:

It's right there in the DMG that many things outside of combat don't even require a check. Have eyes? So long as you have time and don't risk danger, it's assumed that even someone non-proficient in Perception will eventually find everything in a given area; from the socks behind the dresser to the trap on the secret door under the rug beneath the bed. It's not even a "take 20" situation from 3e; you just...find it. No check. The same goes for any other ability check; so long as there is no dramatic consequence to failure, it's generally assumed you succeed. NB - This can even include opposed checks and other activities that might otherwise appear to be "dangerous", such as picking pockets or burgling for a living. If the GM rules the activity to lack consequence to the point that the check is waived, then no check is required regardless of ability scores, proficiency or class features. Most conversations don't require Persuasion, most climbing doesn't require Athletics and so on and so forth. The "I can't act like a Rogue because I'll eventually roll low enough to get myself killed" attitude simply doesn't apply because you're not rolling enough dice for that to be an inevitability; there's a chance of it, for sure, but at the end of the day you're much more likely to get yourself killed by a stupid decision ("I'm a Rogue, so I try to sneak past the 100-eyed-sentry-of-sleepless-abandon") than fickle fortune ("Oh, I rolled a 1 on my Stealth check"), because usually the worst thing to happen as a result of out-of-combat checks is that you get to roll some more dice to see what happens next. The Player Characters have assumed competence outside of combat, so to assume the inverse and impose consequences on inconsequential activities is a failure to employ the rules as written, at best, or outright adversarial GMing at worst (and yes, adversarial GMing is absolutely a bad thing; one of the worst things a GM can employ).
OK, so let's take a relatively simple and common rogue task: Scouting the enemy camp. To do that effectively, you need to be either disguised or hidden, and either one requires a skill check. There's a consequence for failure: You get caught. So you can't just abstract away that check. And if you do get caught, well, you can say that the consequence is more dice rolls, but with a lone rogue vs. the entire enemy camp, it's pretty much a given what the end result of those more dice rolls will be. Now, one way to deal with that is to just be competent at what you do, so you won't fail that Hide or Deception check. That's what you did in 3rd edition. But in 5th edition, nobody's allowed to be competent, so that's not an option. And as a result, scouting an enemy camp is something you just can't afford to risk. At least, not as a rogue: The wizard can still do it, because for them, the consequence of failure is just a 10 GP cost. And so, a part of the rogue's role is removed from the game.

[Rukelnikov]

OK, so let's take a relatively simple and common rogue task: Scouting the enemy camp. To do that effectively, you need to be either disguised or hidden, and either one requires a skill check. There's a consequence for failure: You get caught. So you can't just abstract away that check. And if you do get caught, well, you can say that the consequence is more dice rolls, but with a lone rogue vs. the entire enemy camp, it's pretty much a given what the end result of those more dice rolls will be. Now, one way to deal with that is to just be competent at what you do, so you won't fail that Hide or Deception check. That's what you did in 3rd edition. But in 5th edition, nobody's allowed to be competent, so that's not an option. And as a result, scouting an enemy camp is something you just can't afford to risk. At least, not as a rogue: The wizard can still do it, because for them, the consequence of failure is just a 10 GP cost. And so, a part of the rogue's role is removed from the game.

What do you mean by this? That there is a chance for failure?

[stoutstien]

What do you mean by this? That there is a chance for failure?
Probably that the basic math behind the ability DCs are set too high if you're trying to function with a single roll resolution system.

[JellyPooga]

OK, so let's take a relatively simple and common rogue task: Scouting the enemy camp. To do that effectively, you need to be either disguised or hidden, and either one requires a skill check. There's a consequence for failure: You get caught. So you can't just abstract away that check. And if you do get caught, well, you can say that the consequence is more dice rolls, but with a lone rogue vs. the entire enemy camp, it's pretty much a given what the end result of those more dice rolls will be. Now, one way to deal with that is to just be competent at what you do, so you won't fail that Hide or Deception check. That's what you did in 3rd edition. But in 5th edition, nobody's allowed to be competent, so that's not an option. And as a result, scouting an enemy camp is something you just can't afford to risk. At least, not as a rogue: The wizard can still do it, because for them, the consequence of failure is just a 10 GP cost. And so, a part of the rogue's role is removed from the game.

Ok, so there's a couple of issues here.

