Powerful / Deadly Sneak: Ever worth taking?


Advice

51 to 97 of 97 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Sczarni

First: -2 is NOT a - 10% chance to hit. This is only the case when a hit registers between the 1-20 range. If you are in the "I can roll anything over a two" range, even with the -2, then the -2 modifier doesn't make a bit of difference.
As for the damage: 1-6 average is 3.5 (rolled a billion times randomly). 3-6 average is 4.5 (rolled a billion times). So for those who don't care about the attack roll, they have increased their average damage a point. Which seems weak until you apply it to say five dice. Then it's like a +5 weapon.


Maouse the problem with your 3-6 average is that your assuming 4 numbers rolled. your actually rolling 6 numbers still so roughly 50% of your rolls would still come up 3.


maouse wrote:

First: -2 is NOT a - 10% chance to hit. This is only the case when a hit registers between the 1-20 range. If you are in the "I can roll anything over a two" range, even with the -2, then the -2 modifier doesn't make a bit of difference.

As for the damage: 1-6 average is 3.5 (rolled a billion times randomly). 3-6 average is 4.5 (rolled a billion times). So for those who don't care about the attack roll, they have increased their average damage a point. Which seems weak until you apply it to say five dice. Then it's like a +5 weapon.

1. no offense but how many rogues, especially at higher levels, ever reach that area where they consistently hit on a 2?

2. 3+3+3+4+5+6=24/6=4 average. 1 and 2 are turned into 3 not you reroll all 1's and 2's.

Sczarni

Well, let me see.... higher levels... there is the dex of 20+, the +4 or 5 weapon, the flanking/loss of enemy dex bonus, the bab of say 10+. That gets me to + 24 or so... and my rogues usually start with some sort of ranged touch attack... so i think all high level rogues should be hitting on a two. Maybe it is just me.

As for the averaging: the point is it does change your average damage. It also changes you minimal damage. Instead of being a 5-30 you are now a 15-30 threat with 5d6 sneak attack. You now can skip die rolls when your opponent only has 15 hp left. At level 19 you are doing 93 min damage with three attacks a round. Versus rolling and maybe hitting for 33. Sure the average is only slightly higher, but the base is trippled.


maouse wrote:
First: -2 is NOT a - 10% chance to hit. This is only the case when a hit registers between the 1-20 range. If you are in the "I can roll anything over a two" range, even with the -2, then the -2 modifier doesn't make a bit of difference.

You need to remember that Powerful and Deadly Sneak both require a full-attack, which for most of the game is going to mean iteratives. Powerful Sneak's damage bonus is so pitifully small that not only do you need to have a 95% chance to hit normally, but close to that on your iteratives too. With two attacks and absolutely no non-Sneak damage, you need an 85% on the iterative. If you are using a Short Sword and have +1 damage, you would need 95%. If you have debuffed an enemy to the point where a Rogue has an attack bonus is around 5 higher than their AC, I think the enemy has more to worry about than an extra 1/6th of a point of damage per die.

maouse wrote:
As for the damage: 1-6 average is 3.5 (rolled a billion times randomly). 3-6 average is 4.5 (rolled a billion times). So for those who don't care about the attack roll, they have increased their average damage a point. Which seems weak until you apply it to say five dice. Then it's like a +5 weapon.

(3+3+3+4+5+6)/6=4, not 4.5. Which means when you need to wait until you have 10 dice, not 5, for it to total 5 damage. It still isn't "like a +5 weapon," in that the most important part of a +5 weapon is the attack bonus, not damage. You might as well say a clunker is like a sports car because they both have cup holders.


A ranged touch attack does less damage than a full round melee attack so that is not exactly a bonus.

The rogue might be multiclassed, but then he is losing SA, and that hurts the ability even more.

Sczarni

Again, the feats are really about upping you min damage. Obviously if you roll all sixes the feat doesn't help. At lvl 19, do you want to ever do 33/44 points on a full round of sneak attacks? Or do you want to be assured that you will pump out 93/124 guaranteed?


Only guaranteed if you hit on each roll.

Sczarni

wraithstrike wrote:

A ranged touch attack does less damage than a full round melee attack so that is not exactly a bonus.

The rogue might be multiclassed, but then he is losing SA, and that hurts the ability even more.

i start with ranged touch attacks so i can use shatter defense for the next four attacks.... my high level rogues deny dex bonuses continually... or at least that is the plan. Fighters entangled or on fire fight poorly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
maouse wrote:
Again, the feats are really about upping you min damage. Obviously if you roll all sixes the feat doesn't help. At lvl 19, do you want to ever do 33/44 points on a full round of sneak attacks? Or do you want to be assured that you will pump out 93/124 guaranteed?

