Using stealth as a group

[Randal 0]

 How should I handle the situation where a group of pcs want to sneak up on a group of npc's?  For example if I had 3 pc's trying to use cover and darkness to get the jump on some npc's currently busy eating a carcass.  I imagine this would be an opposed stealth test?  But since there are multiple individuals, do I need to roll for each one? Then there could potentially be 3x3 =9 dice rolls if I test each individual against the other.  If I roll for the group,how do I handle different stats, I.e. some characters have a better characteristic score than the others.

My guess was that I should have the pc with the lowest rating roll for stealth against the npc's with the highest rating.  Thus I'd be trying to represent the worst one at hiding trying to hide from the best one at noticing hidden people.

Another option was to have each pc and npc do a roll and compare worst stealth roll against the best awareness roll.  What I don't like about this is that it seems like it would be pretty impossible to succeed with a larger group.  Then again maybe this makes more sense.

Any better ideas or opinions would be appreciated.

Cheers.

[Librarian 1]

 I would have each player roll stealth, and I would roll an awareness roll for each npc who might possibly see them and then just compare the awareness degrees of success to the stealth degrees to determin if anyone saw anyone.

[ItsUncertainWho 3]

 Or make your stealthiest player roll for the party with a -10 per person in the group vs. the enemies perception.

[Darth Smeg 234]

I think your suggested approach is fine.

I like to keep rolls to a minimum, and I think the players with the stealthier characters will be fine with the idea that "if Clumsy Joe can do it, the rest of us can do it no sweat".

[Kasatka 157]

It would be an assisted, opposed skill check. The PC with the best stealth is assisted by the other players, who grant a bonus or penalty to the lead PCs check depending on if they pass or fail. Then the NPC with the best perception does the same with their awareness check, with bonus or penalty from the other 2 NPC. If the PCs win they go unnoticed, if the NPCs win they spot the PCs.

[Librarian 1]

 the only problem with one roll is that it denies the sneaky characters the chance to take a stealthed snipe shot should the opposition see his buddies.

then again unless your raven guard stealth checks for space marines are largely a waste when your at -30 to move silently and  -40 to all hide checks it generally makes it easier to just wade in shooting.

[Kasatka 157]

 Which is exactly why it would be an assisted, opposed roll - if the Ravenguard marine really wanted to stealth it up he'd go in solo ahead of the group and get into position, then vox them to proceed, that way he can still make a sneak attack on the enemy if/when the other marines botch their stealth and get spotted.

[BrotherKane 1]

Indeed, I would say you ought to make it harder for a group for sending everyone in for a stealth attack.  It is more likely that someone would give the game away.  Worst vs best is a streamlined way of doing it but it denies the stealthy guy a chance to roll his skill that he is good at.  If clumsy joe fails then only clumsy joe has been seen/heard.  The rest of the group that pass can still do different things, maintain the ambush, charge in straight away, or whatever.

[Kasatka 157]

BrotherKane said:

Indeed, I would say you ought to make it harder for a group for sending everyone in for a stealth attack.  It is more likely that someone would give the game away.  Worst vs best is a streamlined way of doing it but it denies the stealthy guy a chance to roll his skill that he is good at.  If clumsy joe fails then only clumsy joe has been seen/heard.  The rest of the group that pass can still do different things, maintain the ambush, charge in straight away, or whatever.

I'm not sure if you understood what i was suggesting but i wasn't streamlining it - the rules for assisting state that you get the person with best chance of success and everyone else rolls and then factors in their pass/fail. By having the best sneaker versus the best spotter, with modifiers from their respective groups, it represents the stealthy party being led and directed by their expert, and the spotting party being directed by their most aware guy.

The experts can still get their group to pass if someone fails, but they'd have to be exceptionally good if their allies start botching rolls left right and centre.

[BrotherKane 1]

To me that just doesn't make sense.  What your suggesting allows a party with one expert and 4 other guys in squeaking power armour to sneak up on another group (extreme but you see what I mean).  If someone fails a stealth roll it means they have stepped on a creaky floorboard, or made a heavy footfall.  I don't think these are generally things that an 'expert' could help with.

If they are all going to roll anyway, which they have to in order to be part of the group check, then why not just use all the rolls seperately?

