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

1483 posts / 0 new
Last post
LoW, can you update with the new changes appearing under Perception in the Rule Compendium

RC 150 Perception
Find A Hidden Creature:  If a creature finds a hidden creature, it might point the hidden creature out to others, resulting in them knowing it`s locatio.
I'm a little confused about how this all works. Let's say that you have this situation:

A Rogue wearing Armor of Dark Deeds ( www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/it... )in the middle of a well-lit room attacks a monster with Gloaming Cut ( www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/po... ). The rogue has combat advantage against the monster and an Int modifier of 2.

Assuming a sufficient Stealth roll, can the rogue become hidden?

--S



Specificly, you now need SCTC to Hide with Gloaming Cut, which Armor of Dark Deeds cannot supply. AoDD would allow the following with GC (or Deft Strike, Nimble Strike, or any Attack power with movement.)
  • Start NOT hidden and within the movement range of the power to Superior Cover/Total Concealment.

  • Use the power, moving into SCTC to make a Stealth Check to become hidden at the end of the action.

  • Use the Concealment granted by AoDD to use a Move Action while maintaining your Hidden state. (Remember, if you move more than 2 squares you'll need to make another stealth check, barring CS Rogue or other Specific Exceptions.)


Armor of Dark Deeds is primarily of use to Cunning Rogues who can use their class ability to Hide in Concealment after a Move Action that places them 3 squares from where they started. However, This Class Ability doesn't work with non-Move Action powers like Gloaming Cut. So, some finesse is still required to make it work.
 


As I read it, if a Cunning Rogue moves at least 3 squares away from where he started, he can make a stealth check to become hidden if he has any Concealment and any Cover.  The Armor of Dark Deeds would grant him that.  As long as those two conditions met, then why wouldn't he be able to make the Stealth check if he had an IntMod of 3 or more with Gloaming Cut?  (or any attack with movement powers that would get you 3 spaces away?)

-D
As I read it, if a Cunning Rogue moves at least 3 squares away from where he started,



During a MOVE ACTION.

As long as those two conditions met, then why wouldn't he be able to make the Stealth check if he had an IntMod of 3 or more with Gloaming Cut?  (or any attack with movement powers that would get you 3 spaces away?)



I fell afoul of this exact mistake a couple of days ago.

The Cunning Sneak ability to hide without SCTC only applies if they're making the check after MOVE ACTIONS, not just actions during which they move.

If you aren't spending a Move Action to make the move, Cunning Sneak doesn't 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.
Show
I'm a little confused about how this all works. Let's say that you have this situation:

A Rogue wearing Armor of Dark Deeds ( www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/it... )in the middle of a well-lit room attacks a monster with Gloaming Cut ( www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/po... ). The rogue has combat advantage against the monster and an Int modifier of 2.

Assuming a sufficient Stealth roll, can the rogue become hidden?

--S



Specificly, you now need SCTC to Hide with Gloaming Cut, which Armor of Dark Deeds cannot supply. AoDD would allow the following with GC (or Deft Strike, Nimble Strike, or any Attack power with movement.)
  • Start NOT hidden and within the movement range of the power to Superior Cover/Total Concealment.

  • Use the power, moving into SCTC to make a Stealth Check to become hidden at the end of the action.

  • Use the Concealment granted by AoDD to use a Move Action while maintaining your Hidden state. (Remember, if you move more than 2 squares you'll need to make another stealth check, barring CS Rogue or other Specific Exceptions.)


Armor of Dark Deeds is primarily of use to Cunning Rogues who can use their class ability to Hide in Concealment after a Move Action that places them 3 squares from where they started. However, This Class Ability doesn't work with non-Move Action powers like Gloaming Cut. So, some finesse is still required to make it work.
 


As I read it, if a Cunning Rogue moves at least 3 squares away from where he started, he can make a stealth check to become hidden if he has any Concealment and any Cover.  The Armor of Dark Deeds would grant him that.  As long as those two conditions met, then why wouldn't he be able to make the Stealth check if he had an IntMod of 3 or more with Gloaming Cut?  (or any attack with movement powers that would get you 3 spaces away?)

-D




What LOW said.

The Cunning Sneak class ability specifies it works with Move Actions. It hasn't recieved erratta to work with Standard, Minor, Immediate, or Free Actions. Not even those that allow movement.