Chance of dealing 33 damage on 33d6: 1 in 47751966659678405306351616.

Chance of missing completely thanks to Deadly Sneak while within the d20: 1 in 10.

I'll take those odds.

Sczarni

Talonhawke wrote:
Only guaranteed if you hit on each roll.

intimidate, ranged touch shatter defense, improved initiative, flat footed and chill touch/ray/etc ranged touch or touch attacks. So they get deflection. At 19 you are at 14 bab, 4 hips, 4 weapon, 6 stat, so that is + 28 to + 30 vs 10+ deflection. You can get higher if you need it, easily enough in the usual ways (dex 32 vs 22-26). But, i know everyone isn't a power gamer.


maouse wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

A ranged touch attack does less damage than a full round melee attack so that is not exactly a bonus.

The rogue might be multiclassed, but then he is losing SA, and that hurts the ability even more.

i start with ranged touch attacks so i can use shatter defense for the next four attacks.... my high level rogues deny dex bonuses continually... or at least that is the plan. Fighters entangled or on fire fight poorly.

So you are spreading your ability scores across charisma, dex, strength, and wisdom.

Now you could be using a strength based rogue, but you still need dex to qualify for the TWF feats.

You could also use strength to intimidate people, but it still seems like a stretch to have the intimidate check succeed a lot, but I will also admit that I have not tried to focus on intimidate enough to make sure it worked more than 80% of the time, so it might not require as much focus as I am imagining. I guess if it does work, and you have Shatter defenses do the heavy lifting that combo does get better.

Sczarni

wraithstrike wrote:
maouse wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

A ranged touch attack does less damage than a full round melee attack so that is not exactly a bonus.

The rogue might be multiclassed, but then he is losing SA, and that hurts the ability even more.

i start with ranged touch attacks so i can use shatter defense for the next four attacks.... my high level rogues deny dex bonuses continually... or at least that is the plan. Fighters entangled or on fire fight poorly.

So you are spreading your ability scores across charisma, dex, strength, and wisdom.

Now you could be using a strength based rogue, but you still need dex to qualify for the TWF feats.

You could also use strength to intimidate people, but it still seems like a stretch to have the intimidate check succeed a lot, but I will also admit that I have not tried to focus on intimidate enough to make sure it worked more than 80% of the time, so it might not require as much focus as I am imagining. I guess if it does work, and you have Shatter defenses do the heavy lifting that combo does get better.

intimidate is 10+hd+wis mod. 19 ranks plus 3 class skill, if you add str and cha you can hit thirty pretty easy. A few more points and you can intimidate 20 hd mobs with 15 wis bonuses with your take ten roll.


You do know you can only get it on a full attack action right? You can't use it with spells that give touch attacks. It's not on a full round action its a full attack action. Aka unless you've found a way to make a regular full attack all touch attacks you're not getting it off with touch attacks.


maouse wrote:
But, i know everyone isn't a power gamer.

Exactly we aren't talking the super rogues that show up from time to time. This thread is for the average joe player who doesn't realize just how much -2 can hurt his second and third attacks. Especially if he is already TWF.

Sczarni

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
You do know you can only get it on a full attack action right? You can't use it with spells that give touch attacks. It's not on a full round action its a full attack action. Aka unless you've found a way to make a regular full attack all touch attacks you're not getting it off with touch attacks.

i cast my major magic chill touch a week ago. Been taking a minus four on my skills every since. Now when combat starts i have nineteen touch attacks. ;)

Sczarni

Mort the Cleverly Named wrote:
maouse wrote:
Again, the feats are really about upping you min damage. Obviously if you roll all sixes the feat doesn't help. At lvl 19, do you want to ever do 33/44 points on a full round of sneak attacks? Or do you want to be assured that you will pump out 93/124 guaranteed?

Chance of dealing 33 damage on 33d6: 1 in 47751966659678405306351616.

Chance of missing completely thanks to Deadly Sneak while within the d20: 1 in 10.

I'll take those odds.

chance of dealing 110 or less damage on 33d6. 1 in 2. With this feat, chance of dealing more than 110? Better than 1 in 2.


maouse wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
You do know you can only get it on a full attack action right? You can't use it with spells that give touch attacks. It's not on a full round action its a full attack action. Aka unless you've found a way to make a regular full attack all touch attacks you're not getting it off with touch attacks.
i cast my major magic chill touch a week ago. Been taking a minus four on my skills every since. Now when combat starts i have nineteen touch attacks. ;)

Interesting didn't they limit that to once per round in 3.5? Regardless you are right there is a loophole. It is limited as a standard action to deliver a touch attack of any kind to allies but there is no ruling on how it is treated with enemies so you simply have to treat it as a normal attack. :)

carry on then.


