Can a Rogue re-hide using Gloaming Cut after losing hidden through it?

59 posts / 0 new
Last post
Is the following true?

I believe the key benefit of Gloaming Cut comes from this section of the stealth rules:

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.

This would rule that other attack powers that grant movement do not allow you an attempt to hide because the movement is part of the attack action.  Gloaming Cut provides an exception that allows you to attack, move, and hide, all as part of the same action.

That isn't true. Attack powers that grant movement would allow you to make a stealth check at the end of the action that involves moving, but not if you are already Hidden. Gloaming Cut does not provide an exception to the rule that you can't Hide as part of the same action, because it doesn't say it does.

And you become unHidden at the end of an action. So if you are already Hidden, use Gloaming Cut, roll to become Hidden... you then lose Hidden at the end of the action. There is no way of interpreting it where it works. Particularly after the MP2 FAQ.
That isn't true. Attack powers that grant movement would allow you to make a stealth check at the end of the action that involves moving, but not if you are already Hidden. Gloaming Cut does not provide an exception to the rule that you can't Hide as part of the same action, because it doesn't say it does.

And you become unHidden at the end of an action. So if you are already Hidden, use Gloaming Cut, roll to become Hidden... you then lose Hidden at the end of the action. There is no way of interpreting it where it works. Particularly after the MP2 FAQ.


This does not seem correct. Per Gloaming Cut:

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

My understanding is that if I am hidden, I can use Gloaming Cut, and whether I hit or miss, I can then shift after the attack and become hidden again. At the end of the action, I am now hidden.

Under the Stealth rules... "Don’t Attack: If the creature makes an attack, it doesn’t remain hidden."

This means that if you are hidden and use Gloaming Cut, when you make the attack, you become unhidden immediately. You do NOT become unhidden at the end of the action. You become unhidden when you make the attack. You retain the benefits of being hidden until the end of the action, but you lose the hidden status at the moment of the actual attack.

And since Gloaming Cut says you can make a stealth check to become hidden, I see that as overriding the general rule that you cannot hide as part of the same action that made you lose hidden status. Specific overrules general. (Why else would it tell you that you can make a Stealth check if not to specifically override the general rule? If you are limited to only making the Stealth check if you were not hidden to begin with, then saying you can make a Stealth check would be redundant since it is no different from any other action that grants a move component.)
You can’t become hidden again as part of that same action that caused you to not remain hidden unless it specifically say otherwise.


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

Why would this specific rule not override the general rule you just quoted?

If it cannot override the general rule, then Gloaming Cut would just say "Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier."

Now you can still make a Stealth check after the action, BUT only if you did not lose hidden status as part of the Gloaming Cut action.
Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier, and you can make a Stealth check to become hidden.

Why would this specific rule not override the general rule you just quoted?

If it cannot override the general rule, then Gloaming Cut would just say "Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier."

Now you can still make a Stealth check after the action, BUT only if you did not lose hidden status as part of the Gloaming Cut action.


The problem is you're still hidden when you make that Stealth check.  Okay, great, even if we accept that you're hiding again while you're still hiding, fine, resolve the stealth check.  Woo, you're hidden again!

...and then the action ends, and you become unhidden due to attacking.

Gloaming Cut is a stellar example of the devs writing a power without knowing what the actual rules are.  They don't need to say that you can make a stealth check to become hidden - the stealth rules already let you do that.  If I were to rewrite Gloaming Cut based on what I think the RAI is, it would be the following:

You shift Int mod squares.  If you were hidden before the attack, make a Stealth check.  You remain hidden from any creature whose passive perception is lower than your Stealth result.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier, and you can make a Stealth check to become hidden.

Why would this specific rule not override the general rule you just quoted?

If it cannot override the general rule, then Gloaming Cut would just say "Effect: You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier."

Now you can still make a Stealth check after the action, BUT only if you did not lose hidden status as part of the Gloaming Cut action.


The problem is you're still hidden when you make that Stealth check.  Okay, great, even if we accept that you're hiding again while you're still hiding, fine, resolve the stealth check.  Woo, you're hidden again!

...and then the action ends, and you become unhidden due to attacking.