1) Failing a single Stealth check does not mean our scouting Rogue dies.
- For a start, a single guard noticing you means you now have choices to make (e.g. to run away or to try and silence the guard before he raises the alarm). If those choices are taken away from you, your GM is doing a bad job of handling a scouting encounter.
- If you, a Rogue, let yourself be mobbed by the entire camp, you are doing a pretty bad job of being a Rogue. From lvl.2, a Rogue running away is the fastest thing on two legs, if nothing else, let alone other contingencies you might have.
- Assuming our Rogue fights and loses...that still doesn't mean he's dead! Capture is a far more interesting and dramatic consequence of this kind of failuren opening up a slew of story hooks and encounters to follow. A GM that just kills you on the spot is a bad GM.

2) +7 Stealth (lvl.1 Rogue w.Expertise) vs. +3 Perception (Challenge 1 Guard Captain) sounds pretty competent to me. Add a little darkness to the mix and that Captain (let alone a bog standard Guard) has Disadvantage. Add something extra (camouflage, a friendly buff, equipment or circumstance) and you might even have Advantage too. Odds can easily be stacked in your favour to succeed and as previously stated, failing a single Stealth check should not be the end of the encounter. Your statement that 5e doesn't let anyone be competent, particularly in reference to Rogues, is facetious; Expertise plus Dis/Advantage means you absolutely have opportunity to be exceedingly competent. If you're just trying your luck without putting any effort into getting the job done reliably, then you probably deserve to fail. But hey, sometimes you win a coin flip, so you do you.

3) Scouting alone is a stupid idea.

[sayaijin]

3) Scouting alone is a stupid idea.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, although I can't say that an enemy will always choose capture over just immediately killing any strangers - kinda depends on circumstances, yeah?

What I do take issue with is this statement that scouting alone is stupid. Yes, it is ideal to keep the party all together, but spells like find familiar and arcane eye exist - why do spellcasters get to have all the fun? Why can't there be a class that is specifically chosen to be the lone scout?

To the original point of the thread though, there are plenty of circumstances outside of combat where having a reliable source of skills is powerful - situations where it's not combat, but it is time sensitive enough that you don't have the luxury of trial and error for a long time.

[da newt]

3) Scouting alone is a stupid idea.

I think "Scouting alone is RISKY." is a more accurate statement. Saying it's stupid is a bit too black and white for my taste. It's not just zero or one.

[RogueJK]

I'm a big fan of Party Face characters with access to Charm effects that don't make the target hostile afterwards, such as Swashbuckler Panache, Autumn Eladrin Fey Step, Archfey Warlock Fey Presence, etc.

Also, Telepathy/Message. Ranged silent communication is handy in so many different ways.

[Man_Over_Game]

On the whole "scouting" thing, do note that it's actually very safe if you have Darkvision when scouting in the dark, as you are very unlikely to be seen until someone is within vision range of you, and any attempts to spot you while Stealthed without light will be made with Disadvantage even within that radius.

As for my favorite noncombat powers, those level 2 Warlock Invocations are the bomb. I would mess so many things up with Mask of Many Faces.

[JellyPooga]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, although I can't say that an enemy will always choose capture over just immediately killing any strangers - kinda depends on circumstances, yeah?

It does depend, for sure, but at the end of the day we're not playing a realism simulator, it's a story-based game. Take Star Wars Ep.V for example. Luke goes investigating, fails his Perception check and BAM! Wampa fodder. Roll credits...OR he's knocked out cold, the flesh eating monster puts him in the fridge and he's put into an extreme survival situation, Ben turns up as a dreamquest-giver, Han gets to be a Big Damn Hero and the story continues.

Death is a valid consequence in many situations and should be an ever present threat to increase dramatic tension, but it's also...well, it's really kinda boring. There's so much more you can do with not-death, because unless the players are able to reverse the ultimate status condition, it ends the story for that character and that defeats the point of playing.


What I do take issue with is this statement that scouting alone is stupid. Yes, it is ideal to keep the party all together, but spells like find familiar and arcane eye exist - why do spellcasters get to have all the fun? Why can't there be a class that is specifically chosen to be the lone scout?

Magic doesn't have much bearing on whether doing something mundane is stupid or not. Climbing a sheer cliff in the middle of a raging storm is a stupid idea regardless of the fact that Spider Climb or Fly might exist. Similarly, going scouting solo if there is a legitimate option not to (to qualify my previous statement) is a stupid idea that has little to do with keeping the party together or spellcasters having all the fun and everything to do with scouting efficiently and safely.

Part of what makes playing a non-caster fun, at least for me, is achieving the "impossible" (or at leaat "challenging"!) that magic would have made trivial. So yeah, maybe a Wizard can cast Arcane Eye and scout out a whole dungeon in a fraction of the time it'd take me and my scouting buddy, but there are times that spell won't be useful, won't be available or plain won't work (or even backfire). Plus, it doesn't cost me a spell slot that could have been used on something the Rogue can't do, like blow up a room full of people (...unless he has some explosives, of course) or whatever.