Chill Touch should be a free action to touch an enemy, but casting the spell is a standard action.

PS:Am I missing something?

Sczarni

wraithstrike wrote:

Chill Touch should be a free action to touch an enemy, but casting the spell is a standard action.

PS:Am I missing something?

yes. You are.missing that it has caster level uses and remains until all those touch attacks are made. Thus you can cast it a week before battle and use all your attacks in a full attack round to use 3-4 "charges" of the spell. Oh, and it can't be dispelled. ... long threads on held spells... but no you dont cast it and go slap happy benny hill style making cl attacks as free actions. It has cl uses, the same round you cast it you can(but don't have to) take a free action to use one held charge. Charges for touch attacks (as opposed to ranged touch ones) never disapate and stay forever until used.


It's only a free action on the turn its cast.

Quote:

Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.

Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If the attack misses, you are still holding the charge.


Hope you didn't touch anything this week.

Sczarni

Talonhawke wrote:
Hope you didn't touch anything this week.

thus the minus four on all my skills for only using one hand (seriously, level nineteen rogue with take "sixes" still works as a skill monkey)


and yes technically by raw it goes off even if you touch items so your gm could rule it goes off by touching your clothes the ground your allies or just about anything else. It goes off even if you unintentionally touch something.


Nowhere does it specify you choose which hand holds a touch spell charge you touch something you lose it. Also thats a week of no spellcasting for you.

Sczarni

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
maouse wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
You do know you can only get it on a full attack action right? You can't use it with spells that give touch attacks. It's not on a full round action its a full attack action. Aka unless you've found a way to make a regular full attack all touch attacks you're not getting it off with touch attacks.
i cast my major magic chill touch a week ago. Been taking a minus four on my skills every since. Now when combat starts i have nineteen touch attacks. ;)

Interesting didn't they limit that to once per round in 3.5? Regardless you are right there is a loophole. It is limited as a standard action to deliver a touch attack of any kind to allies but there is no ruling on how it is treated with enemies so you simply have to treat it as a normal attack. :)

carry on then.

two options (as already quoted): you can deliver it as touch attacks not provoking aoo; or you can do a unarmed strike (provoking based on feats). With the touch you get no aoo and only the d6 for chill touch (plus sneak attack damage). With the unarmed you get unarmed damage, chill touch damage, and sneak attack damage. But of course you also roll vs armored ac.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:

It's only a free action on the turn its cast.

Quote:

Many spells have a range of touch. To use these spells, you cast the spell and then touch the subject. In the same round that you cast the spell, you may also touch (or attempt to touch) as a free action. You may take your move before casting the spell, after touching the target, or between casting the spell and touching the target. You can automatically touch one friend or use the spell on yourself, but to touch an opponent, you must succeed on an attack roll.

Touch Attacks: Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered to be an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The act of casting a spell, however, does provoke an attack of opportunity. Touch attacks come in two types: melee touch attacks and ranged touch attacks. You can score critical hits with either type of attack as long as the spell deals damage. Your opponent's AC against a touch attack does not include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. His size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) all apply normally.

Holding the Charge: If you don't discharge the spell in the round when you cast the spell, you can hold the charge indefinitely. You can continue to make touch attacks round after round. If you touch anything or anyone while holding a charge, even unintentionally, the spell discharges. If you cast another spell, the touch spell dissipates. You can touch one friend as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. Alternatively, you may make a normal unarmed attack (or an attack with a natural weapon) while holding a charge. In this case, you aren't considered armed and you provoke attacks of opportunity as normal for the attack. If your unarmed attack or natural weapon attack normally doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, neither does this attack. If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges. If

...

That is how I thought it worked. I thought someone had found a loophole when I saw the statement about casting it a week in advance.

PS:I see what the issue is now. M was trying to cast it a week ahead of time and still get an attack as a free action. If that is not what is being said then I am still confused.


Actually as per raw it doesn't even state touch with your hands. It says touch. As per raw all touch spells should be unusable because hey you're touching your clothes. Maybe not with your hands but it doesn't specify with your hands. Its why you can deliver touch attacks through natural weapons like bite. Its not in your hands. Its in you.

