Commandos, a stealth perspective.

[Lephys]

Anybody with a bit of physical ability can be stealthy, and there's no reason not to allow it. If I want my fighters to strip down to their skivies in order to sneak up to a camp and stage an ambush, then I want to be able to do so. So no, saying only Rogues should be stealthy is too constraining. Even a fighter in plate mail can be sneaky, if they are far enough away from the listener.

 

This. Stealth can range all the way from sneaking past a campsite with drunken, passed-out bandits at night without waking them up to stealing a key, undetected, from beneath a king's seat cushion in the midst of a royal banquet.

 

Defensive stealth should be pretty simple for almost any class, even though it will still have a range of skill levels. But, offensive stealth (stealth that involves movement progression and/or targets and actions while remaining undetected) will most likely be where Rogues will be necessary, or at least highly valuable.

 

It's just like Josh said about positional stealth benefits at the point of combat initialization. I don't think your full-plate fighter is going to ambush-flank a group of bandits from the trees without making too much noise and giving himself away before his attack is executed, but that doesn't mean he can't make his way gently into a shadowy area and stand very still until a suspicious guard passes him by in a castle corridor.

[Helm]

Anybody with a bit of physical ability can be stealthy, and there's no reason not to allow it. If I want my fighters to strip down to their skivies in order to sneak up to a camp and stage an ambush, then I want to be able to do so. So no, saying only Rogues should be stealthy is too constraining. Even a fighter in plate mail can be sneaky, if they are far enough away from the listener.

 

This. Stealth can range all the way from sneaking past a campsite with drunken, passed-out bandits at night without waking them up to stealing a key, undetected, from beneath a king's seat cushion in the midst of a royal banquet.

 

Defensive stealth should be pretty simple for almost any class, even though it will still have a range of skill levels. But, offensive stealth (stealth that involves movement progression and/or targets and actions while remaining undetected) will most likely be where Rogues will be necessary, or at least highly valuable.

 

It's just like Josh said about positional stealth benefits at the point of combat initialization. I don't think your full-plate fighter is going to ambush-flank a group of bandits from the trees without making too much noise and giving himself away before his attack is executed, but that doesn't mean he can't make his way gently into a shadowy area and stand very still until a suspicious guard passes him by in a castle corridor.

That makes sense actually if stealth can only be used offensively by the rogue (e.g. backstabbing)... but then again what you described is not really stealth it is just plain old sneaking. Sure, any class could do that.

 

They just have to make sure that the stealth of the rogue will always be drastically superior to that of a fighter or a wizard for example. In other words only a rogue should be able to "hide in the shadows" (like in D&D) and complete feats that require a large amount a dexterity, so that the borders between classes are not too loose in regards to stealth abilities. This is supposed to class based game after all.

[Lephys]

That makes sense actually if stealth can only be used offensively by the rogue (e.g. backstabbing)... but then again what you described is not really stealth it is just plain old sneaking. Sure, any class could do that.

It is not my intention to be snide here, but stealth is literally "the act or characteristic of moving with extreme care and/or quietness, especially so as to avoid detection." Sneaking is a part of stealth. I understand what you mean, though, about the difference between a Rogue's abilities and the other classes' abilities in that regard, and I agree. However...

 

In other words only a rogue should be able to "hide in the shadows" (like in D&D) and complete feats that require a large amount a dexterity, so that the borders between classes are not too loose in regards to stealth abilities. This is supposed to class based game after all.

 

I would say that if anyone should be able to sneak to some degree, then anyone should be able to achieve some degree of greater concealment within shadows (unless, of course, the thing they're hiding from possess infrared senses, like some snakes and such.) I was actually under the impression, for what it's worth, that in at least one of the editions of D&D's ruleset, all classes had access to the "hide in shadows" ability. Or, if they didn't, they could still literally hide in shadows, and "hide in shadows" was simply the name given to the Rogue's superior ability to hide almost anywhere (and it was just implied that he always found the best shadows... naming style, really).

 

That might've been all you meant, though. Also, I might be mistaken.