[sayaijin]

It does depend, for sure, but at the end of the day we're not playing a realism simulator, it's a story-based game.

Differs from table to table. Sometimes people like playing a realism simulator. In a recent session my arcane trickster sent his familiar ahead to scout a cult headquarters cave, and the DM had one of their archers shoot it dead the moment they saw it because they were already on alert (thanks paladin in our party with heavy armor). If my rogue had walked in instead of using a familiar, should the DM not have had them attack because it was a PC?


Similarly, going scouting solo if there is a legitimate option not to (to qualify my previous statement) is a stupid idea that has little to do with keeping the party together or spellcasters having all the fun and everything to do with scouting efficiently and safely.


Thank you for qualifying. You are correct that there are often more efficient ways of doing things, but if a player wants a Lone Scout character who doesn't use magic, then I'll give them consequences for dumb moves, but it's a cool concept that has a basis in pop culture, and I will encourage them.

[JellyPooga]

Differs from table to table. Sometimes people like playing a realism simulator. In a recent session my arcane trickster sent his familiar ahead to scout a cult headquarters cave, and the DM had one of their archers shoot it dead the moment they saw it because they were already on alert (thanks paladin in our party with heavy armor). If my rogue had walked in instead of using a familiar, should the DM not have had them attack because it was a PC?

Two points to be made here. The first being that a Familiar is either an NPC or an extension of a PC; a familiar dies, then it's a plot point in a Players story, not the end of it. The second is yes, the Rogue in your scenario should be shot at! Being shot at =/= being dead for a PC. Setting aside the numbers (AC, HP, etc.) that make most characters hadder to kill than a skngle-digit-HP Familiar, PCs are remarkably hard to kill (Death Saves) and if solo are remarkably easy to capture once unconscious. Again, it comes down to the point that death isn't very interesting as a consequence unless it's dramatically appropriate to the story. "Gone Missing" or "Captured" or "interrogated" are all much more interesting.


Thank you for qualifying. You are correct that there are often more efficient ways of doing things, but if a player wants a Lone Scout character who doesn't use magic, then I'll give them consequences for failing, but it's a cool concept that has a basis in pop culture.

Heh, yeah, if Player wants to play the Overconfident Hero, that's up to them. The Brave Knight charging heroically into battle might be cool and heroic and about as pop culture as you get in a fantasy game, but that character is still stupid for doing stupid things if he gets in over head as a result! Solo scouting is no different; it's cool and edgy and lone wolfish and hella badass...right up until you get caught because you foolishly chose not to have backup.

[Rukelnikov]

Probably that the basic math behind the ability DCs are set too high if you're trying to function with a single roll resolution system.

Well, I assume it varies depending on tastes, for me passive perception is generally too low.

A lvl 1 Rogue could easily have +7 Stealth (+3 Dex, +4 Expertise). That means to be equally as competent at perceiving, one would need a passive perception of 18, so its a 50/50 chance (since both are equally as good). There are no published Tier 1 creatures with a passive perception that high.

By lvl 5 the Rogue likely has +10 Stealth (+4 Dex, +6 Expertise), so now enemies need a passive perception of 21 to be equally as competent as the rogue, and again, the are no Tier 2 creatures that good, the lowest CR ones are 13.

And the trend continues, the only two exceptions being Demogorgon (CR 26/PP 29) and Molydeus(CR 21/PP 31), every other published creature is less competent than a Rogue of its given tier.


What I do take issue with is this statement that scouting alone is stupid. Yes, it is ideal to keep the party all together, but spells like find familiar and arcane eye exist - why do spellcasters get to have all the fun? Why can't there be a class that is specifically chosen to be the lone scout?

Well, IMO there are a couple, all Druids can be superb solo scouts with no investment at all, wild shape alone can mean many enemies will ignore you even if they see you, and have many spells useful for the task, the only downside they have is no easy access to Nondetection. Rangers and Rogues can be superb scouts too, but maybe a bit more investment.

[Man_Over_Game]

Well, I assume it varies depending on tastes, for me passive perception is generally too low.

A lvl 1 Rogue could easily have +7 Stealth (+3 Dex, +4 Expertise). That means to be equally as competent at perceiving, one would need a passive perception of 18, so its a 50/50 chance (since both are equally as good). There are no published Tier 1 creatures with a passive perception that high.

