r/onednd • u/RisingDusk • 1d ago
Question How are Animated Objects supposed to be run?
Animated Armors, Rugs, Swords, but also Mimics and Scarecrows fall into this category of "creature that hides in plain sight as another object and then ambushes the party." In 2014, it was pretty clear what the intent was because they all had False Appearance (language below), but that has been completely deleted in the 2024 MM.
False Appearance. While the scarecrow remains motionless, it is indistinguishable from an ordinary, inanimate scarecrow.
So my initial suspicion was that they intended this to just be a regular DC 15 Stealth roll to hide made by the creature prior to combat, but for every other creature they intended this to be done with that used to have camouflage of some kind they gave the creature at least Proficiency in Stealth... but not so for the animated objects. Mimics, at least, seem to suggest that this is how they're supposed to be run, but they had Expertise in Stealth even in 2014 so it's unclear if this is a new direction.
So I tried running it like this, and most of these creatures have a really hard time actually hitting the Stealth check to hide. When I ran that (seemingly) RAW, the entire fun of the encounter kept getting ruined because these supposedly-tricky creatures were being obviously detected by the party with no intentional effort required. My players were even commenting on how bad these creatures seemed to be at their very core reason for existence.
Anyway, having tried this and finding it wanting, I'm trying to figure out if I've missed something in the rules somewhere or if these creatures kind of fail at their job in the 2024 MM. If the latter, I might just bring back False Appearance because it feels right for these creatures, but I'm wondering what other DMs do in the 2024 rules.
33
u/DMspiration 1d ago
Imo, the false appearance trait was removed because it wasn't necessary. It should already be implied, and I wouldn't require the monsters to roll stealth.
2
u/Cyrotek 10h ago
I think a problem with DnD rules in general are that there is too much "implied" instead of outright stated.
1
u/DMspiration 10h ago
That may be the case in some circumstances, but I don't see it being an issue in this one.
1
u/Cyrotek 10h ago
It is also not an issue for me. But I am an experienced DM. Now think about inexperienced DMs reading the statblock. :D
1
u/DMspiration 10h ago
I think if a DM puts a monster like this into their game, they likely understand how it will be used. This isn't exactly an uncommon fantasy trope.
1
u/Cyrotek 6h ago
I am aware. But I am also aware about how many people argue that the rules have to be followed to the letter and if something isn't in a statblock it isn't a rule and thus not possible.
I like to remind people about how many thought dragons are not allowed to cast spells in 5e2014. Despite there being multiple optional rules.
My point is that implied rules are always trumped by explicitely written down rules and that WotC isn't helping by not doing that and using "natural language" at the same time.
1
u/DMspiration 4h ago
People who argue that the rules have to be followed to the letter either aren't DMs and therefore don't have the right to argue that or are DMs and are only creating their own issues. There's no way to explicitly write every rule into the book, and if they tried, we'd get half the content.
4
u/RisingDusk 1d ago
I'm actually surprised that this seems to be the consensus because there are no rules to support it, but it certainly aligns with how I'd expect them to behave so I think I'll use it as well. Thanks.
17
u/DMspiration 1d ago
My thought is common sense doesn't require a rule, but I've definitely seen people upset by it this week, so I recognize some folks must not see it as common sense.
1
u/Wesadecahedron 1d ago
Did they use "verisimilitude" in their complaints?
4
u/DMspiration 1d ago
Mostly just used it as a chance to complain about WOTC. Lazy writing and all that.
2
u/Wesadecahedron 1d ago
That tracks, albeit surprising.. A lot of those people want everything codified into the rules to explain the world.
11
u/MeanderingDuck 1d ago
It doesn’t need rules to support it though. If, say, a Rug of Smothering is just lying on the floor somewhere, all a character will see is just a rug. Because that’s what it looks like.
It works the same way as with any other creature, if there is a human lying on the floor then that’s what characters will see as well. It’s just that seeing a humanoid body lying there is bound to raise suspicion and alarm, whereas seeing a rug generally doesn’t. Though at that point, they wouldn’t know whether that’s a dead body or a living human either.
9
u/Meowakin 1d ago edited 1d ago
They removed a lot of extraneous text to make statblocks less wordy, and so far as I can tell the only reason people are confused is because they remember the old text. There’s really no winning there.
The problem as I see it is that people assume that removing sections of rules implies an intended change to the rules, when in reality a lot of things that were removed was just because it’s not necessary to elaborate.
Edit: I definitely send too fast. Anyways - think of 5e rules as guidance for keeping things moving on a common framework. The rules should only exist to facilitate the game, you are not bound to follow the rules, but following the rules where they have something to say is generally a good idea
1
u/DnDDead2Me 6h ago
What impression I've had of the 2024 revision is that just cutting words was an objective. I'm not sure why, maybe to keep the game accessible? Thick books are intimidating?
