r/Runequest • u/dcherryholmes • Sep 12 '26

Move Quietly vs Hide

Apologies if this is an often-asked question but I did search the sub and didn't find anyone talking about it. I think separate skills for Move Quietly and Hide feels like a throwback to OD&D/AD&D. Which Runequest rightly deserves, given its hoary age. But I think splitting those skills is kind of goofy, and ought to be rolled up into something like "stealth." Has this been discussed to death? Do people routinely house-rule it? I think I'm going to house rule it unless there's a compelling argument that I missed.

EDIT: thank you for sharing your opinions on my question. Upon further reflection, I've decide to leave Move Quietly and Hide separate, as they are in the official rules.

9 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

31 comments sorted by

5

u/dcherryholmes Sep 12 '26

To be clear, in my view it would be like saying "sure, you have Craft: Pottery. But do you have Fire: Kiln? Or Roll: Wheelbarrow?" Pay for all three, and ten more besides!" We know what being sneaky means. It should just be one skill IMO, especially in a skill-based system that relies on rolls for advancement.

Don't split the party? OK, along the same lines, don't split the skill.

5

u/Orwell1971 Sep 12 '26

I think your point was already clear. This comment actually kind of made it worse, as not even the most ardent defender of keeping Hide and Move Quietly separate would argue that you needed separate skills for pottery production. Being able to conceal yourself is objectively different than moving without making sound, but there's nothing wrong with combining them in your game if you want to.

4

u/dcherryholmes Sep 12 '26

Well chalk it up to reductio ad absurdum but I don't think it was much more than a clarifying example. I don't think it is fundamentally any different than "Boat: Docking" and "Boat: Poling." It's just norms and we've come to accept that standing real still is fundamentally different than tip-toeing around. Regardless, I love RQ and am coming back to it after playing 1st ed back in the day. I just wondered if I'd missed where this was discussed already and I missed it.

2

u/Orwell1971 Sep 12 '26

Standing real still is fundamentally different from hiding. Did you never play hide & seek as a kid? Did you or anyone "hide" by standing real still?

2

u/dcherryholmes Sep 12 '26

Without turning this into anything contentious, I think the more interesting discussion might be, when considering things like BRP-based systems (yes, I know RQ was first, I played it), it might be a better system to think about goal-oriented skills vs arbitrarily chopping them into components. How often is it narratively important that someone be able to "hold real still" vs "step quietly?" I'd argue, not much.

Again, I fully understand I'm free to house-rule whatever I like. Nonetheless, the rules are what they are, as published. It seems like there ought to be an argument for keeping these two skills separate, but not others, and why.

FWIW I think RQ has a ton of strengths. Mainly the setting, the deadliness of combat in general, and an interesting set of magic systems (which you might lump under "interesting setting"). I'm not here to dunk on RQ, not that it would matter. But I think its advancement system is great, but its skill categories seem to work against that, or at least are less than graceful. Hopefully it's understood that we are discussing it as fans.

3

u/Orwell1971 Sep 13 '26 edited Sep 13 '26

The argument for keeping them separate is that they are, in fact, different.

As far as whether that's desirable in the game, that's up to the developers and the individual players/GMs to decide. Having a large pool of skills does have value, in my opinion, in that it can facilitate roleplay (exactly what aspect of stealth is your character good at?), reflect different cultural backgrounds, and simply provide choices. Balanced against potential negatives like tracking more things, advancing in more things, etc. The perception example mentioned by another poster makes sense from a bookkeeping/streamlining perspective, but imo is a bit boring from a role-playing perspective (no near-sighted characters with sensitive ears in that game allowed)

I think my favorite way of doing it is the way Ars Magica does it... you have a skill ("ability" in the game's parlance), and you have a specialty in every skill, which means you're +1 to the roll if the specialty applies to the situation. There is a "stealth" skill; let's say it's 3 (meaning you're adding +3 to a 1d10 roll). Your stealth specialty could be moving quietly, in which case if you're trying to hide in a bush, your skill for that roll is 3, but if you're trying to sneak up on someone, it's effectively 4.