By lvl 5 the Rogue likely has +10 Stealth (+4 Dex, +6 Expertise), so now enemies need a passive perception of 21 to be equally as competent as the rogue, and again, the are no Tier 2 creatures that good, the lowest CR ones are 13.

And the trend continues, the only two exceptions being Demogorgon (CR 26/PP 29) and Molydeus(CR 21/PP 31), every other published creature is less competent than a Rogue of its given tier.

However, it is worth stating that Stealth is generally something that needs to fail only once for it to fail. You might have a couple Stealth checks before the "attempt" is successful, and having only one success is meaningless.

For situations where the player needs to check (and succeed) more than once, those are better simulated with Disadvantage.

Now, I consider this a fault of the system, DMs, or just what players think makes a better game (when they sometimes don't), but that doesn't make the problem less of an issue.

What's funny is that this is a problem that's completely resolved with Reliable Talent, which is what started the whole conversation. Reliable Talent means that a DM won't really ever make you fail by asking for too many checks, like we sometimes do.

[Telok]

Ok, so there's a couple of issues here....

2) +7 Stealth (lvl.1 Rogue w.Expertise) vs. +3 Perception (Challenge 1 Guard Captain) sounds pretty competent to me.

Approx 66% win, 30% loss, 4% tie per roll required. By brute force calculation. The scout requires favorable conditions to stealth (darkness, obscurement, invisibility, etc.) and will not gain advantage from that, they require additional interference with the spotter beyond the base concealing conditions to gain advantage.

[Rukelnikov]

However, it is worth stating that Stealth is generally something that needs to fail only once for it to fail. You might have a couple Stealth checks before the "attempt" is successful, and having only one success is meaningless.

Is it like that though? I think it depends on the situation, a couple of guards may hear a noise nearby but do not know what caused it, now they have to go check. Kind of like the alerted state most mobs have in stealth games.


For situations where the player needs to check (and succeed) more than once, those are better simulated with Disadvantage.

True


Now, I consider this a fault of the system, DMs, or just what players think makes a better game (when they sometimes don't), but that doesn't make the problem less of an issue.

What's funny is that this is a problem that's completely resolved with Reliable Talent, which is what started the whole conversation. Reliable Talent means that a DM won't really ever make you fail by asking for too many checks, like we sometimes do.

Also true, but Reliable Talent is something that comes at level 11, so more often than not a given Rogue won't have that feature.

[JellyPooga]

Approx 66% win, 30% loss, 4% tie per roll required. By brute force calculation. The scout requires favorable conditions to stealth (darkness, obscurement, invisibility, etc.) and will not gain advantage from that, they require additional interference with the spotter beyond the base concealing conditions to gain advantage.

It's worth noting that even Dim Light imposes Disadvantage on Perception, by default. Our Guard Captain has a Passive Perception of 8 under such circumstances and that includes if they're using Darkvision. Our Rogue doesn't need Advantage to auto-pass that check.

[Dark.Revenant]

It's worth noting that even Dim Light imposes Disadvantage on Perception, by default. Our Guard Captain has a Passive Perception of 8 under such circumstances and that includes if they're using Darkvision. Our Rogue doesn't need Advantage to auto-pass that check.

It's also worth noting that the guard could simply be trying to listen for intruders (usually dangerous animals) rather than literally spotting them, as you'd typically be doing in the wilderness while camping at night. If that's the case, it would just be a straight roll of the Rogue's Stealth (no advantage, unless you're using a magic item that would grant it or make it unnecessary) vs. the guard's passive perception score.

Further, as soon as you fail the roll, the default assumption of the game is that initiative is rolled, with every conscious member of the camp rolling initiative (albeit Surprised, except for the guard who was listening for intruders). You might do something that ends combat (such as making a Persuasion, Deception, or Stealth check), but the PHB clearly implies that the usual consequence here is the beginning of an encounter, not an additional skill challenge.

[sayaijin]

Further, as soon as you fail the roll, the default assumption of the game is that initiative is rolled, with every conscious member of the camp rolling initiative (albeit Surprised, except for the guard who was listening for intruders). You might do something that ends combat (such as making a Persuasion, Deception, or Stealth check), but the PHB clearly implies that the usual consequence here is the beginning of an encounter, not an additional skill challenge.

All right, now I'm curious. I realize this very much relies on circumstances like location of the camp and how high of alert the enemies are at, but if you wanted to immediately sneak away from this theoretical combat that you've started with an enemy patrol who can't see you, and only heard you how long would that take?

