Stealth Rules Request

[DimitriX]

Even after the update for the stealth rules, I'm still seeing a lot of threads of people trying to parse out what the rules mean and how they're supposed to work. Welcome to the Stealth rules, the new grapple. They're so poorly written and convoluted that my group has essentially decided that stealth during combat is either useless or so difficult to achieve even for a halfling rogue that its not worth trying.

I have to make my same complaint for a moment. Did anyone actually play test these rules? Didn't anyone in all of the years of play testing that supposedly happened play a halfling rogue and try to use stealth in combat using these rules? This might be petty, but my favorite class is the rogue and this crappy rule and the crappy revision of the rule has kind of soured my previous excitement about 4e.

So my request: Is it possible that one of the designers could write an article, make a thread, or shoot a video that shows the steps of using Stealth in combat and explaining the logic so the rest of us can quit trying to guess and do the play testing for them?

 

[Caliban]

If you are making a request of the game designers and actually want a serious response, you probably want to post it on the official WOTC forums, or send it to Sage Advice, rather than post it here.

Also, leaving out the "You don't know how to playtest!!" type of comments would be a good idea. No one wants to talk to someone who is calling them and idiot and then asking for stuff.

 

[DimitriX]

I'm posting here because I've gotten more responses and faster responses from the developers on this forum than the official WotC forums. (I'm not the only one that has noticed this.)

Yes, the 'you don't know how to playtest' comments were probably a bit rude. But, its born out of frustration of having the rules for almost 3 months and I still can't get a consensus on how something as fundamental as sneaking up on an opponent should work. Hopefully, the designers will see through that help us out anyway.

 

[deleteme123456]

We used the new rules last time we played and the bugbear rogue was stealthing every turn with decent success (hard not to beat the kobolds), but some of them were stealthing too. The only problem I had with that was, barring cool things like deft strike, it was really hard for them to be able to get a good shot off with combat advantage and not be facing -5 for superior cover from range.

The PCs figured out the easiest way to counteract the enemy stealth: move up to where the enemies can't easily move into superior cover.

 

[Caliban]

I'm posting here because I've gotten more responses and faster responses from the developers on this forum than the official WotC forums. (I'm not the only one that has noticed this.)

In the rules forum? Not that I've ever noticed.

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

Even after the update for the stealth rules, I'm still seeing a lot of threads of people trying to parse out what the rules mean and how they're supposed to work. Welcome to the Stealth rules, the new grapple. They're so poorly written and convoluted that my group has essentially decided that stealth during combat is either useless or so difficult to achieve even for a halfling rogue that its not worth trying.

My group is playing using the literal reading of Fleeting Ghost, which allows the Rogue to make a Stealth check via the power, which in practical terms allows him to make checks in sqares granting cover/concealment. This has unbroken the Rogue, at least well enough to make using Stealth viable for something other than corner hugging. Customer Service has ruled against and in favor of this, as well as saying they don't know, so pending future errata, it is a viable solution, and allowable by RAW.

I have to make my same complaint for a moment. Did anyone actually play test these rules? Didn't anyone in all of the years of play testing that supposedly happened play a halfling rogue and try to use stealth in combat using these rules? This might be petty, but my favorite class is the rogue and this crappy rule and the crappy revision of the rule has kind of soured my previous excitement about 4e.

From the playtest posts and developer comments from Mike Mearls, the rogue was and is being played and tested extensively (with Mearls playing a rogue himself in a game running now). The original rule worked functionally for the groups I was in, but it did need some refinement to smooth things out. The new rule was pretty awful to play a rogue under from the time the compendium release came out (which we started using immediately) until I could pick up Fleeting Ghost and use cover/concealment to gain Stealth again.

Note that like you, the Rogue is my favorite class in 4e. But I also DM (though my game is on hold pending all this getting cleaned up), and I liked that strikers were mobile, and able to move around the battlefield via Stealth and avoid being targeted while still being able to attack. It helped make two of the high-level concepts of 4e, using the whole map and having more movement, actually work. Without being able to use Stealth to avoid being targeted while moving and attacking, the most enjoyable feature of 4e to me is removed from the game.

So my request: Is it possible that one of the designers could write an article, make a thread, or shoot a video that shows the steps of using Stealth in combat and explaining the logic so the rest of us can quit trying to guess and do the play testing for them?

I think the template has already been set for getting a response (or a change to the rules). Create multiple threads on multiple message boards (being sure to include some misinformation to generate confusion) and flood customer service with questions. Use different mail accounts and vary your question slightly to get the answers you want from customer service (or go for the uber-win and try to get responses that you can twist into a corner case or that conflict with another response). It appears the game is now being designed by whoever gripes the most on the internet.

 

[napoleonbuff]

From the start I've house-ruled that stealth in combat just gives you CA, it doesn't make you hidden/invisible; I therefore largely ignored the errata, as my group had zero problems with the rules (though I have added the new rule about checking at the end of a move action, and I will now allow total cover/concealment to enable a player to hide).

But I just had a thought: perhaps I'll adjust my house rule so that beating perception by 10+ even in partial cover/concealment = hidden. Seems like it would be more fun and would give even more reason to bump that stealth skill.