No, I am not hidden when I make the stealth check. I already lost hidden when I made the attack, not when the Effect takes place. So the order of events is 1) I attack using Gloaming Cut, losing hidden status, 2) I shift 2 squares, 3) I make a stealth check to become hidden again, 4) action is done, and I am now hidden.
No, I am not hidden when I make the stealth check. I already lost hidden when I made the attack, not when the Effect takes place

No.  As quoted above:

Not Remaining Hidden: If the creature takes an action that causes it not to remain hidden, the creature retains the benefits of being hidden, such as combat advantage, until the action is resolved. The creature can’t become hidden again as part of that same action.

Bolded and underlined for emphasis.

Gloaming Cut is one action that involves both attack and movement.  If the attack causes you to lose hidden, the movement cannot cause you to gain hidden.  This is very clear.

Also, see my edits above.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
No, I am not hidden when I make the stealth check. I already lost hidden when I made the attack, not when the Effect takes place

No.  As quoted above:

Not Remaining Hidden: If the creature takes an action that causes it not to remain hidden, the creature retains the benefits of being hidden, such as combat advantage, until the action is resolved. The creature can’t become hidden again as part of that same action.

Bolded and underlined for emphasis.

Gloaming Cut is one action that involves both attack and movement.  If the attack causes you to lose hidden, the movement cannot cause you to gain hidden.  This is very clear.

Also, see my edits above.


You are arguing another point now. There are 2 separate issues that need to be considered with Gloaming Cut.

The first is that people argue you cannot become hidden again as part of that same action that caused you not to remain Hidden. Gloaming Cut specifically overrides this general rule, stating that you CAN become Hidden as part of this action. Specific overrides general.

The second is that even if you CAN become hidden again with Gloaming Cut, it is irrelevant because you lose hidden status regardless at the end of the action. That is why I pointed out that you actually lose hidden status when you make the attack with Gloaming Cut, then AFTER you made the attack and lost hidden status, the Effect takes place making you hidden. You do NOT lose Hidden at the end of the action, but during the first part of the action.

Which point do you now disagree with? 
Also, the MP2 FAQ specify you still have to meet the requirements for stealth checks to be able to make one and you don't meet it.

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.

Also, the MP2 FAQ specify you still have to meet the requirements for stealth checks to be able to make one and you don't meet it.

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.



The FAQ only states that you have to meet the requirements for stealth checks. The stealth skill specifically tells you the requirements.

"A creature can make a Stealth check against a target only if the creature has superior cover or total concealment against that target or if the creature is outside the target’s line of sight. Outside combat, the DM might allow a creature to make a Stealth check against a distracted target, even if the creature doesn’t have superior cover or total concealment and isn’t outside the target’s line of sight. The target might be focused on something in a different direction, allowing the creature to sneak around it."

If you meet these requirements, you can make the Stealth check. Nothing in Stealth says that I cannot make the Stealth check. The part in Stealth that says "The creature can’t become hidden again as part of that same action" is overridden by Gloaming Cut saying that I can become hidden. Specific overrides general.
Gloaming Cut specifically overrides this general rule, stating that you CAN become Hidden as part of this action. 


No, it doesn't say that, not anywhere even close to saying that.  In order to be a SvG override, it has to reference the rule it's overriding.  It would have to have wording like I described above, or something saying "even if you would have lost hidden due to attacking" or something similar.

Your logic that you're using to invoke SvG just doesn't work:  it'd be like saying that Deft Strike allows you to make the shift even though you're immobilized, because Deft Strike tells you to shift two squares and you normally can't shift two squares, so SvG!  No.  You're immobilized, and the power does not say "shift two squares even if you're immobilized" so the general rule applies.

If you use your logic, all general rules stop working under all circumstances.  That's the opposite of what general means.

The second is that even if you CAN become hidden again with Gloaming Cut, it is irrelevant because you lose hidden status regardless at the end of the action. That is why I pointed out that you actually lose hidden status when you make the attack with Gloaming Cut, then AFTER you made the attack and lost hidden status, the Effect takes place making you hidden. You do NOT lose Hidden at the end of the action, but during the first part of the action.