Now obviously this isn't Elder Scrolls. We're not shooting them and waiting for them to say "Guess it was just the wind" before we shoot them again. I'm saying initiative is rolled because they heard you, you sneak out of range of their hearing and wait. How long until it's no longer combat?

[JellyPooga]

It's also worth noting that the guard could simply be trying to listen for intruders (usually dangerous animals) rather than literally spotting them, as you'd typically be doing in the wilderness while camping at night. If that's the case, it would just be a straight roll of the Rogue's Stealth (no advantage, unless you're using a magic item that would grant it or make it unnecessary) vs. the guard's passive perception score.

You don't shoot at a noise in the dark unless you're super-paranoid or already aware of a hidden intruder. If our guard is rolling solely on hearing, then that delays combat further, because he still has to A) identify the sound as an intruder and B) locate said intruder before even C) determining that he's going to actually shoot that intruder rather than, say, challenge their presence, perhaps asking for a password or explanation (circumstances differ, of course). All of those sound like things you do outside of combat to me.


Further, as soon as you fail the roll, the default assumption of the game is that initiative is rolled, with every conscious member of the camp rolling initiative (albeit Surprised, except for the guard who was listening for intruders). You might do something that ends combat (such as making a Persuasion, Deception, or Stealth check), but the PHB clearly implies that the usual consequence here is the beginning of an encounter, not an additional skill challenge.

Can you provide a source for your assertion that following a single failed Stealth roll, the default assumption is to roll Initiative? Yes being detected may initiate combat, particularly if the scenario is already inherently hostile for whatever reason but I suspect the default response to failing a Stealth check is actually the GM asking the Player "What do you do next?" after describing the initial response of the NPC. If the answer to that question is aggressive or likely to be received with hostility, then yes, Initiative could be rolled, but if it's anything from "I run away" to "I try to blag it", then Initiative absolutely should not be rolled for anyone (yet), let alone the entire camp (which is some hostile GMing right there...take a step back and look at how that particular assertion might play out at a table:

Player: "I sneak up on the guard" Rolls Stealth *fails*
GM: "The entire camp is now alert to your presence and rolled higher Initiative than you. You have one turn before they descend on your position. Sucks to be you, I guess."
Player: "Wait, what?")

[Rukelnikov]

Player: "I sneak up on the guard" Rolls Stealth *fails*
GM: "The entire camp is now alert to your presence and rolled higher Initiative than you. You have one turn before they descend on your position. Sucks to be you, I guess."
Player: "Wait, what?")

That escalated quickly lol

[KorvinStarmast]

Ritual casting everytime I’m out of combat I’m ritual casting something, when I’m playing a class with it. Alarm, and Skywrite (and of course Leomund's hut) are some good out of combat ritual spells.

I think "Scouting alone is RISKY." is a more accurate statement. Saying it's stupid is a bit too black and white for my taste. It's not just zero or one. My bard is our scout. (No rogue). She has message cantrip to whisper back info to the 'lock. She has advantage (shadow tattoo, Tasha's) and expertise (Lore Bard!) so she's quite sneaky ... when the party bothers to do that kind of thing.

As for my favorite noncombat powers, those level 2 Warlock Invocations are the bomb. I would mess so many things up with Mask of Many Faces. Yep, my celestial has that, it's handy.
Differs from table to table. Sometimes people like playing a realism simulator. In a recent session my arcane trickster sent his familiar ahead to scout a cult headquarters cave, and the DM had one of their archers shoot it dead the moment they saw it because they were already on alert (thanks paladin in our party with heavy armor). If my rogue had walked in instead of using a familiar, should the DM not have had them attack because it was a PC? Familiars are not infallible. Sometimes, they are a snack for a monster. :smallwink:

[Dark.Revenant]

You don't shoot at a noise in the dark unless you're super-paranoid or already aware of a hidden intruder. If our guard is rolling solely on hearing, then that delays combat further, because he still has to A) identify the sound as an intruder and B) locate said intruder before even C) determining that he's going to actually shoot that intruder rather than, say, challenge their presence, perhaps asking for a password or explanation (circumstances differ, of course). All of those sound like things you do outside of combat to me.



Can you provide a source for your assertion that following a single failed Stealth roll, the default assumption is to roll Initiative? Yes being detected may initiate combat, particularly if the scenario is already inherently hostile for whatever reason but I suspect the default response to failing a Stealth check is actually the GM asking the Player "What do you do next?" after describing the initial response of the NPC. If the answer to that question is aggressive or likely to be received with hostility, then yes, Initiative could be rolled, but if it's anything from "I run away" to "I try to blag it", then Initiative absolutely should not be rolled for anyone (yet), let alone the entire camp (which is some hostile GMing right there...take a step back and look at how that particular assertion might play out at a table:

Player: "I sneak up on the guard" Rolls Stealth *fails*
GM: "The entire camp is now alert to your presence and rolled higher Initiative than you. You have one turn before they descend on your position. Sucks to be you, I guess."
Player: "Wait, what?")

