New Stealth rules and Fleeting Ghost

71 posts / 0 new
Last post
Consider the text of the fleeting ghost utility power:

Compendium wrote:
Fleeting Ghost Rogue Utility 2

You are stealthy and fleet of foot at the same time.
At-Will Martial
Move Action Personal
Prerequisite: You must be trained in Stealth.
Effect: You can move your speed and make a Stealth check. You do not take the normal penalty from movement on this check.

I would like to emphasize that making a stealth check is part of the power. Also note the following from the new stealth description.

Compendium wrote:
Becoming Hidden: You can make a Stealth check against an enemy only if you have superior cover or total concealment against the enemy or if you’re outside the enemy’s line of sight. Outside combat, the DM can allow you to make a Stealth check against a distracted enemy, even if you don’t have superior cover or total concealment and aren’t outside the enemy’s line of sight. The distracted enemy might be focused on something in a different direction, allowing you to sneak up.

Now the nerf was that characters can only hide if they have total concealment/cover. That is expressed in the first sentence where it states that you can only make a stealth check with total conceament/cover.

Point of emphasis: The rules prevent you from hiding by preventing you from rolling the stealth check!

My question is this: is the following interpretation reasonable?

Fleeting Ghost allows a stealth check whenever it is used; “Move your speed and make a stealth check.” This is a case of a specfic power overriding the general rule that you need total concealment and allows a rogue using the power to make a stealth check with any normal move.

Assuming the stealth check is successful the rogue would then be hidden and thus subject to the following portion of the stealth rules.

Compendium wrote:
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, or to stay outside line of sight, but you do need some degree of cover or concealment to remain hidden. You can’t use another creature as cover to remain hidden.

So, if the rogue uses fleeting ghost and makes his stealth check without normal cover/concealment he would be immediately revealed. (Of course, the other conditions like attacking/talking would also break his stealth.)

Thus, a rogue can make a move action to activate fleeting ghost, end his move in a square with normal cover/concealment, make a stealth check (via the FG rules) and remain hidden (via the stealth rules.) If this works then rogues with FG don't need superior cover/concealment to hide.

What do y'all think?

PS. When coupled with the stealth nerf, this interpretation has the (positive IMHO) benefit of allowing rogues to be good stealthers while disallowing warlocks the ability to be constantly hidden.
No, the player does not meet the requirments to make a stealth check. This utility allows the player to move and not take a movement penalty to his stealth check.
The ability does not grant a stealth check it grants the ability not to take a penalty to a stealth check. Trying to read it any other way is rules lawyering.
The ability does not grant a stealth check it grants the ability not to take a penalty to a stealth check. Trying to read it any other way is rules lawyering.

You see, here's where I think you might be wrong. The power explicitly grants a stealth check. I mean, look at it.

"You can move your speed and make a Stealth check."

That's just about as clear as it can be... Although I will grant that this was written before the stealth nerf and thus might be an unintended consequence of the wording.

I'll ignore the ad hominem.
You're rules lawyering and you know it... there is no way you can seriously think that's the way its supposed to work right? RIGHT?

They specifically changed the rules because it was never intended to be that easy to gain stealth in combat. You're just trying to find another way to break the rules in your favor.

All you have to do is compare it to the other level 2 Rogue utilities and it's plain as day that how you're trying to rule it is not the correct ruling.

Either you're clueless or you're a rules lawyer.

If it wasn't an at will power it would be a very big maybe. It's an at will so it's an emphatic no.
Thus, a rogue can make a move action to activate fleeting ghost, end his move in a square with normal cover/concealment, make a stealth check (via the FG rules) and remain hidden (via the stealth rules.) If this works then rogues with FG don't need superior cover/concealment to hide.

I can see this being a reasonable interpretation. Allowing rogues to stealth behind normal cover/concealment isn't anything rogues haven't been doing since 4.0 was released up until the stealth revamp. If nothing else, this underlines what I've been saying about the need to update a lot more than the basic stealth rules.

I think the intention was just to avoid the -5 penalty for moving. In that regard it is like a more specificly potent Skill Focus: Stealth. Hopefully we will get a LOT of clarification from WotC when the instill the new stealth update, rather than just the presented changes to the basic skill.
Seems reasonable enough to me. I see nothing that would prevent it from working the way you present it. The specific rule would indeed override the general, and it does specifically say make a stealth check. Unless I see something that says it doesn't work that way thats probably how I'd rule it.
Yes, you can move and make a Stealth check...however if you don't have cover you automatically fail.
Yeah, but yhe point fippy is it will work with regular cover, as oposed to needing superior cover/total concelment. It works by RAW, but probly not by RAI (mostly because the rules changed), I expect there will be a fairly thourough errata of stealth related powers in the near future, makeing this whole dicusion mute, but untill then enjoy foks.
I was playing a game last week with a guy that would stealth all the time...

