Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

My replacement for Sneak Attack, allowing for ranged rogues to flourish, and eliminating the buddy system.


Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew

51 to 100 of 115 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

After my post-drugged state (sheesh, that stuff lingers), looking at and thinking about it, your revised version is pretty great. I don't see flanking listed, though, so you may wish to add that under "flanking". I am so going to use this, however.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quote:
Whenever he is flanking a creature or attacking a creature with a detrimental condition (see List to determine what is a detrimental condition) affecting it, he gains a +2 circumstance bonus to damage rolls against that creature.

Flanking is there, I swear.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Cheapy wrote:
Quote:
Whenever he is flanking a creature or attacking a creature with a detrimental condition (see List to determine what is a detrimental condition) affecting it, he gains a +2 circumstance bonus to damage rolls against that creature.
Flanking is there, I swear.

Yay! Nevermind. Going back to getting that knock-out stuff out of my system...

Andoran

This seems like a pretty good idea Cheapy and I may have to try it out with my group, perhaps as an alternate to see if I can get anyone to bite.

One more thing though, I would like to reopen the case for Energy Drain to be included. It seems that it was excluded for meta reasons. Energy Drain means the poor subject "lost levels." However, you never actually lose levels in Pathfinder. If you are an energy drained 10th level character, you are still a 10th level character. However, you are not working to your full potential. You have a condition that is inhibiting your ability to do all the things you can usually do. The way I picture it this would be every bit as visible as the Sickened Condition. Unless you are gaming in the Order of the Stick universe (which could be fun now that I think about it) the Opportunist has no idea what a level is. He can still see someone in a funk and take advantage of it.

So, I'm going to keep Energy Drain on the list and I think you should reconsider adding it to yours.

[/soap box]


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'll see what my publisher thinks. Thanks!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

So, it totally made it into my otherwise-APG homebrew (and likely several others of mine too!). Thanks!


So when I saw this, I was kinda concerned that there might be some potential balance issues with the extra damage getting multiplied on crit, but when I ran the numbers, I was very much pleasantly suprised.

Even with the ability to get multiplied by a crit, the Opportunist Ability is at best 20% less damage than Sneak Attack using a Keen Falcata, at worst, it's 40% less damage if using something like an unarmed strike.

For those interested, the formula I used a trunkated DPR formula only focusing on the precision damage. The formula looked like the following

chanceToHit*Damage + chanceToHit*chanceToCrit*Damage*(Multiplyer - 1)

So it does provide an interesting amount of cost opportunity for character building. If the player wants to do the most damage, and is willing to jump through the hoops, then Sneak Attack is the better choice, but if the player wants to consistently be able to handle enemies on their own, then the rule provided here is pretty rad.

As an aside, does this trigger off of things like elementals and Protheans? If so, I think that might be a balancing issue in favor the rule proposed here. Allowing the same restrictions on eligible creature targets and letting things like uncanny dodge work as a defense against this might be reasonable.


I'd be inclined to only have it work for conditions that decrease AC or give a bonus to hit against the affected opponent, either directly or by reducing dexterity.

This would disqualify ranged attacks against prone creatures but include melee attacks against prone creatures.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks for checking the DPR Jeranimus Rex.

If those critters have a condition, then yes. This is not precision damage.

One thing I'm thinking of looking into further is making it 1d4 that's multiplied on a crit. This will have a net + .5 damage per two levels above OA, and only -1 away from Sneak Attack. I'm just a fan of consistent damage, but this might work better.

Doing my own DPR right now, to double check.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I did some DPR myself, and...OA is always lower in the cases I did.

Those cases were, with how close they were:
1) wep finesse short sword (73%)
2) wep finesse rapier (76%)
3) wep finesse keen rapier (83%)
4) str two-handed 1d6 18-20/x2 weapon (83%)
5) str keen two-handed 1d6 18-20/x2 weapon (88%)
6) str falcata (85%)
7) str keen falcata (91%)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Also did a comparison between ranged rogues, when not invisible.

OA's DPR in that metric is slightly below 3 times better.

If someone finds an error in the math, let me know. Doing it by hand sucks.