And the rule that says this is...where?  Oh, wait, it's that rule over there, that says that you do the exact opposite of this.  Please, provide a rules source that says why you lose hidden after the attack and before the movement, and not at the end of the action like the Not Remaining Hidden rule says you do.

Which point do you now disagree with? 

Both, because you are posting things that are clearly contradicted by the rules and stubbornly refuse to acknowledge it.


D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Not really similar comparisons.

The Stealth rule states you cannot become hidden as part of the action that made you lose hidden status. It does not say you cannot make another Stealth check, you just can't become hidden using that Stealth check. Gloaming Cut states that you can become hidden with the Stealth check. Period.

Why would they even bother to put in the part stating you can make a stealth check to become hidden, if it is not letting you do something you normally could not do?
The Prone rule states that you cannot shift.  Deft Strike states that you can shift

Except you can't shift with Deft Strike while prone.

SvG does not work how you think it does.  Period.  A SvG override requires an actual reference to the rule it's overriding.  Otherwise, things like conditions stop working completely.


You ask a legitimate question:  "Why would they even bother to put in the part stating you can make a stealth check to become hidden, if it is not letting you do something you normally could not do?" and that's been answered already:  because the person who wrote Gloaming Cut didn't understand the stealth rules.

Mistakes happen.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Deft Strike lets you shift, and it has to say that because you normally cannot shift after an attack. That is why I feel that this is not a good comparison to the Gloaming Cut issue. Gloaming Cut does not have to say you can make a Stealth check if that is just something you normally can do otherwise.

However, I see your point. Deft Strike basically really is saying "You shift [if you are able to shift]."

So there are 2 ways to interpret Gloaming Cut. Your way is: "You can make a Stealth check to become hidden [if you are able to make a Stealth check AND if you are able to become hidden]" and the other way is "You can make a Stealth check [if you are able make a Stealth check] to become hidden." Note that the Martial FAQ only points out the second interpretation is at least necessary. It does not state that the second of these interpretations is invalid.

Maybe I don't understand your SvG rule then. You say that you have to refer specifically to the rule you are overriding. Then how does Cunning Sneak work, since it does not mention which rule it is overriding?

Cunning Sneak: If you end your movement 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.

Are you then suggesting that Cunning Sneak lets you make a Stealth check to become hidden if you have any concealment or any cover, as long as you meet the regular Stealth check requirement of having total concealment or superior cover?

If you have to mention the specific rule you are overriding, then Cunning Sneak should say "Cunning Sneak: If you end your movement 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, instead of the normal requirement of requiring total concealment or superior cover, except for cover provided by intervening allies.
Deft Strike lets you shift, and it has to say that because you normally cannot shift after an attack.

It doesn't say that anywhere.

D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
You normally do not shift as part of an attack power. I put in the [...] part so you can see the implied part of the powers. Implied meaning the part that is implied because otherwise the rules would break, such as being prone preventing you from shifting, even if the power says you can shift.

Specifically, Deft Strike actually says "Before the attack, you can move up to 2 squares."  

But what it really means is "Before the attack, you can move up to 2 squares. [If you are able to move.]"
Just glossing over the numerous rules errors you're making, why are you ignoring the basic stealth rules? Using an attack power causes you to lose Hidden. You got that part right. But the rules say you lose Hidden at the end of any action that involves losing Hidden. Not immediately. At the end. So until you get to the end of the action, whatever it is, you're still Hidden. So when you make the stealth check from Gloaming Cut, is that part of the same action as the attack? Yes, all one power. So are you still Hidden when you make it? Yes. Does making a stealth check while already Hidden do anything? No. Do you still lose Hidden at the end of the action? Yes.

Mand is being pretty patient with correcting you, but you really have to ask yourself if you just want to be wrong or if you actually care about learning anything about the rules.
Just glossing over the numerous rules errors you're making, why are you ignoring the basic stealth rules? Using an attack power causes you to lose Hidden. You got that part right. But the rules say you lose Hidden at the end of any action that involves losing Hidden. Not immediately. At the end. So until you get to the end of the action, whatever it is, you're still Hidden. So when you make the stealth check from Gloaming Cut, is that part of the same action as the attack? Yes, all one power. So are you still Hidden when you make it? Yes. Does making a stealth check while already Hidden do anything? No. Do you still lose Hidden at the end of the action? Yes.