When your Stealth is beaten, someone has "noticed" you. The DMG gives context for this on p243. It's reasonable to assume that being noticed means that the spotter has realized you're not just some harmless critter making a barely-audible rustle of leaves in the brush, but a potential threat that might be about to attack.

Ultimately, both the DMG and PHB make clear that it's up to the disposition of the player and the DM whether combat will actually begin, but given that references to (failing) Stealth are always in sections relating to, say, Initiative, or Surprise, or beginning an encounter (though not necessarily combat), the implication is that the usual outcome is the beginning of a combat encounter.

The DM obviously can choose to do something else instead, but I think I've made my point: a single failed Stealth check CAN, and probably WILL at some point, immediately begin a pitched combat encounter.

[sayaijin]

When your Stealth is beaten, someone has "noticed" you. The DMG gives context for this on p243. It's reasonable to assume that being noticed means that the spotter has realized you're not just some harmless critter making a barely-audible rustle of leaves in the brush, but a potential threat that might be about to attack.

Ultimately, both the DMG and PHB make clear that it's up to the disposition of the player and the DM whether combat will actually begin, but given that references to (failing) Stealth are always in sections relating to, say, Initiative, or Surprise, or beginning an encounter (though not necessarily combat), the implication is that the usual outcome is the beginning of a combat encounter.

The DM obviously can choose to do something else instead, but I think I've made my point: a single failed Stealth check CAN, and probably WILL at some point, immediately begin a pitched combat encounter.

Context is of course key. If the guard cannot see the Rogue (no dark vision), then depending on how paranoid they are they may alert the rest of the camp (crying wolf?), or search the darkness, or just brush it off as just a noise. I'm not sure beating stealth lets them know what is there, just that something is there.

If you flip it around and it's PC's standing guard and something sneaking up on them, do you immediately have the PC's roll initiative the moment the PC standing watch hears a noise? I would wait to roll initiative until the PC says they attack or the creature attacks the PC.

[Bardon]

The Minor Illusion cantrip is almost cheating for a Kenku. Who needs to talk when you can just show them exactly what you want to convey? It's also fantastic to show an area you've scouted as a map, as a trivial example.

[ff7hero]

The Minor Illusion cantrip is almost cheating for a Kenku. Who needs to talk when you can just show them exactly what you want to convey? It's also fantastic to show an area you've scouted as a map, as a trivial example.

Or just make an illusion of someone saying what you want to say? The audio option on Minor Illusion is hands down my favorite part.

[Person_Man]

I'm sure I'll think of more later, but here are a few.

Imp familiars, especially if you give them a fun personality
Mask of Many Faces or Changeling race with friends cantrip
Minor Illusion
Telepathy (GOO, Aberrant mind, Kalashtar, Ghostwise, Telpathic Feat)
Mage Hand Legerdemain or Telekinetic Feat
Flight
Invisibility
Suggestion
Detect Thoughts
Subtle metamagic
Scrying
Sending
Leomund's Tiny Hut
Speak with the Dead
Darkvision

This is basically my list, plus Wildshape because it grants you swim/water breathing, flight, and you’re the ultimate scout. Even if enemies see a bird or a rat, in most of the time they’ll just ignore you. And if for some reason they do attack you, you can just run away very quickly and heal if necessary.

It’s a shame that there isn’t a 5E equivalent of the 3.5 Beguiler or Psychic Rogue that packaged this all together in a balanced way. I’m assuming that a Lore Bard with some modest multiclassing would cover everything, but I’d hate to devote half my class resources to out of combat abilities, and then quickly run dry on spells in the second or third combat.

In particular, I’m of the opinion that pure utility abilities should basically be at-will or rituals. (And thankfully many are) But conversely, anything that basically controls an enemy (Suggestion, Dominate, powerful illusions, etc) should require a limited resource and should be “if the target passes their Saving Throw they are immune for 24 hours.”

[Chronos]

A guard hearing something but then brushing it off as "probably just a wild animal" isn't a consequence for a failed stealth check. It's a description of a successful one.

[Man_Over_Game]

Is it like that though? I think it depends on the situation, a couple of guards may hear a noise nearby but do not know what caused it, now they have to go check. Kind of like the alerted state most mobs have in stealth games.