One of the ideas I had, but forgot until just a minute ago: give the rogue half it's sneak attack dice all the time, rounded up, so that he can actually move, and do other things.


Huh. Interesting. Definitely interesting. I'm gonna playtest this a bit, and if I like it, I'll let would-be rogues choose b/w the two, briefing them on pros and cons.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks Irulesmost, I'd love to hear how your playtests go!

Honestly, I was hoping for it to be within 20% for the iconic rogue (which for me is weapon finesse and shortsword), so I might think about bumping it up to 1d4, which is multiplied on a critical hit.

Or I might re-instate the bonuses to-hit instead. I'm leaning towards this one, since it means rogues have a method to increase their attack bonus, like every other 3/4ths BAB class out there.

Regarding the Energy Drain issue:
I can see that it doesn't make sense to give advantages against the person who got hit by a vampire 5 days ago. But it also makes sense to give advantages against the person who was energy drained last round.

One possible solution is adding in text saying the rogue must be aware of the condition. But that opens up some cans and/or bags of worms.

This would make vampire rogues very, very nasty. I'm leaning towards not allowing it, and adding text in a sidebar saying it might make sense in some cases, subject to GM ruling.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The text sidebar is a good idea. That allows a lot of freedom in what otherwise might feel limiting or be a hotly debated ruling.


Thank you, Cheapy :)


Cheapy wrote:

Thanks Irulesmost, I'd love to hear how your playtests go!

Honestly, I was hoping for it to be within 20% for the iconic rogue (which for me is weapon finesse and shortsword), so I might think about bumping it up to 1d4, which is multiplied on a critical hit.

Or I might re-instate the bonuses to-hit instead. I'm leaning towards this one, since it means rogues have a method to increase their attack bonus, like every other 3/4ths BAB class out there.

Regarding the Energy Drain issue:
I can see that it doesn't make sense to give advantages against the person who got hit by a vampire 5 days ago. But it also makes sense to give advantages against the person who was energy drained last round.

One possible solution is adding in text saying the rogue must be aware of the condition. But that opens up some cans and/or bags of worms.

This would make vampire rogues very, very nasty. I'm leaning towards not allowing it, and adding text in a sidebar saying it might make sense in some cases, subject to GM ruling.

I would definately look into the rogue also getting a bonus to hit and/or crit against targets with a condition. There are a lot of DMs out there that see huge damage numbers that sneak attack can put out int a single round and think "OMG that is OP", because it is hard to account for the rogue inherent lack of accuracy. I wouldn't amp up the damage any more, but an accuracy boost would bring it up to par.


Nice idea. I see no problem with letting this affect energy drained creatures personally. I disagree with the sentiment that a 18 con creature with say...6 con drain is no worse off than a 12 con non-drained creature. The numbers are arbitrary, and having no drain means you are at your full potential.

As for the ranged attacks against prone creatures? I say just let it happen. It's already harder to hit, and I don't see any balance issues. Why couldn't you still aim for vitals?

The one issue I can think of is what if someone is a knife master? I say maybe if you change it to d4 damage, have it read "Reduce the Sneak attack die by one step". That way a Knife Master would roll d6s with daggers and everything else (to my knowledge) would be d4s.


A word of warning: having the ability increase the chance to hit could be potentially unbalancing in the new ability's favor. I'll do DPR calculations on my own after I'm done Xmas Shopping

On the question of archetypes, don't sweat it. If an archetype does not function properly, don't worry too much about it, even Paizo doesn't have 100% proper meshing between its own content even.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Right, if it's 20% less in most non-optimized cases, I'll be happy. I think +1 per 4 levels would put it far past that mark.

Maybe +1 at first level, +1 at 8th level, then +1 at 15th level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

First thing's first, If the rogue already has a .75 chance of hitting the target, then sneak attack (if triggered) will be dealing more damage, the break down goes like this

Chance to Hit: Difference in favor of sneak attack (falcata in parynthesis)

.95 = 26% (20%)
.9 = 22% (16%)
.85 = 17% (11%)
.8 = 12% (5%)
.75 = 6% (-1%)

However, once accuracy dips bellow .7, then the favor flips for the new mechanic, I'll leave the falcata out of this part of the analysis, since it already pulled ahead above.