No it does not say that under Stealth. It lists things that make you lose being hidden which happen as soon as one of those things occur. But you retain the benefits of Hidden status until the end of the action. Retaining the benefits is not the same as retaining Hidden status. This point I have covered several times already.

Mand is being pretty patient with correcting you, but you really have to ask yourself if you just want to be wrong or if you actually care about learning anything about the rules.


I do appreciate everyone being patient with me about this. But I don't see anything mentioned so far that goes against what I believe the power does RAW. And I don't see the issue with Gloaming Cut being specifically a power that lets you re-hide after the attack. You take a penalty for using the ability (damage is only [W] with no ability modifier added) so there is a trade-off. It is also frustrating because people keep bringing up things that are clearly wrong, like saying you lose Hidden at the end of the action which is not in the Stealth rules at all.
The benefit of being Hidden is being Hidden. Sigh.

Then you haven't been reading. I'd start with the sticky, top of the forum, Rules of the Hidden Club. It is a nice primer for people who can't understand the rules just from reading them.
The benefit of being Hidden is being Hidden. Sigh.


That does not sound right.

"Not Remaining Hidden: If the creature takes an action that causes it not to remain hidden, the creature retains the benefits of being hidden..."

Seems the Stealth rules themselves draw a distinction between remaining hidden versus retaining the benefits of being hidden.
I think you need to read the thread that Alcestis pointed you to.  Read it completely and learn the basics of what your talking about.  And then if you still don't understand we can try explaining it to you again.  As it stands now you seem to have very little understanding of what you're talking about and you're also telling people who very much do know that they are wrong.  Stop your sillyness now, please and thank you.
"Non nobis Domine Sed nomini tuo da gloriam" "I wish for death not because I want to die, but because I seek the war eternal"

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg)

I think you need to read the thread that Alcestis pointed you to.  Read it completely and learn the basics of what your talking about.  And then if you still don't understand we can try explaining it to you again.  As it stands now you seem to have very little understanding of what you're talking about and you're also telling people who very much do know that they are wrong.  Stop your sillyness now, please and thank you.


That, and you keep saying "the rules say this" when they say the opposite.  You're not being part of a productive discussion if you deny what the rules say.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
An example of a power which *does* let you remain hidden after the attack: Shadow Strike, from Martial Power 2.

Attack: Dexterity vs AC.  If you are hidden when you attack, you can make a Stealth check to remain hidden after the attack.

Gloaming Cut makes no mention of being hidden before the attack; therefore, it doesn't care whether or not you were hidden before, during, or after the attack.  It allows you to make a Stealth check (if you are able to do so) and you can become hidden (if you are able to do so.)  You lost hidden from using Gloaming Cut?  Well, then you cannot become hidden with this Stealth check as that still violates one of the rules of Hidden Club.
IIRC, Gloaming Cut was published back when the Stealth rules normally didn't allow you to try to hide at any time other than at the end of a move action. That was the 'general' rule the 'specific' Effect line of the power was intended to overcome; nothing else. Since the Stealth rules later changed to allow an attempt to hide at the end of any action that includes movement, Gloaming Cut should probably be considered an obsolete power.

"My flying carpet is full of elves."

IIRC, Gloaming Cut was published back when the Stealth rules normally didn't allow you to try to hide at any time other than at the end of a move action. That was the 'general' rule the 'specific' Effect line of the power was intended to overcome; nothing else. Since the Stealth rules later changed to allow an attempt to hide at the end of any action that includes movement, Gloaming Cut should probably be considered an obsolete power.

They had already been errata'd, actually, though it is possible it was written in-house and then the errata got done while the book was being published....
The benefit of being Hidden is being Hidden. Sigh.



Please pardon me if my grasp of the English language is not adequately strong for interpreting the Stealth rules, but would it not be proper to interpret the that "retain the benefits of being hidden" does not mean the same as"being hidden", meaning you lose the hidden status as soon as you attack?

