This is a replacement for sneak attack that will be in an upcoming product of mine. I like it a bit too much to not share it with everyone. Y'know, if you love something, set it free? Something along those lines.

The fluff is easily replaced with whatever, but the thing it's for has a meanstreak.

Replace the phrase "vicious opportunist" with "rogue". Or "ninja". Or "sandman bard". Or y'know, anything with sneak attack. Just change the bonus damage progression to whatever that thing has.

At first level, a vicious opportunist can take advantage of the suffering of others. Whenever he is flanking or attacking a creature with a detrimental condition affecting it, he gains a +2 circumstance bonus to damage rolls. At 3rd level and every 2 levels thereafter the bonus to damage rolls increases by +2. If the vicious opportunist is not flanking, the creature must have a detrimental condition before the attack for the vicious opportunist to gain this bonus.

This ability replaces sneak attack. Abilities that trigger off of sneak attack instead activate off of this ability. For abilities that use the number of dice of a sneak attack to determine effects, the effective number of dice is equal to the bonus damage from this ability, divided by 2. For example, if a level 5 vicious opportunist has the Bleeding Attack rogue talent, whenever she attacks a creature with a detrimental condition, she gains a +6 circumstance to damage rolls. In addition, she does three points of bleed damage from the Bleeding Attack talent.

Notes:

My main worry is Bleeding Attack. It creates a somewhat hard to get rid of condition, that will allow sneak att--opportunities aplenty quite often. Perhaps too often.

This is currently undergoing playtesting in a few games, and it's working out wonderfully. Our ranged rogue is using it with his crossbow, and he's able to help out a bit due to it.

What I've found is that it helps create more dynamic playstyles that incorporate things other than just mindless attacking. People know that if they inflict a condition somehow, the rogue will be able to capitalize on it

Any other thoughts, criticisms, praises, etc are much appreciated.

I want someone with dazzling display and this feat could get a bit crazy.

I really like the idea. I can't see an issue. I'll probably add it to the list of things I offer to rogues.

I want someone with dazzling display and this feat could get a bit crazy.

Hey, if they want to spend a full-round action to set it up, more power to them.

A rogue walks into a bar, scares the s*%# out of everyone, then massacres the whole lot.

Well, maybe instead of a bar, a necromancer's cult :)

I really, really like it. I've been looking for a way out of sneak attack for a while, and this seems pretty decent. I have to think on it for a bit, however.

Thanks Tacticslion.

Originally, this had +1 to hit for every...4 levels? So level 1, 5, 9, 13, 17. But that was before you could get it from Flanking.

My gut feeling said that was a bit too good, so I scrapped that aspect, and let them flank. I'll need to do some DPR calculations to figure that out for sure.

Another possibility is replacing the +2 with 1d4. This does give a .5 per 2 levels increase in damage over +2, but it can give that dice rollin' feel people have been known to love. It'd only be 1 point behind sneak attack.

I personally feel that the -1.5 average damage is more than made up for with the ability to do Opportunities Aplenty far more often. Archer rogues are now possible, so I don't want to go overboard with the damage. That could go from "oh look, rogues have a nice thing" to "oh look, the rogues doing almost everything for us."

I have one more thought doesn't this make light sensitivity really suck as then enemies get sneak attack on you.

Moment of weakness, and all that.

I think NPC rogues had it easier than PC rogues. The GM could set up all the encounters so they shine. This means the PC rogues can set up more advantageous situations, and more often.

Dirty Trick, bleed, intimidate, etc.

Smoke Sticks and thunder stones and tangle foot bags for everyone!

I really, really dig the idea, Cheapy - it inspired me.

I may give it a shot as a base level talent, however, and would like your opinion on my version:

Vicious Opportunist (Ex) A rogue can take advantage of the suffering of others. When attacking a creature with a detrimental condition affecting it (shaken, bleeding, stunned, and so on) a rogue may deal one-half his normal sneak attack dice (minimum 1 die) to the affected creature.

In essence, I think it accomplishes something that's bothered me about the rogue - without flanking, damage is severely hampered. My hope is this version will maintain the "signature ability" of the rogue, but enhance their performance without enhancing it "too much".