However, Armor of Dark Deeds is still an "A++++would buy again!" item for cunning sneaks as the concealment it grants moves with you and is as reliable as your chance to hit each round. You just have to take your Move Action(s) after doing anything on your turn that would spoil Hidden.


LoW, can you update with the new changes appearing under Perception in the Rule Compendium

RC 150 Perception
Find A Hidden Creature:  If a creature finds a hidden creature, it might point the hidden creature out to others, resulting in them knowing it`s locatio.

They didn't!  Personally I think that makes stealth too weak.  Without special powers, it's already fairly hard to use effectively.  Anyway, there go all my eloquent arguments on that one. 
However, Armor of Dark Deeds is still an "A++++would buy again!" item for cunning sneaks as the concealment it grants moves with you and is as reliable as your chance to hit each round. You just have to take your Move Action(s) after doing anything on your turn that would spoil Hidden.


Or just play a new style Rogue/Thief who get as their 16th level paragon path class feature the ability to remain hidden after an attack.

If you need to move, you just have to use Sneak's Trick, or only go two squares.
As I read it, if a Cunning Rogue moves at least 3 squares away from where he started,



During a MOVE ACTION.

As long as those two conditions met, then why wouldn't he be able to make the Stealth check if he had an IntMod of 3 or more with Gloaming Cut?  (or any attack with movement powers that would get you 3 spaces away?)



I fell afoul of this exact mistake a couple of days ago.

The Cunning Sneak ability to hide without SCTC only applies if they're making the check after MOVE ACTIONS, not just actions during which they move.

If you aren't spending a Move Action to make the move, Cunning Sneak doesn't apply.



I thought so too for a while, I was going back and forth on the interpretation, then I found something in MP2 that offered me some clarity. 
On Page 56, last paragraph under Shadow Rogue: 
"Any powers that let you move as part of your attack are excellent choices, because they can help you become hidden using the Cunning Sneak class feature."

What I take from that is that ANY power (or power/feat/item combo) that moves you 3 squares away from where you started qualifies you to make a stealth check to become hidden if you have any cover or any concielment.  So Gloaming Cut with an IntMod of 3, Deft Strike with a item bonus to shifting would qualify as well. 
I know the (general) stealth rules state that "You can't become hidden again as part of that same action."  The Cunning Sneak seems to me to be the requirement you would neet to fulfill in order to to make the (specific) exception.

I also noticed that the Action Type: "Move Action" is often capitalized in the books.  I also noticed that responses to my post were capitalized as well and it isn't capitalized in the book.  I don't know if this is a convention in the books or not or if it has any bearing on how to read the rules. 

Please let me know if I have missed something,

D-

I thought so too for a while, I was going back and forth on the interpretation, then I found something in MP2 that offered me some clarity. 
On Page 56, last paragraph under Shadow Rogue: 
"Any powers that let you move as part of your attack are excellent choices, because they can help you become hidden using the Cunning Sneak class feature."

What I take from that is that ANY power (or power/feat/item combo) that moves you 3 squares away from where you started qualifies you to make a stealth check to become hidden if you have any cover or any concielment. 



"Advice on which powers to take for a certain build" is not "a rule".

What you've found is evidence that they intended to mean "action during which you move", but, intended or not, what Cunning Sneak ACTUALLY SAYS is Move Actions only.


I know the (general) stealth rules state that "You can't become hidden again as part of that same action."  The Cunning Sneak seems to me to be the requirement you would neet to fulfill in order to to make the (specific) exception.



This is possible, but it's also possible that the intent of the Stealth Check at the end of Gloaming Cut is to let you make a Stealth Check after a Standard Action - which, when MP2 was printed, you couldn't do.


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.
ALright, for cunning sneaks,

Cunning Sneak
You don’t take a penalty to Stealth checks for moving more than 2 squares, and you take a –5 penalty instead of a –10 penalty to Stealth checks for running.

If you end a move action at least 3 squares away from your starting position, you can make a Stealth check to become hidden if you have any concealment or any cover, except for cover provided by intervening allies.


does starting position mean at the beginning of your turn, or at the beginning of a move action? The former might allow for Gloaming Cut to be used with a move action where you did not actually move to join Hidden Club. Edge case, and I don't think RAI, but might be worth something.
If you end a move action at least 3 squares away from your starting position, you can make a Stealth check to become hidden if you have any concealment or any cover, except for cover provided by intervening allies.


