The Ninja Warlock

[Benly]

I was just reading the Ranger Vs. Warlock thread, and nobody seems to have noticed a neat little trick a warlock can use. I'm going to be using this for my character; it emerged from looking for a paragon option for a Star Warlock that was better than Doomspeaker (which just doesn't appeal to me).

The basics: warlock of any pact (Fey probably works best) with Skill Training: Stealth. Multiclass to Rogue, take Acolyte Power for Fleeting Ghost. Skill Focus: Stealth too if you like. The idea is to move at least three spaces every round to gain concealment from Shadow Walk, then hide. On your next turn, attack as you like, move again, and hide as you walk; this triggers Shadow Walk again so you retain concealment and remain hidden after your turn ends.

When you reach paragon tier, you can take Secret Stride and retrain Acolyte Power for Hide In Plain Sight, in case you are prevented from moving around freely. Feytouched is a good paragon path for this plan; however, since I'm playing Star Pact I intended to go Master Infiltrator rather than Doomspeaker.

What do you think, sirs?

 

[Rechan]

Smells like "Poor Man's Shadowdancer" to me.

 

[Graf]

People are already doing this (at least in my KotS game). It's a nightmare for a DM. You don't need anything other than warlock to do it. (though you're right, training stealth makes it much better)

Stealth in 4e is worse than grapple. The rules are on three different pages.The most important "targeting what you can't see" doesn't even come up in the stealth section. It's sucktacular.

Here's how it works (for the purposes of discussion this is "by RAW" -- so 'common sense' or 'I'm Old Skool, I'd never allow that as a DM' don't enter the picture.)
Character A is the warlock character.
Character's x,y,z are the enemies.

Steath is not an action (it's not even a free action, it's "part of another action" -- so weird, so people "spend second wind stealthily", whatever )

A attacks, and moves 3 squares. He's concealed till his next turn. Since no rule mentions that he loses the concealment he can do whatever he likes (play the bongos, stand on his hands) and still be concealed.
(of course, if he speaks, attacks or carries a light source he "breaks stealth" but he's still concealed -- so it seems like he can just attack, take-any-none-prohibited-action (drink a potion, draw a weapon, etc), and "re-stealth for free").

At the end of A's turn they make an opposed stealth roll (-5 -- because it moved more than 2 squares in it's turn) vs it's opponent's passive stealth checks. BUT the perceiver (in this case x,y,z) have to "beat" the stealth check by 10 to actually see the hider (A).
[Yes, it says, "beat" even though the perceivers (x,y,z) aren't rolling].
If the perceivers (x,y,z) don't "beat" A by 10 then they know he's there, but not what square he's in. Just his "existence" and "direction".
Of course, since he's just blasted the snot out of somebody, his "existence and direction" are probably pretty well known to the monsters anyway.

Effectively, our warlock, A, is at +5 to a skill check that will allow him to not get attacked next round.

In our example we'll say that x (Kobold Wyrmpriest) sees A but y & z (Kobold Dragonshields) don't. A has concealment vs all three but, in game terms, y & z "don't know what square he's in".
[You have to make another check if you make an immediate action or AoO... but that suggests that our guy can be running around and hitting people and still maintain his stealth. Sorta weird since attacking is supposed to break stealth normally.]

Then, on their respective turns y & z both can spend a minor action to make a "perception check" vs the last stealth check of A.
Wait? You didn't write down A's last stealth check?
Oops.

Anyway, assuming you've been keeping track of A's last stealth total then y& z can spend their action & roll perception. If they win they know direction and existence and if they win by 10 they know the square.
(9 minions? 9 rolls by RAW anyway)

But wait, x (the wyrmpriest) knows where the character is... can he say "ten feet in front of you bozo!"? The book appears to be silent.
If y & z try to attack randomly how is the DM (who already knows where A is) supposed to determine which squares they go for? The book appears to be silent.

The kicker is that it's "free" for the warlock to do this. It doesn't cost them anything to "try to do-whatever-I'm-doing-stealthily" so there's no reason why they wouldn't do it Every. Single. Round.

Yeah, I'm thinking some parts of the rules didn't get playtested too much.

 

[Cyronax]

The kicker is that it's "free" for the warlock to do this. It doesn't cost them anything to "try to do-whatever-I'm-doing-stealthily" so there's no reason why they wouldn't do it Every. Single. Round.

Yeah, I'm thinking some parts of the rules didn't get playtested too much.

Add all that to a gnome from the MM as a PC and it gets even worse with all the invisibility when damaged and reactive concealment going on.

 

[Benly]

Yeah, a straightforward warlock can do it okay. Training Stealth and taking either Secret Stride or rogue multiclass boosts your check by 10 between them, though, which makes you considerably more of a ninja, and rogue multiclass opens up Hide In Plain Sight which is also awesome.

Multiclassing also gives starlocks an option that isn't Doomsayer, which (other than its action-point bonus) is kind of a dog.

 

[MindWanderer]

BUT the perceiver (in this case x,y,z) have to "beat" the stealth check by 10 to actually see the hider (A).
[Yes, it says, "beat" even though the perceivers (x,y,z) aren't rolling].
If the perceivers (x,y,z) don't "beat" A by 10 then they know he's there, but not what square he's in. Just his "existence" and "direction".

That's only if you have superior cover or total concealment. With plain ol' concealment, they just have to beat it.

 

[ZetaStriker]

Yeah, you were citing the invisibility rules, not stealth rules.

 

[livinginarizona]

So if I'm a Tiefling Warlock (which gets a racial +2 Stealth bonus) and I train in Stealth (+5) as one of my 4 skills, do both stack with each other?

[Without the book to look at, so forgive me for asking]

I'm a little confused on the skill check part....an example would work wonders. So let's say I roll a 10 on my stealth check roll.....would they have to roll better than 17 (10 +7), 22 (10+7+5 because I moved) or would they have to beat 27 (10+7+10)

TIA.

 

[ZetaStriker]

They're completely different bonuses, so yes, racial stacks with training.

As for your question, you'd roll stealth. First, you have to beat their passive perception, or 10+their perception. If you do that, they can actively search for you on their turn, this time actually rolling their perception. In your example, you rolled a 17. If their passive perception is 17 or higher, or if their roll on their next turn beats that number, then you didn't manage to hide at all.

And even if someone fails to see you, it only takes one guy with a high perception to say "he's right there!", followed by a barrage of Area and Close attacks that do not take penalties against targets that can't be seen.

 

[Aezoc]

I don't have the books, but at least in 3e pointing and yelling "Get him!" would be a free action.

So your warlock does his thing and hides. Depending on the enemies' initiative order, the dragonshields either blindly attack likely squares, or the wyrmpriest goes first and points out where you are. At that point, I presume the dragonshields can see you and attack you normally, correct?