I'm also using a mechanic I stole from Conan d20 and converted into a talent:

Sneak Attack Style (Ex): The rogue chooses a sneak attack style. This can be any one weapon with which he is proficient, including unarmed strikes and missile weapons. Whenever he makes a sneak attack using his chosen weapon, he inflicts greater damage, increasing his sneak attack die from 1d6 to 1d8, and gains a +1 circumstance bonus on his attack roll.

I'm not seeing too much problem with the 50% dice from Vicious and the die size increase from Sneak Style, but I may have missed something.

I really, really dig the idea, Cheapy - it inspired me.

I may give it a shot as a base level talent, however, and would like your opinion on my version:

Quote:

Vicious Opportunist (Ex) A rogue can take advantage of the suffering of others. When attacking a creature with a detrimental condition affecting it (shaken, bleeding, stunned, and so on) a rogue may deal one-half his normal sneak attack dice (minimum 1 die) to the affected creature.

In essence, I think it accomplishes something that's bothered me about the rogue - without flanking, damage is severely hampered. My hope is this version will maintain the "signature ability" of the rogue, but enhance their performance without enhancing it "too much".

I'm also using a mechanic I stole from Conan d20 and converted into a talent:

Quote:

Sneak Attack Style (Ex): The rogue chooses a sneak attack style. This can be any one weapon with which he is proficient, including unarmed strikes and missile weapons. Whenever he makes a sneak attack using his chosen weapon, he inflicts greater damage, increasing his sneak attack die from 1d6 to 1d8, and gains a +1 circumstance bonus on his attack roll.

I'm not seeing too much problem with the 50% dice from Vicious and the die size increase from Sneak Style, but I may have missed something.

Thanks for the kind words!

I think that talent could work pretty well. The only issue I see with it is if the target is flat-footed. Do they use full SA, or half SA? Because flat-footed is a detrimental condition :)

The net damage will be above what just my Opportunities Aplenty will do, I think. 1d8 per two levels every now and then, then 1d8 per 4 levels most of the time. It's hard to say anything definitive about how often you'd get one vs the other, other than you'd get the 1d8 per 4 levels more often.

But, 1d8 per 4 levels averages to 4.5 points of damage, which is .5 above OA.

Still, they're rogues. If they can do some finally do some serious damage, all the better!

My main concern about the ability is figuring out which to use. It's fairly simple, but it does require a bit more thinking than just "+2 per 2 levels". Also, the weird issues it will have with some talents that require SA damage die.

But neither of those are big enough to not recommend trying that out! I'd love to hear how it goes.

And the best part? It still allows for the ranged rogue, while the flanking specialist can dish some serious hurt.

The only issue I see with it is if the target is flat-footed. Do they use full SA, or half SA? Because flat-footed is a detrimental condition :)

Excellent point. I'll have to make sure to put a qualifier in there. Intent was to increase their damage while not using circumstances that provide for sneak attack.=)

I'll add to the bottom, "Any condition which normally allows a rogue to use his full sneak attack is unaffected."

The net damage will be above what just my Opportunities Aplenty will do, I think. 1d8 per two levels every now and then, then 1d8 per 4 levels most of the time. It's hard to say anything definitive about how often you'd get one vs the other, other than you'd get the 1d8 per 4 levels more often.

I currently run a game for my wife & one of our good friends and in this group, flanking is less common. In January, after Christmas break, I'll be running for a 7 player group and I expect flanking circumstances to be significantly higher. It will be interesting to see how it plays out!

Still, they're rogues. If they can do some finally do some serious damage, all the better!

But neither of those are big enough to not recommend trying that out! I'd love to hear how it goes.

And the best part? It still allows for the ranged rogue, while the flanking specialist can dish some serious hurt.

I couldn't agree more. I've always been disappointed how poorly the rogue performed in combat. I'll definitely make it a point to drop a word on how its going.

This is a solid idea. I am going to certainly present it to gaming groups as I move forward. I tend to present options and have discussions on rule variants collectively before I move forward in games I run, but this is a solid, solid rule variant.

