Using Stealth in Melee - How?

[gtoasnt3]

Sounds like your rogue is using all the tricks available to him. Flanking is usually the go-to for CA once in combat. Don't forget about blinding your foes. Does prone work as well? I can't recall offhand.

Yep, prone works against melee attacks, but not ranged.

 

[OchreJelly]

Yes, but now we are getting a bit more exotic than just a break LOS and charge scanario.

For the specific plan above, since the Barbarian can't see the NPC any more than the NPC can see the barbarian, he at least needs to make some sort of check before he can activate his held action. How many times have you anticipated something and completely flubbed the timing--or discovered that you didn't quite have everything accounted for?

Not necessarily true. The foe running up to the corner isn't exactly being sneaky like the barbarian is. Remember that part of being hidden is to remain quiet and remain still. I would say a guy running to the corner isn't exactly quiet so the barbarian could hear him coming. The only check he needs to make is his free passive perception.

Now you could say the guy running to the corner is trying to sneak too, which gives him a -5 on his check if he's moving more than 2 squares. Frankly in this case you may as well drop out of combat because you have 2 sneaky guys trying to find each other.

Again, I think its a better precedent for the player to have a harder time doing this stuff solo and should get most of his combat advantage from flanking and working with the other players.

Agreed. I never was trying to argue that hiding is a better way to gain CA, but the OP was looking for examples of how to do exactly that in a combat situation. All I was trying to do was show how it's possible and that the rules support it.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

We're going to have a very challenging Level 6 session on Sunday, with experienced players and a good DM.
My plan is to try to hide *before* the encounter actually begins, thus gain CA in the first round for the very first charge attack.
For example, let's say we know there are enemies around the corner, and I announce that I use stealth before the initiative is actually rolled. Possible?

 

[OchreJelly]

is this like in a dungeon setting where there is a room around the corner? It gets a little tricky in open spaces because technically your foes are invisible to you (i.e. you can't see them, they can't see you). When attacking invisible foes you are technically declaring what square to attack.

Yes you can stealth check outside of combat. Then you make a passive perception check or if you have rounds to spare you can make an active perception check (standard action) to hear where they are. They technically get +10 to stealth for being invisible. The DM can modify that up or down depending on the NPC action. If they are sitting around talking then they get like -5 or something. If you beat their opposed stealth roll with your perception by 10 or more you know exactly what square the source of the sound is in. Then on initiative you can use an action that incorporates movement in the attack (charge, pressing attack etc.). Assuming your stealth was high enough, you should get CA.

This is all detailed on p. 281 of the PHB.

Remember though, you only need total cover or total conceal to iniate being hidden (starting from around the corner). Once you are hidden you can use regular cover or concealment to make new stealth checks. So if you started around a corner and knew there was like a table between you and your foes, you could move to that table (providing cover) and make a new stealth check at the end of the move action. If that move is more than 2 squares it's a -5 to your check. But at least in this case you would have LOS to your foes and not have to worry about the "blind attack" scenario above.

Lastly how would you know there is a table there, or basically how would you know the layout of the room? If you were approaching a room full of NPCs that aren't aware of your approaching, are talking etc. I (as a DM) would count these NPCs as distracted. You don't need total cover or conceal to make stealth checks against distracted NPCs outside of combat. So as a DM I would let you "quickly peek around" the corner before the fight to see the layout of the room. You would still need to make a stealth check to "peek".

 

[MyISPHatesENWorld]

Again, I think its a better precedent for the player to have a harder time doing this stuff solo and should get most of his combat advantage from flanking and working with the other players.

Agreed. I never was trying to argue that hiding is a better way to gain CA, but the OP was looking for examples of how to do exactly that in a combat situation. All I was trying to do was show how it's possible and that the rules support it.

The barbarian would generally be expected get most of his combat advantage from flanking and power effects. However, for a rogue, whose key class ability relies heavily on combat advantage and which, by design, is supposed to be the best at stealth, stealth can (and should) be an as good or even better method of gaining combat advantage.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

... for a rogue, whose key class ability relies heavily on combat advantage and which, by design, is supposed to be the best at stealth, stealth can (and should) be an as good or even better method of gaining combat advantage.

That leads to my original question. I honestly have almost never seen our rogue pull off some nice CA stunts based on Stealth. It's all about flanking with the fighter or whoever is present, or powers that cause conditions.

 

[gtoasnt3]

That is the truth, Orcus. I am a firm believer in the 4th ed rules, and as a 30 year DM, I haven't used one house rule yet for this version. My PC's are all in agreement and we haven't had this much fun in years. So, yes, our Rogue has one shot at a stealth CA prior to the action heating up and then he has to have help or work hard to get another CA.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

yes the 4e rules are fantastic, no doubt about that. We also don't have any house rules, and on top of it nobody opens the rulebook, haha. Just great.

Flanking is great because it's a very simple way to "force" players to cooperate. I think it's the first time a player realizes the importance of teamwork, and the deployment of numerous other options like Warlord, or providing conditions, come from there.
I remember I started my first 4e battle with my old mindset, just myself going in. Now we talk on message boards about team optimizations.

The rogue with the Sneak Attack bonus falls behind my Barbarian with Howling Strike (+1d6) Horned Helm (+1d6), Vanguard Weapon (+1d8), Surprising Charge (+1[W]), Powerful Charge (+2 damage) though.

Has anyone played a Rogue who is specialized in charging? Could be awesome. There is also Roundabout Charge, which allows for very sneaky maneuvers.

 

[CapnZapp]

Unless I am mistaken, the Rogue is balanced on the presumption he gains Sneak Attack about half the time? That is, Quarry/Sneak/Curse aside, the three Striker classes are meant to be balanced?

(Of course, it could well be that the truth is somewhat different, say "the Warlock must gain Curse bonus damage 2/3 of the time or he falls behind" or "the Rogue don't need Sneak bonus damage more than 1/3 the time or he becomes a bit too good" or whatever.

My point is for the Rogue it can't be enough to simply use the rules and expect class balance. Instead, the Rogue is a bit like the 3E Ranger, whose power depended a good deal on whether you used his favored enemy monsters or not.

That is, our conclusions regarding Stealth should be governed not simply by bickering about the RAW and discussing corner cases. No, we should aim to arrive at a situation where the Rogue gets to use Sneak damage as much as is balanced.

There is no right or wrong here. A DM with a new player, or with a player not interested in minmaxing, could well hand out Sneak Attacks to all the Rogue's attacks, and it would still not be overpowered, or encroach on the other PC's fun. A DM with a player good at talking his way, could restrict Sneak Attack to only the bare minimum allowed by pure mechanical considerations: flanking, powers, and just possibly a single bonus use from skills.

 

[CapnZapp]

Another question, isn't your above conclusion regarding Charge + Combat Advantage a houserule. Or at the least a debatable interpretation of RAW?


Errataed Stealth says: "If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until you resolve the action."

It doesn't say: "If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until you have resolved the action."

Of course, it doesn't say "If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until before you resolve the action." either...


Or am I missing something here?