Sczarni

Thomas Long 175 wrote:
and yes technically by raw it goes off even if you touch items so your gm could rule it goes off by touching your clothes the ground your allies or just about anything else. It goes off even if you unintentionally touch something.

that is up to the gm. And unless i build a contraption to holdmy arm in the air while i sleep i concur that a week is stretching it. It was an example of "casting before combat." You know, like every.module in PF says the monsters do....


maouse wrote:
chance of dealing 110 or less damage on 33d6. 1 in 2. With this feat, chance of dealing more than 110? Better than 1 in 2.

The chance of rolling 110 or less damage is around 1 in 4 (27.118%, to be exact). There is a 1 in 2 chance of rolling 115.5 damage or less, because that is the actual average of 33d6. I'd keep going with this stuff, but I've put way too many calculations into this already, and actual numbers seem to be having little effect.

Sczarni

Mort the Cleverly Named wrote:
maouse wrote:
chance of dealing 110 or less damage on 33d6. 1 in 2. With this feat, chance of dealing more than 110? Better than 1 in 2.

The chance of rolling 110 or less damage is around 1 in 4 (27.118%, to be exact). There is a 1 in 2 chance of rolling 115.5 damage or less, because that is the actual average of 33d6. I'd keep going with this stuff, but I've put way too many calculations into this already, and actual numbers seem to be having little effect.

The talents are, in the vast majority of circumstances, traps for the superstitious and those that are bad at math. If someone enjoys them, realizing this or not, good for them.

ok. So what is the 1 in 2 damage average for using the feat? That will basically tell you what the feat does in addition to eliminating the 27% chance of doing less than minimal damage (i guess we should look at the 93 minwith the feat instead of 110 loose ave min). In other words, is there a 10% chance of doing less than 93 damage without the feat? If so, losing 10% attack may make sense? Not exactly apples and oranges, because again, you are trading attack % for damage %.

Ps. They are also for the chronicly poor rollers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That is 115.5 assuming every attack hits?


maouse wrote:
ok. So what is the 1 in 2 damage average for using the feat? That will basically tell you what the feat does in addition to eliminating the 27% chance of doing less than minimal damage (i guess we should look at the 93 minwith the feat instead of 110 loose ave min). In other words, is there a 10% chance of doing less than 93 damage without the feat? If so, losing 10% attack may make sense? Not exactly apples and oranges, because again, you are trading attack % for damage %.

There is a 99.074% chance you will get over 93 damage without Deadly Sneak. Deadly Sneak does deform the average damage up, though, to the point where it is actually a bonus in some reasonable circumstances (unlike Powerful). The big issue issue is that there are many, many circumstances where players can accidentally make themselves worse, without seemingly realizing it (for the record, flat-footed touch sneak attacks are totally not that circumstance, and are basically the best use of the talent around). Powerful is of course far worse, hurting in all but the weirdest of cases.

maouse wrote:
Ps. They are also for the chronicly poor rollers.

Heh. I actually cut that last line about who the talent was for on reconsideration. Regardless, I find this an odd position. I mean, do most people who consider themselves poor rollers for damage also think they will be good rollers for attack? I'd think if you were superstitious about one I would be superstitious about the other, too. In which case hedging my bets on one die going well instead of the sum of 10 would seem like a bad idea to me.

EDIT: Sorry, missed one bit. The average damage with Powerful Sneak is 120.6, with Deadly Sneak it is 130.5. This means that Powerful Sneak is almost never going to be an average increase unless you hit on a 2 (and close to that on iteratives). Deadly is more complicated (based on non-Sneak damage and exact attack bonus), but you still need a very high chance to hit and little bonus damage for it to be a substantial average boost.

Sczarni

wraithstrike wrote:
That is 115.5 assuming every attack hits?

yes, for purposes of discussion we are presuming the 10% hit chance modifier. Is this balance with the % damage base increase OR % damage average increase. I think we all agree that .5 damage per sneak attack die, and not applied to base amounts to a less than 10% damage increase. The other question is if the base damage increase matters 10% of the time or not. If it does, then the feats are arguably useful. You won't get much extra damage out of the skill on average, but you also mitigate all your low rolls... which, arguably are already mitigated by making 33 of them to begin with. Sample size does also matter. The larger the sample size, the closer (statistically) to the average you will be (in the bell as it were) with fewer outlaying low or high rolls. As stated, the more rolls the more astronomical the odds of rolling all 1's (or 6's) becomes.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sneak talents would make sense if every other rogue talent was so poor, but that's not the case.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

maouse wrote:
You know, like every.module in PF says the monsters do....