I think detrimental condition is way too broad, listing the detrimental conditions affected seems fair enough.

Are creatures normally immune or resistant to SA still resistant/immune ?

How do you imagine archers are more viable with this option, intimidate them from 30' away, or entangling them with a tanglefootbag ? The options still seem fairly limited.

I think detrimental condition is way too broad, listing the detrimental conditions affected seems fair enough.

Are creatures normally immune or resistant to SA still resistant/immune ?

How do you imagine archers are more viable with this option, intimidate them from 30' away, or entangling them with a tanglefootbag ? The options still seem fairly limited.

I could do that, but it'd end up being all of them but Invisible and Incorporeal.

No, but if you want, yes. It's not precision damage.

Tanglefoot Bag, intimidation, snap shot to get a bleeding attack in, asking your wizard buddy to try battlefield control and debuffs, your barbarian friend using intimidate, entangle spell, blinding, dirty trick, tripping, flanking to inflict a condition with bleeding attack or something else (not applicable to archer rogues), being invisible, sniping, etc.

The rogue doesn't need to inflict them. Just mention your abilities, and state that you can capitalize on the debuffs applied by others. It was enough to get my group very interested in applying conditions.

And notice how the last two in the list are the only ways for a current archer rogue to work? :-)

By the way, if you do use this, pick up the Condition Card Deck. It's not necessary, but helps!

This is a solid idea. I am going to certainly present it to gaming groups as I move forward. I tend to present options and have discussions on rule variants collectively before I move forward in games I run, but this is a solid, solid rule variant.

Thanks! It's had favorable results in my groups, so I hope it does in yours too.

Remco Sommeling wrote:

I think detrimental condition is way too broad, listing the detrimental conditions affected seems fair enough.

Are creatures normally immune or resistant to SA still resistant/immune ?

How do you imagine archers are more viable with this option, intimidate them from 30' away, or entangling them with a tanglefootbag ? The options still seem fairly limited.

I could do that, but it'd end up being all of them but Invisible and Incorporeal.

No, but if you want, yes. It's not precision damage.

Tanglefoot Bag, intimidation, snap shot to get a bleeding attack in, asking your wizard buddy to try battlefield control and debuffs, your barbarian friend using intimidate, entangle spell, blinding, dirty trick, tripping, flanking to inflict a condition with bleeding attack or something else (not applicable to archer rogues), being invisible, sniping, etc.

The rogue doesn't need to inflict them. Just mention your abilities, and state that you can capitalize on the debuffs applied by others. It was enough to get my group very interested in applying conditions.

And notice how the last two in the list are the only ways for a current archer rogue to work? :-)

By the way, if you do use this, pick up the Condition Card Deck. It's not necessary, but helps!

I get it, just dont think all conditions are appropriate for allowing oppurtunistic attacks, bleeding for one, lying on the ground can in the case of ranged attacks make someone harder to hit, blindness already works.

If you say entangled, sickened, shaken, stunned, nauseated, fatigued or exhausted I can imagine it. Many other conditions seem too meta for me, it might work to equalize the rogue but it doesnt tickle my imagination.

Which conditions do you have issues imagining this working with? You might be on to something.

In general, it's taking advantage of momentary weakness in others.

Which conditions do you have issues imagining this working with? You might be on to something.

In general, it's taking advantage of momentary weakness in others.

Don't mind if I do.

Taking the list of conditions from the Core:
Dead, petrified, unconcious, dying and disabled: I guess you could apply on these conditions... But I don't see a reason why.
Blind, flat footed, helpless, paralyzed, cowering, pinned: all already allow for SA. Since Opportunities aplenty (OA) doesn't state it hits opponents denied Dex to AC it might be better to add these conditions.
Confused: Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused creature. It's in the description.
Fascinated: It breaks automatically if the subject knows you intend harm. If he doesn't know you would take him by surprise anyway and get sneak attack.
Energy drained: I'm not sure how you could make an opportunity from this... I'm not even sure you can recgonize someone has that condition without magical means.
Frightened and panicked: in those conditions the enemy is actively running away. Easier to get an attack with a ranged weapon but harder with melee. Maybe you can only use OA in people in this conditions with ranged weapons?
Prone: Easier to hit in melee but harder at range. Maybe you can only use OA against people in this condition with melee weapons?

