D&D 4E 4e stealth issues

[Colmarr]

We recently encountered some issues with the errataed 4e stealth rules, and I thought I'd throw them open for discussion:

Issue 1: A shadowhunter bat ("SHB")starts its turn hidden. It uses Flyby attack (a standard action) to move 4 squares, attack PC1, and fly 4 more squares around a corner. PC1 has readied to attack the SHB when it moves into a square adjacent to him. On the way out the bat moves through a square threatened by PC2.

[sblock=Our interpretation The SHB retains it's hidden status until the end of its action, meaning that PC1's attack is at -5 for total concealment. PC2 doesn't get his opportunity attack because the SHB is still hidden (and thus invisible).[/sblock]

Issue 2: A goblin begins its turn hidden. PC1 is in the next room and has readied to attack the goblin if it appears. The goblin moves across the open doorway to the other side.

[sblock=Our interpretationPC1's readied attack is at -5 to hit. Even though the goblin is in the open doorway, it retains it's hidden status until the end of its move action.[/sblock]

Did we miss something?

 

[Mengu]

I think you missed the part that says:

Keep Out of Sight: If you no longer have any cover or concealment against an enemy, you don’t remain hidden from that enemy.

So unless there is cover or conealment all the way down the flight path of the shadow bat, the moment the bat leaves cover, it is no longer hidden.

 

[Larrin]

I don't think stealth waits until the end of your turn to action to end. It ends when it ends, at that instant withing the action. Thus once it ends, you don't suffer any penalties due to stealth to attack the previously stealthed creature. Thus if the player sees the goblin or bat, their stealth is gone, there is no penalty to attack them.

It really makes no sense otherwise; A goblin in a doorway is perfectly visible, regardless of whether you could see him before or not. Stealth doesn't have 'lingering' effects.

 

[MarkB]

Did we miss something?

Strictly by the post-errata RAW, you're correct.

For what it's worth, I do tend to rule slightly differently when I DM. I allow characters who cease to be hidden due to movement to retain combat advantage until the end of their action, but they lose all other aspects of the Hidden condition the moment they no longer qualify for them.

That retains the "surprise attack" aspect of stealth, and allows mobile rogues to get in their sneak attacks, without raising the more problematic issues such as those you highlighted.

 

[Unwise]

I play that stealth ends as soon as you no longer have cover/concealment, which I believe is the RAW. In both of your examples, the attackers would not be hidden.

Unlike the previous poster, I would not allow a rogue to charge out of the shadows and get combat advantage on a victim. I believe that to be one of the points of those abilities that tie movement/shifting to attacks is to take advantage of stealth. (Remember, that if combat has not begun, then sure, the rogue would get CA+Sneak Attack as he has suprised them)

For example, I start in complete darkness and have three squares of coverless light between me and the victim (who has rolled initiative, so has 360 vision and is on guard). If I move those three squares, I am seen, so don't get any advantage. If I use a "shift 3 squares then attack" power, then at the beginning of my attack I get CA (as I am hidden), so will get +2 and do sneak attack. This is regardless of the fact that the guy can see me now, as my attack has already started by the time he can.

This is just the way we play, I have not bothered to dig further into the rules, as I don't see any faults with this currently.

In OPs examples, I would say that the bat has combat advantage over everyone that could not see him when he began his attack (assuming that swoop is an attack manauver). This does not mean that he keeps his stealth the entire time though.
In the goblins example, he moves, loses his stealth, when his attack comes around, he gets no CA.

 

[Anathos]

I think you missed the part that says:

Keep Out of Sight: If you no longer have any cover or concealment against an enemy, you don’t remain hidden from that enemy.

So unless there is cover or conealment all the way down the flight path of the shadow bat, the moment the bat leaves cover, it is no longer hidden.

I play that stealth ends as soon as you no longer have cover/concealment, which I believe is the RAW. In both of your examples, the attackers would not be hidden.

You both missed this part:

Not Remaining Hidden: If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until you resolve the action. You can’t become hidden again as part of that same action.

 

[DracoSuave]

We recently encountered some issues with the errataed 4e stealth rules, and I thought I'd throw them open for discussion:

Issue 1: A shadowhunter bat ("SHB")starts its turn hidden. It uses Flyby attack (a standard action) to move 4 squares, attack PC1, and fly 4 more squares around a corner. PC1 has readied to attack the SHB when it moves into a square adjacent to him. On the way out the bat moves through a square threatened by PC2.