Fleeting Ghost + Chameleon (used after he attacks, because it triggers from the auto-breaking of stealth). Since the powers say you can do it, he basically was like the "Predator" of that game...

Not sure what the intended rules were, but by what is WRITTEN, it works just fine...
What do y'all think?

PS. When coupled with the stealth nerf, this interpretation has the (positive IMHO) benefit of allowing rogues to be good stealthers while disallowing warlocks the ability to be constantly hidden.

It's over powered because it's an at will. If it where an encounter power, I would agree with your interpretation of the power, but playing it the way you are suggesting with an at will power amounts to near constant stealth.

Jay
Fleeting Ghost + Chameleon (used after he attacks, because it triggers from the auto-breaking of stealth). Since the powers say you can do it, he basically was like the "Predator" of that game...

Chameleon cannot be used on the character's turn.
Chameleon cannot be used on the character's turn.

An unfortunate truth, the rules for imidiate interupts say you cant use them during your own turn.
This is how I'm adjucating it.
So, Favored Enemy, since you seem to be pretty reasonable, how would you rule it? Do you think that with the other rogue abilities that this would be overpowered in normal gameplay?
You're rules lawyering and you know it... there is no way you can seriously think that's the way its supposed to work right? RIGHT?

They specifically changed the rules because it was never intended to be that easy to gain stealth in combat. You're just trying to find another way to break the rules in your favor.

All you have to do is compare it to the other level 2 Rogue utilities and it's plain as day that how you're trying to rule it is not the correct ruling.

Either you're clueless or you're a rules lawyer.

If it wasn't an at will power it would be a very big maybe. It's an at will so it's an emphatic no.

Gee mate, don't hold back.

Go on.

Let it all out.

I mean were all morons here appart from you, right?
Gee mate, don't hold back.

Go on.

Let it all out.

I mean were all morons here appart from you, right?

When some one is trying to break the game yes. There is no way any one can seriously think a level 2 utility that is at will and grants regular cover is in any way shape or form balanced. Especially when they specifically changed stealth so that it didn't work that way.
So yes if every one actually think its what was intended then I suppose the shoe would fit now wouldn't it? If not every one then thinks that then obviously no not every one is a moron. (Which has been shown to be the case already as others have also said its not intended.)
When some one is trying to break the game yes. There is no way any one can seriously think a level 2 utility that is at will and grants regular cover is in any way shape or form balanced. Especially when they specifically changed stealth so that it didn't work that way.
So yes if every one actually think its what was intended then I suppose the shoe would fit now wouldn't it? If not every one then thinks that then obviously no not every one is a moron. (Which has been shown to be the case already as others have also said its not intended.)

The gent yoru were responding to wasn't disagreeing with you. He said you were being a jerk, because you're being rude. Instead on instantly starting in on flaming the guy for interperting the rules you could have just give constructive critiscism.

Instead you basically said, "OMG you're such a n00b stop being stupid clearly I'm right scrub!". That's what it read like to me at least.

Also, while I think the OPs scenario could be valid should the DM agree until WotC fully errats the situation, I still agree with you. It's probably not intended that way. You just don't have to be rude about it.
When some one is trying to break the game yes. There is no way any one can seriously think a level 2 utility that is at will and grants regular cover is in any way shape or form balanced. Especially when they specifically changed stealth so that it didn't work that way.

Ah, maybe now I see what the issue is. I am not claiming that fleeting ghost grants cover/concealment of any sort. Rather, it allows rogues to use it to hide when they end their move in normal cover/concealment.

I should also point out a couple of caveats.

1) This does require a move action. That means that you couldn't use a shift-move or any move-equivalent actions.
2) As a consequence, the nerf did remove the minor action to stealth trick. Which, in my opinion, was ridiculous and needed to be fixed.
3) The rogue still needs to make the stealth check, and that means he/she will fail on occasion.
Ah, maybe now I see what the issue is. I am not claiming that fleeting ghost grants cover/concealment of any sort. Rather, it allows rogues to use it to hide when they end their move in normal cover/concealment.