I think the benefit of the effect line of Gloaming Cut power post-erreta is that it boost the shift distance to enable a Stealth check after a 3+ shift distance.

All the "can make a stealth check" powers are redundant and should be removed for powers with move included, but there are the powers like Veiled Missile which doesn't involve movement where it still makes sense to have it in.

Edit: Also, of course the powers with "can make a stealth check to remain hidden" wouldn't be redundant either.
Let me try!

Quoting the compendium:"Don't Attack: If the creature makes an attack, it doesn't remain hidden."
This heavily implies, but doesn't outright state, that you lose hidden status the moment you make an attack.

So let's read on, quoting compendium:"Not Remaining Hidden: If the creature takes an action that causes it not to remain hidden, the creature retains the benefits of being hidden, such as combat advantage, until the action is resolved."
So the action is Gloaming Cut, the moment you make the attack portion of the action you trigger "Not Remaining Hidden", but as the effect line following the attack is part of the Gloaming Cut action, you still retain the benefits of being hidden.

Now then, the wording "retain the benefits of hidden" seems to imply a difference from being hidden, however...
As all the benefits of the hidden status remain intact, ruleswise you remain hidden.

Gloaming Cut is one action, which causes you to not remain hidden, but untill the action in its entirety is resolved you retain the benefits from being hidden, which to the extend of the rules means you're still hidden, even during the effect line.
As the action causes you to lose hidden status, you can't use that same action to become hidden again.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something that bothered me on the other side of the fence was that Mand12's post #16 suggested that peteincary made a false statement, but it was Mand12's post #12 that first introduced this mistake.
Your logic that you're using to invoke SvG just doesn't work:  it'd be like saying that Deft Strike allows you to make the shift even though you're immobilized, because Deft Strike tells you to shift two squares and you normally can't shift two squares, so SvG!

Eventually followed by
Deft Strike lets you shift, and it has to say that because you normally cannot shift after an attack.

It doesn't say that anywhere.




If I'm missing/misinterpretting something here please elaborate, because the last thing I wish to be is ignorant or misinformed, otherwise let's just move on and it feels good to get this of my chest.

Something that bothered me on the other side of the fence was that Mand12's post #16 suggested that peteincary made a false statement, but it was Mand12's post #12 that first introduced this mistake.
Your logic that you're using to invoke SvG just doesn't work:  it'd be like saying that Deft Strike allows you to make the shift even though you're immobilized, because Deft Strike tells you to shift two squares and you normally can't shift two squares, so SvG!

Eventually followed by
Deft Strike lets you shift, and it has to say that because you normally cannot shift after an attack.

It doesn't say that anywhere.




If I'm missing/misinterpretting something here please elaborate, because the last thing I wish to be is ignorant or misinformed, otherwise let's just move on and it feels good to get this of my chest.




Deft Strike doesn't let you shift *after* the attack, it lets you move 2 squares *before* the attack.  I think that is what Mand12 was pointing out.  In fact, Mand's example is the best one for reading *all* of the rules, not just the ones that the power seems to modify, because the rules do not exist individually inside a vaccuum.  If you are immobilized, you cannot use Deft Strike to get to move 2 squares, simply because Deft Strike says that you can.  You are immobilized (which Deft Strike doesn't mention, at all) so you cannot claim that using Deft Strike while immobilized allows you to move 2 squares.

If you are slowed (Speed = 2) and a power says you can move 6 squares, then you *are allowed* to move those 6 squares, even though your Speed is currently 2 from being slowed.  This is the power *specifically* telling you how many squares to move (which overrides the *general* value of your speed.)

In order for Gloaming Cut to allow you to hide again if you were hidden when using Gloaming Cut, the power would have to say something along the lines of "If you were hidden before using this attack, ..." or " ... even if you were hidden before using this attack."  If it doesn't mention a rule, it is not superceding the rule.
In order for Gloaming Cut to allow you to hide again if you were hidden when using Gloaming Cut, the power would have to say something along the lines of "If you were hidden before using this attack, ..." or " ... even if you were hidden before using this attack."  If it doesn't mention a rule, it is not superceding the rule.