[Randal 0]

I don't think using the assistance rule makes sense here. I think it applies to when one person can benefit from others helping them accomplishing a difficult task.  The example in the core books has the players cooperating to activate an artefact using their tech use skill.  It makes perfect sense in this case that pooling their knowledge would help in accomplishing this task.  In the case of moving stealthily to surprise an opponent, I don't see at all how Clumsy Joe could help Stealthy Sam or the group move in a stealthy manner. Quite the opposite in fact.

In the end I had everybody roll and I just compared the rolls of the PCs versus the NPCs.  I think it makes the most sense since they all chose to try the sneak attack rather than just letting a stealthy player try to get the first hit.  I had all the NPC do an awareness test and if they had noticed a single player then they would no longer be surprised.

I think it was simple and made sense. Also, this method reinforces the notion that Clumsy Joe should not be included in stealth attacks since he will mess it up for the group.

 

 

[BrotherKane 1]

That is exactly what I was trying to say.  Sorry if I wasn't clear.

[Naviward 57]

 The approach I take, which kind of covers both bases people have mentioned here, is to have everyone make the check in question separately, then have every two degrees of success cancel out 1 degree of failure (to represent the better members of the group helping the team out). Then, if it's a failure overall, those that failed individually are the ones spotted.

If you want to have opponents actively spotting, then have them roll first then add their degrees of success or failure as a modifier to the group roll.

Seems to work well, giving the group a chance to all sneak in (or other checks like group climbing or swimming, depending on the situation) without one player's super sneak magically getting the rest of the team in automatically. 

[Chastity 13]

BrotherKane said:

To me that just doesn't make sense.  What your suggesting allows a party with one expert and 4 other guys in squeaking power armour to sneak up on another group (extreme but you see what I mean).  If someone fails a stealth roll it means they have stepped on a creaky floorboard, or made a heavy footfall.  I don't think these are generally things that an 'expert' could help with.

If they are all going to roll anyway, which they have to in order to be part of the group check, then why not just use all the rolls seperately?

I think it depends a lot on how you're imagining it. It's perfectly reasonable for a Stealth expert to point out squeaky floorboards to *avoid*, or to to warn people of where guards are looking.

I also just don't think that the "step on a creaky floorboard" interpretation of stealth represents the way stealth actually works. It's not like somebody makes a noise and suddenly the enemy becomes instantly aware of who is there, and where, and immediately apprehends their intent.

The disadvantage of everybody rolling individually is that the chances of a stealth operation actually working decrease exponentially with the number of infiltrators - something which the existence of commando squads and special operations units in the real world strongly implies is not the case. Stealth isn't really a coin toss, a lot of it comes down to planning and timing, and that's exactly the sort of thing that one expert can help with.

[Musclewizard 0]

I'd differentiate this into a number of situations:

1. Is someone taking the lead / Moving ahead of the group
2. Is the group aproaching from different directions
3. Would it be more fun for the scene to go fast vs. going more believable
4. Would failure by a member of the group change the plot in such a way that it comes to a dead end (like trying to stop the only suspect in a criminial investigation from killing himself by sneaking up on and disarming him).

In situations 1 and 4 only a single player would roll stealth. Should the group approach from different directions they'd all roll for themselves, this is more believable I think and it also allows the stealthy player to shine (assuming there is one).
In situation 3 a 'fast scene' could be created by only having the sneakiest character roll (opposed by the most perceptive enemy) whereas a 'believable scene' could have every character roll stealth opposed by either the most perceptive enemy or by every enemy (thou the latter one would significantly increase the chance of detection obviously).

[Chastity 13]

I'm not sure that making everybody roll against everybody else necessarily creates a more "believable" scene, or rather, I think it creates a more believable scene on the surface (it feels intuitively right that everybody should interact in some way) but it actually leads to some really unlikely scenarios (like the really stealthy character rolling badly and getting spotted while the Khorne Berzerker remains completely unseen).

[Musclewizard 0]

Chastity said:

I'm not sure that making everybody roll against everybody else necessarily creates a more "believable" scene, or rather, I think it creates a more believable scene on the surface (it feels intuitively right that everybody should interact in some way) but it actually leads to some really unlikely scenarios (like the really stealthy character rolling badly and getting spotted while the Khorne Berzerker remains completely unseen).

Fair enough.
I guess the most generic solution / the solution that can be applied to the most sitations would be to have the stealthiest character roll against the most perceptive enemy.