In most TTRPGs, sneaking and hiding are after thoughts handled with a simple stealth check. The only thing I've come across that tries to really expand on it is "Shadowflyght: a stealth supplement for any system."What else is there? Is there anything that you remember playing that you really enjoyed?
>>96611928I get where you're coming from but I think a simple stealth roll is the best solution. Rolling for stealth is rolling for nothing to happen. Having complex mechanics in order to avoid things from actually happening sounds quite unsatisfying.
>>96611928Black Seven does interesting things in this space.
>>96617262>Black Sevenhttps://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/93976/black-sevenThis?
>>96611928I give players stealth missions sometimes. Gonna be doing one this weekend. It's really a "heist" mission where the players have a detailed layout, aren't supposed to start a big fight, and then they do what they choose to achieve their victory (in this case: rescue the girl). I know where everything and everyone is (there's a rooftop map for this, too). They've gotta skulk around and decide how to approach it. I don't really have a planned particular way for them to accomplish it. They'll just have to figure it out and we'll see how it goes.
>>96617287Yes.
>>96617731Excellent, I'll take a look.
>>96611928Alexandrian has a whole short article on running stealth segments in games.
>>96611928>What else is there? Is there anything that you remember playing that you really enjoyed?Spicing the check itself. My first GM taught me this:Player makes a stealth check, using a cup or rolling it inside a box. Nobody sees the dice outcome. It is only revealed when it is needed.This way, the player doesn't know if the sneak worked, and the GM doesn't know what value he has to roll to spot the PCIt's a simple thing, but it always works
>>96618106This is cool, I like it.
Mothership has stealth as a tacit thing and one of those fail forward kind of philosophies. So a failed checked doesn't mean you didn't do the thing, but you brought attention to you.
>>96616995I believe the goal is for there to be things to engage with so that successfully preventing things from happening is still an enjoyable gameplay experience, rather than a case in which success means less fun to be had.
>>96611928
>>96616995No it isn't. If you're trying to avoid detection, it's because you have some kind of goal you're trying to accomplish without being detected.
>>96618106The fact this is a major revelation is disheartening to see, both for current players and GMs.Certain skill checks should never be visible for players - it's too easy for them to metagame their level of success."Roll a stealth check.""Ah shit, I rolled a 2, my bonus is 10. So 12, well I'm fucked."Same goes with things like Search / Perception / Intuition / Sense Motive, and the like. They might grumble and bitch about it at first, but if they actual value roleplay, they'll adapt. If they're too hard into the crunch and playing it like a board game then it's a different story, unfortunately.>inb4 but muh GM fudging hidden diceIf you don't trust your GM to run your game and adjudicate properly, then why are you in his game? Leave, find another game or start your own.As for the GM not seeing what he rolled either, what is the point of the arbitrator being denied information to arbitrate an outcome?
>>96618106Stop using single rolls.
Hidden rolls is obviously a skill issue crutch and open rolls are better for roleplay.
>>96618803>because I said soEnlightening argument.
>>96618803>CrutchFor the players with ADHD, obviously. Needing instantaneous resolution sounds like a personal problem.As for being "better for roleplay", when the GM reveals the results, there is nothing preventing roleplay from occurring. Why one has to happen before, or after, the other is nonsensical.
>>96618858Nope, for all players. The roleplay happens as soon as the action is declared, since rolls aren't hidden, as per my decree, which is absolute.
>>96618879>as per my decree, which is absoluteIf you're the GM, yes. While I disagree on open rolls, I agree on this. Even if you're being snarky or ironic.Too much faggotry around GMing. Either you arbitrate or you serve no purpose.
Nope, absolute for all people and all games at all times. You lose.
>>96618883you're so fuckin scared of players making decisions LMAO
>>96618891>said faggotry appearsYour reading comprehension is poor - I suggest rereading the thread. That, combined with your >LMAOgives away the broccoli hair. Read a book, kid.
>>96618935ooooo the players are making decisions with knowledge about the world oooooooo spooky
>>96618891>players making decisions scares a GMI think you're confused about how a tabletop game works - players decide on a course of action and the GM arbitrates based on various factors, usually including dice rolls.But, as usual, the nogames reveals itself.
>>96618943As usual, you're scared of players making decisions :)
I want to give my players the Splinter Cell/Siphon Filter/Dishonored
>>96619171I want to give my players the Splinter Cell/Siphon Filter/Dishonored experience in a TTRPG.Dunno what happened to this post.