I'm not completely certain if I have interpretet them all correctly, but here are some more powers which does let you re-hide or remain hidden (or similar effects), if it helps with making it more clear.

Distracting Shot
Fitting Demise
Killing Shadow
Strike of Dancing Shadows
Perfect Sniper
Bewildering Assault
Treachery's reward

Other powers like Killer's Ambush and Killer's Retreat have the same wording as Gloaming Cut, which means the only bonus line you get from Cunning Sneak is the expanded shift distance. The increased distance may enable hiding if it means you can shift 3+ squares from your starting position, if you attacked from not-hidden and if you end up with concealment/cover (the "You may make a stealth check to become hidden" part of the effect line is still completely redundant for those powers).

One power where the Cunning Sneak bonus line is 100% useless is Lurker's Assault, the others appear to retain at least some use, in spite of the redundant text.

Deft Strike lets you shift, and it has to say that because you normally cannot shift after an attack.

It doesn't say that anywhere.

Deft Strike does not let you shift. My bad. I wonder why I thought Deft Strike lets you shift?

Your logic that you're using to invoke SvG just doesn't work:  it'd be like saying that Deft Strike allows you to make the shift even though you're immobilized, because Deft Strike tells you to shift two squares and you normally can't shift two squares, so SvG!  No.  You're immobilized, and the power does not say "shift two squares even if you're immobilized" so the general rule applies.

Oops that is why I remembered what Deft Strike does incorrectly. Mand12, thanks for correcting me and Mand12

But I think I am finally getting this SvG rule. (I've already read the Rules of Hidden Club posting many times. I think it is just the SvG understanding that was making Gloaming Cut confusing for me.) Thanks to all who have helped clarify this concept for me.

I do have one additional question, regarding what was said about losing Hidden status but retaining the benefits of Hidden status. Does this mean if you are hidden and run across an open area and then behind another wall, out of line of sight, that enemies do not actually see you run across the open area, but are only aware at the end of your move that someone is behind the wall out of line of sight? They would not know who ran across the open area because you were still invisible and silent during that part of the move? Or do they actually see you, but take a -5 to attacks due to total concealment, cannot make OA against you during the move, and grant CA to you during the move?
They don't see you, since you retain the benefit of being hidden until the action is resolved, which means you are still invisible and have total concealment.
Shift, move, whichever, the point remains.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
They don't see you, since you retain the benefit of being hidden until the action is resolved, which means you are still invisible and have total concealment.



Since movement is resolved on a square-by-square basis, wouldn't the benefits of hidden be lost as soon as they leave the first square without cover or concealment?
They don't see you, since you retain the benefit of being hidden until the action is resolved, which means you are still invisible and have total concealment.



Since movement is resolved on a square-by-square basis, wouldn't the benefits of hidden be lost as soon as they leave the first square without cover or concealment?

No since you retain the benefit of being hidden until the action is resolved, which emcompass movement.

For exemple, you retain the benefit of being hidden until Deft Strike's action is resolved, even if you are coming out of concealment before attacking. Likewise, using Twin Strike while hidden means you have combat advantage for both attacks until the action is resolved.

The benefit of being Hidden is being Hidden. Sigh.



You are basically arguing that being unable to become hidden is one of the "benefits" of being hidden. Clearly it is not in any way a benefit, therefore it cannot be a part of the benefits of being hidden, therefore it is not something which persists until the end of the action per that phrase.

That still leaves the other part of the rule, which disallows becoming hidden during the same action you became unhidden. The Gloaming Cut phrasing is either an exception to this or has no meaning (due to being written prior to a rules change that made it partially obsolete, like Barrelling Charge). 

I can buy the "it has no meaning" argument, since the book was probably in print before the errata was finalized. Though given the existance of permastealth characters, I don't think it would be terrible to give the stealth-specialist rogue build (who already gives up a second NAD due to being Dex/Int) a few extra chances to re-hide.   
feel free to houserule it that way then.
"Non nobis Domine Sed nomini tuo da gloriam" "I wish for death not because I want to die, but because I seek the war eternal"

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg)

The benefit of being Hidden is being Hidden. Sigh.



