The Rules Of Hidden Club: Targeting things you can't see in D&D.

1483 posts / 0 new
Last post
Crap, I was answering the wrong question.  RAW it definitely does not allow you to become hidden to an enemy who you were previously not hidden from.

I was addressing the remaining hidden being vs everyone or just vs the target.  That I think is RAI almost certianly not intended to be vs everyone, although RAW it definitely is.
Crap, I was answering the wrong question.  RAW it definitely does not allow you to become hidden to an enemy who you were previously not hidden from.

I was addressing the remaining hidden being vs everyone or just vs the target.  That I think is RAI almost certianly not intended to be vs everyone, although RAW it definitely is.



I think it pretty much HAS to be against everyone - it's an Immediate, so you can't use it more than once.

But yeah.  RAW says "no need for cover/concealment FROM ANYONE because you beat THAT ONE GUY".  I just think that's intentional and intended for speed and simplicity, not an oversight.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

And I think it's an oversight, and the power is only intended to work against one person between each of your turns.  If more than one blow your cover/concealment, you *should* be hosed.  It's too powerful as written.

All opinion on my part of course.  We agree on how it actually works. 

@Fritz

So what do you think you're supposed to do, pick one of the enemies that simultaneously see you, when the chest you were hiding behind is destroyed? I don't think so, the power RAW and fluff support the idea that you gain a chamelon-like invisibility effect.  There's no more reason for that to only work vs a single target than here is for the assasine's U6 invis powers to work vs a single creature. It's certainly not more powerful than any of those or the warlock's at-will shadowstep or at-will eyebite.




Can we get this stickied?

 

"What is the sort of thing that I do care about is a failure to seriously evaluate what does and doesn't work in favor of a sort of cargo cult posturing. And yes, it's painful to read design notes columns that are all just "So D&D 3.5 sort of had these problems. We know people have some issues with them. What a puzzler! But we think we have a solution in the form of X", where X is sort of a half-baked version of an idea that 4e executed perfectly well and which worked fine." - Lesp

@Fritz

So what do you think you're supposed to do, pick one of the enemies that simultaneously see you, when the chest you were hiding behind is destroyed?

Most common use for this power is one creature moving to a position where you no longer have concealment from an object in the way IMX.  Getting the bonus vs any others that move later in the round doesn't fit.  And yes, if your cover is removed so multiple creatures see you, you should pick one, since it targets one creature.  The entirety of the rest of the power is dependent on the stealth check vs the target.  Then suddenly the last benefit is vs all creatures.  I guess I just see it as inconsistent.  All opinion though, it works against all creatures as is.  I certainly run it as written, although I've had a few Rogue players surprised when I pointed out it works against all players. 




Can we get this stickied?




I agree - this post should be stickied.  Kudos to LoW.

I have another question about Chameleon, but it is about the ring, not the power.

The Chameleon Ring's daily power states:
"You do not require cover or concealment to make Stealth checks until the end of your next turn."

From this thread, however, we know that you need SUPERIOR cover or TOTAL concealment to make a Stealth check to become hidden.

Does this mean that the Chameleon ring can only help you remain hidden if you already were, or is it supposed to help you BECOME hidden?

My confusion arises because the description of the ring's power does not specifically state "superior cover or total concealment," but those are indeed the normal requirements for making a Stealth check to become hidden.

Thanks in advance. 
 
The Chameleon Ring's daily power states:
"You do not require cover or concealment to make Stealth checks until the end of your next turn."

From this thread, however, we know that you need SUPERIOR cover or TOTAL concealment to make a Stealth check to become hidden.

Does this mean that the Chameleon ring can only help you remain hidden if you already were, or is it supposed to help you BECOME hidden?



The ring doesn't capitalise the terms, and the Daily power would not function at all if it was intended only to apply to "Cover" and "Concealment" - so I think it's intended to mean "removes all cover and concealment requirements".

A Daily power that does nothing shouldn't exist, and if we don't take a liberal reading of it, it does nothing. 
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
I agree that is the intended meaning; just wanted your (expert) opinion on it. Thanks!

