Problem with Stealth?

[Boge]

Our GM always gives people a perception roll vs my stealth regardless. So it's always my roll vs two or three others. And for some reason he averages rolls of 8. So I end up needing Stealth of 17 or 18 just to sneak around. I'm usually caught anyway. And if someone else with less Stealth is with me, forget it. Their 13 Stealth roll vs 3 Perception rolls of 10...chances are we're caught. And it's not just that they heard us and come looking, but we're seen.

[AlexanderHowl]

Originally Posted by Icelander

If the PCs have access to superpowers, absolutely. Note, however, that Night Vision higher than 2 is not possible for a normal human.

Where does it say that? That is a limitation for human genetic engineering in Biotech, but it is not a limitation for individuals human characters in Basic.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Where does it say that? That is a limitation for human genetic engineering in Biotech, but it is not a limitation for individuals human characters in Basic.

GURPS Tactical Shooting. GURPS Basic Set doesn't assume anything about whether the characters are superheroes, aliens, cinematic or realistic, but GURPS Tactical Shooting is focused on realistic action, among which is shooting in darkness.

Not that you need an explicit note to be aware that no realistic human can have equal Night Vision to a cat.

[Black Leviathan]

I think the phrase "On Guard" is throwing people. It's not that you have to be patrolling with a floodlight and a German Sheppard in order to contest stealth. You just have to be not tuned in to the conversation around the campfire or listening to your Ipod or focused on cooking the stew for the party. It's a non-resting status, you're incurring fatigue because of the stress of being focused on every noise around you, but you can do it laying down or eating or in the shower theoretically.

I think if you have the Discriminatory Hearing Advantage you're on guard for the purpose of hearing checks no matter what you're doing. At best you'd have a distraction penalty

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Where does it say that? That is a limitation for human genetic engineering in Biotech, but it is not a limitation for individuals human characters in Basic.

Basic doesn't have much to say about human limitations. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

[AlexanderHowl]

I think that there is a disagreement on what is realistic between books. GURPS generally notes what is realistic and what is cinematic in text, so I think Tactical Shooting just reflects what one author thinks is realistic rather than what the system thinks is realistic. Even nowadays, I have better Night Vision than 2, and I was realistic the last time I checked. After all, -3 is torchlight, which is not at all bad for any endeavor.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I think that there is a disagreement on what is realistic between books. GURPS generally notes what is realistic and what is cinematic in text, so I think Tactical Shooting just reflects what one author thinks is realistic rather than what the system thinks is realistic. Even nowadays, I have better Night Vision than 2, and I was realistic the last time I checked. After all, -3 is torchlight, which is not at all bad for any endeavor.

So you don't notice any difference in how well you see by torchlight than how well you see in interior lighting?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I think that there is a disagreement on what is realistic between books. GURPS generally notes what is realistic and what is cinematic in text, so I think Tactical Shooting just reflects what one author thinks is realistic rather than what the system thinks is realistic. Even nowadays, I have better Night Vision than 2, and I was realistic the last time I checked. After all, -3 is torchlight, which is not at all bad for any endeavor.

On the scale of darkness levels in GURPS, variation in human visual sensitivity amounts to at a maximum 1 level, though it's possible to train at least some skills to tolerate lower light. -3 is torchlight at several yards away.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I think that there is a disagreement on what is realistic between books. GURPS generally notes what is realistic and what is cinematic in text, so I think Tactical Shooting just reflects what one author thinks is realistic rather than what the system thinks is realistic. Even nowadays, I have better Night Vision than 2, and I was realistic the last time I checked. After all, -3 is torchlight, which is not at all bad for any endeavor.

Yeah...

Bio-Tech and Tactical Shooting had actual mandates to define realistic human capabilities, while Basic aimed to cover anything from victims eaten by zombies to godlike supers.

Also, it's not merely a question of one author believing a given benchmark is realistic, it's dozens of playtesters, including subject matter experts, published GURPS authors and extremely argumentative posters.

Advantages, Perks and Techniques that represent training or experience in performing certain activities in darkness are realistic, though they can never buy off the penalty completely. But Night Vision is too broad to be realistic. Someone with Night Vision 5 can perform gem-cutting equally well in weak candlelight as in bright light.

[kdtipa]

To quote the book's definition of Stealth...

If someone is specifically on the alert for intruders, the GM will roll a Quick Contest between your Stealth and the sentinel’s Perception.

That feels like the misleading part to me. If you want to run the game by RAW and accept the implication that you don't bother rolling for people who aren't specifically on the alert for intruders... it's up to you.

I think though that it makes sense to handle the difference between someone who is on-guard, alert but not specifically looking (normal), and distracted (participating in conversation, eating, cleaning your gear, etc) as a set of modifiers instead of how you decide whether to make a perception roll or not. Maybe +2 to on-guard, 0 for alert but not looking, and -2 for distracted? It's a house rule and a GM call... but it feels like a better choice than going with the weird wording in the Stealth rule.

I also generally like to avoid lots of rolls, so will have the person make a Stealth roll and just tell me how much they make it by. That margin of success is a penalty to anyone that might perceive them for the next few minutes, and instead of a quick contest... I just use that penalty for everyone that rolls to perceive the one sneaking.

And don't forget that size, distance, darkness, cover, and so on will affect the perception roll as well. If a person is one yard away, you might hear them breathing. If a person is 50 yards away, you are very unlikely to hear them breathing. I'd even go so far as to suggest it makes sense to include speed modifier as a bonus to the person doing the perceiving. Instead of a penalty to hit something moving fast, it's a bonus to see it because something sitting still is less likely to draw attention.

So, basically I think I'm saying: If the RAW have weird things in them, there's a chance it's an error or oversight. It's a tool-kit system anyway, and GMs are meant to pick and choose and customize.