Is Stealth the new Grapple?

[clearstream]

No.

I like a man who says what he means

Skills in 4th edition are too broad to be defined so narrowly. They are NOT 1 tool that can only be applied only one way in one situation.

Stealth can be used to:
duck behind cover in battle - resulting in a lasting condition
open a door quietly - only applies during the action
melt into the crowd at a market - applies during the action and results in a lasting condition
Whisper instructions unheard during negotiations with the Bishop - only applies during the action
Draw a dagger quietly after having successfully made a stealthy move action on a guard - an skill check to maintain a condition.

By RAW, Stealth can't be used to result in a lasting condition. There is no such wording. As for whether skills need to have broad applicability, I agree with you.

The problem is that for the mechanics to resolve robustly, with good consideration to use and balance issues, it is essential to pick one way or the other. Picking one way or the other resolves intent cleanly and allows us to move on to rules that are easy to agree with and simple to run.

But if we insist on picking and choosing actions to apply stealth with, and the mode of application, not only do we have no guidance from RAW, but we are increasing the mechanical complexity without increasing the play value commensurately.

-vk

 

[MarkB]

By RAW, Stealth can't be used to result in a lasting condition. There is no such wording.

Success: You avoid notice, unheard and hidden from view. If you later attack or shout, you're no longer hidden.​

Emphasis added for clarity. That's pretty much a textbook definition of a successful check resulting in a lasting condition.

 

[clearstream]

Success: You avoid notice, unheard and hidden from view. If you later attack or shout, you're no longer hidden.
​

Emphasis added for clarity. That's pretty much a textbook definition of a successful check resulting in a lasting condition.

And presumably also no longer avoiding notice, or unheard. However, reconsidered that wording does mean RAW wants us to contemplate a lasting hidden condition. Later is the critical word. The 'no longer' would work in either case. I judge that the 'later' is too general to mean just 'later during this action'. Nice examination of the RAW Mark.

As you know, my Stealth - Streamlined RAI relied on a lasting condition applying. I'm going to have to go back to that, hugely informed by this foray into looking closely at line one of the Stealth rules block.

I believe it may help substantially if you could consider an issue. Is there any RAW that tells you to choose some actions and not others to get that lasting effect with? (Save an attack action or free action used to shout.)

-vk

 

[the_redbeard]

The problem is that for the mechanics to resolve robustly, with good consideration to use and balance issues, it is essential to pick one way or the other. Picking one way or the other resolves intent cleanly and allows us to move on to rules that are easy to agree with and simple to run.

But if we insist on picking and choosing actions to apply stealth with, and the mode of application, not only do we have no guidance from RAW, but we are increasing the mechanical complexity without increasing the play value commensurately.

-vk

Without increasing play value? How about the value of rogues (or rangers or anyone who trains stealth well enough to be good at it) being able to creatively apply their skill?

Needlessly straightjacketing a skill constricts creativity.

The skill has to cover a myriad of player (and DM) ways to do things sneakily - whether hiding themselves or something, or performing an action surreptitiously.

I think I agreed in the beginning of this thread that the wording of the skill could be improved. (The FAQ helps a bit, but not enough.)
I disagree that it is mechanically complicated.

Despite cliche'd criticisms, 4th edition is not a video game. The mechanics are not going to be relegated to hard logic of a computer program. Its rules are a framework for a cooperative, interpretive experience.

 

[firesnakearies]

Without increasing play value? How about the value of rogues (or rangers or anyone who trains stealth well enough to be good at it) being able to creatively apply their skill?

Needlessly straightjacketing a skill constricts creativity.

The skill has to cover a myriad of player (and DM) ways to do things sneakily - whether hiding themselves or something, or performing an action surreptitiously.

I think I agreed in the beginning of this thread that the wording of the skill could be improved. (The FAQ helps a bit, but not enough.)
I disagree that it is mechanically complicated.

Despite cliche'd criticisms, 4th edition is not a video game. The mechanics are not going to be relegated to hard logic of a computer program. Its rules are a framework for a cooperative, interpretive experience.

Hear hear!

 

[clearstream]

I disagree that it is mechanically complicated.

To write rules explaining Stealth clearly will require much wording, with several branching points and layered conditionals. I openly challenge anyone to resolve Stealth with mechanically non-complicated rules that omit nothing and handle the range of cases. If they do, that will prove your disagreement is justified.

Despite cliche'd criticisms, 4th edition is not a video game. The mechanics are not going to be relegated to hard logic of a computer program. Its rules are a framework for a cooperative, interpretive experience.

The RPGA Campaign Handbook was just over 30 pages last time I looked. Rather than add a long list of actions to allow and disallow, and the mode of stealth to apply to each, it will be better to have coherent rules in the main game. Stealth is only one skill; powers, not skills, are intended to be the focus of combat. That even applies to Rogues.

Mearls emphasised that the game math intended Rogues to have Sneak Attack most of the time, and that Stealth was meant to feed into that while being no big deal. Rogues can gain CA in 13 ways other than stealth. They have powers that generate CA, and can benefit from the effects of powers of their own and other players that result in CA. Stealth is supplemental, not central, in RAW and RAI. Although I do respect that some players love the idea of Stealth being their core combat mode.

-vk

 

[MarkB]

I believe it may help substantially if you could consider an issue. Is there any RAW that tells you to choose some actions and not others to get that lasting effect with? (Save an attack action or free action used to shout.)

Beyond the (all too subjective) interpretation of the phrase "part of the action you wish to perform stealthily", no, such guidance is unfortunately lacking.

I've tended towards only using Move actions involving movement in order to gain the Hidden condition, on the grounds that if you're observed then you need to move into a hidden position - but that's not particularly supported by the rules.