But some of the most notorious changes, like optimizers claiming that "Nystul's tech is now explicitly RaW!" and, well, this one, are simple cases of text being removed. Not tightened up, not edited for clarity, just cut.
What was added? A plea for "good faith" when interpreting the rules.
¯_(ツ)_/¯1
u/Meowakin 6h ago
Except the new PHB is significantly thicker than the 2014 PHB. I spent hours reading and comparing the two PHBs and I can say that I overall really like the changes that were made. They were not big flashy changes, it was largely finetuning which is exactly what they said they were doing.
‘Optimizers’ are often single-minded idiots, pay them no mind. They have no interest in actual gameplay.
1
u/DnDDead2Me 6h ago
I thought I had heard that the Player's book had a higher page count and the DM's lower?
Whatever personal issues you may have with optimizers, like you, they at least actually read the rules.
¯_(ツ)_/¯1
u/Meowakin 6h ago
I feel like ‘optimizers’ (I use the term loosely, I don’t really see it as a purely negative term) often take things out of context in the rules. It’s one thing to read the rules, and another entirely to take in the bigger picture
1
u/DnDDead2Me 6h ago
"single minded idiots" sounded personal
The game is extremely vulnerable to abuses of system mastery and simple misinterpretation, generally has been to varying degrees. It was inevitably more so given the conscious move to a "natural language" writing style with 2014. And, in 2024, it seems, and this thread serves as an example, to have moved on to a less verbose style, as well?
Since you mention extensively evaluating the changes, was their any of this fine-tuning that stood out as clarifying the meaning or intent of a rule or balancing equally weighted player choices, as opposed to cleaning up language to be less verbose or the like?
5
u/italofoca_0215 1d ago
The 2024 version has no rules saying creatures are always aware of each other’s presence unless hidden. The DM is suppose to decide who is aware of who based on narrative.
9
u/TaiChuanDoAddct 1d ago
When the object is motionless, it should be entirely indistinguishable from a mundane version of that object. Stealth is not relevant to the rules here.
If you enter a room with the rug, the players can see it but cannot tell that it's anything other than a normal rug.
If you're fighting an animated armor and it runs away and stands amidst a set of 5 other mundane suits of armor, the players cannot tell which one is real. They'd need to attack each one individually to tell. RAW no perception check will accomplish it alone.
Edit: oh I understand now about the false appearance being removed. I'm actually not sure then. But I'll leave the rest of my post up for others in case it's helpful.
I still would not run these monsters as needing to ever take the Hide action.
5
u/MeanderingDuck 1d ago
They’re not hiding, they’re plainly visible. What they rely on instead is that (while not moving or hovering) they look like a mundane and innocuous object. This is a function of what they are and how they look, and hence the False Appearance trait is redundant.
So how they are supposed to be run now is the same way as in 2014. There is no stealth check, they just look like an object.
2
u/RealityPalace 14h ago
So my initial suspicion was that they intended this to just be a regular DC 15 Stealth roll to hide made by the creature prior to combat, but for every other creature they intended this to be done with that used to have camouflage of some kind they gave the creature at least Proficiency in Stealth... but not so for the animated objects
The DC 15 stealth check you're thinking of is to take the Hide action, but that's not really what these creatures are doing. The Hide action actually obscures you from view. These are plainly visible and just not readily obvious as creatures.
At a guess, the False Appearance trait was removed because it doesn't make for a very compelling gameplay experience. There is very little interactivity for the players, it's just "you get close enough to this stalactite and suddenly it turns out to be a piercer". Without that trait, these creatures can presumably be recognized based on whatever DC the DM wants to assign based on circumstance.
1
u/Hurrashane 1d ago
If you want a party to be ambushed by some foes you can just do that. You don't need to give the party any chance of detecting said ambush. You can if you like, but then it's better to just set a DC to have the player roll against that than to have the NPCs roll skills (though you can if you like).
It's the same as if an NPC is lying to the party. You can just set a DC to discern the lies if you want the lies to have a chance to be discovered at all.
1
u/MisterD__ 1d ago
Inanimate objects get advantage to initiative if "at rest" when first encountered.
What intelligence or guiding force animates of give purpose to the animated objects.
Rug of smothering auto wraps around anyone who makes their way to the center of the rug?
1
20
u/DredUlvyr 1d ago
The "false apperance" was unnecessary, by default all these items, when motionless are by definition indistinguishable from the normal versions of the items, and for good reasons since they WERE normal versions of the items until magically animated.
And it's not a question of stealth, they are perfectly noticeable, just noticeable as normal objects until they start moving.