Final list of conditions:
entangled, sickened, shaken, deafened, dazzled, stunned, staggered, nauseated, fatigued, exhausted, blind, flat footed, helpless, paralyzed, cowering and pinned

Might be easier to keep OA as is.

Originally, there was such a list. But as I was making it, it got to the point where it was just easier to say all detrimental conditions. Less cross-referencing, making it easier on players and GMs.

Does the target have a condition? Yes? Great!

Petrified, dead and broken are a bit weird, but oh well.

The specifics of OA override the general of confusion, fwiw.

Originally, there was such a list. But as I was making it, it got to the point where it was just easier to say all detrimental conditions. Less cross-referencing, making it easier on players and GMs.

Does the target have a condition? Yes? Great!

Petrified, dead and broken are a bit weird, but oh well.

The specifics of OA override the general of confusion, fwiw.

How about something like this?

Detrimental conditions include any condition which inflicts a penalty to ability scores, attacks rolls, damage rolls, skill checks, or movement speed. Any condition which prevents standard actions, move actions, or forces an opponent to roll twice and use the worse result also counts as a detrimental condition. Conditions which inflict a penalty to armor class count as detrimental conditions only if the apply the penalty to the attack the rogue is making.

I'm sure I'm missing something, or maybe including something unintended.

It'd probably work, but it would still require crossreferencing to see what each condition does, and that can slow down combat.

If a GM would prefer a finite list or a definitive set of qualifications, that's great and it would make a lot more sense.

But this is just the simplest with the least amount of work.

Side note: one advantage of bleed is that the critter with bleed will die sooner, meaning the GM won't have to keep track of bleed for too long!

How does that slow down combat? If you're playing with a condition, you already need to know what it does.

That's true. I was distracted when I wrote that post. Still less simple than the base, but shouldn't normally slow down combat.

Since there's a fair number of people who are talking about it, what do people see as the advantage of having either a definitive list of conditions or more strict criteria?

Is it to cut down on player arguing with the GM? You just really don't like the idea of doing more damage to a dead person? Dislike the non-ultra rigorous definition?

Here's a more rigorous definition:

For the purposes of this ability, a detrimental condition is any condition other than invisible or incorporeal that affects a creature.

Broken is only for objects, so this wouldn't work anyways against them.

Fascination would not work, since they are no longer affected by Fascination when you draw the weapon.

This could work against petrified creatures, depending on if petrified creatures are objects or creatures. If they're objects, it doesn't work. If they are creatures, it does work. Amusingly enough, if they are creatures, a normal rogue can sneak attack them too, since they are unconscious and hence helpless.

The only one left that I see as iffy is Energy Drain. But...why not? It's one of the iconic "this applies a penalty to you" conditions.

Energy drain is supposed to be like losing levels. There's no way that I know of for a rogue to tell it's happened. I don't see how that could be exploited unless the rogue can use the ability to take advantage of low level characters, which he can't.

I very definitely think you shouldn't be able to use this on prone creatures at range, but it seems crazy not to be able to do so in melee. I think that prone at least should be explained individually.

I don't think you absolutely need a comprehensive list. I DO however think "detrimental condition" alone isn't enough. Saying "anything that's a condition other than invisible or insubstantial" makes much more sense, but still leaves the potential for problems when people ask if x counts as a condition.

The reason I think it needs defining is pretty simple: The same reason Weapon Training needs to have a number instead of just saying "At this level, the fighter hits a bit more often and does more damage". If there's much room for interpretation on something that's meant to be pretty simple it's not much of a rule. It's just a guideline that will be taken to mean different things at different tables and by different players.

+1 damages per level would be simpler than your "+2 damages per 2 level".

I think you should state that ability damages, ability drain, and level drain aren't "detrimental condition", they are damages. (I don't like the idea of "oh, you encountered a wraith three day ago? Now you're still a valid target for sneak attack, even if there's no actual difference between you and someone who rolled poorly in Con").