Was AV1 released before the Stealth update?  I wonder if it needs an update to meet it's originally required purpose?  There are several powers that could use that, but most of them are in the PHB1.

Although I agree it may be possible to interpret it as a non-specific game term usage, as LoW says.


Was AV1 released before the Stealth update?  I wonder if it needs an update to meet it's originally required purpose?  There are several powers that could use that, but most of them are in the PHB1.




Nope.  AV1 postdates PHB2, and the update to Stealth is from *July 2008* - which is to say, a month after the original printing of PHB1.

The change to Stealth is one of the very first rule changes ever, in 4E.  Every book except PHB1, DMG1, and MM1 postdate it.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

Was AV1 released before the Stealth update?  I wonder if it needs an update to meet it's originally required purpose?  There are several powers that could use that, but most of them are in the PHB1.




Nope.  AV1 postdates PHB2, and the update to Stealth is from *July 2008* - which is to say, a month after the original printing of PHB1.

The change to Stealth is one of the very first rule changes ever, in 4E.  Every book except PHB1, DMG1, and MM1 postdate it.

AV1 predates PHB2 by nearly a year.

Adventurer's Vault: September 2008
PHB2: March 2009

That being said, still two months after the aforementioned stealth modification.
I've looked through the thread and couldn't find any reference to it.

The Monk PP Ghostwalker has the 11th level ability Of Two Worlds.  "You have concealment against any enemy granting combat advantage to you."

If you are hidden against an enemy you have combat advantage against them.  Would this mean that you could use the Of Two Worlds feature to remain hidden without normal cover or concealment against an enemy because you have combat advantage against them?
I've looked through the thread and couldn't find any reference to it.

The Monk PP Ghostwalker has the 11th level ability Of Two Worlds.  "You have concealment against any enemy granting combat advantage to you."

If you are hidden against an enemy you have combat advantage against them.  Would this mean that you could use the Of Two Worlds feature to remain hidden without normal cover or concealment against an enemy because you have combat advantage against them?



Looks like it.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
I've looked through the thread and couldn't find any reference to it.

The Monk PP Ghostwalker has the 11th level ability Of Two Worlds.  "You have concealment against any enemy granting combat advantage to you."

If you are hidden against an enemy you have combat advantage against them.  Would this mean that you could use the Of Two Worlds feature to remain hidden without normal cover or concealment against an enemy because you have combat advantage against them?


Yes, but bear in mind that if you attack or perform any other action that causes you to stop being hidden, you can't hide again after that action.
I've looked through the thread and couldn't find any reference to it.

The Monk PP Ghostwalker has the 11th level ability Of Two Worlds.  "You have concealment against any enemy granting combat advantage to you."

If you are hidden against an enemy you have combat advantage against them.  Would this mean that you could use the Of Two Worlds feature to remain hidden without normal cover or concealment against an enemy because you have combat advantage against them?


Yes, but bear in mind that if you attack or perform any other action that causes you to stop being hidden, you can't hide again after that action.



I was certain of the re-hiding part because of how hiding works, but I thought the RP aspects of this intriguing.  Being able to walk down the middle of the street hidden from everyone because you've had superior cover at *some* point to any individual because of street intersections and bends in the road.  The problem with keeping this up?  The last panel of this comic.

www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0656.html
It is a cool idea.  Just need a way to get phasing on demand, to avoid those pesky doors

I was certain of the re-hiding part because of how hiding works, but I thought the RP aspects of this intriguing.  Being able to walk down the middle of the street hidden from everyone because you've had superior cover at *some* point to any individual because of street intersections and bends in the road.  



Gee, a Ghostwalker, who walks like a ghost?  Amazing!

(Warlocks, especially Gnome warlocks, do the same thing.)
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
So, the guy asking in the other thread about Gloaming Cut got me thinking.  Do you need TCSC in order to hide again after using it?  That seems...odd to me.  If you still need TCSC to meet the conditions of:

bullet.gif        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.

