[4e] Stealth

[Waargh!]

Lets clarify WHEN you can hide. You are in a forest. The enemies see you. You spot a tree and want to hide behind it, for the sole purpose of gaining combat advantages. So you can move behind cover(tree) and make a hide check? Wouldn't everybody see you since there where paying attention to you?
If the tree is big enough you can stay behind it, thus covering the all of you, thus having total cover. But lets say it's small and you just want the cover. Can you still hide? Does this make sense though?

When somebody spots you, do you have to move to a different cover? The rules say that you have to obtain cover or distract. Do you have to start from cover and and in cover in order to make a stealth check? Or the "you need to have cover" means ending in cover/concealment?

[erikun]

Yes, if you dive behind a low wall, you can use Stealth to hide. The opponent can't see you, now can they? I would say that qualifies as "hidden" to me.

Let's try an example: you're standing next to a wall on a featureless plain. You duck behind the wall to avoid some hobgoblin archers. You're hidden, right? The hobgoblins can't see you, period. The can't shoot you. Sure, they know where you are, but that doesn't mean they can see you. You're hidden.

Now let's assume that the walk around the wall and look behind it. They're going to see you, correct? I'm sure there's a technical rule that basically says "you cannot hide without cover or concealment". So as long as they can look around the wall, they can see you again. Unless you're invisible, or teleported, or... well, you get the idea.

Now, if they didn't know you were behind the wall, you could make a Stealth check. What does that mean? Well, it means you squeezed up against the wall as closely as possible, and not moving. If the hobgoblins don't spot you then, it means they just glanced at the wall as they were passing by, and didn't notice you. Perhaps they looked too early, and didn't realize you were squeezed close to it. Perhaps they did see you, but out of the corner of their eye, they thought you were just a bag of rubble.

However, if the hobgoblins are actively looking behind the wall, they're going to automatically see you (see first example). It's like asking for an attack roll when running something over with a steamroller - some things should just automatically succeed.

[kieza]

You need cover or concealment to hide. Usually, this would come from one of three things: it's dark out and you're in shadows, you're behind a smallish obstacle like a tree, or you are the subject of a power.

If it's the first case: you can hide, even right next to someone, so long as you remain in shadows. Note that if you stab them, they will start making active checks and the likelihood of being spotted increases dramatically. If they have a torch or other potential source of light handy, they can remove your concealment, at which point you become visible immediately.

If the second case: so long as you have cover relative to someone, you can hide from them--they may know that you're there if they saw you hide there, but they can't see you. If, say, they move around the tree and you no longer have cover, you become visible immediately, even if they weren't looking for you. If you pass through areas where you have no cover as part of a move, you become visible immediately, although if you wind up with cover again, you can hide again.

If the third case, you can hide so long as the power remains active. If it is dispelled or whatever, you become visible immediately.

There's a fourth sort-of category that's open to DM fiat: the person you hide from is distracted. The DM can decide that out of combat, someone is paying attention to something else, and you can hide from them without cover. The DMG says that generally in combat, people are paying attention in all directions, but that doesn't really make sense all the time. As a houserule, I'd say that if you start and end a move with cover and concealment, the person you hide from doesn't know even your general location (he didn't see you hide earlier), and you don't attract attention to yourself by attacking or whatever, you can make a check to remain "hidden" during the move. (ie, you aren't visible for long, and the person isn't keeping an eye on your location)

[Yakk]

There's a fourth sort-of category that's open to DM fiat: the person you hide from is distracted. The DM can decide that out of combat, someone is paying attention to something else, and you can hide from them without cover. The DMG says that generally in combat, people are paying attention in all directions, but that doesn't really make sense all the time. As a houserule, I'd say that if you start and end a move with cover and concealment, the person you hide from doesn't know even your general location (he didn't see you hide earlier), and you don't attract attention to yourself by attacking or whatever, you can make a check to remain "hidden" during the move. (ie, you aren't visible for long, and the person isn't keeping an eye on your location)

Careful: that is a lot like a Rogue Power.

[Gypsy0001]

Hiding after being detected should provide you the opportunity to seek out a new hiding spot. If you stay in the same spot they know you're there and they'll see you when they come around the corner.

Example: Suppose you see me upstairs and I run into the linen closet, shut the door, and hide. You can't see me or cast spells at me, but you know where I am.

If I don't move elsewhere, you can just walk up and open the door and find me.

But if I climb the walls and enter the attic and loop down through the master bedroom, then while you're busy poking around in the linen closet trying to figure out where on earth I went, I can sneak up from behind you and sneak attack.