I should also point out a couple of caveats.

1) This does require a move action. That means that you couldn't use a shift-move or any move-equivalent actions.
2) As a consequence, the nerf did remove the minor action to stealth trick. Which, in my opinion, was ridiculous and needed to be fixed.
3) The rogue still needs to make the stealth check, and that means he/she will fail on occasion.

Pretty much. You still need cover or concealment, just not total concealment.
I really like the idea of a rogue having use of a power that lets it hide more easily then others. While I think the intention is to simply prevent the rogue from taking penalties, I am not opposed to the power having more ooph.

If I was your DM I would make this caveat to you. I will accept your interpetation, if we add this. "Special: If you do not have Superior Cover or Total Concealment at the end of your move action you cannot use this power again for the remainder of the encounter or 5 minutes."
So, Favored Enemy, since you seem to be pretty reasonable, how would you rule it? Do you think that with the other rogue abilities that this would be overpowered in normal gameplay?

Fleeting Ghost has not changed in power level. If it wasn't too powerful before, it is not more powerful now. The only change is the context in which the power is used. Before the Stealth change, all it did was remedy a penalty. Now, because of the weakening of Stealth, it seems better because you are normally restricted to superior cover. Being able to hide behind cover used to be something you could do all the time.

I think part of the problem is the set of utility powers you get as alternate choices. Fleeting Ghost and Tumble have always been head-and-shoulders above the other choices, although Great Leap is okay. People see the discrepancy and are trying to apply a balance now that there is an opportunity.

My opinion is that rogues should have to work to gain CA, but it should be consistantly attainable. Rogues have a potentially high damage output through Sneak Attack. This high output is partly balanced by the inconvenience necessary to gain Sneak Attack. To gain CA, he often cannot be in the position he wants to, or has to subject himself to opportunity attacks to get there. He often cannot attack the opponent he would like to because he can't get CA against that foe. Instead he has to attack a low priority target.

I don't see hiding behind normal cover as preventing this balancing inconvenience. I do see being able to hide behind allies as removing the balance because, in that case, you no longer have to be out of position to gain CA. You can shoot from cover and move into flanking position at will. That is unbalanced. Fleeting Ghost, using the stronger interpretation, is not unbalanced as far as game mechanics. It is unbalanced in regard to most of the alternate L2 utility powers, but that is nothing new.

If I were the DM, I would talk it over with my group and see if there was a general concensus. I would also take a look at the rogue's performance in play, compared to the other players and compared to the intention that the rogue should usually be getting combat advantage. Taking those factors into consideration, make a decision as to whether or not the stronger interpretation of Fleeting Ghose would unbalance the rogue. If not, use the stronger interpretation.
-snip-

As thorough an answer as I could ever hope for. Thanks for the response. :D
[b]What do y'all think?

Consider Diversion. Diversion tells you to make a check and fails to tell you that you don't need SC/TC. Does that mean you can only use Diversion in SC/TC?

EDIT Argument retracted for being too tedious :P

-vk
Wow, this post in general (Skipped some of the replies) seems to completely justify the wording used in the compendium, almost explaining why they would make it as rigid as they did accross the board. They must have been looking at the Rogue's need to maintain CA when making this "nerfed" version of stealth and utility powers such as this specifically. If you want to be a stealthy rogue, then you clearly still your option available to you. It still creates a challenge that they have to overcome (since allies no longer give cover) but are given a chance to bend the rule due to thier class (Which many would argue is the concept behind being a stealthy rogue).

Not only does this interpretation validate the new ruling, but it also solves the stealth rogue's nerfing concerns with a RAW patch (even in its pre-implementation stage) which is the important part.

Many of the complaints so far are arguing against it for reasons outside of the scope of the RAW interpretation, which was the point of the original post. Fair/balanced/intended, none of that matters in this arguement, if the wordings listed by the original poster are accurate, this is RAW, this is how rogues CAN (if it works for your game) remain un-nerfed by the "current" ruling.

Even from a fair balanced perspective, I still think this is a brilliant balance decision for DMs and players. If you really think that rogues shouldnt be able to be stealthy then the other classes, then go ahead with that arguement, it should be entertaining, but be prepared for a new thread where people waste time pitting class aptitudes against each other.

Dibs on "CLERICS SHOULDNT BE ABLE TO HEAL THAT WELL!!!", and "FIGHTERS SHOULD GET TO DEAL MARKING DAMAGE TOO!!!"

waka?