I think this pretty clearly states that the starting position is at the beginning of the move action, since move action is primary predicate of that sentence.

"Advice on which powers to take for a certain build" is not "a rule".

What you've found is evidence that they intended to mean "action during which you move", but, intended or not, what Cunning Sneak ACTUALLY SAYS is Move Actions only.

I totally agree that this is advice and not a rule.  However it does a good job of establishing the game makers intentions for the feature.  I figure this at least opens enough space around the issue to put it up to the DM to decide if they wish to follow RAW or RAI. 

"Advice on which powers to take for a certain build" is not "a rule".

What you've found is evidence that they intended to mean "action during which you move", but, intended or not, what Cunning Sneak ACTUALLY SAYS is Move Actions only.

I totally agree that this is advice and not a rule.  However it does a good job of establishing the game makers intentions for the feature.  I figure this at least opens enough space around the issue to put it up to the DM to decide if they wish to follow RAW or RAI. 


This one's a tough call - since I don't know for sure that the same person/group that made the advice originally crafted the rule.  That said, it's coming from the same 'horses mouth' for all we know.  And as such, perhaps it deserves a footnote in LoW's guide as something that should be noted by DM's adjudicating Cunning Sneak purview.


"Advice on which powers to take for a certain build" is not "a rule".

What you've found is evidence that they intended to mean "action during which you move", but, intended or not, what Cunning Sneak ACTUALLY SAYS is Move Actions only.

I totally agree that this is advice and not a rule.  However it does a good job of establishing the game makers intentions for the feature.  I figure this at least opens enough space around the issue to put it up to the DM to decide if they wish to follow RAW or RAI. 


This one's a tough call - since I don't know for sure that the same person/group that made the advice originally crafted the rule.  That said, it's coming from the same 'horses mouth' for all we know.  And as such, perhaps it deserves a footnote in LoW's guide as something that should be noted by DM's adjudicating Cunning Sneak purview.



It's not really a tough call, because it's not a rule, it's just Bad Advice. There's lots of that in the PHBs.

It may or may not show how the CS Class Talent rule worked at some point during it's developement. But I think it's likely to have been written during playtest and before a final pre-pub rule nerf.

If they add "powers with movement" to the CS Class Talent it will stop being bad advice, but there is no evidence they plan to do that. Rather they seem to be bent on restricting the sub-class rather than expanding it.

It's not really a tough call, because it's not a rule, it's just Bad Advice. There's lots of that in the PHBs.

It may or may not show how the CS Class Talent rule worked at some point during it's developement. But I think it's likely to have been written during playtest and before a final pre-pub rule nerf.

If they add "powers with movement" to the CS Class Talent it will stop being bad advice, but there is no evidence they plan to do that. Rather they seem to be bent on restricting the sub-class rather than expanding it.

@Raven - *sigh* you're probably right.  It would be nice if we could have more of an insight into RAI.  Until they actually change the rules though erratta or update, however, we should probably go with what we know vs. what we suspect (which will only take us down a road of greater dispute).
Would it alter anyone's interpretation (of RAI at the very least) if there were a power with exactly the same language as Gloaming Cut, but published after the Stealth update?

Unseen Hunter's Pounce is a monk paragon path (Unseen Hand) power from Psionic Power.  Its movement technique reads as follows: "You have concealment until the end of your next turn, and you shift your speed.  At the end of this movement, you can make a Steath check to hide."

Not only was this publisged post-Stealth-update, but it is also part of an actual move action, which would have made a Stealth check legal before the update anyway.

This strongly implies that "make a Stealth check to hide" is not just something they throw in there to get around the pre-update requirement of hiding only on a move action.  It must have a broader effect, or else it's completely superfluous.

What can that broader effect be?  The concealment clause points us in the direction of not needing TCSC, does it not?  But I'm more inclined to think it just flat-out obviates ALL the requirements for hiding since nothing specific is called out.
If your position is that the official rules don't matter, or that house rules can fix everything, please don't bother posting in forums about the official rules. To do so is a waste of everyone's time.
I'm afraid concealment till the end of your turn can be used to remain hidden after a successful stealth check.  That's pretty useful.  Add to that the fact that if you had Cunning Sneak on top of this power you certainly could make a check to become hidden and meet the prereqs (as you suggested).