It certainly can be, depends on who you ask:


A guard hearing something but then brushing it off as "probably just a wild animal" isn't a consequence for a failed stealth check. It's a description of a successful one.

A lot of DMs rule it as "You fail, you get caught". Whether or not that's book accurate or "DND" accurate doesn't really matter to me, it's just bad game design either way.

Players have fun when they're allowed to learn from mistakes, and that requires them being allowed to fail and still succeed, and 5e isn't inherently designed that way. It's gotta be something the DM decides, the rules won't do anything for you (other than the low difficulty of 5e combat, which was their attempt for the same result).

The fact that most folks' scouting solutions on this forum involves very powerful magic (like Find Familiar) pretty much shows exactly how forgiving DND culture is when it comes to stealth, scouting, or skills in general. Those things shouldn't be necessary, so why are they?

[sayaijin]

A guard hearing something but then brushing it off as "probably just a wild animal" isn't a consequence for a failed stealth check. It's a description of a successful one.

Similar to what Man_Over_Game said, it really depends on what "stealth" is. If failing stealth is the PC shouting "I'm an enemy, and you now know I'm here!" then yeah, the guard definitely wouldn't shrug it off. If breaking stealth is you stumbled on a rock and made a loud noise with your foot on loose dirt, then whether that's an enemy or a wild animal is largely dependent on what the guard can see.

I think if the rogue is unseen, in darkness, and fails a stealth check, then that should be the cue for the guard to decide whether to investigate or not. If they are expecting an attack then they might alert the others. If they're not expecting anything, maybe they brush it off, maybe they go look on their own. I wouldn't rule that it gives away the rogues location unless they're doing a horrible job hiding.

[Gignere]

Similar to what Man_Over_Game said, it really depends on what "stealth" is. If failing stealth is the PC shouting "I'm an enemy, and you now know I'm here!" then yeah, the guard definitely wouldn't shrug it off. If breaking stealth is you stumbled on a rock and made a loud noise with your foot on loose dirt, then whether that's an enemy or a wild animal is largely dependent on what the guard can see.

I think if the rogue is unseen, in darkness, and fails a stealth check, then that should be the cue for the guard to decide whether to investigate or not. If they are expecting an attack then they might alert the others. If they're not expecting anything, maybe they brush it off, maybe they go look on their own. I wouldn't rule that it gives away the rogues location unless they're doing a horrible job hiding.

When I DM it’s not failed stealth, roll initiative and every body and their mothers will pile on you. It’s more like failed stealth check, guard starts walking towards you what do you do?

Like if my player said he will try to move away another stealth check. If he said I will pretend to be an animal, roll deception, etc. basically I usually allow for good role playing to nullify the failed stealth check, unless it was like a natural 1.

Of course not every circumstance is like this though like if he’s stealthing to try and surprise a sleeping dragon a failed stealth check can lead to initiative. But for reconnaissance and infiltration I will allow multiple checks depending on what the player do to try and salvage the failed roll.

[Mr. Wonderful]

When I DM it’s not failed stealth, roll initiative and every body and their mothers will pile on you. It’s more like failed stealth check, guard starts walking towards you what do you do?

Like if my player said he will try to move away another stealth check. If he said I will pretend to be an animal, roll deception, etc. basically I usually allow for good role playing to nullify the failed stealth check, unless it was like a natural 1.

Of course not every circumstance is like this though like if he’s stealthing to try and surprise a sleeping dragon a failed stealth check can lead to initiative. But for reconnaissance and infiltration I will allow multiple checks depending on what the player do to try and salvage the failed roll.

Agreed completely. For those who still have questions, turn it around.

One night have the middle watch hear a failed stealth roll, a cracking stick, tumbling rocks what have you. On a 1 you might hear a yelp of pain or muttered cursing. Depending on the character and situation, most characters will go on "high alert" themselves, making active spotting checks, or using spells or items to help determine what's going on. Many might also wake up one or more other party members.

What they won't do - at least in my experience - is shout "TALLY HO!" and run headlong into the darkness towards the noise.

So a failed check won't result in the death or capture of the scout. But it will make any further scouting a LOT more difficult and much more serious consequences on any further fails. But even then, the rogue with her Cunning Action is likely to put some distance away from any pursuers.

[Sparky McDibben]

What they won't do - at least in my experience - is shout "TALLY HO!" and run headlong into the darkness towards the noise.

And now my next group of orcs will have high-brow English accents and be very involved in fox hunting.

"I say, Lugburz, your armor is positively spiffing, old chap! Are those halflings 'cross the way?"

