Using Stealth in Melee - How?

[YuriPup]

Yes, but we are not talking about ranged attacks (where I think it would still be hard to pull off) but a barbarian charging back at his target.

CA is granted, generally, when the target is unable to give all his attention to an attack and the thresh hold is high on that scale too. Being attacked by multiple attackers isn't enough--the target has to be flanked too.

That I don't know precisely when you are coming out doesn't seem to be on the same level as being dazed, blinded or having someone beat on the back of my head.

I would give you a better chance if you managed to stay stealthed through the NPCs turn if he looked for you and stayed stealthed.

Keep in mind:

- Keep Out of Sight: If you no longer have any cover
or concealment against an enemy, you don’t remain
hidden from that enemy. You don’t need superior
cover, total concealment to remain hidden. You
can’t use another creature as cover to remain hidden.

So if the NPC moves around the pillar/rock on its turn, you loose stealth.

 

[OchreJelly]

Yeah if the NPC follows the PC around the corner they no longer have cover between them, thus he loses his stealth. I understand that. And the ranged attack is one example.

If you want a melee example, the barbarian could ready 'pressing strike' to trigger whenever a foe comes within 1 square of the corner he's hiding behind. He would then get to shift 2 squares out around the corner and attack all as part of the same standard action, and retain his stealth benefit, assuming he beat the foes passive perception. In a sense he pops out suddenly and chops the guy.

It really won't come up very often and there's not many classes that can pull it off. Rogues and barbarians are the classes I think of being crafty or fast and they have access to powers that let them move and attack as one action. I have no problem with that.

 

[YuriPup]

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?

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.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

This is all very interesting. Thanks.
I want to add another twist to it.
My barbarian is an Eladrin, MC into fighter (battle awareness from Martial Power). His main weapon is the Greatspear, which has reach. Reach weapons have a significant disadvantage: You can't charge into a flanking position with them because you need to stop the movement 1 square away from the target. This means, I'm missing out on a lot of CA opportunities. I compensate this with the Feral Armor (Dragon magazine 369) which grants a claw attack.
Any ideas that pop up for this combo? For example, I'm thinking about fey stepping into a hiding position, then charge out of it. Or feystepping out of hiding into the fight, using a close burst attack against all monsters with CA.
Also: Reach allows me to stay one square further away from the target than other PC's.

 

[Dragonstriker]

Why stop 1 square away?
Reach doesn't mean "can't be used adjacent" anymore.

Properties:
Reach (With a reach weapon, you can attack enemies that are 2 squares away from you as well as adjacent enemies, with no attack penalty. You can still make opportunity attacks only against adjacent enemies. Likewise, you can flank only an adjacent enemy.).

 

[Saeviomagy]

Reach weapons have a significant disadvantage: You can't charge into a flanking position with them because you need to stop the movement 1 square away from the target.

In 3.5e, this was true. In 4e, all reach weapons can also attack an adjacent target.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

yes, you can attack an adjacent enemy with a reach weapon, but not when you charge. This has been discussed elsewhere at length. I also got a customer service answer confirming it.
I really don't want to turn this thread into a discussion about charging with reach. If you charge with a reach weapon, your movement has to end from the nearest square where you can attack the enemy.

 

[YuriPup]

Your GM doesn't give you CA for poking someong from behind from 2 squares?

You are engaged in combat with them, they are facing 2 targets...

*runs off to get phb*

Ok it does say you have to adjasent to the bugger for some reason, but I would say that within 10 feet is adjacent if you you have a reach 1 weapon.

You are still physically threatening the target and overloading his ability to defend himself well. As GM I would give it to you.

 

[Orcus Porkus]

no, for flanking you have to be adjacent, and adjacent means adjacent

 

[YuriPup]

Offically, yes.

But as Tom Dowd would say about SR, "Their your rules, you bought them. Do with them what you like."

If I find it breaks, well it can always be patched. I can't say the one reach weapon user in my group--human warlord--is exactally dishing out the damage. Neither is the paladin for that matter.