I don't think this constitutes enough evidence to change the interpretation of the stealth rules away from what LoW has established here.  It may be that change to the stealth rules are coming, but I'm not buying a paradigm shift based just on this.  Certainly stealth would work more powerfully otherwise - and it may even be RAI as was alluded to earlier that Cunning Sneak should work with other types of actions other than just move actions.  But we need some kind of consistent approach here and LoW's guide is the best measure that stands all the tests.  Maybe it will serve as a starting point for them to clear up stealth more consistently through erratta and update than this hodgepodge approach they've been applying to date that's caused all this confusion.

Unseen Hunter's Pounce is a monk paragon path (Unseen Hand) power from Psionic Power.  Its movement technique reads as follows: "You have concealment until the end of your next turn, and you shift your speed.  At the end of this movement, you can make a Steath check to hide."

Not only was this publisged post-Stealth-update, but it is also part of an actual move action, which would have made a Stealth check legal before the update anyway.

This strongly implies that "make a Stealth check to hide" is not just something they throw in there to get around the pre-update requirement of hiding only on a move action.  It must have a broader effect, or else it's completely superfluous.



Or, it was written pre-update and books take a very long time to get to the printer.

As-written, I think it's completely superfluous, and that's unpleasant.
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.

Unseen Hunter's Pounce is a monk paragon path (Unseen Hand) power from Psionic Power.  Its movement technique reads as follows: "You have concealment until the end of your next turn, and you shift your speed.  At the end of this movement, you can make a Steath check to hide."

Not only was this publisged post-Stealth-update, but it is also part of an actual move action, which would have made a Stealth check legal before the update anyway.

This strongly implies that "make a Stealth check to hide" is not just something they throw in there to get around the pre-update requirement of hiding only on a move action.  It must have a broader effect, or else it's completely superfluous.



Or, it was written pre-update and books take a very long time to get to the printer.

As-written, I think it's completely superfluous, and that's unpleasant.



Forgive me if I'm missing something here, but doesn't it allowing you to make a check with only concealment (not total concealment) count for something here?

Forgive me if I'm missing something here, but doesn't it allowing you to make a check with only concealment (not total concealment) count for something here?



Not really, because it is NOT "allowing you to make a check with Concealment".  It is giving you Concealment and also giving you a check.

If the power said "you may make a Stealth Check to become Hidden if you have any Cover or Concealment", then it would be implicitly overriding the need for SCTC.

"You have Concealment" and "You can move and roll Stealth" do not say "And your Stealth check can work despite you not meeting the requirements for Stealth to work".
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.
while i understand you point, and agree that it doesn't say that, I think that that is not the intention. otherwise, why put the verbage in there it's psionic power, after all, and I doubt that power was written before the stealth rules rewrite, even with publisher delays.
while i understand you point, and agree that it doesn't say that, I think that that is not the intention. otherwise, why put the verbage in there it's psionic power, after all, and I doubt that power was written before the stealth rules rewrite, even with publisher delays.



Articles in books are usually written around a year before they hit the shelves.

The rewrite to "any of your actions during which you move" is very recent.

I agree 100% that this needs a rewrite and is poorly written.
I do not agree that RAI is as easy to discern as you say.

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.

Forgive me if I'm missing something here, but doesn't it allowing you to make a check with only concealment (not total concealment) count for something here?



Not really, because it is NOT "allowing you to make a check with Concealment".  It is giving you Concealment and also giving you a check.

If the power said "you may make a Stealth Check to become Hidden if you have any Cover or Concealment", then it would be implicitly overriding the need for SCTC.

"You have Concealment" and "You can move and roll Stealth" do not say "And your Stealth check can work despite you not meeting the requirements for Stealth to work".




actually, let me amend this argument a bit more, with some bolding for emphasis.

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.

