Rangers need a proper stealth spell

[Selkie]

I love the changes made to the ranger class, and it's now my favourite class in 4.2.3.

I would just argue that a ranger needs a proper, transparent stealth spell.

In lore rangers are silent, stealthy and able to blend into their surroundings.

With this in mind I think they need a spell that works exactly like a mushroom of shadows. The player will know exactly that they are getting a +4 stealth boost for a determined number of turns.

At the moment, conceal tracks in the second spell book is hard to properly understand.

I think there could be an argument for switching resist poison into the second spell book and including the new stealth spell into the first.

With sense surroundings and detect life an early/mid game ranger could use stealth tactically to pick and choose the fights they want to take.

For me, conceal tracks works best when you're escaping monsters. I want a stealth spell that's transparent, reliable and opens up the strategy of the early game.

Do I want the moon on a stick? Yeah, probably

[Pete Mack]

Rogues dont get +4 stealth til CL 40 (and +5 at 50, which many never reach.) I dont see giving rangers anything xomparable.

[Grotug]

Might be interesting to have the stealth spell work in the following complicated way: augment 4 eligible equipment slots by +1 stealth, provided that the equipment isn't yet maxed out (+4 stealth or more) and provided @ is in fact wearing equipment in the eligible slot. This would make the spell less powerful on already very powerful characters. For example, if you have boots of Elvenkind <+7, +4> and an Elven cloak of stealth <+1, +4> you will not get a boost to the stealth on your feet and cloak by the spell (therefor the maximum stealth boost you'll be able to get from the spell while wearing those elven boots and cloak would be +2). This also means the stealth will not be overpowered very early on in the game (since you'll need to be wearing equipment in each of the 4 slots in order to get the full effect).

The equipment slots that would be eligible to stealth buffs from the spell would be: cloak, footwear, shield and body armor (the 4 slots that are most commonly found with stealth on them from {ego} items).

You could take this idea a bit further by increasing the spell's potential for overall power by having it augment any other equipment slots beyond the base 4 slots that have some stealth on them (provided the stealth is less than 4). So if you are wearing an amulet of Trickery with 3 stealth (or less) and a defender weapon with 3 stealth (or less) and a ring of the mouse with 3 stealth (or less), then you'd get +7 stealth boost from the spell (provided you are also wearing shoes, cloak, shield and armor with 3 or less stealth on each of them).

To combat the challenge of transparency with the complicated workings of the spell, whenever @ looks at their equipment they'll see +1 stealth boosts on each eligible equipment slot while the spell is active.

Might also be fun to have the duration of the spell be dependent on the number of stealth boosts. The more stealth boosts the longer the spell lasts. So you could have a base spell duration of 10+1d10 turns + 5+1d5 turns for each +1 stealth. So the most common spell duration would be 10+1d10 + 20+1d20 = 30+1d30 turns. In the rare instance of the +7 stealth example given above the spell duration would be 10+1d10 + 35+1d35 turns = 45+1d45 turns.

[Estie]

I didnt use the existing stealth spell and I dont think I would use the proposed one, either.

It is just too much hassle, with high spell fail rate and low mana pool to begin with; I'd rather keep the opportunity to react with spells. And after stat gain stealth loses its value anyway.

This assumes parameters in line with other spells; if it gets a super long duration, I will make a macro and click it.

I agree with previous posters that ranger is a weak class.

[Selkie]

I agree with previous posters that ranger is a weak class.

Ranger certainly isn't a weak class. With a sling of power and a collection of branded ammo you can spam the h key all the way to level 40. By then you'll have an artifact bow and near unlimited branded ammo of every flavour.

People complain that melee at the end game is stronger than the launcher. This is generally the case, but completely ignored the fact that the launcher is ranged and therefore @ is receiving zero melee blows and monster breath attacks are likely to be atba greater range and inflict lower damage

[archolewa]

People complain that melee at the end game is stronger than the launcher. This is generally the case, but completely ignored the fact that the launcher is ranged and therefore @ is receiving zero melee blows and monster breath attacks are likely to be atba greater range and inflict lower damage

Also, monsters tend to move towards you a lot when they are at a distance, so they have a lot of wasted turns.

I actually like the idea of giving equipment armor a temporary stealth ego with a spell. We already have precedent with the Paladin and Blackguard brand spells. No need to make it so complicated though. I say it just gives your armor a temporary stealth ego that doesnt stack with any stealth ego that may already exist on the armor. The bonus can go up with level. +1 stealth is useful in the early game, but hardly overpowered. Meanwhile +4 or +5 stealth in the endgame is powerful, but as someone said stealth is less important by then, so its not going to break the game.

[Estie]

Ranger certainly isn't a weak class. With a sling of power and a collection of branded ammo you can spam the h key all the way to level 40. By then you'll have an artifact bow and near unlimited branded ammo of every flavour.

People complain that melee at the end game is stronger than the launcher. This is generally the case, but completely ignored the fact that the launcher is ranged and therefore @ is receiving zero melee blows and monster breath attacks are likely to be atba greater range and inflict lower damage

Everyone is impressive when they have an early sling of power. The create ammo spell kicks in at about statgain, which is when melee starts overtaking ranged. And again, its not like other classes cant use a good bow when they find one. Preserve the good arrows they find for bosses and melee the trash, which is exactly what ranger does, as well.

The extra shot(s) dont come close to what paladin or blackguard get from their spells.

This is not a call for balance, just an observation.

[tangar]

PWMA recently had a new item - shadow mushrooms. It gives TIMED_INC:STEALTH effect for 10+1d10. I used this effect for my new Assassin class in Tangaria as 'Fade in Shadows' skill

[Grotug]

I think the mushrooms of shadows in Vanilla do not last long enough, but 1d10,+10 seems just about useless for a stealth duration.

@Estie: but the extra shots Ranger gets isn't a spell, it's just free power they are bestowed with as they level.

[schlosrat]

I'm currently playing a clvl 50 ranger getting ready to fight M (I play slow and have only recently returned to the game. I'm sure a better player would have already killed M with this character). As such I use Cover Tracks a lot. It doesn't boost steath shown on the character sheet, but I believe it greatly reduces the range at which monsters notice you if they're asleep. Am I wrong in this understanding?

Once they've noticed me, then cover tracks is *almost* useless. I was fleeing from a greater balrog in the hopes of luring him into an open place where I could kill him with my bow when he stopped following me. In that instance, it actually worked against me. I had it on when I approached the pit, but as he was already awake it didn't help. When fleeing to get him where I wanted to engage him, he lost track of me.

If the "effect" of cover tracks is to reduce the range at which monsters notice you, then I think it should apply regardless if they're awake or not, though perhaps less of an effect if they're awake.

Maybe Rangers don't need a stealth spell so much as a tweak to how cover tracks works?

[Grotug]

New Angband: if you want them to pursue you, they won't. If you want them to not pursue you, they will. Their ESP is even better than @'s!

[Raerick]

I think the mushrooms of shadows in Vanilla do not last long enough, but 1d10,+10 seems just about useless for a stealth duration.

I agree completely with this. At best you get 20 turns of stealth for the cost of an item slot and additional weight (though that part is mostly superfluous.) I think that the duration of at least a few consumables need to be buffed to make them worth carrying.