[Grey Watcher]

True, but knowing where someone is, and actually being able to see Percieve him or her are two separate things. In the examples of diving behind a wall or ducking in a closet to hide then, yes, assuming you make your hide check, you're hidden (if you fail, perhaps your knees are sticking up over the wall or you closed the closet door on your cloak). But yes, if you succeed, you are hidden. Intelligent (say Int > 8) should be able to figure out where you are, but ducking out of sight, even in an obvious place, just might confuse very unintelligent beings (ie zombies), and allow you to escape. Furthermore, because you're hidden, while they know where you are, they don't get line of sight, and can't observe your behavior (they might not know, for example, that you're readying an action to cast Evan's Spiked Tentacles of Forced Intrusion on whoever opens the closet door.

[Theli]

Yes, with stealth all you need is some kind of concealment or cover, and to win on an opposed stealth check, in order to gain combat advantage. This is true even if they know exactly where you are. And when you attack, you lose any other benefit stealth might be able to grant you.

Now to hide/sneak away or around someone that's already aware of you so that they lose track... That's a bit more difficult. Even if you're "hidden", if they know exactly where you are and where to attack, you get only some benefit from that concealment and not total protection. (They can still attack the "square", in other words.)

Or at least this is how I understand it.

[SCPRedMage]

There's a Warlock class feature, Shadow Walk, that grants concealment if you move at least three squares. I find the thought of using it to hide from enemies while standing in the open EXTREMELY amusing... :smallbiggrin:

[sombrastewart]

There's a Warlock class feature, Shadow Walk, that grants concealment if you move at least three squares. I find the thought of using it to hide from enemies while standing in the open EXTREMELY amusing... :smallbiggrin:

Good God, that's a great idea.

Anyone know of a good rogue build that could incorporate that?

[TheOOB]

Good God, that's a great idea.

Anyone know of a good rogue build that could incorporate that?

Unfortunately, anyone who is a rogue can't have that feature.

[Edea]

I thought Stealthing was the point of Shadow Walk, honestly.

I also found it a bit odd that Warlocks do not gain Stealth as a class skill, but they do get...Thievery; yet they have powers that boost Stealth...and not Thievery. :/

OT, The Star Pact is also a bit wtf; their at-will is Constitution based, but most of their encounter powers (in particular their -forced- Paragon Path powers) are Charisma based, and their dailies are all over the place (not that that matters, since they aren't affected by the pact you chose). MAD in and of itself isn't really the point; the point is that the other two pacts don't suffer from this problem, and they aren't significantly worse in any other areas (from what I've been seeing, Fey has been deemed 'better,' actually).

There aren't that many must-have feats for 'locks, so the one I'm playing next took ST:Stealth (and may take SF:Stealth if I feel it's necessary). That's pretty much a guaranteed +2 to hit from CA, which striker characters (such as Warlocks) desperately need.

[sombrastewart]

Unfortunately, anyone who is a rogue can't have that feature.

Alright, I don't know 4e well, and I'm sure I'll come off as an idiot, but why the hell not?

[TheOOB]

Alright, I don't know 4e well, and I'm sure I'll come off as an idiot, but why the hell not?

It's a class feature of the warlock, not a power. You pick one class in 4e, and you multiclass by picking feats you gain some powers of another class in exchange for powers from your own class. There is no way to gain features from another class unless it is specifically in the multiclass feat.

[sombrastewart]

It's a class feature of the warlock, not a power. You pick one class in 4e, and you multiclass by picking feats you gain some powers of another class in exchange for powers from your own class. There is no way to gain features from another class unless it is specifically in the multiclass feat.

Thank you.

It makes me sad, but thank you for being polite in clarifying that .

[SCPRedMage]

I thought Stealthing was the point of Shadow Walk, honestly.
No, the point is the concealment; it's -2 to any attack against you. The stealth is just a REALLY awesome side effect...

[wodan46]

Don't be too sad. Warlock can still multiclass to Rogue and get backstab once per encounter.

As it stands, when you multiclass, you get a specific class feature that has been downgraded from at-will to encounter or encounter to daily, ontop of a free trained skill, access to paragon paths, and access to power swap feats.

Personally, I see no problem in declaring that you can take any class feature at the downgraded level rather than the specific ones provided within PHB.

So for example, for Warlock, you could instead of getting Eldritch Blast 1/per encounter, you could get Shadow-walk once per encounter, or Curse once per encounter, complete with the Boon bonus for killing the target.

Features that could easily be offered without rules problems.
Wizards: Implement effect 1/daily
Clerics: Healing Lore 1/encounter
Warlock: Shadowalk 1/encounter Curse/Pact Boon 1/encounter
Fighter: +Wis to Opportunity Attack 1/encounter

Warlocks, Rangers, Rogues, and Fighters all have +1 situational attack bonuses. These would be granted 1 per day, but last for the whole encounter. The Warlord and Rogue's subclass tricks would also work this way.