*note - Great addition vonklaude , thats what were all looking for to help the conversation
Many of the complaints so far are arguing against it for reasons outside of the scope of the RAW interpretation, which was the point of the original post. Fair/balanced/intended, none of that matters in this arguement, if the wordings listed by the original poster are accurate, this is RAW, this is how rogues can remain un-nerfed by the "current" ruling.

EDIT My RAW arguments moved to a later post. They agree with gamervoid.

-vk
If we're going to get lawyery, all the power says is "You can move your speed and make a Stealth check." It doesn't say you become hidden if you succeed at the Stealth check, the way that Chameleon does. Technically, the power does absolutely nothing. You make a skill check and nothing happens. Like a power that says "You can move your speed and make a History check." With no result, the History check doesn't do anything.

Of course, one way to look at it is that it means you can make a Stealth check to do something specific, like try to hide yourself. Kind of like saying that maybe you could make the History check to do something specific, like see if you know anything about the runes on the door. In that case, you'd have to follow the rules in the skill section for doing that thing. Your History check would be exactly the same as a normal History check to figure out the runes on the door. Your stealth check would be exactly the same as your normal stealth check to try and hide: you need total cover or concealment.
Agreed. The Posibility that it can weave in other directions is possible depending on the level of scrutiny , its just enlightening that MAYBE there was some dynamic thought behind the new rule that intended to make use of these improved interpretations of how the various stealth based effects can interact to appease players.

Im actually hating rules lawyering in 4.0 because it CAN weave so well. The differences in elbow room between this and 3.5 are painful when forums are 10x faster to speculate then WOTC can finalize.
Makeshiftwings has it right. Because Fleeting Ghost does not say what you get for making your stealth check, you have to look at the rules to stealth. In the (current) rules for stealth, you can become hidden by passing a stealth check, but only if you are in total concealment/superior cover. Nothing about Fleeting Ghost changes that requirement. If stealth has any other options (From house rules, maybe) that don't require total etc., something like moving across a gravel floor without setting off the sound detecting alarm trap, then you can use Fleeting Ghost for that.
Makeshiftwings has it right. Because Fleeting Ghost does not say what you get for making your stealth check, you have to look at the rules to stealth. In the (current) rules for stealth, you can become hidden by passing a stealth check, but only if you are in total concealment/superior cover. Nothing about Fleeting Ghost changes that requirement.

What really caught my eye and convinced me to make the original post was the peculiar wording of the revised stealth skill. It does not state that stealth rolls to become hidden automatically fail without a distraction or total cover/concealment. It also does not say that such rolls can only be successful with a distraction or total concealment/cover.

Rather, it states that you cannot make the check at all. That distinction makes this interpretation plausible IMHO.

You are right, of course, that when you make the stealth check you should refer to the rules for stealth. It would seem that those rules continue to apply except for the portions that are explicitly overridden by other rules. In this case, my argument was that since FG explicitly allows the rogue to make a stealth check the section of the stealth rules that prevents the roll without total concealment/cover would be overridden.

The other portions of stealth rule would then remain in force. Included would be the rules for what a successful check means, what a failed roll means, what makes a particular roll a success or a failure, and (as I note in my original post) the rules governing remaining hidden.
This
Of course, one way to look at it is that it means you can make a Stealth check to do something specific, like try to hide yourself. Kind of like saying that maybe you could make the History check to do something specific, like see if you know anything about the runes on the door.

Does not necessarily lead to this
In that case, you'd have to follow the rules in the skill section for doing that thing. Your History check would be exactly the same as a normal History check to figure out the runes on the door. Your stealth check would be exactly the same as your normal stealth check to try and hide: you need total cover or concealment.

Anyway, I don't really think it is worth the effort to try and determine a hard and fast rule for everyone to follow. We are, after all, talking about an unadjusted power designed to work with an adjusted skill. WotC can pretty much say it works however they want it to and no arguement would change that. Just keep an open mind, in the mean time, and wait for some clarification to accompany the errata update.
My question arises from a weird collision of words from the Fleeting Ghost power and the revised Stealth skill wording. Say a character makes a Stealth check with Fleeting Ghost as part of movement from point A to point B, but during part of this movement the character is out in the open (no cover or concealment). At point B, the character ends his movement behind non-total cover. The revised Stealth wording states:

Not Remaining Hidden: If you take an action that causes you not to remain hidden, you retain the benefits of being hidden until you resolve the action. You can’t become hidden again as part of that same action.