Except for those two points, I like the idea.

In D&D 3.0 that was simply a feat called Craven.

In D&D 3.0 that was simply a feat called Craven.

Slightly similar, but...Not very close. That still relied on Sneak Attacks.

In D&D 3.0 that was simply a feat called Craven.

It wasn't Craven was simply a feat that added to sneak attack damage it didn't actually change sneak attack in any way.

+1 damages per level would be simpler than your "+2 damages per 2 level".

I think you should state that ability damages, ability drain, and level drain aren't "detrimental condition", they are damages. (I don't like the idea of "oh, you encountered a wraith three day ago? Now you're still a valid target for sneak attack, even if there's no actual difference between you and someone who rolled poorly in Con").

Except for those two points, I like the idea.

The argument against Energy Drain far outweighs my "why not?", so I'll remove it. Ability Drain / Damage isn't covered by this ability though. At least, searching the condition list didn't show any matches for either of those.

I'll think about the +1 per level instead. There were some aesthetic and game design issues that immediately popped in my head about that, so I'll be looking at the idea closely.

The same paragraph applies to ranged attacks against prone. A ranged attack from 10 feet away surely wouldn't make it impossible to ...whatever the verb is here. One from 30 feet away? Yea, I could see that argument.

Other issues:
* Range limit.
* How does Uncanny Dodge interact with this? (Side note: Mortuum, UD technically is a greater advantage over lesser level enemies, but I know what you meant :) )

Cheapy wrote:

Originally, there was such a list. But as I was making it, it got to the point where it was just easier to say all detrimental conditions. Less cross-referencing, making it easier on players and GMs.

Does the target have a condition? Yes? Great!

Petrified, dead and broken are a bit weird, but oh well.

The specifics of OA override the general of confusion, fwiw.

How about something like this?

Detrimental conditions include any condition which inflicts a penalty to ability scores, attacks rolls, damage rolls, skill checks, or movement speed. Any condition which prevents standard actions, move actions, or forces an opponent to roll twice and use the worse result also counts as a detrimental condition. Conditions which inflict a penalty to armor class count as detrimental conditions only if the apply the penalty to the attack the rogue is making.

I'm sure I'm missing something, or maybe including something unintended.

Yep.

All glory to the rogue - power attack inflicts a penalty to attack.
And rage forbids some standard actions, is a condition and gives a -2 on AC. Some UC barb archetype gets even further maulses i think.

So some limited listing might be better.

But the idea is very good. All missing is a clear rule or list, so there is not too much uncertainity when it is applied.

Regarding critical strikes:
As normal sneak is not multiplied, the damage gap between normal sneak and this is lessened.
And are added effects (bleed, strength dam) multiplied?

But the idea is very good. All missing is a clear rule or list, so there is not too much uncertainity when it is applied.

the problem with comprehensive list is that many monsters (and even spells) apply a condition that is not named. eg: aura of menace (archon ability) is essentially the same as shaken, except it's not shaken.

For a houserule, the lack of comprehensive list is fine. For published material, the best way to do this is probably to add a tag [detrimental condition] to many conditions and special effects (aura of menace has the tag, rage doesn't).

Thanks!

Only hit point damage is multiplied. Which is the general rule, I think. So no bleed, etc.

I'll be doing dpr calculations for this vs identical SA rogues with builds of various optimization and at various levels. I suspect that the falcata two-hander brute would make this ridiculous,. But as long as the DPR is reasonably close, I am fine with it.

Now if only I could quantify how often you'd get this vs normal SAN.

Another possibility is replacing the +2 with 1d4. This does give a .5 per 2 levels increase in damage over +2, but it can give that dice rollin' feel people have been known to love. It'd only be 1 point behind sneak attack.

I personally feel that the -1.5 average damage is more than made up for with the ability to do Opportunities Aplenty far more often. Archer rogues are now possible, so I don't want to go overboard with the damage. That could go from "oh look, rogues have a nice thing" to "oh look, the rogues doing almost everything for us."

