D&D 4E My take on 4E Stealth

[ravenight]

Yes, the image of Shaq hiding behind Dakota Fanning makes very little sense, but a) we are talking about a fully armored Dakota Fanning, wielding some sort of weapon and possibly a shield, and b) we aren't talking about Shaq disappearing completely from view, we are talking about him crouching and concealing himself in such a way that he escapes notice for a few seconds.

 

[Mistwell]

The rules specifically state (PH 280) that allies give you cover against ranged attacks. Because it never says they give you cover in any other circumstances...

Look at the very next section down in the stealth rule from the section you are referring to. It's titled "Determining Cover" I seem to recall.

 

[Nikosandros]

Look at the very next section down in the stealth rule from the section you are referring to. It's titled "Determining Cover" I seem to recall.

IMO that section simply states how to determine if an enemy grants cover against ranged attacks, as stated in the previous section that strongly seems to imply that enemies only grant cover against ranged attacks.

Normal covers also protects against melee attacks, so it is clear that enemies don't provide "standard" cover.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree with you, BUT because those have the same mechanics, the text in "Determining cover" Bullet point treated them the same. Some people will cling to that means the are the same even though the bullet point that defined "Cover" indicated cover came from terrain.

There is a reasonable disagreement over how it operates. People who disagree with your view are not "clinging" to anything, they just view it differently than you do, and place their rules emphasis on a different section than you.

I understand the dispute, I think each side has it's strong argument and weaknesses, but trying to characterize it in the aggressive manner you just did isn't helpful. We simply don't know for sure how it is supposed to work until we get better official clarification from WOTC beyond the CustServ answers.

IMO that section simply states how to determine if an enemy grants cover against ranged attacks, as stated in the previous section that strongly seems to imply that enemies only grant cover against ranged attacks.

Normal covers also protects against melee attacks, so it is clear that enemies don't provide "standard" cover.

I understand that is your perspective, and I disagree with it, but you said "Because it never says they give you cover in any other circumstances". We don't know if that is correct or not. Part of the dispute lies in the "Determining Cover" section, and it's impossible at this point to say for sure that "it never says they give you cover in any other circumstances" given that section.

 

[Nikosandros]

I understand that is your perspective, and I disagree with it, but you said "Because it never says they give you cover in any other circumstances". We don't know if that is correct or not. Part of the dispute lies in the "Determining Cover" section, and it's impossible at this point to say for sure that "it never says they give you cover in any other circumstances" given that section.

Well, I said IMO and "seems to imply"...

Of course, the answer is not clear cut at all and I'm certainly biased in my reading of the rules by the fact that I don't like the idea of other characters providing cover for stealth.

In any event, I think that it is fairly obvious that the type of cover granted by creatures is not standard, since it doesn't work against melee attacks. Naturally, this does not automatically imply that it doesn't work for stealth.

 

[reveal]

I wrote to CS and asked this question:

If a person does not attack with a range weapon but is, say, 6 squares away, do you get cover against them if there's an ally between you and the target? Mainly, I'm trying to figure out if you would be able to hide from them if they don't actually make a ranged attack against you.

And the answer is...

Hello. Yes, you can hide behind your allies even if you aren't being attacked with a ranged attack.

Evan T.

 

[clearstream]

I wrote to CS and asked this question:...

...and assuming your DM tells you that the situation is appropriate.

In this specific case I would personally consider whether the hider was previously unobserved, whether any other observers are able to see and point out the hider, and whether the ally was large enough in all three dimensions to not leave parts of the hider obviously sticking out.

-vk

 

[Xorn]

Incidentally, the DMG states, "A creature that’s around a corner from the attacker, or protected by terrain, has cover."

Then additionally (and only when Determining Cover For Ranged Attacks), and enemy between you and the target gives cover, but only for the purposes of making a Ranged Attack. That's why allies do not provide cover for stealth, by my reading.

Note the DMG also states, "As the referee, you decide based on common sense whether a creature has cover against an attack."

 

[Dayspire]

Note the DMG also states, "As the referee, you decide based on common sense whether a creature has cover against an attack."

I wish I could bold this, colorize it, and then blast it into the brain of some people.

 

[Dausuul]

As always, my solution is this: "Explain how what you're doing makes sense in-game. If you can come up with a plausible explanation for how your dragonborn is hiding behind the halfling, you can do it per the RAW. Otherwise, nada."