Then why is the effect in Gloaming Cut written the way it is?

Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier, and you can make a Stealth check to become hidden.


Why is the bold part necessary, if you still have to meet TCSC?  You can already make a Stealth check as part of the shift as you can with any movement.

My question is this:  is the TSCS requirement of Becoming Hidden overridden by the effect of Gloaming Cut, allowing you to bypass TSCS and just go to the CC requirement for Remaining Hidden?  If not, why are there so many powers that give similar effects, that being you move as part of the power and then it says "You can make a Stealth check to become hidden" and why are they generally weaker than their competing powers?  Gloaming Cut doesn't have Dex mod to damage - is that drop in output counterbalanced just by the shift effect?  Or is there something more potent to the "You can make a Stealth check to become hidden" aspect?
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition

I was certain of the re-hiding part because of how hiding works, but I thought the RP aspects of this intriguing.  Being able to walk down the middle of the street hidden from everyone because you've had superior cover at *some* point to any individual because of street intersections and bends in the road.  



Gee, a Ghostwalker, who walks like a ghost?  Amazing!

(Warlocks, especially Gnome warlocks, do the same thing.)



Yes, but Warlocks have the disadvantage of needing to move at least 3 squares a round to maintain their concealment.  Which usually gives them a -5 to their Stealth check until Paragon Tier when Secret Stride becomes available.  Doesn't stop the Warlock, just makes it a little harder.  Was there something else a gnome can do that you were referencing besides their ability to start an encounter hidden?

Then why is the effect in Gloaming Cut written the way it is?

Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier, and you can make a Stealth check to become hidden.


Why is the bold part necessary, if you still have to meet TCSC?  You can already make a Stealth check as part of the shift as you can with any movement.



Not when Gloaming Cut was written.

When Gloaming Cut was written, you could make a Stealth Check to become Hidden *only* at the end of a Move Action, not any other kind of action.  So Gloaming Cut , and a lot of other MP2 powers, included wording to let you make a Stealth check after/during your Standard Action.  The ones that let you make the attack during the Standard are still meaningful.  The ones at the end, are not.

And while Gloaming Cut tells you to make a Stealth check (because, when it was written, you couldn't) it does NOT tell you to make an abnormal, unusual, exceptional, or in any way non-standard Stealth Check - meaning, all the requirements to become Hidden from any given enemy still apply.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.

I was certain of the re-hiding part because of how hiding works, but I thought the RP aspects of this intriguing.  Being able to walk down the middle of the street hidden from everyone because you've had superior cover at *some* point to any individual because of street intersections and bends in the road.  



Gee, a Ghostwalker, who walks like a ghost?  Amazing!

(Warlocks, especially Gnome warlocks, do the same thing.)



Yes, but Warlocks have the disadvantage of needing to move at least 3 squares a round to maintain their concealment.  Which usually gives them a -5 to their Stealth check until Paragon Tier



And the Ghostwalker's trick *starts* at 11.  I'm not seeing a really big comparison.

Was there something else a gnome can do that you were referencing besides their ability to start an encounter hidden?



That, and Fade Away, and the fact that if you're playing a Gnome Warlock you're almost certainly Fey/Dark pact and have a ton more blinds, teleports, and ways to turn invisible.  It's just a side effect of the race/class combo that the build almost always follows.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
So...pretty much all of the Cunning Sneak-oriented powers were gutted from their intended power level by the stealth change? 
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
How does the Fourth Rule of Hidden Club apply to an Assassin's shrouds? Does applying a shroud cause your Hidden status to break?
Shroud isn't an attack, and so no.  In fact, how to get a true assassination out of an Assassin is to get hidden, get within range of your target, build up shrouds, and then when you hit max, jump out with your executioner axe and chop his head off.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Shroud isn't an attack, and so no.  In fact, how to get a true assassination out of an Assassin is to get hidden, get within range of your target, build up shrouds, and then when you hit max, jump out with your executioner axe and chop his head off.