You are basically arguing that being unable to become hidden is one of the "benefits" of being hidden. Clearly it is not in any way a benefit, therefore it cannot be a part of the benefits of being hidden, therefore it is not something which persists until the end of the action per that phrase.

That still leaves the other part of the rule, which disallows becoming hidden during the same action you became unhidden. The Gloaming Cut phrasing is either an exception to this or has no meaning (due to being written prior to a rules change that made it partially obsolete, like Barrelling Charge). 

I can buy the "it has no meaning" argument, since the book was probably in print before the errata was finalized. Though given the existance of permastealth characters, I don't think it would be terrible to give the stealth-specialist rogue build (who already gives up a second NAD due to being Dex/Int) a few extra chances to re-hide.   

Being Hidden grants certain benefits. You cannot become Hidden if you are already Hidden. That isn't a benefit, that is just the rules.

It means you can make a stealth check, so long as you meet most of the normal prereqs for a stealth check. Which we know because it has been officially FAQed, so your argument holds no water. It doesn't mean nothing however. You can shift 0 and still make the check. You can shift less than the distance normally required for a stealth check and still make the check. Is that still basically worthless as a power? Yep. Is it RAW? Yep.

Also Cunning Sneaks are not Dex/Int in any actual build that would be at all worth playing. What it says in the book and what you need in reality are not at all related.
I've been through this argument here a number of times and I still disagree with the majority. If the wording in Gloaming Cut wasn't specifically in place to override the restriction in becoming Hidden again as part of the same action in which you become unHidden, why do we have Killer's Ambush available to us with the exact same wording as Gloaming Cut (You shift a number of squares equal to your Intelligence modifier, and you can make a Stealth check to become hidden?)

In the spoiler we have a power that REQUIRES that the rogue be Hidden from his intended target, grants a shift and a stealth check to become Hidden at the end if the rogue is a Cunning Sneak:

Show


Killer's Ambush

Your enemy doesn’t see you until it’s too late, and by then, you’ve left it a gaping wound to remember you by.


Encounter        Martial, Rattling, Weapon
Standard Action      Melee or Ranged weapon


Requirement: You must be wielding a crossbow, a light blade, or a sling.


Target: One creature from which you are hidden


Attack: Dexterity vs. AC


Hit: 3[W] + Dexterity modifier damage. You shift 1 square.


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

 

They'll argue that its a broken holdover from pre-stealth errata and handwave it away. The fact is that specific wording overrides the rule mentioned earlier. It's true that pre-errata you couldn't roll stealth without a Move action, so at that point it provided a two-fold benefit. After the errata the only benefit provided by these powers is overriding the previously-mentioned rule about not becoming Hidden as part of the same action in which you lost Hidden. That rule doesn't apply because you used a power that explicitly states that you get to make that "...stealth check to become hidden," with the unstated assumption that you meet the requirements of the Stealth roll that are not specifically overridden by the power.

For example:You're a Cunning Sneak rogue and attack with Gloaming Cut while hidden and shift 3 squares (INT mod) after the attack and are granted a Stealth roll. If a drow limned you in Darkfire, for instance, then you cannot benefit from invisibility or concealment - you would need cover (because you're a Cunning Sneak rogue) or superior cover in order to make the check after the shift. 

Another hand-wave they'll bring up is the comparison to shifting while restrained, immobilized etc, saying "but the power SAYS I get to shift!" Those are very different - there's some outside event that caused you to lose the ability to move, overriding the movement ability of the power. In the case of Gloaming Cut and every other power with the "and you can make a Stealth check to become hidden," as long as you meet the requirements for rolling Stealth, then you do so and become Hidden if you're successful.
 
I've been through this argument here a number of times and I still disagree with the majority.  ..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true">

That is because you're wrong.

This has been officially FAQed. That is how it is. If you don't like, it tough. Time to to suck it up.
I've been through this argument here a number of times and I still disagree with the majority.  ..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true">

That is because you're wrong.

This has been officially FAQed. That is how it is. If you don't like, it tough. Time to to suck it up.



Can you give a link to the official reply?

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/21.jpg)

Sign In to post comments