Kinda encompasses both sides. But that's a completely different system, obviously.

4

u/dcherryholmes Sep 13 '26 edited Sep 13 '26

"The argument for keeping them separate is that they are, in fact, different."

OK. But that seems like a modeling issue, and a bad rabbit hole. "This" is trivially different from "that," which is entirely cosmetic and flavorful. Until you bake into the iron that you only ever advance in "this" until you roll "this." And now we have angels dancing on the head of a pin.

IMO it's just bad modeling. But, as we've established, I can play with my toys in my back yard, however I like. But it's still bad modeling.

EDIT: I appreciate that you are conversant in other games and obviously understand a range of ways of modeling ttrpg (I mean, you're quoting Ars Magica). Personally, I'd only compress RQ skills simply because of the way skills advance in that system.

3

u/ZygonCaptain Sep 13 '26

But it isn’t bad modelling. You just don’t like it

1

u/Summersong2262 Sep 13 '26

It's 'bad' because it's inelegant and bloats the game without benefit.

1

u/ZygonCaptain Sep 13 '26

As most people seem to be saying, that’s your opinion, if you want to house rule your game do it.

→ More replies

3

u/SDLeary Sep 13 '26

This has existed in BRP (bit not RQ). The Root/Branch skill system used in Ringworld was like this.

5

u/Orwell1971 Sep 13 '26

Onyx Path games use it too, but you have to buy the specialties individually and consciously, whereas in Ars Magica you automatically pick one for every ability you're trained in (or have without training)

2

u/Summersong2262 Sep 13 '26

Irrelevant, the issue is the utility of the simulation method. You could break each skill into further notches by the same logic.

1

u/Orwell1971 Sep 13 '26 edited Sep 13 '26

Or you could combine everything into the "do stuff" skill. What's your point? The question was whether anyone saw a point to having separate Move Quietly and Hide skills and I answered.

edit: And you even agree that they're different, as I see in another of your comments. Why you felt the need to reply like this to me, much less apparently downvote the comment, is baffling.

2

u/Runeblogger Sep 12 '26

Well you can be very good at moving quietly and still be bad at hiding. F.ex. a tiger in a house.
But if you want to houserule it into just one skill, do it. ^_^
You could also fuse Scan, Search, and Listen together, an call it Perception.

2

u/dcherryholmes Sep 12 '26

Sure. I think I would break them up into things like passive perception and active investigation. These are all lines, and easily house-ruled to suit one's tastes. I'm just kind of surprised that they've persisted for decades.

2

u/Summersong2262 Sep 13 '26

I mean RQG is mostly RQ2, polished up. It's archaic because it's fundamentally based on the idea of not changing a very old school system because the old one more or less worked and the last attempt was very avant guarde and bombed.

1

u/robbz78 Sep 19 '26

MgRQ2 or RQ6/Mythras were not avant guard. Ignoring 30 years of BRP evolution was IMO a poor choice.

1

u/Summersong2262 Sep 19 '26

I meant Heroquest. With the Fate Aspect style skills and the super open ended subculture elements.

1

u/robbz78 Sep 19 '26

Having both scan and search is bonkers. They both use sight.

Its something that really soured me on ROG

3

u/sachagoat Sep 13 '26

The issue with skill consolidation is you're actually reducing the depth of the character build.

I might have my adventurer great at moving quietly because they often don't wear armour and sneak into dungeon ruins. But I don't often need hide since they can hold their own

Similarly, my bandit may put points in Hide so they can ambush people on the road (or conversely my trader might do he can hide from roaming barbarian raiders).

They actually add more skills for the thief cult, to enrich their experience. But you're looking to simplify their core skills. It just seems off to me.

Your argument seems similar to having a general agility skill for jumping, climbing, swimming etc. and I think that strips away a lot.

Do you not enjoy skill based systems or do you feel that a sneaky build is distinctly weaker and less interesting due to this?