What, then, is the purpose of the following feat:

Hidden Insight, Dragon 379: Creatures from which you are hidden are not aware of your shrouds.

When the flavor text on Assassin's Shroud reads: "You cause invisible shrouds to settle on your foe. At your command, the shrouds reveal the target's weak points to your keen gaze." 
They're aware that they've been shrouded, yes, but you are still hidden and they don't know your precise location.  So, it's likely that they will start looking for you, running, calling for help, etc. but it doesn't break hidden.

By using that feat, the situation I described is more likely.  The cautious, calculating Assassin patiently watches his prey, and when the time is right strikes with vicious results.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I guess it's a topic for another thread, then: how do they know if the shrouds are invisible? I guess assassin shrouds are stinky, or something. Undecided
There's a general rule that anyone who's the target of a power knows what they've been targeted with.  Maybe it's a chill up their spine, an odd feeling of being watched - but they do know what's been done to them.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I guess it's a topic for another thread, then: how do they know if the shrouds are invisible? I guess assassin shrouds are stinky, or something. Undecided



A target of a power always knows
A) that they've been targeted, and by what
and
B) the details of the power.

That's a core rule.

In this case:  Unless you have the Feat that says your target isn't aware of your Shrouds, I would totally rule that Shrouding someone breaks the "don't do anything that draws attention to yourself or overtly affects your environment" rule, and you're not Hidden any more.  But that's a DM call.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
So...pretty much all of the Cunning Sneak-oriented powers were gutted from their intended power level by the stealth change? 



#1:  Not really, since they still work the same way.  There are just OTHER powers that also work the same way without the explicit callout

#2:  Some of the Cunning Sneak powers let you roll stealth in the middle of them, before the action ends.  That's often useful!

Something else that occured to me:

Stealth:  "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."

Gloaming Cut:  Attack while hidden, lose hidden, move, then make a Stealth Check to become Hidden *as part of the power text*.

Does Gloaming Cut count as a "specific" to override the restriction against not becoming Hidden again?

I'm not sure where I fall on this one, yet.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
If a power says you can do something, you can do it.  That's what specific means.  The example given in Specific vs General is "You can't use daily powers on a charge, but if a daily power says you can use it on a charge you can use it on a charge."

Power text is about as specific as it gets...which is why I asked whether you need TCSC to hide even though you get a "Make a Stealth check to become hidden" as part of power text.


And what I meant by my was that the OTHER powers that work the same way tend to not have things like damage penalties that CS powers typically do.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition

Gloaming Cut:  Attack while hidden, lose hidden, move, then make a Stealth Check to become Hidden *as part of the power text*.


Not quite, though... Gloaming Cut doesn't necessarily assume that you are hidden to begin with.  So it's not clearly justified to take it as overriding the general rule; the rider really could just be intended to let you hide after the action, and is useless now that you can always do that. 

Customer Service does say you can rehide though, for what it's worth.  They also say you need SCTC for it.
If a power says you can do something, you can do it.  That's what specific means.

No it doesn't.  Specific means it calls out the general rule it is overriding in some way.  If it doesn't reference a general rule, it doesn't override it just because it says "do X".  If X is still limited by other limitations, they still apply.

That said, I don't doubt that RAI for Gloaming Cut type powers was for them to override the attacking from hidden rule.
If a power says you can do something, you can do it.  That's what specific means.  The example given in Specific vs General is "You can't use daily powers on a charge, but if a daily power says you can use it on a charge you can use it on a charge."



Except you can ALWAYS make a Stealth Check to become Hidden at the end of any action where you move, therefore this is not a change from the normal rules that provides an "exception".  It also doesn't call out and change to the requirements to become Hidden from any enemy - it just says you can make a normal Stealth check, and a normal stealth check has normal requirements.

