To my knowledge, the highly debated Stealth skill in 4e has not received official errata just yet. Thanks to the DnD Insider Compendium, however, we may have a sneak peek at WoTC’s attempt to “clarify” the use of the Stealth skill in 4e campaigns.
You can read the changes for yourself by loading up the compendium and doing a search for “stealth”. From there, click on the Skill tab and then select either the Ranger or Rogue entry.
Short list of changes?
- Stealth checks are now made at the end of move actions
- You must have superior cover or total concealment to “become hidden”
- You must maintain cover or concealment to remain hidden
There is still no mention of Combat Advantage, minor vs. standard action for Perception checks and many of the other questions surrounding Stealth. However, this should at least clear up Wizards’ intent with regards to using corners, caskets, and other forms of cover as a launchpad for stealth attacks.
Sorry Warlocks – no soup for us.
About time!
Actually, the info in the D&D Insider is considered official errata. 🙂
It does state that the check is opposed by each enemies passive perception. But it does not state that you have combat advantage over those who can’t see you. I’m hoping that’s just an oversight.
Tony Law’s last post: Time to tell me what you think!
The issue with perception checks is when you do an active perception check. The PHB states it is a minor action on one page and then states it is a standard action on another page.
Many readers feel the standard action is when looking around your area for all things hidden (secret doors, levers, players, etc) while the minor action is usually used for trying to locate a monster/player you can’t see. Either way, it would be nice for WoTC to clear this up since fully understanding Stealth in 4e (if that is even possible at the moment) requires putting together about 8 different pages of text throughout the PHB and then requiring tons of speculation on top of that.
I think they do clear it up. They state that the stealth skill is opposed by the passive Perceptions (not an action) of each opponent. It then states, towards the end of the entry, that if an opponent wants to find you, they must make an active Perception check (standard action as listed under Perception (If you want to use the skill actively, you need to take a standard action…)).
Tony Law’s last post: Time to tell me what you think!
Except that pg 281 under the section of “Targeting What You Can’t See” clearly states the active Perception Check against a stealthed/hidden target is a minor action – this is where the contradiction/ambiguity comes from for most players/DMs.
Many DMs (from what I’ve read) have decided to use the Standard Action Perception check for a general “look for anything/everything out of the ordinary around me” while the Minor Action Perception check is for “I think someone is around and I’m going to try and pinpoint them or get a general direction”.
The 2nd scenario usually comes up when Creature A was once aware of Creature B and then Creature B either went invisible or successfully hid from Creature A. Creature A can spend a minor action perception check to try and locate Creature B only and not any other hidden or secret people/items of note.
In short? The new Stealth info doesn’t cover this disparity at all or give any new insight or clarity. The idea of using Stealth vs. Passive Perception was never in question to my knowledge.
Ah. I see what you mean. The first paragraph of that passage should clear it up, though.
If you’re fighting a creature you can’t see—when a creature is invisible, you’re blinded, or you’re fighting in darkness you can’t see through—you have to target a square rather than the creature.
It specifically references invisible creatures, you being blinded, and you fighting in darkness. It does not use “etc.” after those examples or use the phrase “for example.”
I don’t think these rules apply to someone hiding. Even if they have total concealment, they aren’t invisible, they’re just in a “totally obscured square.”
Tony Law’s last post: Time to tell me what you think!
It says “If you’re fighting a creature you can’t see” and then gives some examples. That entire section deals with Stealth vs Perception. I hardly think “Targeting What You Can’t See” was not meant to deal with Stealthed creatures. At any rate, WoTC needs to clear it up – the fact that it even needs to be debated is evidence of such.
The old Stealth clearly states you become hidden, unseen, and unnoticed. The new Stealth success entry states, “Success: You are hidden, which means you are silent and invisible to the enemy.”
Furthermore, Total Concealment (pg 281 also) states “You can’t see the target. The target is invisible, in a totally obscured square, or in a heavily obscured square and not adjacent to you.”
Total Cover or Total Concealment is only needed to initially become hidden. Once hidden, you only need to maintain normal cover or concealment to stay hidden.
Given the rules as you interpret them, a person could never attack a hidden/stealthed creature without spending an action point because it would cost them a standard action just to try and figure out where they are located relative to them.
This is why many DMs feel the Standard Action pertains to “detect all hidden/secret things in the area (like traps, doors, tracks, evidence, compartments, buttons, levers, etc)” while the minor action is for “trying to locate someone you can’t see”.
And no, it doesn’t have to be total concealment. Once a player is hidden, they only need low light (normal concealment) to remain hidden, or to keep moving (Shadow Walk), etc.
I’m just glad they are finally starting to address the issue – Stealth, along with Skill Checks and Skill Challenges have been one of the weak sides to 4e for me since the beginning.
I guess I see the list as an all inclusive list, not just examples but others may add as they desire.
With that said, I am also glad they’re addressing skill issues. 🙂
Tony Law’s last post: Time to tell me what you think!