Once the character finishes this move action, would the FG-Stealth effectively be pre-determined to break, thus forcing the character back to the non-FG Stealth requirements at the end of the action?

If this were the case, would it mean that even though the Fleeting Ghost power allows a Stealth check, if the action itself contains Stealth-breaking elements, a character would not be able to dovetail the FG Stealth check into the “Keep Out of Sight” rules?

Otherwise it does look like FG-Stealth is the intended/back-door (take your pick) way into getting Stealth from non-total cover, which I think is the point here.

My other question would be, is there a good reason for Shadow Stride and Fleeting Ghost to be this redundant?
If we're going to get lawyery, all the power says is "You can move your speed and make a Stealth check." It doesn't say you become hidden if you succeed at the Stealth check, the way that Chameleon does. Technically, the power does absolutely nothing. You make a skill check and nothing happens. Like a power that says "You can move your speed and make a History check." With no result, the History check doesn't do anything.

Heh. That's a nice line of reasoning, but it won't prevail. There is only one consequence of a successful skill check on Stealth, and that is becoming hidden. That can't be unhooked without introducing a principle that undermines other parts of the game: that a successful check might not lead to the Success effect!

What your argument does a good job of raising is the question of why we get to ignore some parts of the Stealth RAW and not others?

My view on that is summarised here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=16507354.

On balance my sense is the RAW favours letting Fleeting Ghost give you a check without meeting the Becoming Hidden requirements. The matter cannot be entirely settled from RAW; gamervoid is spot on in noticing that 4ed RAW can weave different ways depending how you scrutinise it.

So DMs call until Errata fixes it, but if you decide to allow it you are safe to do so RAW-wise. There's nothing proving you need SC/TC, and much that suggests otherwise. HiFructose's argument about once triggered being an example.

-vk
My question arises from a weird collision of words from the Fleeting Ghost power and the revised Stealth skill wording. Say a character makes a Stealth check with Fleeting Ghost as part of movement from point A to point B, but during part of this movement the character is out in the open (no cover or concealment). At point B, the character ends his movement behind non-total cover. The revised Stealth wording states:

Once the character finishes this move action, would the FG-Stealth effectively be pre-determined to break, thus forcing the character back to the non-FG Stealth requirements at the end of the action?

If this were the case, would it mean that even though the Fleeting Ghost power allows a Stealth check, if the action itself contains Stealth-breaking elements, a character would not be able to dovetail the FG Stealth check into the “Keep Out of Sight” rules?

No more than making a Stealth check the usual way at the end of a move action would be. Remember: the Remaining Hidden requirements do not exist until you are hidden. Nothing you do can break hiding you don't have.

My other question would be, is there a good reason for Shadow Stride and Fleeting Ghost to be this redundant?

Fleeting Ghost is in no way made redundant by DDI Stealth. In fact, it locks in neatly to the Rogue class specialty.

Shadow Stride is now very slightly redundant, where it was previously bugged. Not much one can do about that. Shadow Stride remains useful because it means you can cross an open space and not break your hiding.

-vk
Fleeting Ghost would allow a Stealth Check. But, what do you get with a successful check? Sounds like the new Stealth rules would not let you become hidden without the SC/TC. But, becoming/staying hidden is only one portion of the Stealth Skill.

So, go ahead and make your Stealth Check, when using Fleeting Ghost. Your DM probably should say you are not hidden, but, you moved very silently!

From what I can see, Fleeting Ghost was meant to allow rogues an early opportunity to do what the Paragon Feat: Secret Stride allowed. Basically both got rid of the -5 penalty for moving your normal speed.
Fleeting Ghost would allow a Stealth Check. But, what do you get with a successful check? Sounds like the new Stealth rules would not let you become hidden without the SC/TC.

Actually, the revised version of Stealth would not let you make a Stealth check without SC/TC ("Becoming Hidden: You can make a Stealth check against an enemy only if you have superior cover or total concealment"). Fleeting Ghost, as written, allows you to make a Stealth check.


But, becoming/staying hidden is only one portion of the Stealth Skill.

So, go ahead and make your Stealth Check, when using Fleeting Ghost. Your DM probably should say you are not hidden, but, you moved very silently!

If he wants to ignore the rules and jerk the player around at the same time, then yeah, he should say that, in just that way. But, the RAW on the result of a Stealth check is quite clear: "Success: You are hidden, which means you are silent and invisible to the enemy..."

