New stealth stuff from WotC

[JDillard]

Shadow stride lets you hop from cover to cover while remaining hidden even if the intervening spaces are not covered (which indicates you can lose stealth after any square of movement not just after your whole move action)

I really don't think this is the case, although I did for a while there. It's not a matter of "you lose hidden after any square of movement", it's "you lose hiden after the action in which you didn't remain hidden completes".

To put it more succinctly: At any point in an action, if you go out of cover, you lose hidden at the end of that action. It doesn't matter where you end up, only where you went through. Still makes Shadow Stride useful, but you don't have to have that "lose stealth after any square" bit to make it so.

 

[Khime]

What the....????

They're putting original rules content into the compendium, and just waiting for someone to stumble across it and notice it's there? Not just original rules either, but rules that contradict the PHB?

That's not the way a compendium is supposed to work. At least publich the original content outside of the compendium, then reference it.

It could just be that the person who updates the compendium is faster (or gets information sooner) than the person who posts the latest errata PDFs. Or the official errata releases come out when enough errata have accumulated, but the compendium can be updated piecemeal.

 

[NeoNick]

I think this is a HUGE nerf to mainly rogues. IMHO it will be much harder for them to get CA and their Sneak Attacks.

This is because of two changes:
- You need superior cover or total concealment to start hiding.
- You can't hide behind another creature.

Earlier rogues could /by our interpretation/ get their so needed CA by getting behind -2 cover (which could be had behind an ally) or -2 concealment. Now this is gone.

I like 4 ed a lot and it seems every class and power has been nicely balanced and tested EXCEPT stealth! In the stealth-case Wizard really have made an unprofessional job. hrmf

 

[Festivus]

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

He didn't say "combat advantage with every attack from stealth". There are many other ways to gain combat advantage, and by round 2 I would be expecting my fighter/paladin type to be on the opposite side of whatever we were fighting so I could have CA. Then there are the tricks if the fighter is too dumb, I mean slow to get into flank.

I like this clarification, it puts rogues back into the sneaky business where it should have been.

 

[baberg]

I guess the rogue in my party just doesn't play like the rest of you. His combat advantage, 9 times out of 10, comes from either true stealth (hiding around a corner and ambushing the next creature to walk past) or from flanking a target. My warlock, on the other hand, used the concealment feature every single turn, trying to stealth - and I always though it was just a little bit cheesy.

 

[Valesin]

I guess the rogue in my party just doesn't play like the rest of you. His combat advantage, 9 times out of 10, comes from either true stealth (hiding around a corner and ambushing the next creature to walk past) or from flanking a target. My warlock, on the other hand, used the concealment feature every single turn, trying to stealth - and I always though it was just a little bit cheesy.

I guess I just don't see the problem with the guy who creates magical cocealment every time he moves AND doesn't get sneak attack being stealthy. Cheese would be if the guy who gets multiple SA dice every time he is stealthy were to have a supernatural concealment cloaking him at all times.

 

[NeoNick]

Flanking will be very important for rogues after this change and one might wonder where the tumble skill is? I don't think the once per enounter power/utility is enough - the rogue will constantly need to be shifting more squares than one to flank. Remember that the fighter can only push enemies (one of his at-will-attacks), he cannot shift enemies to where he wants them - ergo the rogue need to be behind enemy lines.

Now I see no reason whatsoever for any unmarked mobs not to try kill flanking rogues. They are easier to hit than the tank and have fewer hitpoints and surges.

And if you think that Artful Dodger is the solution I still don't think so. Even if you get some extra AC on OA, it's often bad strategy to help the monsters get free attacks. The main reason for I don't think AD will help at all is when it's the monster's turn to attack! They will choose the target that is the easiest to hit and has fewest hitpoints, ergo the rogue gets a lot of attacks if he's available. And when that happens the Artful Dodger has no bonuses from his CHA and very likely worse AC than the tank (and that's even when mobs are marked!).

 

[bardolph]

The advantage of Deft Strike over Charge is that Deft Strike does not have to be the last thing you do in your turn. You can then use a move right after to dart back into SC/TC and re-hide.

Also, Deft Strike is a DEX-based attack, while a charge is STR.

Fleeting Ghost (at-will, 2): What this does depends on who you ask. By an absolutely literal reading, this does in fact let you hide without any cover or concealment, which is pretty fantastic if so. On the other hand, it seems like the intent is to prevent the movement penalties to stealth rather than just be a blank check. Needs clarification.

I think the intent is pretty clear, even if the wording isn't. Fleeting Ghost waives the -5 Stealth for moving. That's all.

Master of Deceit (encounter, 2): Useful for starting a distraction, but the problem remains that distractions are 1/encounter.