Can you point to some specific examples where they pre-cast touch attack spells? I've read a lot and don't recall any that say a character pre-cast a touch attack spell and I can think of a lot of cases where it would have been handy.

Sczarni

Dennis Baker wrote:
maouse wrote:
You know, like every.module in PF says the monsters do....
Can you point to some specific examples where they pre-cast touch attack spells? I've read a lot and don't recall any that say a character pre-cast a touch attack spell and I can think of a lot of cases where it would have been handy.

i didn't mean the modules say they all cast held spells. I meant that they all say they cast mage armor, bull's str, etc... before combat. and i can point to several that do this. Just look at the whole falcon's hollow campaign setting. Every monster boss seems to know the players are there three rounds before they get there and are all "suited up" in buffs and defensive spells.


I would like to know how this 115 is coming up. Being flat-footed ignored your dex bonus to AC, not your armor or shield bonus to AC, and some creature's flat-footed AC is almost as high as their regular AC so making them flat-footed won't matter a whole lot.

Sczarni

wraithstrike wrote:
I would like to know how this 115 is coming up. Being flat-footed ignored your dex bonus to AC, not your armor or shield bonus to AC, and some creature's flat-footed AC is almost as high as their regular AC so making them flat-footed won't matter a whole lot.

flat footed looses their dex. Touch ignores armor. Thus they are at touch minus dex AC. Which means an almost certain hit. Which means 115 average damage with 33d6 rolled. That is 3 hits for 1d6 plus 10d6 sneak attack damage (making touch attacks with chill touch, not unarmed attacks).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I smell straw.

Sczarni

Mort the Cleverly Named wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
I would like to know how this 115 is coming up. Being flat-footed ignored your dex bonus to AC, not your armor or shield bonus to AC, and some creature's flat-footed AC is almost as high as their regular AC so making them flat-footed won't matter a whole lot.
It is assuming everything hits thanks to attacking Flat-Footed Touch AC using Chill Touch (also no critical misses or hits). I'm not sure how easy this would be in an actual game, with immunity and SR and such, but it is as good a way to get to the mythical land where these are really good talents: beyond the range of a d20.

yeh sr can be a pain. 19 cl does help a bit, but often not enough. Cold immunity is a pain. Being undead... well at least we brought along our 19th lvl rogue/cleric to turn them...(one other benefit of chill touch is it works on all undead as turning if not immune to cold and you beat their sr... except incorporeal ones who can't be touched).


maouse wrote:
i didn't mean the modules say they all cast held spells. I meant that they all say they cast mage armor, bull's str, etc... before combat. and i can point to several that do this. Just look at the whole falcon's hollow campaign setting. Every monster boss seems to know the players are there three rounds before they get there and are all "suited up" in buffs and defensive spells.

No offense last I checked those are touch attacks that are delivered before combat. The duration is just long enough that it lasts straight through the combat anyways


maouse wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
I would like to know how this 115 is coming up. Being flat-footed ignored your dex bonus to AC, not your armor or shield bonus to AC, and some creature's flat-footed AC is almost as high as their regular AC so making them flat-footed won't matter a whole lot.
flat footed looses their dex. Touch ignores armor. Thus they are at touch minus dex AC. Which means an almost certain hit. Which means 115 average damage with 33d6 rolled. That is 3 hits for 1d6 plus 10d6 sneak attack damage (making touch attacks with chill touch, not unarmed attacks).

I know how AC works, but after the first round how do you plan to get that many touch attacks in.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Reminds me of Joe Isuzu:

"It'll go from 0 to 60 in 3 seconds." (Disclaimer: Downhill in a hurricane)


I'm amazed at the number of words spent on these useless talents.

The number of times these can be a benefit and not just a liability is ridiculously low: I would not use them 99% of the time even if they were free, let alone waste two precious rogue talents on those.

If they were at no penalty to to hit they would be in line with the average of the rogue talents, getting from useless at low level to decent at really high level. Note however that at level 10 you get advanced rogue talents and the bar get even higher.


Jadeite wrote:

You can:

Quote:
Early Firearms: When firing an early firearm, the attack resolves against the target's touch AC when the target is within the first range increment of the weapon, but this type of attack is not considered a touch attack for the purposes of feats and abilities such as Deadly Aim. At higher range increments, the attack resolves normally, including taking the normal cumulative –2 penalty for each full range increment. Unlike other projectile weapons, early firearms have a maximum range of five range increments.

Ah, missed that, thank you!

51 to 97 of 97 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Powerful / Deadly Sneak: Ever worth taking? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.