What's wrong with Stealth?

[Prestidigitalis]

After reading the Clarification on Superior Cover thread, I find myself wondering what the overall opinion of Stealth is here on ENWorld. So, answer the poll question and you will be rewarded with long life, bonus XP and (possibly) (maybe) bacon. As usual, the answers aren't completely mutually exclusive, so pick any you agree with.

 

[lukelightning]

It seems like it's too hard to get the "stealth" condition.... considering it is "just" CA (which won't stack with other things that grant CA), I don't see why there is all these hoops you have to jump through in order to get sneaky.

 

[Mengu]

I wasn't feeling any of the options, so voted just give me the bacon.

The stealth rules are what they are. Could they have been better? I'm sure. Are they serviceable? I think so. Are they too hard to benefit from? Depends on the game. Should they be hard to benefit from? I think so. There are plenty of ways to gain CA. I don't really want Stealth to be an every day combat skill. The occasional hide and seek could be fun, but if used in every combat, I'd start to get irritated. So your goliath wants to hide behind the halfling eh? Well the dire ape hiding behind the spit bucket jumps out and tears your limbs apart.

The rules for the most part do a good job of closing loopholes so there is no trivial way to hide in plain sight. And just like PC's can make each other aware of hidden enemies, so can the bad guys. And if stealth was any easier to use in combat, in most my games, I'm positive it would work against the PC's.

Having said that, I can see the less rules savvy players looking at stealth and getting utterly confused. So, there probably is room for improvement as far as the wording/examples go.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

A little bit complex when you first see it...

but i believe you can just use common sense instead of those rules... and you can´t use total cover from creatures, because creatures never block all lines (except maybe if the creature is a gelatineous cube, exactly filling its square

 

[Prestidigitalis]

I wasn't feeling any of the options, so voted just give me the bacon.

Well then, have some bacon. Do I have to do everything for you???

It's pretty common for the complainers to be the loudest voices, so it will be interesting to see how many people agree with you.

 

[Blackbrrd]

It's too complex, I haven't even bothered trying to learn the rules for it. The reason for this is probably that it's hard for the players to get/use so it hasn't come up.

 

[Zaran]

I voted "too hard to get CA" . Stealth as written might not be difficult to use, but by the time the rogue hides and sneaks up on the bad guy at 2 squares a move action ,the battle will usually be over and the rogue will not have really participated. And once, he gets there all he gets is a sneak attack.

I actually think that the rules are fine. Just not much use in combat, unless you are sneaking up before combat starts.

 

[Blackbrrd]

A little bit complex when you first see it...

but i believe you can just use common sense instead of those rules..

Very good answer. I think I will use this revision to stealth.

Player: can I stealth if I do this
DM: yeah, that sounds plausible
Player: great, attack with CA

Instead of:
Player: can I stealth if I do this:
DM: let me see, I am just going to get out my ruler and check if these 4 imaginary lines crosses here and.... 2 minutes: yeah, it looks like it.
Player: zzzzzzzzzzz

 

[1of3]

After reading the Clarification on Superior Cover thread, I find myself wondering what the overall opinion of Stealth is here on ENWorld.

I like them. Insofar that

As for the topic you mention... Its most amazing career is due to one person trying to be deliberately silly.

 

[DracoSuave]

Stealth IS actually pretty easy these days. You generally roll once, it's a minor action to find them. Nothing hard about it.

And not, it's not just CA, it's -5 to be hit IF they know you're there at all. Which they don't necessarily.

The problem lies, as with any rule, when someone tries to insist a loophole exists that doesn't. But then the problem in this scenario isn't the rule, it's the person.