I believe that by allowing you to make a stealth check to hide in this condition, this is a specific that beats general, because you couldn't make a stealth check to hide normally. That is to say, you can't actually make the check without this caveat trumping the general rule. You just don't have the tools without the power. It's like saying you make a longsword attack without a longsword. A power might say "you can make a longsword attack" even though the rules otherplaces say that you must have a longsword to make a longsword attack.

bear in mind, I still agree that it should say "you can make a stealth check even though you wouldn't normally be able to in this situation", but I think that it is strong enough on it's own. just barely.


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.



I've actually *made* this exact argument in the past, and have been successfully convinced that "you can make a Stealth check against an enemy" means "you can apply the result of your Stealth check to that enemy".

Because, you can make a stealth check at the end of every move, forever, even if there are no enemies around, even if you're doing it against enemies who you aren't aware of.  You CAN become Hidden from someone you're also Hidden from, after all.

As well, you almost never "make a check against an enemy" directly when rolling Stealth.  You make a single check and apply the results to all enemies where the conditions match up for you to be able to apply it to them.  If you were "making a check against an enemy you want to be Hidden from", you'd be rolling once per enemy.
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.
Hey, how long has this been in the Martial Power 2 FAQ?  I could swear I looked earlier this week and it wasn't there.

1. When using the Rogue power, Gloaming Cut, do I have to have superior cover or total concealment to be able to make the stealth check that the effect of the power gives me?

Yes, you do. You still have to meet the requirements for stealth checks to be able to make this.



If your position is that the official rules don't matter, or that house rules can fix everything, please don't bother posting in forums about the official rules. To do so is a waste of everyone's time.

"Advice on which powers to take for a certain build" is not "a rule".

What you've found is evidence that they intended to mean "action during which you move", but, intended or not, what Cunning Sneak ACTUALLY SAYS is Move Actions only.

I totally agree that this is advice and not a rule.  However it does a good job of establishing the game makers intentions for the feature.  I figure this at least opens enough space around the issue to put it up to the DM to decide if they wish to follow RAW or RAI. 

This one's a tough call - since I don't know for sure that the same person/group that made the advice originally crafted the rule.  That said, it's coming from the same 'horses mouth' for all we know.  And as such, perhaps it deserves a footnote in LoW's guide as something that should be noted by DM's adjudicating Cunning Sneak purview.

It's not really a tough call, because it's not a rule, it's just Bad Advice. There's lots of that in the PHBs.

It may or may not show how the CS Class Talent rule worked at some point during it's developement. But I think it's likely to have been written during playtest and before a final pre-pub rule nerf.

If they add "powers with movement" to the CS Class Talent it will stop being bad advice, but there is no evidence they plan to do that. Rather they seem to be bent on restricting the sub-class rather than expanding it.

I don't have access to the Compendium, but someone told me that they recently updated and reworded the Stealth/Cunning Sneak rules in regards to Move Actions.  
Can someone verify? (or deny) 

-D 
Taken directly from the Compendium:

Cunning Sneak
You don’t take a penalty to Stealth checks for moving more than 2 squares, and you take a –5 penalty instead of a –10 penalty to Stealth checks for running.

If you end a move action at least 3 squares away from your starting position, you can make a Stealth check to become hidden if you have any concealment or any cover, except for cover provided by intervening allies.


Stealth: The check is usually at the end of a move action, but it can be at the end of any of the creature’s actions that involve the creature moving.

So it looks like Stealth has been updated, but Cunning Sneak has not changed.
If your position is that the official rules don't matter, or that house rules can fix everything, please don't bother posting in forums about the official rules. To do so is a waste of everyone's time.
Taken directly from the Compendium:

Cunning Sneak
You don’t take a penalty to Stealth checks for moving more than 2 squares, and you take a –5 penalty instead of a –10 penalty to Stealth checks for running.

If you end a move action at least 3 squares away from your starting position, you can make a Stealth check to become hidden if you have any concealment or any cover, except for cover provided by intervening allies.


Stealth: The check is usually at the end of a move action, but it can be at the end of any of the creature’s actions that involve the creature moving.

So it looks like Stealth has been updated, but Cunning Sneak has not changed.


So if a standard action attack includes a move, you can make a stealth check if you end in SCTC, but to hide just using concealment via Cunning Sneak, your movement needs to take place in a move action.