 

But, really, even things like backstab (which is pretty much just a stealthy critical hit) were meant to refer more to the Rogue's superior ability to attack from behind in conjunction with his tendency to possess high dexterity (and therefore strike with finesse, more easily achieving critical hits). IF another class attacks an enemy from a blindspot, it makes sense that they should get some sort of bonus, as well, even if it's only to critical chance, or to-hit chance, or a slight damage bonus. Again, the Rogue should definitely exclusively get the most (in both quantity and effectiveness) abilities involving getting into a backstabby position, but I think the whole "Rogues are the best at critical hits and Dexterity-requiring activities" notion presents some problems. I mean, would not a master Monk be equally (if not superiorly) dexterous and precise?

 

I'm sincerely asking and presenting all this so that I might hear your thoughts on the matter.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Lephys

[Helm]

That makes sense actually if stealth can only be used offensively by the rogue (e.g. backstabbing)... but then again what you described is not really stealth it is just plain old sneaking. Sure, any class could do that.

It is not my intention to be snide here, but stealth is literally "the act or characteristic of moving with extreme care and/or quietness, especially so as to avoid detection." Sneaking is a part of stealth. I understand what you mean, though, about the difference between a Rogue's abilities and the other classes' abilities in that regard, and I agree. However...

 

In other words only a rogue should be able to "hide in the shadows" (like in D&D) and complete feats that require a large amount a dexterity, so that the borders between classes are not too loose in regards to stealth abilities. This is supposed to class based game after all.

Yes, but I couldn't think of a better way (well, not of the top of my head at least) to distinguish between "stealth" and "sneaking", even though they are fundamentally the same thing. Anybody can "sneak", but only very few actually master "stealth". I guess "furtively", "clandestine" or "latently" might have been better terms for "sneaking" in the way I used it.

 

Well, anyway, like you said, you know what I mean.

I would say that if anyone should be able to sneak to some degree, then anyone should be able to achieve some degree of greater concealment within shadows (unless, of course, the thing they're hiding from possess infrared senses, like some snakes and such.) I was actually under the impression, for what it's worth, that in at least one of the editions of D&D's ruleset, all classes had access to the "hide in shadows" ability. Or, if they didn't, they could still literally hide in shadows, and "hide in shadows" was simply the name given to the Rogue's superior ability to hide almost anywhere (and it was just implied that he always found the best shadows... naming style, really).

What I meant was the "hide in shadows" thief skill in D&D. I.e. a master rogue/thief could walk around in the middle of a room full of enemies and they would never even see him, because he was hidden in the shadows. Sure, any character could use the shadows (darkness) or an object to conceal themselves.

Again, the Rogue should definitely exclusively get the most (in both quantity and effectiveness) abilities involving getting into a backstabby position, but I think the whole "Rogues are the best at critical hits and Dexterity-requiring activities" notion presents some problems. I mean, would not a master Monk be equally (if not superiorly) dexterous and precise?

I was talking about stealth abilities, that require dexterity, whatever they might be.

 

I guess a monk could do some of them and a ninja too (I know, no ninjas in PE), it depends on how the classes are designed. But a paladin, barbarian or wizard? Nope.

[Somna]

[...]

In other words only a rogue should be able to "hide in the shadows" (like in D&D) and complete feats that require a large amount a dexterity, so that the borders between classes are not too loose in regards to stealth abilities. This is supposed to class based game after all.

 

I would say that if anyone should be able to sneak to some degree, then anyone should be able to achieve some degree of greater concealment within shadows (unless, of course, the thing they're hiding from possess infrared senses, like some snakes and such.) I was actually under the impression, for what it's worth, that in at least one of the editions of D&D's ruleset, all classes had access to the "hide in shadows" ability. Or, if they didn't, they could still literally hide in shadows, and "hide in shadows" was simply the name given to the Rogue's superior ability to hide almost anywhere (and it was just implied that he always found the best shadows... naming style, really).

[...]

AD&D, rogues were the only class able to actually hide using their class ability. Everyone else depended on Invisibility.