From what I can see, Fleeting Ghost was meant to allow rogues an early opportunity to do what the Paragon Feat: Secret Stride allowed. Basically both got rid of the -5 penalty for moving your normal speed.

That's your interpretation, but since Shadow Stride explicitly required cover to make a check as written before the changes to the Stealth skill and Fleeting Ghost didn't have any requirements for making a check, that isn't clear in the RAW, and the RAW in fact supports the interpretation that Fleeting Ghost grants a check.

And, even if your interpretation was the original intent, it isn't necessarily the intent after the adjustment to the Stealth skill. With all of the other limits placed on the effectiveness of Stealth, and the pre-existing requirements for all of the other Stealth-related rogue powers of the character already being hidden still in place, having the initial Stealth-related power act as a less daunting entry point to becoming hidden than SC/TC is reasonable.

As far as guessing intent, the literal interpretation of Fleeting Ghost is much more in line with the description of the Rogue class: "You slip into and out of shadows on a whim, pass anywhere across the field of battle without reprisal..." Shadows are Concealment, not Total Concealment, and it seems odd that the intent would be to make Rogues that can't hide in shadows without hiding behind an upended table first or that are required to sit in one place ducking in and out from behind a corner over and over rather than moving around the battlefield slipping into and out of the shadows.
If they just posted errata for the power fleeting ghost that you could make a stealth check with any cover/concealment it would be clear and fairly balanced.

I think of being able to judge when to move from partially covered doorway to partially covered doorway in dim light as what you would expect from a rogue. You didn't start in full cover...but it is a special power and what better reason to move your full speed to try and remain stealthy!
In regard to HiFructose;

I'm going through this same type of debate in my thread "Help with Ranger Build" regarding using Quick Draw. (Take a look at it, would love your feedback)

Anyways, In regards to this discussion. I think HiFructose hit it on the nose here folks, Think about it from Design view.

Skills are suppose to be used as is, But there is always exception too the rule, Mainly from Class powers.

I don't think Errata on stealth was nerfed. I think it was intended. To help solidify the rogue class.

Before any class could hide just as easy, also as someone so clearly pointed out above about Secret Stride, again I think that feat referrers more to another class like ranger or something who doesn't multiclass to have some extra edge when using the skill.

Rogue doesn't need to, Cut and Dry, Simply Put... Rogue's do it better then anyone else, and will be an exception to the rule because of their class.

Just like any other class trying to be a wizard, doesn't work so well.

Point is, if you look at all the rogue powers that utilize stealth in some way, Shadow Stride, Chameleon, and of course Fleeting Ghost.

If in any way these powers were not intended to give the rogue and edge in stealth they "MOST" likely would have included them in the Errata with stealth.

I mean, maybe I'm wrong but do you really think the design team completely overlooked the Rogue's Bread and Butter stealth skill? Unless maybe just maybe it was intended to function the same as it always has.

I really don't think he is being a rules lawyer, If you look at the power its the only power that allows you to make a said "Stealth Check".

Errata is clear with its rules as below.
Becoming Hidden: You can make a Stealth check against an enemy only if
you have superior cover or total concealment against the enemy or if you’re
outside the enemy’s line of sight.

Fleeting Ghost States...

EFFECT: You can move your speed and make a Stealth Check.

Remember its and EFFECT like any other power its an exception to the rule.

Just like Great Leap is an exception to the rule, to allow you to jump as if you had running start and you can exceed your speed. Right? Why? Cause its an effect of a power, which can always be an exception to the rule.

But, the catch even know the power/effect goes off. (i.e make a stealth check) you still then have to follow standard rules to upkeep it. Since it doesn't say till the end of your turn or what not, its like an immediate effect, at the end of the move action.

So, now at which point we are, Success or Failure.
On a Success, Now these rules take into effect.

Remaining Hidden: You remain hidden as long as you meet these
requirements.
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, or to stay outside line of sight, but you do
need some degree of cover or concealment to remain hidden. You can’t use
another creature as cover to remain hidden.
Keep Quiet: If you speak louder than a whisper or otherwise draw
attention to yourself, you don’t remain hidden from any enemy that can hear
you.
Keep Still: If you move more than 2 squares during an action, you must
make a new Stealth check with a –5 penalty. If you run, the penalty is –10. If
any enemy’s passive Perception check beats your check result, you don’t
remain hidden from that enemy.
Don’t Attack: If you attack, you don’t remain hidden.