The idea of becoming Hidden again at the end of the action when you started Hidden?  THAT'S something that might be an exception to the normal rules.  It depends if you take the "not remaining Hidden" thing as "you can't make a Stealth check as part of the same action that loses Hidden", in which case Gloaming Cut is a specific overriding case, or if you interpret "not remaining Hidden" as "roll Stealth all you want, you can't become Hidden" just like it is at the end of a normal move where you lack the prerequisites.
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.
I've never been comfortable with the interpretation of "and make a stealth check" that doesn't allow that stealth check to do anything.  It seems to make the clause meaningless to me.  I know I'm in the solid minority on this, I'm not even sure I'm right, but it still bugs the legist in me.  Gloaming Cut is now in that category, along with things like Fleeting Ghost. 

If it had come out after the most recent stealth changes I'd say that clearly the wording was intended to override the "and you can't become hidden after losing hidden with the same action" clause because there would be no point to it otherwise.  But it precedes that and, I believe, was therefore fairly clearly intended to give you a stealth check as part of the action, when that wasn't otherwise possible.  So I'm afraid that while I don't like it, I think Gloaming Cut doesn't let you hide after losing hidden as part of the strike any more.

Unlike From the Shadows, which still retains mobility usefullness, Gloaming Cut is now much less useful for many characters than it once was.  It's not useless, it still gives good post-strike mobility for high-INT characters.  (INT < 13 characters will be categorically better w. Acrobatic Strike, and I might go w. AS over GC even for an INT 14 character for the extra damage)  But it's definitely lost some of what made it really good in my opinion.

[edit] This is one reason I'm not very happy with the decision to release updates for rules like a pen-and-paper game was a computer program.  Gloaming Cut should clearly have gotten a change during the most recent stealth updates, but like From the Shadows (and before it Fleeting Ghost) an update has basically invalidated an entire clause in a power's description.  If WOTC were perfect they'd never miss updating that clause, but we're all human (WOTC no less than the rest of us) and so some things get missed, which then leads to precisely this sort of debate.  So does Gloaming Cut let you bypass the rules about rehiding after losing hidden with the same action or not, who knows, we simply can't say because we aren't told if the lack of change to the pertinent clause is intentional (which would let us imply that the exception is intended) or if the lack of change is just WOTC forgetting to update something that was effected by the recent rule's updates.  Unfortunately reality is what it is and we are left trying to determine RAI so that we can then determine RAW, which is entirely backwards from the way it should be.[/edit]

-abs
If you don't like it, just play it the way customer service suggests, and have it let you rehide after the attack.  That makes it a good and useful power for a Stealth based character.
It's not whether or not I like it Jaelis.  In my own game I can make whatever ruling I like.  (though I usually do so with the goal of making my PCs look awesome)  I suppose if I played LFR I'd have a much stronger objection since you can't interpret stuff there, but I run a home game.  (and I know how to shut up and accept a DM's rules in the games where I'm a player, even when I disagree w. them)  So my problem is with the process which leads to this sort of confusion, not just with this particular ruling.

And I'm sorry LoW for bringing the gripe up, it's going badly off-topic on my part.  My theories aren't really appropriate conversation here.  Although discussing what Gloaming Cut's wording means certainly is.  So I'll drop my gripe and simply note that I believe Gloaming Cut requires substantial guessing at RAI in order to determine what RAW is saying.  (and that I don't like that one bit)

-abs
I've never been comfortable with the interpretation of "and make a stealth check" that doesn't allow that stealth check to do anything.  It seems to make the clause meaningless to me.  I know I'm in the solid minority on this, I'm not even sure I'm right, but it still bugs the legist in me.  Gloaming Cut is now in that category, along with things like Fleeting Ghost. 



Fleeting Ghost, notably, predates the first Stealth changes.  It made sense in June and July 2008, but since then has had obsolete wording.

And yes, it should be altered.

(PS:  Hey, WotC, I volunteer to rewrite all the Stealth rules and Stealth-affecting powers, with examples, to be clear and simple and unambiguous.  All you need to do is tell me which of the possible meanings is the intended one, and I will happily do this for you!)
Confused about Stealth? Think "invisibility" means "take the mini off the board to make people guess?" You need to check out The Rules Of Hidden Club.
Damage types and resistances: A working house rule.