3.0 is where the general "Hide" skill came in, and high level Rangers and Shadowdancers became better at hiding than equivalent Rogues due to their "Hide in Plain Sight" ability. Rogues were simply more likely to succeed with their "Skill Mastery" ability if they chose to use Hide as one of their Skill Mastery skills. So in a sense, they actually took most of the stealth superiority away from Rogues and gave it to anyone who chose to specialize in it.

[Lephys]

I was talking about stealth abilities, that require dexterity, whatever they might be.

 

I guess a monk could do some of them and a ninja too (I know, no ninjas in PE), it depends on how the classes are designed. But a paladin, barbarian or wizard? Nope.

 

Ahhh. My bad. I misunderstood. I was just thinking dex-based abilities.

 

AD&D, rogues were the only class able to actually hide using their class ability. Everyone else depended on Invisibility.

3.0 is where the general "Hide" skill came in, and high level Rangers and Shadowdancers became better at hiding than equivalent Rogues due to their "Hide in Plain Sight" ability. Rogues were simply more likely to succeed with their "Skill Mastery" ability if they chose to use Hide as one of their Skill Mastery skills. So in a sense, they actually took most of the stealth superiority away from Rogues and gave it to anyone who chose to specialize in it.

 

Interesting. I've played a bit of AD&D, and a bit of 3rd edition, but I never played quite often enough to get super familiar with any ruleset differences (either I barely played AD&D, or it had been a while when we started playing 3rd.) I just remembered having the "Hide" ability as a Wizard. And, you're right, that kinda screwed over the Rogues. They basically just got a higher numerical skill at that point.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Lephys

[Gavinfoxx]

Several classes had the Thief 'Hide' ability in AD&D, though; hence the use of the generic term 'Rogue', which is used as a category of classes in AD&D. Nondetection was also quite necessary for hiding in AD&D... In 3.Xe, hiding effectively is spread throughout many many abilities all over the game (which was true to a lesser extent in AD&D), beyond the move silently and hide skills, which are in quite a few classes. Things useful for hiding are Mind Blank, Darkstalker, Camouflage, a lead-lined cloak, being an incorporeal undead, having Hide in Plain Sight, Nondetection, etc. etc.

[JFSOCC]

Anyone can try to be quiet and unseen. not everyone is equally good at it. limiting stealth should be done by affinity, not by banning certain classes from it. If I want to play a commando fighter (which I would never, fighters are boring) then knowing a little stealth would be nice. Restricting that is arbitrarily restriction my role-playing abilities.

But a fighter will never reach the skill-levels rogues could reach.

[Somna]

Several classes had the Thief 'Hide' ability in AD&D, though; hence the use of the generic term 'Rogue', which is used as a category of classes in AD&D. Nondetection was also quite necessary for hiding in AD&D... In 3.Xe, hiding effectively is spread throughout many many abilities all over the game (which was true to a lesser extent in AD&D), beyond the move silently and hide skills, which are in quite a few classes. Things useful for hiding are Mind Blank, Darkstalker, Camouflage, a lead-lined cloak, being an incorporeal undead, having Hide in Plain Sight, Nondetection, etc. etc.

 

Hmm, only AD&D class other than Thief that might have Hide in Shadows that I can think of is Bard, which is, as you imply, also a Rogue. What else was there? Ranger? I know Clerics and Wizards definitely did not, unless it was a non-weapon proficiency?

 

Non-Detection, lead-lined cloak and so forth shouldn't be needed if there's no reason for them to look at you in the first place, but Hide/Stealth is not working as intended in 3.0+ settings as written anyway if this thread can be believed. (Edit: Whether you believe the guy or not, I did find it entertaining though!)

Edited January 12, 2013 by Somna

[Gavinfoxx]

You should maybe read this thread too, for 3.Xe...

 

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php%3Ftopic%3D11034

 

Its web cache cause brilliantgameologists is having issues. Also, this is a list of stuff thread that mentions all the ways of getting hide in plain sight and camouflage, two abilities which are needed to hide in plain sight (one lets you hide without concealment, one lets you hide while being observed. You probably want both).

 

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871954/Lists_of_Stuff

 

Also, several kits had stealth. But yes, Ranger, Thief, Bard (or particular kits from them) was where most of the hiding options were.