Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Shadow Stride vs. Fleeting Ghost vs. Secret Stride
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Smeelbo" data-source="post: 4698415" data-attributes="member: 81898"><p><strong>Fleeting Ghost, Reconsidered Yet Again</strong></p><p></p><p>While I've reached no final decision on how to correctly interpret <em>Fleeting Ghost</em>, I am being more and more swayed by the argument that it acts like an exception to <em>Becoming Hidden</em>, rather than being a weaker version of the paragon feat <em>Secret Stride</em>.</p><p> </p><p>I noted earlier, and in some other threads, that if <em>Fleeting Ghost</em> were intended to simply remove the movement penalty for a <em>Stealth</em> Check, it would have been written more like this:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Effect:</strong> Move up to your full speed. If you can make a <em>Stealth</em> check at the end of this move, you do not take the normal penalty from movement on this check.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>In other words, it would modify the <em>Stealth </em>check you could <u>already</u> make, rather than <u>explicitly</u> granting a <em>Stealth</em> check at the end of the move. It has been pointed out that this wording is awkward, and that <em>"common sense"</em> should be used, but then I read the wording on this feat, <u>immediately</u> before <em>Shadow Stride</em> in the PHB, page 122:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong><u>Dangerous Theft, Rogue Utility 10:</u></strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Encounter, Martial</strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Free Action, Personal</strong></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Prerequisite:</strong> You must be trained in <em>Thievery</em>.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Effect:</strong> On your next action, ignore the -10 penalty when you make a <em>Thievery</em> check to pick a pocket during combat.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>Compare this language to <em>Fleeting Ghost</em> and <em>Shadow Stride</em>. Clearly, the authors of the rogue utilities knew how to write a power so that it modified a check, as opposed to granting a check.</p><p> </p><p>Now consider the <em>Stealth Errata</em>:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px"><strong>Becoming Hidden:</strong> You can make a <em>Stealth</em> check against an enemy only if you have superior cover or total concealment against the enemy or if you’re outside the enemy’s line of sight.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p><p>If <em>Fleeting Ghost</em> were intended only to remove the penalty from a Stealth check, leaving all other requirements intact, then it would have been worded similarly to <em>Dangerous Theft</em>, above. Because <em>Fleeting Ghost</em> <u>explicitly</u> grants a stealth check, I conclude that <em>Stealth</em> check is an exception to <em>Becoming Hidden</em>, which would otherwise preclude that <em>Stealth</em> check at the end of a normal move.</p><p> </p><p>One can reasonably argue that the developers simply botched the wording, but the fact that the wording of <em>Fleeting Ghost</em> was <u>not</u> errata'd, while <em>Shadow Stride</em> <u>was</u> reworded, combined with the precedent of <em>Dangerous Theft</em>'s wording, strongly suggests that the wording of <em>Fleeting Ghost</em> reflects their intent, and therefore the <em>Stealth</em> check is intentionally granted and intended to be an exception to the <em>Stealth Errata</em>.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Smeelbo</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Smeelbo, post: 4698415, member: 81898"] [b]Fleeting Ghost, Reconsidered Yet Again[/b] While I've reached no final decision on how to correctly interpret [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I], I am being more and more swayed by the argument that it acts like an exception to [I]Becoming Hidden[/I], rather than being a weaker version of the paragon feat [I]Secret Stride[/I]. I noted earlier, and in some other threads, that if [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I] were intended to simply remove the movement penalty for a [I]Stealth[/I] Check, it would have been written more like this: [INDENT][B]Effect:[/B] Move up to your full speed. If you can make a [I]Stealth[/I] check at the end of this move, you do not take the normal penalty from movement on this check. [/INDENT]In other words, it would modify the [I]Stealth [/I]check you could [U]already[/U] make, rather than [U]explicitly[/U] granting a [I]Stealth[/I] check at the end of the move. It has been pointed out that this wording is awkward, and that [I]"common sense"[/I] should be used, but then I read the wording on this feat, [U]immediately[/U] before [I]Shadow Stride[/I] in the PHB, page 122: [INDENT][B][U]Dangerous Theft, Rogue Utility 10:[/U][/B] [B]Encounter, Martial[/B] [B]Free Action, Personal[/B] [B]Prerequisite:[/B] You must be trained in [I]Thievery[/I]. [B]Effect:[/B] On your next action, ignore the -10 penalty when you make a [I]Thievery[/I] check to pick a pocket during combat. [/INDENT]Compare this language to [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I] and [I]Shadow Stride[/I]. Clearly, the authors of the rogue utilities knew how to write a power so that it modified a check, as opposed to granting a check. Now consider the [I]Stealth Errata[/I]: [INDENT][B]Becoming Hidden:[/B] You can make a [I]Stealth[/I] check against an enemy only if you have superior cover or total concealment against the enemy or if you’re outside the enemy’s line of sight. [/INDENT]If [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I] were intended only to remove the penalty from a Stealth check, leaving all other requirements intact, then it would have been worded similarly to [I]Dangerous Theft[/I], above. Because [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I] [U]explicitly[/U] grants a stealth check, I conclude that [I]Stealth[/I] check is an exception to [I]Becoming Hidden[/I], which would otherwise preclude that [I]Stealth[/I] check at the end of a normal move. One can reasonably argue that the developers simply botched the wording, but the fact that the wording of [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I] was [U]not[/U] errata'd, while [I]Shadow Stride[/I] [U]was[/U] reworded, combined with the precedent of [I]Dangerous Theft[/I]'s wording, strongly suggests that the wording of [I]Fleeting Ghost[/I] reflects their intent, and therefore the [I]Stealth[/I] check is intentionally granted and intended to be an exception to the [I]Stealth Errata[/I]. [B]Smeelbo[/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Shadow Stride vs. Fleeting Ghost vs. Secret Stride
Top