Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CajunAzn" data-source="post: 5075198" data-attributes="member: 87718">To illustrate how a rule can be read and consequently implemented in different ways, let's go back to the passage on stealth itself.  Let's take a narrow viewpoint and concentrate only on the part about creatures not counting as cover:   If you read this paragraph, and only this paragraph, the I would agree with your interpretation. Your cover vanishes instantly, and this is design flaw/oversight. But let's read over the whole article (forum policy means I can't quote the whole thing): Now we are given the wider perspective of the rule and I now no longer think the previous interpretation is correct. Notice how the entire rule is laid out in a chronological step-by-step fashion. It's a "Before, During and After" type arrangement, that suggests that the "During" portion shouldn't retroactively cancel the "Before" portion. Now notice how the "Remaining Hidden" section is laid out. It is a bullet list of conditions that are all phrased in the manner of the player doing something while stealthed on the action after. There is no indication that these rules, should be back-applied to the situation in the "Becoming Hidden" portion.  Therefore it becomes reasonable that the clause: "you cannot use creatures as cover to remain hidden" only applies on the player's next action while stealthed. And I'll emphasize the word choice of "remain" vs "become" to suggest that creature cover was intended as an option to start the stealth condition, but not to keep it (on the next action).  Many of you just ignore this contextual implication while determining when the rule of "remain hidden" should be applied.  === Many rules in D&D4 only make sense when you take into account the context they are written. For example, Fleeting Ghost: "You can move your speed and make a Stealth check. You do not take the normal penalty from movement on this check." If I were to blindly just read the first sentance, I might be lead to believe this rule allows me to make stealth rolls in plain sight. However, when I read the context, "You do not take the normal penalty from the movement" Now it becomes clear that the only difference is you don't apply the movement penalties, and the cover/concealement requirements still apply. === So I ask everybody to read that passage again, look at my points from a contextual view, and tell me if maybe there's some truth to what I'm saying.</blockquote>

Verification