"I believe they are, Trapass! Tally-ho, lads, and let's add some meat back to the old feed-bag!"

(Not meant to mock you, Mr. Wonderful; I just thought this was an awesome way to flavor a bunch of orcs!)

[XmonkTad]

A few Warlock invocations made it to the list, but I've got my two:
For flavor definitely Aspect of the Moon. For fun: Beast Speech, as it opens the door to hundreds of hilarious new interactions.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I've probably used prestidigitation more times than I've used the Attack action. I am always perfectly clean, I smell like roses, and I only eat the most delicious of foods. It's absolute wish fulfillment.

[Bardon]

Or just make an illusion of someone saying what you want to say? The audio option on Minor Illusion is hands down my favorite part.

I thought that would be pushing it a bit with the GM :smallbiggrin: besides thinking of an image to describe what you want to say is part of the fun. :)

[Telok]

What they won't do - at least in my experience - is shout "TALLY HO!" and run headlong into the darkness towards the noise.

So a failed check won't result in the death or capture of the scout. But...

What I do as a player, and my players did last (although not 5e) game was to fireball the source of the sound. Even got the fireball bead necklace for the non-casters.

[sayaijin]

What I do as a player, and my players did last (although not 5e) game was to fireball the source of the sound. Even got the fireball bead necklace for the non-casters.

I guess two questions:

1) Does failing stealth tell you where the source of the sound is? (Within 20ft radius of course)
2) What did you do when your GM made the noise someone who wasn't sneaking up on you who you really wouldn't want to fireball? Like a king's messenger?

[KorvinStarmast]

I've probably used prestidigitation more times than I've used the Attack action. I am always perfectly clean, I smell like roses, and I only eat the most delicious of foods. It's absolute wish fulfillment. My celestial lock uses it a lot to clean up, and one time she shined an NPC's (retired paladin) dirty boots as a way to warm him up to a necessary conversation regarding the suspected pack of werewolves near his village.

[Chronos]

I think my most recent Prestidigitation was when the DM was saying we were heading into an area infested with mosquitos, so I made everyone in the party smell like citronella. Dunno if it had any meaningful effect or not, but hey, it doesn't cost anything to try.

[Dalinar]

I've got a few.

A while back I convinced the party Bard to take a level in Aberrant Mind Sorcerer and oh man is he hilarious when he uses the telepathic speech and insults people in their brains and whatnot.

Psi-Powered Knack from the Soulknife is kinda like having Expertise in everything that also stacks with Expertise. Sure it's on a resource, but a pretty plentiful one, since you only expend a die when it lets you succeed.

Not strictly out of combat, but last night I got to use a Giant Spider's Web Sense on my Moon Druid to detect some other web-based creatures, which was pretty neat since they were hiding. Super niche of course, but sometimes that just ups the cool factor.

[Telok]

I guess two questions:

1) Does failing stealth tell you where the source of the sound is? (Within 20ft radius of course)
2) What did you do when your GM made the noise someone who wasn't sneaking up on you who you really wouldn't want to fireball? Like a king's messenger?

Failed stealth is either not unseen, or not unheard. As either is sufficient for targeting regular ranged attacks on the correct square the fireball is not an issue.

People not sneaking are a different category of sound and visibility than failed sneakers. Non-stealth typically shows up at 120+ feet whole failed stealth is usually at 60-30 feet. That and the groups trend hard toward anti-social murder-hobo, "king's messengers" will be fakes or just cateorgized as "more xp and loot we don't have to go look for".

[sayaijin]

Failed stealth is either not unseen, or not unheard. As either is sufficient for targeting regular ranged attacks on the correct square the fireball is not an issue.

My question was more about what happens when stealth is failed. Is it, "Oh hey, your passive perception beat their stealth, so here's their mini. Go nuts!" Or is it, "You hear the snapping of a twig from the south. The ever present sound of crickets and night fowl has quieted, and you sense something stalking just out of sight."

Because in the first scenario, yeah throw that fireball. In the second...maybe?

[Rukelnikov]

My question was more about what happens when stealth is failed. Is it, "Oh hey, your passive perception beat their stealth, so here's their mini. Go nuts!" Or is it, "You hear the snapping of a twig from the south. The ever present sound of crickets and night fowl has quieted, and you sense something stalking just out of sight."

Because in the first scenario, yeah throw that fireball. In the second...maybe?

Excatly, "you hear the muffled sound of footsteps behind some bushes 30 feet to your left, it seems there's someone there", that's what beating stealth is generally like in my games.