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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Smeelbo" data-source="post: 4690490" data-attributes="member: 81898">AbdulAlhazred, you aren't getting what is being said, so I will try again. Suppose a rogue is currently hidden, in concealment and/or cover, with two empty squares between him and his enemy, and the enemy is not hidden from the rogue. As currently written, and officially interpreted, the following is strictly legal. The rogue can can use Deft Strike to move adjacent to and attack the enemy with combat advantage, because the rogue was hidden at the beginning of his action, and, as the Stealth Errata clearly states, "If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until you resolve the action."  This is in no way dependent on the interpretation of Fleeting Ghost, but is simply how being hidden works in combat. What MyISPHatesENWorld argues, and I consider plausible, is that Fleeting Ghost grants an at-will move action that is an exception to Becoming Hidden. Specificly, it allows you to move and make a Stealth check, which MyISP argues can only be a Stealth check to Become Hidden. Once hidden, the rules for Remaining Hidden obtain, namely: "You don’t need superior cover, total concealment, or to stay outside line of sight, but you do need some degree of cover or concealment to remain hidden."  So if you use Fleeting Ghost to move to cover or concealment, you become and remain hidden. That, in a nutshell, is what MyISPHatesENWorld argues. He is certainly correct about attacking from Stealth, and may be correct about Fleeting Ghost. Smeelbo</blockquote>

Verification