Failure... well try again.

People are reading into things to much or trying to justify why it shouldn't work when its pretty cut and dry it should work, and works as intended.

I mean powers and effects of powers will always be and always are exceptions to the rules. If you don;t know that by now, you shouldn't be playing this game.

Its like saying, Hail of Arrows lvl 27 Ranger power isn't possible. Well guess what, it is not possible in reality, but its a power in a game which breaks the normal rules of play because it was intended to do so.

Or any other power that has an Effect, for that matter. The rules are some time vague, and everyone will always have their own opinion, problem is not everyone will always be right. And even sometimes when your right or wrong, someone will always overlook, or disagree its part of human nature.

Rogue is a rogue, thats its class, thats what it does.

Those few powers that a rogue has is what makes it a Rogue, If those "POWERS" and "EFFECTS" no longer apply then the rogue is no longer a rogue. Or any class for that matter.
Powers do what they say that they do. This is different from doing what they imply that they do. If a power or feat breaks the general rule, it says so. Just like how fleeting ghost says you don't take the penalty for movement on the stealth check. If it's supposed to ignore the requirement of superior cover or total concealment, it would say so. Clearly, it's not going to say this without erratta because it didn't need to say it when it was first printed.

The power sounds to me like it's supposed to be a bonus to your stealth checks when you move your full speed. Like the more general skill boosting utilities, but at-will because it's only for specific purposes.
Powers do what they say that they do. This is different from doing what they imply that they do. If a power or feat breaks the general rule, it says so. Just like how fleeting ghost says you don't take the penalty for movement on the stealth check. If it's supposed to ignore the requirement of superior cover or total concealment, it would say so. Clearly, it's not going to say this without erratta because it didn't need to say it when it was first printed.

The power sounds to me like it's supposed to be a bonus to your stealth checks when you move your full speed. Like the more general skill boosting utilities, but at-will because it's only for specific purposes.

But the movement section noted in the power is a separate sentence after the main effect which is move your speed and make a stealth check. Which then means its a secondary effect. Look at Shadow Stride as an example allows movement etc but it tells you that only if you succeed on your check does it count.

Fleeting ghost, on the other hand states it's effect, then regardless of whatever happens or what you do, You do not take the normal penalty from movement on this check. Thats secondary effect, I mean if you don't take a penalty for movement regardless of rolling a check. Why are you using the power? And what check roll are you making? Its not to move because it already states there is no penalty and you can move freely. So The only reason you would be making a check is to hide. So again since errate states you can only make a stealth check if you have SC/TC. But this power allows you to make a stealth CHECK.

Then it would fall into the rules of remaining hidden if you had any type of cover or concealment. If not then this power is pretty useless, since all it lets you do is make a stealth check at the end of your move that you did not have to make to begin with when you just could have ran to the location without the use of the power and into SC/TC and made the check as normal.

Again, though powers regardless of what they say or do break the rules all the time, Thats what they do, They give the player/class the extra edge above and beyond the normal rules.

Effects, are always outside the norm, and always will be that was their intent. To give some extra edge regardless of rules.

As I pointed out the power works perfectly fine, I think the Rules for stealth were errated for a reason so no other class could stealth like a rogue.

Fleeting Ghost, only allows you to make a stealth check, Rules clearly state you can only make a check if you have SC/TC unless out of sight or not in combat. So if you have an effect that allows you to make a stealth check it supersedes the rules, (All effects supersede some rule some where pretty much) But again, the thing is even though you make the stealth check as that is it's effect after which you then have to follow the normal rules for remaining hidden.

I mean, say your in combat and use Fleeting Ghost and end your move in cover. Ok, now you make a stealth check if you succeed your hidden. As per the rules your in cover, remaining hidden only requires cover not SC/TC. Thats the effect of the power. Now if you wanted to continue moving unnoticed you would need Shadow Stride.

Fleeting Ghost allows you to make a stealth check regardless, its an effect. Effects are automatic no matter what and happen regardless of any rule and thats hard fact.

And alot of errata has been released already, and I highly doubt after they released Errata regarding the stealth rules they would overlook something so major as fleeting ghost if that wasn't its intent.
Isn't the whole point of this utility power to be able to sneak around at full speed without penalties instead of at 2 squares movement?

Steath checks can be made to move unnoticed, not only to be hidden.