Chance to Hit: Difference in favor of new mechanic.

.7 = 0%
.65 = 9%
.6 = 18%
.55 = 28%
.5 = 41%
.45 = 67%
.4 = 76%
.35 = 102%
.3 = 135
.25 = 182%
.2 = 252%
.15 = 370%
.1 = 605%
.05 = 1311%

These stats assume a keen high crit-weapon (19-20 x4 or 15-20 x2), and show that at level 20, a +5 chance to hit puts this on par with sneak attack. This is of course worse case scenario optimization outside of a falcata, so anything that isn't a Keen Rapier or Scythe will result in a wider gap between sneak attack and the new mechanic. I can do other weapon stats, but that will take time.

If using a Falcata, then a +4 chance to hit still leaves the new mechanic ahead by 1% at level 20 which may of may not be O.K. with you. I'd suggest not worrying too much about trying to balance around the falcata, and that since the +5 bonus won't really be coming around until level 20 anyways, that giving the bonus at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 would be fine.


Now for worst case scenario: the 20 x2 Weapon:

Copy Pasted from Excel, so formating is a little different, but anywhoe analysis at the bottom.

0.95 0.6
0.9 0.633333333
0.85 0.670588235
0.8 0.7125
0.75 0.76
0.7 0.814285714
0.65 0.876923077
0.6 0.95
0.55 1.036363636
0.5 1.14
0.45 1.266666667
0.4 1.425
0.35 1.628571429
0.3 1.9
0.25 2.28
0.2 2.85
0.15 3.8
0.1 5.7
0.05 11.4

In a worst case scenario sort of thing, where the rogue decides to take say improved unarmed strike, or use a club of what have you, the +5 bonus takes it up to about being 24% less efficient than sneak attack. All other weapon types should therefore be more efficient. Wether you want 20% to be the baseline worse case scenario is up to you, but I don't think closing that 4% gap should be a priority.


OK, so when this thread first got started I was quite dubious, especially with the openness of interpretation of what conditions could be used to apply this version of sneak attack.

However I must admit that the concept is starting, if only just, to win me over. I was primarily concerned due to the fact that sneak attack is essentially a one-target fireball which, if set up correctly, can be used multiple times per round.

The current damage output per strike is, however, statistically less than the original sneak attack (at least when disregarding criticals), which comforts me about this version.

Unfortunately, I'm not so sure about the designation of this damage as a circumstance bonus. If this were also classified as precision damage, I would be perfectly at ease with this ability. You would still be dealing this extra damage more often, making sneak attack more viable, but would not also be multiplying it on a critical.

This concerns me because, as the DPR calculations above indicate, the fact that this damage is multiplied on a critical vastly increases the damage potential compared to the standard sneak attack option when a character is optimized with a weapon that gives a 15+ crit range. Especially when you consider that most characters who will be able to take advantage of this mechanic will not have a BAB higher than +15, which against most enemies will end up rolling a crit threat upwards of 2/3 of the times they even hit, on avg.

Now, Cheapy, please don't think that I dislike the idea of making sneak attack more viable, that's totally not it. I am a personal fan of sneak attack and and in favor of anything that does just that. I just want to make sure that this mechanic is balanced for play and not going to be subject to abuse.

Other methods of abuse to keep in mind are feats like Sneaking Precision, which can now be used much more often and allows you to deal this extra damage even more often than before. Sap Adept and Sap Master also now effectively triple your damage for all these attacks (including criticals) instead of just increasing it by a factor of 1.5. If I find any other concerns I will notify you of them.

But remember, these are all my opinions, and you are free to disregard any of them as you see fit. I just want to bring these to your attention so that you can account for them.


Master_Crafter wrote:


This concerns me because, as the DPR calculations above indicate, the fact that this damage is multiplied on a critical vastly increases the damage potential compared to the standard sneak attack option when a character is optimized with a weapon that gives a 15+ crit range. Especially when you consider that most characters who will be able to take advantage of this mechanic will not have a BAB higher than +15, which against most enemies will end up rolling a crit threat upwards of 2/3 of the times they even hit, on avg.