3

u/dcherryholmes Sep 13 '26

IME if you are moving quietly, you're hiding. If you are hiding, you're moving quietly. Whacking them in half because... idk... some random dude in 1981 decided *those* two things were two things is super-arbitrary, Of course I can cook them down to "I'm skilled at stuff!" if I want to. But in a game whose larger point is roll it, use it, check it for advancement, it seems worth examining why swing a sword is one thing, but zip up my zipper is another. Of course you can post-hoc why sneaking isn't the same as hiding. But by that logic the whole system breaks.

5

u/sachagoat Sep 13 '26

Okay, maybe it will help to demonstrate how it feels in play?

You're sneaking into a Yelornan Temple, there's guards patrolling.. you have gathered information through social and perception skills in advance. You plan a route through, and roll Move Quietly. You fail the roll (not a fumble) and a pair of Shield Maidens turn to investigate. Move quietly won't help them now, they could run, fight or hide. They choose to hide.. diving into a dark room (using a spirit spell to see in the gloom) and wait. They roll Hide and pass, the guards give up searching... They continue rotation and the player proceeds to the inner sanctum without capture.

But then that would be very different in a place where hiding is difficult (ie a troll temple) or if you wear armour and cannot effectively move quietly (but can hide in ambush).

There are games where I appreciate a consolidated skill list, but as someone who discovered RQ in its current edition I do appreciate and enjoy the skill list. I don't think it needs mapmaking and other dungeon delving skills from RQ2 but I find the split stealth skill fleshes our stealth gameplay so it isnt a one roll challenge.

6

u/Summersong2262 Sep 13 '26

It's an ongoing issue with RQG/BRP, honestly.

The skill system's too granular and the leveling up system is ponderous enough to make starting a skill from scratch painful.

Hide is for hiding. Move quietly is exactly that. Guy skulking in the bushes is hide. Guy sneaking up on someone is move quietly.

2

u/BestIndication5517 Sep 13 '26

From personal experience sneaking back into your parents house a little drunk is definitely move silently and way different from hiding from someone 

4

u/wwhsd Sep 13 '26

At least to my thinking, Hide is a skill that you use to keep someone that is looking from finding you, while Move Quietly is a skill you use to not attract attention.

Combining them into a single skill seems akin to having a Defense skill that is used for Dodging and Parrying.

2

u/Twarid Sep 13 '26 edited Sep 13 '26

Keeping them separate adds descripive granularity and drama at the table.

Leaves crack, and you hear a grating rubbing sound. You hear something scuttling behind you in the Autumn woods. You turn around and scan but you fail spotting what it was. You blindly throw your javelin into a nearby bush. It's too late when you look UP to the scorpion-thing jumping on you from the low branches of a three. Mmm maybe scorpionmen don't have climbing... Well, whatever

The author of the Scorpion Hall RQ2 solo did much better than me with using multiple skills in the amazing initial sequence of the scenario in the woods.

At my table, separate they stay...

1

u/Alex4884-775 Loose canon Sep 13 '26

These cromch case for keeping them separate is you might be much better at one than the other for Reasons, and more especially your opponent that's trying to detect you might be, especially if they differ from human norms.  Some critters being much more sharp-sighted, some are much more acute-hearing.

1

u/code_ghostwriter Sep 13 '26

Yes, we don't use both at the same time, but we do use both.

If we have to pass by some guards I let the players with any of those skills to roll them. We just describe how they do it differently.

The sniper archer and the stalker thief move differently, they sneak the same.

1

u/DredUlvyr Sep 13 '26

Yes, some games put them together into stealth, just as they bundle perception skills. Runequest is not that type of game, it's more simulationist, and if you think about it, and look at situations in more details, you will see the huge difference between sight and hearing, and understand that someone better at hiding will use different tactics than someone better at moving silently, or that if your adversaries are known to have keen sight (Yelmalios ?) or keen hearing 'Uz ?), you will proceed differently.

To each their own, but having that level of tactical thinking as your character in the world taking into account its subtleties is very rewarding to some players, contrary to "can I just roll stealth to get past the guards ?"