So, a guard is standing in a doorway 10 squares away, his back turned to you.
You want to get through the door silently by taking the guard out before he can shout for an alarm.
A. Fighter in plate: tries moving closer without the guard's passive perception hearing him and pretty much auto-fails because he can't move quietly what-so-ever.
B. A rogue without Fleeting Ghost can try sneaking up to the guard. He can choose to do it as quick as possible by moving at full speed and taking a -5 to his stealth vs perception check to not be noticed; or to play it safe by taking 5 rounds for this and sneak closer 2sq/round. The risk of the guard turning around in to look behind him (out of boredom, because of his training, whatever) is greater of course, so both are risky.
C. A rogue with Fleeting Ghost can sneak up on the guard at full speed without the sneak penalty, greatly increasing the chance of reaching the guard unnoticed. (In fact, he can use fleeting ghost twice per round and move to the guard in a single round, then spend an AP to attack.)

(At Paragon tier, there's a feat that allows this for anyone with enough dex, rogues just get to pull it off sooner.)
IMO, this RAI and RAW

IF you end your movement in full cover/full concealment, you fullfil the requirements of making a HIDE check (without -5 movement penalty, thanks to FG), otherwise, you make checks to REMAIN UNNOTICED.
Isn't the whole point of this utility power to be able to sneak around at full speed without penalties instead of at 2 squares movement?

Steath checks can be made to move unnoticed, not only to be hidden.

So, a guard is standing in a doorway 10 squares away, his back turned to you.
You want to get through the door silently by taking the guard out before he can shout for an alarm.
A. Fighter in plate: tries moving closer without the guard's passive perception hearing him and pretty much auto-fails because he can't move quietly what-so-ever.
B. A rogue without Fleeting Ghost can try sneaking up to the guard. He can choose to do it as quick as possible by moving at full speed and taking a -5 to his stealth vs perception check to not be noticed; or to play it safe by taking 5 rounds for this and sneak closer 2sq/round. The risk of the guard turning around in to look behind him (out of boredom, because of his training, whatever) is greater of course, so both are risky.
C. A rogue with Fleeting Ghost can sneak up on the guard at full speed without the sneak penalty, greatly increasing the chance of reaching the guard unnoticed. (In fact, he can use fleeting ghost twice per round and move to the guard in a single round, then spend an AP to attack.)

(At Paragon tier, there's a feat that allows this for anyone with enough dex, rogues just get to pull it off sooner.)
IMO, this RAI and RAW

IF you end your movement in full cover/full concealment, you fullfil the requirements of making a HIDE check (without -5 movement penalty, thanks to FG), otherwise, you make checks to REMAIN UNNOTICED.

But as above, you could also run to that spot in full plate, and as long as your in SC/TC you can still make a stealth check without the use of this power and gain a +2 to speed. With no penalty. cause your not moving while using stealth your merely moving to a location then trying to hide.

Rules are not suppose to be super realistic they are to simulate fantasy world events, In such they do things that are not part of normal laws that we everyday experience.

Yet again though your not making the check to move without penalty, that is already FREE as Part of the power's effect. So your making a check, at the end of your move when using fleeting ghost. A Stealth Check. Its an effect which can and always will supersede normal rules. So, In effect you can make a stealth check to hide or do whatever you want regarding stealth at the end of your action. Its like Running quietly then sinking into the shadows after your done.

Because of the power's effect, you don't require SC/TC because as per the rules if you do not have SC/TC your not even ALLOWED period, to make a check it fails automatically. BUT because of the effect which supersedes that rule, cause its an effect. It allows you to make a check to hide at the end of your FREE move action with NO normal penalty. The power cost a move action, not your moving or making a check. The power gives you your ability to do so, which also has the bonus of not taking the normal penalty to movement. BUT you get to make a stealth check. NOT make a stealth check to move without penalty. And it clearly states that in the power.

Now if you succeed, your subject to the normal rules of stealth, you need some degree of cover, or it fails, if you have any degree of cover you succeed. Mind you anyone in LOS still gets Perception check.

That has and always will be the intent of the power, Errata for stealth was intended SO, other classes could not gain stealth like a rogue, unless spending 3 Feats into Mutliclassing to gain Rogue Utility Powers.

It has to do with balance issues regarding other classes. Fleeting Ghost is the Rogue's bread and butter power and the only power that makes them good at what they do.

I mean cmon, Thats what rogue's do, if you can't see that the change to stealth was to prevent other classes from doing so, and to solidify the Rogue, for what their class does.
Sign In to post comments