?????

The DPR calculations indicate that the new mechanic, even with a keen rapier or Scythe, deals 26% less damage than sneak attack. Only when the mechanic starts to also give a toHit bonus does it begin to bridge the gap, matching it a +5 (again for a keen rapier or Scythe) and then surpassing it afterward.

I looked into Sneaking Precision and The Sap tree, and by RAW, I'm not sure they function properly with the new mechanic, since they both say in their prerequisite line Sneak Attack, which this replaces. If the Rogue where somehow ever able to get these talents (Gestalting?) Then it would apply to both Sneak attack and the new mechanic, but that can only be done through multiclassing kalestetics.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Rogues can't get Sneaking Precision until level...13? Fighters who dip one level into rogue (to get all of +2 to damage, yay) can get it at level 10. I'll think about it some, but to be honest, 13th level is where things start to get wonky balance-wise anyways. The idea is to give them the means to not be the weakest class in the game. :)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The intention was anywhere it says SA, you replace with OA. So a rogue could take sneaking precision at level 13.


Jeranimus Rex wrote:
The DPR calculations indicate that the new mechanic, even with a keen rapier or Scythe, deals 26% less damage than sneak attack. Only when the mechanic starts to also give a toHit bonus does it begin to bridge the gap, matching it a +5 (again for a keen rapier or Scythe) and then surpassing it afterward.

While this trend is normally true, when most of your attacks which hit are in the critical threat range of the weapon this ceases to be true, as the damage from this new variant is multiplied on a critical.

For instance, with a 75% to hit chance and a 15+ crit weapon (30% crit chance) with a x2 crit you would use the equation (not at all difficult for an optimized rogue to obtain):

dpr = (weapon dmg + competence dmg + precision dmg)*.75 + (weapon dmg + competence dmg)*.225

(Note that I am only including the damage types relevant to this discussion in this equation, and not including the chance of damage from sequential hits, which may also not benefit from SA as much as OA.)

Factoring out weapon damage as it is a common term and multiplying out the crit chance (which will actually decrease the extra damage from this variant), the equation then becomes:

dpr = (competence dmg + precision dmg)*.75 + (competence dmg)*.3*.75

Now, consider that, statistically, SA deals 3.5 dmg/die and OA does a flat 2 dmg/die, plugging those in for each gives us:

SA dpr = (3.5)*.75 + (0)*.225 = 2.625
OA dpr = (2)*.75 + (2)*.225 = 1.95

In this case SA wins the math battle by 0.675, but can still only be applied maybe 2/3 as often as OA (if that). Thus with that factored in the 2.625 for SA becomes more like a 1.75 (.2 lower than OA), and OA wins the math war.

While this obviously is better with a better chance to hit and drops off as your target becomes harder to hit, the fact is that once you become able to inflict the conditions you need to take advantage of OA by means of anything from the Critical Feats to the Dirty Trick feats (which can all be taken by lvl 8 with the right rogue build, 9 if your lazy), you are now using OA's damage all the time, in stead of just occasionally as would be the case with SA.

It is just something to keep in mind. I present this only so that people are aware of these exploits. As I stated before, Cheapy is welcome to take or disregard any of these opinions as he wishes. After all, they are just my opinions.

And thanks for listening anyway, even if you disagree.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Spending actions to be able to do a bit of damage seems like a fair trade off. It's basically the entire idea of a melee cleric, after all. And their actions (divine power) apply to all of their attacks, not just all their attacks against one enemy.

In fact, being able to make the conditions to allow for OA is half of the idea. Makes them masters of their own destiny, rather than relying on, you know, the buddy system rogues currently depend upon.

I do appreciate the opinions however, as they provide quite a bit to think about. Still thinking about the Sap Master, but with the introduction of Underhanded rogue talent, I think SA comes out ahead when using Sap Master.


Master_Crafter wrote:


In this case SA wins the math battle by 0.675, but can still only be applied maybe 2/3 as often as OA (if that). Thus with that factored in the 2.625 for SA becomes more like a 1.75 (.2 lower than OA), and OA wins the math war.

