[OOC] The Missing Warlock [4e, closed]

covaithe

Explorer
Huh. Well, it certainly seems useful... possibly too useful. It reminds me a lot of the 3.5 Improved Feint feat, which was arguably broken. But it's got some safeguards, too...

I really like the intent, which is to let a rogue have a chance to sneak up on an enemy who takes his eyes off her in a fight. I think it has some problems as written. For one thing, it looks like you could use this before moving, then move your full speed without penalty and get CA. Karis definitely will be picking up Deft Strike, so that's CA on someone up to 9 squares away. For another thing, it seems like you shouldn't be able to use it to get CA on someone who can clearly see you for your whole movement and isn't distracted. Consider using this on an archer 7 squares away who's not being attacked, but is firing at Moreen, who's standing next to Karis. It stretches verisimilitude a bit more than I like to have Karis suddenly turn and run in plain sight across that intervening distance and surprise attack the archer.

What about:
* Sly Setup (rogue class feature) *
Move action
Target: One creature
Attack: stealth vs passive perception
Hit: Move up to half your speed and gain CA for your next attack against the creature on this turn.
Special: You must be at least 3 squares away from your target when you use this power. If the target has made an attack this turn, its target must be at least three squares away from you. If the target has been attacked this turn, its attackers must all be at least 2 squares away from you.

Hmm. Now that I've typed all that, it basically boils down to allowing a stealth check at the end of a move if the conditions in Special are met. Which I'd be okay with; it's effectively a description of some circumstances under which a creature could be "distracted" in combat other than from a successful bluff check.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

nerdytenor

First Post
Yet another possibility

Another possible way to go is to boost the utility of bluff without messing with stealth.

* Cunning Distraction (rogue class feature) *
Those who have not tangled with you before would do well to watch your every move.
- Minor Action -
Target: One creature whom you have not attacked this encounter and who has not attacked you this encounter.
Attack: Bluff vs. Passive Perception
Hit: You gain combat advantage against the target on your next attack this turn.
 

covaithe

Explorer
Mmm, nice. Simple and clear. It still leaves stealth broken, but it's a reasonably good consolation prize if we can't fix stealth.

One quibble: what about area attacks? If a wizard hits the whole party with a burst 5 effect, does that make this impossible?

From a purely flavor standpoint, I'd kind of prefer Karis to be sneaky rather than deceptive, but I can live with deceptive.
 

nerdytenor

First Post
Mmm, nice. Simple and clear. It still leaves stealth broken, but it's a reasonably good consolation prize if we can't fix stealth.

Yeah, I'm having trouble coming up with anything that isn't one of


  • Too powerful
  • Underpowered
  • Too complicated
I'll definitely give it some more thought.

One quibble: what about area attacks? If a wizard hits the whole party with a burst 5 effect, does that make this impossible?

Good question. I think so, yes, subject to DM discretion (if you were out of line of sight but in the blast, I would probably rule that you weren't targeted).

From a purely flavor standpoint, I'd kind of prefer Karis to be sneaky rather than deceptive, but I can live with deceptive.

Yeah, I hear you. We could rewrite the power to use stealth instead of bluff, keep the crunch, and change the fluff (Your hands move so quickly that your opponent doesn't see your first attack coming, but he won't be tricked a second time...)
 

covaithe

Explorer
Could we just say that rogues use stealth as in the PHB (normal cover or concealment) and everyone else (e.g. warlocks) use stealth as in the errata? I get the impression that they only errata'd it to deal with warlock concealment.
 

PennStud77

First Post
Covaithe brings up an excellent point: the stealth errata was almost (if not) entirely so that Shadow Walk isn't horribly broken. However, saying that rogues get, as part of their training, an increased sneakiness that allows them to use stealth more readily and at a greater advantage (i.e. as stated before errata) than other classes; rogues train to make more out of the same concealment that others can still be seen in. I think that is simple and useful.
 

nerdytenor

First Post
Could we just say that rogues use stealth as in the PHB (normal cover or concealment) and everyone else (e.g. warlocks) use stealth as in the errata? I get the impression that they only errata'd it to deal with warlock concealment.

I love it. Consider it done. *phew*
 


Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top