>>96611928It's kind of tough, honestly. There are lots of situations where rolling "stealth" makes sense, such as trying to sneak up on a fortress wall without being spotted. But there are lots of other scenarios where stealth should behave more on a basis of sound vs sight. Sneaking up behind a guard requires you to be quiet. Hiding behind something that obscures you (like a low wall) ostensibly hides you as long as you're out of hearing range. It doesn't make sense for a player whose character is sitting without moving behind a column to be noticed by guards walking by unless you treat a stealth roll failure as their character fucking up and drawing attention to themselves in some capacity, which I think feels bad to a certain extent. I personally like players to feel like they can reasonably stealth around by being clever and using the environment rather then just have them keep blowing rolls. Personally, I think players should be able to sacrifice some movement speed to move more quietly/carefully in a way that benefits their stealth rolls, and should automatically be considered hidden if they're out of sight of an enemy. An enemy who is trying to track a player who moved after disappearing from their sight should have to make a tracking roll. But a lot of my grievances in this matter come from 5e which is not a well designed system.
>play Savage Worlds>characters crashland in desert>spot camp of freakshit aliens>player tries to sneak toward them>rolls 3 "exploding dice" on his stealth check>"OKAY ANON I STEALTH TOWARD THEM">"bro it's open ground there's a few dunes to block line of sight but it's an actual sandy desert">"ANON IM STEALTHING I GOT A 14 THATS TWO RAISES [Savage Worlds margin of success mechanic]">"okay ffs whatever"Dude didn't give a shit if it made sense he just wanted to sneak across 200 feet of open ground with none of the 20 men actually spotting him.People are so fucking D&D brained they literally do not envision themselves in the situation their characters are in and if someone could, even in a pulp story or action movie, sneak past them and it be believable by the conventions of the genre.
>>96619293>>96619318I haven't come across much in the way of good stealth game play. At best it's an after thought and at worst it's some kind of magic status.
>>96619318that sucks, he should had borrowed under the sand like a sand shark
>>96611928The problem with stealth as a mechanic is that it can't last for an entire operation. Once the PCs fuck up and one of them gets spotted, stealth goes out the window.
>>96619531It's sticky but that's why I'm exploring the concept. I would prefer to have a raised alarm status and have them try to hide again.
>>96619531There are still potential ways around it, I think, but it would be situational. If one of the PCs gets spotted, but the group is able to find a way to kill/disable the enemy who spotted them before they can raise the alarm, then they can potentially keep the situation under control. Also, for bigger stealth sections, there should be more involved than just a stealth check. Maybe they have to do things like hack security cameras, use athletics to get past motion-detectors or scale a wall, find a way to draw a guard away from their position by creating a seemingly innocuous distraction, take out certain guards that aren't possible to just sneak past, pickpocket keys (or a keycard) from a guard, etc. Also, if one of them does fail a stealth check, you don't necessarily have to make the outcome that they were straight-up caught, especially if it wasn't a critical failure. You could implement something like alert levels (or "stealth health") where a failure might mean they made a noise unintentionally or otherwise did something that drew attention, which will make subsequent stealth rolls more difficult as the guards are now more suspicious after being alerted, and only after major/successive fuck-ups do they get completely caught. That way there can be some back-and-forth to longer stealth missions where it doesn't always devolve into, "oh one of us failed a stealth roll, now we're fucked unless we kill everyone".You could also make it so, if one of the players does get fully caught, perhaps they get captured and it becomes another objective that they have to rescue the captured PC from their captivity, while the captured PC has to deal with being interrogated by the guards.
>>96619531No, that depends on the rules you use and the decisions the players make.
The default mode of dungeon crawling is by stealth. It's baked into the surprise rules.
You know, something I almost never see players or GMs do any more is scouting before a stealth mission, or serious intelligence garhering.
>>96628076That depends on what system. Which is?
>>96628937I think he means early D&D. His statement is true. However, I don't think it works in the way I currently envision trying to do stealth action. It's been a while since I've looked deeply into it, I might reread the AD&D book again and see if anything stands out.
>>96618776>The fact this is a major revelation... it really isn't?>Certain skill checks should never be visible for playersGo with this to people that write game manuals, not me.>Same goes with things like Search / Perception / Intuition / Sense Motive, and the likeOh, you're a DnDrone. Fucking figures. And explains how did you managed to miss a point so obvious and go on semi-related rant anyway
>>96618729/thread.
>>96611928I wrote a gamified stealth system where stealth is a resource the party expends to do things, once.
bump
>>96634405What did you have to do to recover stealth?
>>96618776Did you miss the part where the GM also doesn't know the result?
>>96634405>>96639319Bumping dead threads
>>96639411This thread is better than 80% of the trash on /tg/ right now.