That's strange, and feels kinda arbitrary. Where is it that we're getting that sneak attack is only supposed to happen 2/3s of the time?

Taking 2/3s, then it's 11% in OA's favor, but this is a difference of only 2 points of damage for DPR at level 20, which is arguably insignificant. Any value greater than 2/3's such as 3/4 and above, and the numbers again favor Sneak attack.

On the question of feats, I think having OA work with rogue class features as sneak attack and such is great, but when it comes to feats, keeping those out of the equation would decrease the overall amount of complexity in the rule. It would also potentially encourage the writing of a set of feats that work with OA, but not sneak attack, so that players can have another form of differentiation.

But again, this is Cheapy's mechanic he can do with it as he pleases.


All honesty, my estimation as to how often SA might be used in comparison to OA is rather arbitrary, as it relies almost entirely on guesswork. But I estimated 2/3 because at low levels there are a number of maneuvers and spells available which will give one of the conditions that OA capitalizes, so with help another character or by sacrificing some action economy I imagine it would come into play a bit more often, but not quite twice as often.

At mid to higher levels, though, any OA character who had planned to capitalize on this ability would be able to use it almost at will, with relatively little action economy lost (one attack out of a full attack action with the Dirty Trick tree).

While that one attack or the need to confirm a critical does level the playing field, it can also kill your opponent's action economy or make him completely unable to resist your OA dmg. In fact, while you are sacrificing a single attack at 8th lvl, your opponent has to sacrifice an entire standard action if you have the whole Dirty Trick feat tree, a far more devastating hit to his action economy, especially when you are now getting additional dmg on him.

He's almost better taking the 50% miss chance from being blind and just attacking you. At least then 1/2 of his normal strikes would hit you for damage instead of not being able to retaliate at all.

But all that said, I agree with your last statement. And to quote you, "this is Cheapy's mechanic and he can do with it as he pleases." And I think he has done a good job thus far.

Grand Lodge

Hows this? This is without need to add rogue talents or feats and applies to all sneak attack types. It sort of re-organises what has been posted and gives the rogues some additional boost on crits.

One of the weaknesses of the rogue is that they can normally only Sneak Attack anytime the target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.

While sneak attack can do significant additional damage spikes (especially in lower level campaigns where hit points are lower) rogues generally need to an ally to be able to use that class feature.

Now rogues and others can do +2 damage for each D6 of sneak attack dice they are able to use if unable to apply a sneak attack if the target is under the following negative conditions - entangled, sickened, shaken, frightened, panicked, cowering, deafened, dazzled, stunned, staggered, nauseated, fatigued, exhausted, and prone. While damage is applied it is not considered a 'sneak attack' for feat or talent purposes.

If a target is blind, flat footed, helpless, paralyzed, and pinned then normal sneak attack damage rules are applied.

Finally they can also +2 damage for each D6 of sneak attack dice they are able to use it on any critical attack damage after all damage has been calculated if sneak attack does not normally apply.


Dotting. Been watching for awhile but will definitely be adding it as an option for rogues, perhaps after a bit of adjusting. Great idea!


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Will have to wait to add to my game (no Rogue player atm), but it looks like a great way to keep Rogues from being marginalized in small parties or running solo. Will be adding to the options for Rogues.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Helaman, I quite like that. This ability was supposed to be an either-or (high spike damage or lower damage that can happen more often), but if any class needs a huge boost it'd be the rogue.

My main problem with that ability is that it's too complicated. It's fine if you have experienced and into-it players, but I know most people I play with would find that too complicated.

Master_crafter:
If a player wants to take Combat Expertise, Dirty Trick, Greater Dirty Trick, and Quick Dirty Trick, as well as give up the only attack the rogue has that can be considered a guaranteed hit barring haste (and even then due to the lack of the ability to boost to-hit like any other 3/4ths BAB class it's not really a given)...

I'm fine with that. They've expended 4 feats to pull this off, and they have to do it for every enemy they want to do the damage to.

I recall you being an ardent supporter of Dazzling Display / Shatter Defenses for a rogue, and that's 4 feats as well.