Interesting question: Deft Strike includes a move before the attack, but it fulfills the conditions for making a stealth check at the end of the action.  Sounds to me like you could make a stealth check at the resolution of Deft Strike.  The rule regarding not attacking actually applies to remaining hidden, so I'm not sure it negates the opportunity to make the check... This is a RAW interpretation of course, but it looks like a loophole to me...
You definitely can hide after using Deft Strike, assuming you meet all the requirements (SCTC and not having been hidden at the start of the action.)  Greg B. confirmed it when the update first came out.
You definitely can hide after using Deft Strike, assuming you meet all the requirements (SCTC and not having been hidden at the start of the action.)  Greg B. confirmed it when the update first came out.

Did he?  I assumed it was an unintended consequence of making the wording for stealth the same as for athletics, etc etc.  IMO it makes move/attack powers VERY overpowered, and they should fix it by stopping you from making a stealth check in any power that has an attack but doesn't include an explicit stealth check.

In other words, the change to stealth should help things like move as a minor action powers, but not Deft Strike.

You definitely can hide after using Deft Strike, assuming you meet all the requirements (SCTC and not having been hidden at the start of the action.)  Greg B. confirmed it when the update first came out.

*sigh*  This is one of those cases that I wouldn't bank on continuing to be ruled in this fashion.  I think most people probably houserule that a power like Deft Strike at least necessitates a -10 situational penalty to the stealth check due to the attack.  But then how do you treat Gloaming Cut?  Since the attack was so proximate to the move, would you houserule a -10 here too?  Since it specifies that "you can make a stealth check", I'd be inclined to say no... but it's kind of a mess with the new changes.  How do most people play these out right now? (assuming stealth prereq's of SCTC are met)
For reference:
So yes, you can make a Stealth check after moving as part of deft strike (or a charge), but you must meet all the other requirements, such as having total concealment or superior cover, which could be a challenge after charging, even with boots of adept charging.


It's not my favorite rule, but I guess it keeps things relatively simple.
I think most people probably houserule that a power like Deft Strike at least necessitates a -10 situational penalty to the stealth check due to the attack.  But then how do you treat Gloaming Cut?  Since the attack was so proximate to the move, would you houserule a -10 here too?


Given that trying to hit someone while they're unconscious only hands out a -5 penalty to their defenses, I'd say that anyone who assesses a houseruled -10 penalty to something on reasoning as weak as "well, it's pretty close to when you did X" isn't really playing fair.
I think most people probably houserule that a power like Deft Strike at least necessitates a -10 situational penalty to the stealth check due to the attack.  But then how do you treat Gloaming Cut?  Since the attack was so proximate to the move, would you houserule a -10 here too?


Given that trying to hit someone while they're unconscious only hands out a -5 penalty to their defenses, I'd say that anyone who assesses a houseruled -10 penalty to something on reasoning as weak as "well, it's pretty close to when you did X" isn't really playing fair.

Ok - perhaps -10 was unfair, I was just reaching for a number.  The main point was the penalty.
You definitely can hide after using Deft Strike, assuming you meet all the requirements (SCTC and not having been hidden at the start of the action.)  Greg B. confirmed it when the update first came out.

*sigh*  This is one of those cases that I wouldn't bank on continuing to be ruled in this fashion.  I think most people probably houserule that a power like Deft Strike at least necessitates a -10 situational penalty to the stealth check due to the attack.  But then how do you treat Gloaming Cut?  Since the attack was so proximate to the move, would you houserule a -10 here too?  Since it specifies that "you can make a stealth check", I'd be inclined to say no... but it's kind of a mess with the new changes.  How do most people play these out right now? (assuming stealth prereq's of SCTC are met)

If I agreed with the premise (haven't thought about it enough to decide) I would probably rule that move-attack-hide would suffer a situational penalty but attack-move-hide or move-attack-move-hide would not. The distinguishing difference being the move after the attack.

"I get your attention, and then hide while standing right next to you" - I can see how that might be hard to swallow, even with a power.

"I get your attention, then run off behind something and hide" - easier to believe.

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
If I agreed with the premise (haven't thought about it enough to decide) I would probably rule that move-attack-hide would suffer a situational penalty but attack-move-hide or move-attack-move-hide would not. The distinguishing difference being the move after the attack.