If you're using that distraction to sneak away and end combat, then you can return in 5 minutes and do it again. Not too shabby.

Chameleon (at-will, 6): Actually if you read this literally it's the best stealth power in the game. Reading literally, you can move out of concealment, trigger Chameleon, and from that point forward remain hidden while whaling on him with a baseball bat as long as you're concealed again by the end of your next turn. This should be the power swap of choice for ninja warlocks in that case.

Nope. Immediate Interrupts cannot be performed on your own turn. However, it's great for when you're behind cover and the enemy creature walks up to you.

Shadow Stride (at-will, 10): This.. actually appears to do what Fleeting Ghost is apparently supposed to do. At best it's identical to FG and at worst it's much worse. Weird.

No, it's completely different. FG allows you to move around within a single patch of concealment/cover without taking a -5 penalty, while Shadow Stride lets you cross the open areas in between.

Hide In Plain Sight (at-will, 16): This is a great ability, don't get me wrong, but you have to already be hidden to use it. So it doesn't help with the newly-introduced problem.

Sure it does. Example: You are in a forest, and hide (along with your party). You wait for bad guys to show up, then ambush them. Once your party attacks, everyone else becomes visible, EXCEPT YOU. You can now spend the entire combat firing away with combat advantage AND total concealment (-5 to hit), as long as you don't leave your square. This is an awesome power.

There are a bunch of utility powers that let you stay hidden, but that's not the problem anymore. The problem now is that you need to run off and around a corner before you can become hidden. There is one power that unquestionably addresses that (once per encounter), and it's actually a paragon path power. Fleeting Ghost addresses it with an extremely literal interpretation; if you are interpreting very literally then it's true that Fleeting Ghost and Chameleon are all you need to be as the ninja.

In many cases, your Hidden status will exist before the encounter begins, and these utility powers exist to make the most of that advantage.

While rogues are no longer permanently hidden and untargetable, they are certainly still very playable.

 

[JDillard]

Flanking will be very important for rogues after this change and one might wonder where the tumble skill is? I don't think the once per enounter power/utility is enough - the rogue will constantly need to be shifting more squares than one to flank. Remember that the fighter can only push enemies (one of his at-will-attacks), he cannot shift enemies to where he wants them - ergo the rogue need to be behind enemy lines.

Well, at level 1 alone there are 2 options that move the Rogue around, 2 that move an enemy around, and 2 that straight up give you combat advantage regardless of flanking.

The designers understood that the Rogue would mostly be using CA for Sneak Attack, and built a lot of mobility into their powerset because of it.

Now I see no reason whatsoever for any unmarked mobs not to try kill flanking rogues. They are easier to hit than the tank and have fewer hitpoints and surges. yummie for the monsters

Rogue's have nearly as much AC as a defender, and generally higher Ref defense. There really shouldn't often be monsters that the Rogue is flanking with the defender that aren't marked, so that makes them even more difficult to hit.

I wonder how many people complaining about this as a major nerf have actually tried playing the Rogue like this? I've played in more than one game with a Rogue, and they've had no problem staying alive, getting CA when needed, and doing ridiculously awesome amounts of damage.

I'm wondering if this is a "looks worse on paper than it really is in play" situation.

The only thing I really see screwed over by this change is the idea of a Rogue solo'ing things. It can still happen, but it's damn hard. But then, solo play is not something D&D has ever been built to accomodate, so that's only a rather minor issue at best.

 

[the_redbeard]

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.

It is a better written rule, but it is a huge nerf.

But it is likely to go away.

Baring a new announcement, the Compendium does NOT yet over rule the PHB.

When it first came out, myself and others found a few discrepancies between the PHB and the Compendium. I emailed the ones to Ken Troop (think that's the right guy for DDI) and got an email back that yes these were errors and thanks for reporting them.

Having seen all the differences between the PHB and the Compendium, I have to guess that the data they pulled for the Compendium was from an older version of the PHB.

I will say this: the stealth rule currently in the Compendium is a lot clearer.
But it is also more limited to the point of being superfluous (why bother stealthing if I'm already in total cover?) and quite back to the old 3.5 iteration of stealth and contrary to what developers have said they've intended.

The DDI news article for the Compendium calls it a 'first glimpse.' Have there been any other announcements? Since that time, communication from DDI staff was that they knew there were errors that they needed to fix. Since this is so contrary to the PHB, and no faq or errata agrees with it, I have to count this as another error and not a new rule.

One more confirmation that it is not official: this entry is not used by CS in their responses to our questions. They may or may not be consistent on their interpretations but they do go by the official sources. If the Compendium was official, it would be an invaluable tool to CS in their job.


If anyone has word otherwise, please speak up. This is not a new rule on stealth.