I am still thinking about the use of this for feats that require sneak attack. Sap Master might be an issue, but then again, you don't have any dice to roll, which SM specifies. If it was double damage, then it could be an issue. But you can't roll +2/2 levels twice :)

Sap Adept would make this +4 damage, as opposed to the average of 5.5 for regular sneak attack. If this works with Sap Master, that'd be +8 vs sneak attacks 3.5+3.5+4=11 average.

So, with an 19-20 blunt weapon (hello cestus...and that's about it I think), there's a 10% chance per attack to crit for 2x damage, making Sap Master do 16 damage vs the SA's average of 11. And you can't get a keen blunt weapon, so you'd need to spend a feat to make that 20%.

Just did some napkin DPR comparisons, assuming 75% chance to hit:

Spoiler:

OA: avg damage: 2.5 + 2 (enhancement) + 6 (str) + 40 (Sap MasteR) = 50.5
.75(50.5) + .75(.1*1*50.5)
37.875 + 3.7875 = 41.6625

SA avg: 2.5+2+6 = 10.5 + 55
.75(10.5 + 55) + .75*.1*10.5
49.125 + .7875 = 49.9125

OA with Imp Crit Cestus:
37.875 + .75*.2*50.5 =
37.875 + 7.575 = 45.45

So even with Imp Crit, still is lower than the average of SA, given 75% chance to hit (highly arbitrary), even when we have invested in another feat.

So I'm not too worried.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

After a bit more playtesting, my rogue player (well, party member now) loves it.

He's a crossbow rogue, so this lets him help out a bit here and there. I suspect the existence of an Archer Fighter in the party would have some affect on this, but before the fighter joined, it was fine as well.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm thinking of making the bonus damage +3 if using a two-handed melee weapon, to encourage using different weapons. Still less damage on average, and that fighting style emphasizes staying up front with reckless abandon...a balancing factor in and of itself for Mr. Rogue. Thoughts?


I followed your link from another thread Cheapy.
Like Helaman, I'd like to keep both abilities, not having one replaced by the other.
As for the bonus to to hit, I feel there should be one.
Rogues are among the weakest classes of the game because of their low to hit. A small bonus when sneak attacking could be useful (maybe, like the monk, it could be possible to give them full BAB when sneak attacking).

I can understand why you would rather keep your modification balanced with the current ability of the rogue, but IMHO a boost is needed.

Cheapy wrote:
I'm thinking of making the bonus damage +3 if using a two-handed melee weapon, to encourage using different weapons. Still less damage on average, and that fighting style emphasizes staying up front with reckless abandon...a balancing factor in and of itself for Mr. Rogue. Thoughts?

It would still fall behind sneack attacking: as said I'd work on both abilities. You could give the rogue the +3 bonus you propose (and increasing SA to 1d8) when fighting with one weapon, one handed or two-handed.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It being less damage than sneak attack on average is intentional. It makes up for it with being applicable more often. I also consider this to be a huge boost to rogues, just barely balanced with the current rogue. The ability to sneak attack reliably from range is huge, as is not being constrained to the buddy system. They need a boost, but I don't want to give too large a boost :)

I do believe that the damage of sneak attack is fine. My main issues with sneak attack are the requirement of the buddy system (just bad design, IMO) to use your main class ability consistently.

I'm still toying with the idea of a few bonuses to hit when using the ability.

Maybe some rogue talents to add to this. Some to give bonuses to hit, some to give d4s to roll when sneak attack would normally apply, some to add more damage when using certain types of weapons, etc...


I must also say that I dislike the "detrimental condition" or " anything butinvisibility or incorpreal" wording. Bleeding doesn't seem like a thing that would actually leave an opening, for example.

Similar ideas have been mentioned, but I'm in favor of something along the lines of "Any time your opponent is denied his dexterity bonus, can not see you due to stealth or invisibility, or is afflicted Shaken, Naseated, Sickened, (basically, the mind affecting ones) or has any of their ability scores unnaturally reduced by either below 8 or by 6 or more, whichever occurs first." This last one is to express ability score damage better. Someone loses 1 point to a stat of 19? They might notice it. Drop them 6 points, and they are clearly less effective than they were,likely illustrated by stumbling over thoughts if it's intelligence, stumbling about with strength or dex, whatnot.

the below 8 clause is to show that at this threshold, people begin becoming below average in that stat, and therefore have an obvious weakness. The "6 or more" clause shows their relative drop in power. For example, a fighter with 18 strength being brought to 12 is still stronger than most people. However, he is way off his game.

