New stealth stuff from WotC

[JDillard]

I don't think this has been posted anywhere, which makes me think that it's new info.

There's a reasonably lengthy Stealth excerpt in the rules compendium on the wizards site. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/insider/compendium

I can't link directly to the article, but just search for Stealth from there.

The changes seem fairly small, but do look like they get rid of some of the bizarre stuff people were trying to do with stealth actions.

 

[jaelis]

Highlights:
- Make a stealth check at the end of a move action only
- When hidden, you are silent and invisible with respect to the enemy you are hidden from
- If you attack, you gain the benefit of being hidden, but are no longer hidden afterward.
- If you move, make a new stealth check
- You can't hide behind another creature
Edit:
- You need superior cover or total concealment to start hiding

Seems pretty clear to me now. Good find!

 

[Bolongo]

The big thing I spotted right away is that they now specify superior cover or total concealment to allow a stealth check. Instead of just regular old cover or concealment, like it says in the PHB. The Warlock player in my game will not be happy.

 

[Larrin]

other highlightL: can be made "only if you have superior cover or total concealment against the enemy" so no more warlocks shadow walk=stealth.

 

[Tsuul]

Superior Cover , Total Concealment, or zero Line of Sight to start off the Stealth check, but after that you only need Cover or Concealment to keep it going.

 

[Pielorinho]

To verify that this strategy would work:

The PCs are in a room with 5' diameter pillars in it.

A rogue moves at normal speed across the room to a location that grants her superior cover against an enemy. Until she ends her movement, she has little or no cover or concealment.

At the end of her movement, she makes a stealth check at no penalty.

Although she has superior cover against the enemy, the enemy has no cover against her.

She uses a standard action to make a ranged attack; she has combat advantage on this attack and can apply sneak-attack damage.

Is this accurate?

It makes ranged rogues a lot better if so.

Daniel

 

[Valesin]

Wow, that is pretty...idiotic. You can only use stealth against an enemy against whom you have Total Concealment, which is defined as:

"Total Concealment (–5 Penalty to Attack Rolls):
You can’t see the target. The target is invisible, in
a totally obscured square, or in a heavily obscured square that is not adjacent to you."

So you can only hide from a person when they already have absolutely zero chance of seeing you in the first place.

I guess I can understand their drive to nerf the warlock, but this is just stupid. An invisible person, or a person firing through an arrow slit, really doesn't need stealth. And now no one else can get it.

So much for the rogue being "expected to get combat advantage with every attack."

 

[Stalker0]

Definitely like that stealth only occurs at the end of a move action....that solves 99% of the major issues with stealth right there.

Not sure I like the total cover or concealment needed to start stealthing....really cuts in to the warlock's ability, and now the rogue can no longer duck behind cover, hide, and then attack (he has to get total cover, which means he won't be able to attack his enemy). That was one of my new favorite things about stealth.

Anyway, hopefully we will get some errata soon to make this official, those aren't little clarifications, that's definitely some strong changes to stealth, especially changing the action type.

 

[Valesin]

To verify that this strategy would work:

The PCs are in a room with 5' diameter pillars in it.

A rogue moves at normal speed across the room to a location that grants her superior cover against an enemy. Until she ends her movement, she has little or no cover or concealment.

At the end of her movement, she makes a stealth check at no penalty.

Although she has superior cover against the enemy, the enemy has no cover against her.

She uses a standard action to make a ranged attack; she has combat advantage on this attack and can apply sneak-attack damage.

Is this accurate?

It makes ranged rogues a lot better if so.

Daniel

Whereas that same rogue in an outdoor setting with light underbrush does...nothing.

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

I don't think this has been posted anywhere, which makes me think that it's new info.

It popped up in this thread starting at post 44 if you want more reaction...

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=237210&page=2