[sblock=Our interpretation The SHB retains it's hidden status until the end of its action, meaning that PC1's attack is at -5 for total concealment. PC2 doesn't get his opportunity attack because the SHB is still hidden (and thus invisible).[/sblock]

Issue 2: A goblin begins its turn hidden. PC1 is in the next room and has readied to attack the goblin if it appears. The goblin moves across the open doorway to the other side.

[sblock=Our interpretationPC1's readied attack is at -5 to hit. Even though the goblin is in the open doorway, it retains it's hidden status until the end of its move action.[/sblock]

Did we miss something?

Yes. The first instance, the readied action can never trigger. By the time the character is aware of the enemy's location, that enemy has already moved. Thusly, the 'when the enemy moves adjacent' trigger never occurs. Part of the hidden benefits is that enemies are not aware of your location.

In the second instance, the readied action WILL occur, because the trigger for that is 'when the enemy appears.' This attack will occur without the benefit of concealment because readied actions are immediate reactions and therefore occur after the trigger has completed. The player is aware of the creature because it lost the benefits of the hidden status; a creature cannot lose the benefits of the hidden status (unaware of your location) while retaining the benefits of the hidden status (being invisible).

The important difference is not how the enemy loses the hidden status, but the trigger used in the readied action.

Unlike the previous poster, I would not allow a rogue to charge out of the shadows and get combat advantage on a victim.

That's fine, but understand that by doing so, you partially nerf the aerialist rogue build, and completely gut and dismember the cunning sneak build, not to mention completely and absolutely make some avenger paragon paths completely fail to work as intended. The rule is designed specifically to allow charging out of the shadows to get combat advantage, and the rogue class and avenger pps are designed specifically to take advantage of it.

However, that's not the same as moving out of the shadows, and taking a seperate action after. The rules do not allow you to move out of the shadows, then use a standard action to make an attack and still expect combat advantage. Charging, tho, is a single action, and therefore you do not lose the benefits of being hidden until after the attack has resolved.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Strictly by the post-errata RAW, you're correct.

For what it's worth, I do tend to rule slightly differently when I DM. I allow characters who cease to be hidden due to movement to retain combat advantage until the end of their action, but they lose all other aspects of the Hidden condition the moment they no longer qualify for them.

That retains the "surprise attack" aspect of stealth, and allows mobile rogues to get in their sneak attacks, without raising the more problematic issues such as those you highlighted.

I'm not so sure this is not actually the way the rules are intended to function. It all revolves around what exactly 'retain the benefits' means. I argue that being invisible etc is NOT a 'benefit' of being hidden, it is the DEFINITION of being hidden. Furthermore it is not an effect that is applied TO the hidden character, but a disadvantage applied to anyone that hasn't perceived said character.

By that interpretation when you burst out of hiding and attack you DO get CA because that is a benefit TO YOU of being hidden, but you don't any longer prevent others from seeing you and reacting to you because you are NOT hidden and those affects are applied to those who couldn't see you, not to you and thus aren't a benefit you derive directly. Inarguably they are an ADVANTAGE, but not a rules mechanical benefit. Of course plenty of rules lawyers will simply hate being out-lawyered on this one and it can provoke endless debate, but ah well...

Besides it seems to me to be the intent of the rule, otherwise a rogue can simply run across an open area in plain site and if he makes it out of LoS is effectively never seen at all, which really makes very little sense (though there are certainly feats and powers etc that can give that effect).

 

[DEFCON 1]

I'm not so sure this is not actually the way the rules are intended to function.

That's true, which is why MarkB made sure to point out that this was purely how they ruled it (or really, house-ruled it).

He gives rogues the benefits of the stealth for their attacks when they come out from hidden... but doesn't give the opponents the disadvantages. His choice to make as DM, and no big deal if it works for his group.

 

[eamon]

A general problem with the wording is that the concept of action is poorly delineated. What happens if I shout halfway another action as a free action? Does the action I started first matter, or the action I completed first (the free action)? What if, instead of shouting you're a warden and just mark (nasty anyhow, with stealth...)? Movement, in terms of interrupts, is resolved square-by-square: is that the intent here too - i.e. each individual square of movement is an "action"? And when is an action your action in the first place (which gets complicated in the face of interrupts/reactions)?

Disregarding the inherent fuzziness, I think the intent is clear: you retain stealth until the end of the (ill-defined) action, and then you lose stealth (and cannot become re-hidden). So the rogue racing across the room is "spotted" but nobody has time to react until he's passed. Of course, doing that is noticable, so even though he's in the next room and again has total concealment, he's no longer got stealth - but a simple move fixes that.