Grand Lodge

Crysknife wrote:


Rogues are among the weakest classes of the game because of their low to hit. A small bonus when sneak attacking could be useful (maybe, like the monk, it could be possible to give them full BAB when sneak attacking).

This or a +4 (instead of +2) to hit while flanking would work well... I'm more in favour of the +4 - its just a SMALL boost and its a relatively minor change.

That said, full BAB for sneak attacks? It makes them a HARD hitter - not a bad thing.

I am just a HAIR away from bringing in to hit bonuses as house rules - not sure how the math works out though and if it should be a talent (I suspect its not a bad option).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The issue I see with straight up full BAB is that it gives an extra attack. I'm not sure that's for the best.

I mentioned above...somewhere...that originally this was +2 damage per two levels, and +1 to hit per four levels. I still have to do the math on that. I suppose I can do that right now...


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

After spending an hour working on the DPR, I noticed that my formula was messed up, invalidating everything I did.

I'll do this another time.

things I think will stay the same:

* Full BAB rogue when OA/SA gives a huge boost at levels when they get another attack. At level 20, the difference isn't much though.

* The to-hit boost makes them better than fighters at some levels. I don't like this.

* Fighters do a frickton of damage at level 20, due to Weapon Mastery and +6 weapon training from the gloves O_O


Dotting. Thanks, Cheapy!

Andoran

I really like the idea, and I just might use this in an upcoming campaign, but I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were on having an incremental increase to crit range, rather than a bonus to attack.


One thing I've been doing that's been letting my players enjoy more finesse-type characters is pretty much putting Weapon Finesse intrinsically into every character; it's part of the basic rules now that you can use Dexterity instead of Strength to hit. Then I make Weapon Finesse just allow Dexterity to be used as damage for light weapons, spiked chains, etc., much like the Dervish Dancer feat does for scimitars. I also include that if the player is going to Power Attack they can't use the Dex damage from WF, but instead have to use Strength (I don't want to take out Power Attacking with light weapons in general)

This has opened the game up a bit for my players, and it gives rogues some needed ability points (on point buy) so they can take Cha, Int, Wis as well as making playing a quick character a bit more viable. I've noticed they can deal good damage, but a greatsword with power attack on a 20-base Strength barbarian is still straight basic attacking for more, so they haven't been showing up the heavy hitters.

With this letting rogues spread points around a bit more freely (after all, it really just takes out one feat in a chain, and takes away the "scimitars only" rules in Dervish Dancer)and this suggested change to sneak attack I think rogues/ninjas can stay viable a bit longer now, or at least at lower levels put up a bit more of a fight.

Just my idea =)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Just to let you know I've replaced SA with OA [using d4's] for my games. Although I don't have any Rogues in the current group the general opinion was that it was better than SA.


I'm too lazy to read the whole thread right now, so my apologies if it has already been mentioned.

I like the idea (altough scout archetypes works for ranged), but detrimental condition is too vague.
You're exhausted, I stabb you.
Oh, you've got medium load, I stabb you.
there are so many things that can effect you and that are not worth it to remove.
I think it would be better if you list all the conditions that count.


Most of the thread is about that. There's a very specific definition of detrimental condition in the current draft.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm using the following list...

entangled
sickened
shaken
deafened
dazzled
stunned
staggered
nauseated
fatigued
exhausted
grappled
blind
flat-footed
flanked
helpless
paralyzed
cowering
pinned


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The product this was for has now been released (and has been for a bit). There have been no major changes to the ability itself (from what I recall), but it does add a number of rogue talents / ninja tricks to specialize in various fighting styles.

51 to 100 of 115 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew / My replacement for Sneak Attack, allowing for ranged rogues to flourish, and eliminating the buddy system. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.