"I get your attention, and then hide while standing right next to you" - I can see how that might be hard to swallow, even with a power.

"I get your attention, then run off behind something and hide" - easier to believe.


Thank you.  That quite nicely sums up my feelings.


Interesting question: Deft Strike includes a move before the attack, but it fulfills the conditions for making a stealth check at the end of the action.  Sounds to me like you could make a stealth check at the resolution of Deft Strike.  The rule regarding not attacking actually applies to remaining hidden, so I'm not sure it negates the opportunity to make the check... This is a RAW interpretation of course, but it looks like a loophole to me...



I think it was intended tactic, not a loophole. There are a ton of attack powers that include movement and the application is commonplace at this point.

However, you should note that attack powers that put the movement first (like Deft Strike does) will often have you trying to shoot from behind the SCTC that would allow you to become Hidden. That's usually a Wall or a terrain feature that block LOS between you and your target.

Powers that allow movement after an attack like Nimble Strike and Attacks on the Run, allow you to attack and then run to SCTC to Hide. Feats added to Deft Strike (Ghostwalker for example) allow it to be used this way as well.

Remember, however, that this tactic doesn't work if you started the action Hidden.

The only real question remaining is whether Powers with Movement that specify " You may make a Stealth Check to become hidden." offer any specific exception to the requirements to become hidden. When the Cunning Sneak was introduced these types of powers seemed to be the compliment of the CS class feature and worked very well, but the latest stealth erratta has put into question how we are supposed to interpret them.

...you should note that attack powers that put the movement first (like Deft Strike does) will often have you trying to shoot from behind the SCTC that would allow you to become Hidden. That's usually a Wall or a terrain feature that block LOS between you and your target.

Powers that allow movement after an attack like Nimble Strike and Attacks on the Run, allow you to attack and then run to SCTC to Hide. Feats added to Deft Strike (Ghostwalker for example) allow it to be used this way as well.


These are good points, which had occured to me recently.  Looking at the powers cold in the context of the rules, though, you gotta admit hiding immediately after an attack that's possibly adjacent to you seems wonky - esp. when attacking is included among the factors that remove hidden.  The fact that the case where you can successfully meet the criteria to perform a hide in that situation only come up in rare circumstances gets a bit lost.

Still, in those cases... it still seems a bit wonky... *shrug*
...you should note that attack powers that put the movement first (like Deft Strike does) will often have you trying to shoot from behind the SCTC that would allow you to become Hidden. That's usually a Wall or a terrain feature that block LOS between you and your target.

Powers that allow movement after an attack like Nimble Strike and Attacks on the Run, allow you to attack and then run to SCTC to Hide. Feats added to Deft Strike (Ghostwalker for example) allow it to be used this way as well.


These are good points, which had occured to me recently.  Looking at the powers cold in the context of the rules, though, you gotta admit hiding immediately after an attack that's possibly adjacent to you seems wonky - esp. when attacking is included among the factors that remove hidden.  The fact that the case where you can successfully meet the criteria to perform a hide in that situation only come up in rare circumstances gets a bit lost.

Still, in those cases... it still seems a bit wonky... *shrug*



What difference would it make if you attack with movement to hide or attack and then take a move action to hide? It all occurs in the same turn anyways.

Something to consider is that there is no power disparity between Arcane, Psionic, and Martial abilities in 4e. Martial powers are not Real Life mundane actions. Some of the most devestating attacks in the game are delivered by an 80lb, hairy footed, butterball weilding a kitchen knife. Hiding because you used a psi power has no more inherent effect than if you used a martial power, if the power descriptions are the same.

What difference would it make if you attack with movement to hide or attack and then take a move action to hide? It all occurs in the same turn anyways.

Depends on what you had to do in order to be able to attack.

If, for example, you already did your move action...

Also, when you successfully hide, the enemy all know where you were at the time you hid. They take a -5 penalty with melee or ranged attacks to hit you, but no penalty for area or close attacks (aside from those with the "you can see" qualifier on targeting). Perhaps you would prefer to not be in that square.
"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
I think it was intended tactic, not a loophole.

I think it was almost certainly a loophole.  They added the same language to jump, climb, etc.  The rule seems to have been intended to add flexibility to movement skills ... not grossly power up certain Rogue attack powers.

Sign In to post comments