That's similar to what I've been thinking of doing for Sneak Attack. I like rolling d4s.

carn wrote:

But the idea is very good. All missing is a clear rule or list, so there is not too much uncertainity when it is applied.

the problem with comprehensive list is that many monsters (and even spells) apply a condition that is not named. eg: aura of menace (archon ability) is essentially the same as shaken, except it's not shaken.

For a houserule, the lack of comprehensive list is fine. For published material, the best way to do this is probably to add a tag [detrimental condition] to many conditions and special effects (aura of menace has the tag, rage doesn't).

I will be changing the name for this reason. Detrimental condition refers to the definitive list of conditions in the CRB.

I am still not fond of the idea, instead of making it easier to sneak attack I rather see it :

- become more dangerous by making a sneak attack target inflict conditions much like the anti-paladin can do with his cruelties.

- Inflict sneak attack damage on a critical hit

- do more damage with a single blow rather than a flurry of attacks, thus validating spring attack for a rogue

- Add rogue talent that allow you to sneak attack nauseated, frightened and dazed opponents. This possibly could be a prerequiste to allow for more conditions.

- get a higher bonus to hit shaken, entangled, sickened and flanked creatures

I am still not fond of the idea, instead of making it easier to sneak attack I rather see it :

- become more dangerous by making a sneak attack target inflict conditions much like the anti-paladin can do with his cruelties.

- Inflict sneak attack damage on a critical hit

- do more damage with a single blow rather than a flurry of attacks, thus validating spring attack for a rogue

- Add rogue talent that allow you to sneak attack stunned, nauseated and dazed opponents. This possibly could be a prerequiste to allow for more conditions like exhausted, frightened and grappled.

- get a bonus to hit shaken, entangled, sickened and flanked creatures

You should make a post in this board then, once you flesh it out! I'd love to see new ways to make the rogue...how do I say this...relevant.

Although, the last four of those five make it easier to sneak attack.

Remco Sommeling wrote:

I am still not fond of the idea, instead of making it easier to sneak attack I rather see it :

- become more dangerous by making a sneak attack target inflict conditions much like the anti-paladin can do with his cruelties.

- Inflict sneak attack damage on a critical hit

- do more damage with a single blow rather than a flurry of attacks, thus validating spring attack for a rogue

- Add rogue talent that allow you to sneak attack stunned, nauseated and dazed opponents. This possibly could be a prerequiste to allow for more conditions like exhausted, frightened and grappled.

- get a bonus to hit shaken, entangled, sickened and flanked creatures

You should make a post in this board then, once you flesh it out! I'd love to see new ways to make the rogue...how do I say this...relevant.

Although, the last four of those five make it easier to sneak attack.

Not directly related to this, but something I would consider as a base to a reworking of the rogue is Detect Magic's attempt to fix the rogue, I like the work he does in general.

Detect Magic's rogue fix

Here's the thread DetectMagic's version from, in case others are wondering.

I will reply there.

Also, a team of DM's rogue with SA and a rogue with OA would be devastating.

I think a definitive list of conditions is probably the way to go. 'Detrimental' is too vauge a term. For a houserule at your table thats fine. But if you want to make it a 'legit' alternate rule, it needs to be better codified.

For instance just going by the condition list in the core rules, , as brought up above, Confused, while clearly a detrimental condition, probably shouldnt fall under this heading as it explicately states "Attackers are not at any special advantage when attacking a confused creature." Energy drained is also listed as a condition, but definately doesn make sense to allow this type of attack.

Sorry, Cheapy. I had my wisdom teeth extracted a couple days ago. Haven't really thought about too much since. Will start again soon.

I'll think about the +1 per level instead. There were some aesthetic and game design issues that immediately popped in my head about that, so I'll be looking at the idea closely.

The same paragraph applies to ranged attacks against prone. A ranged attack from 10 feet away surely wouldn't make it impossible to ...whatever the verb is here. One from 30 feet away? Yea, I could see that argument.

Other issues:
* Range limit.
* How does Uncanny Dodge interact with this? (Side note: Mortuum, UD technically is a greater advantage over lesser level enemies, but I know what you meant :) )

I meant with Opportunities Aplenty specifically, not with all rogue class features in general.

What if the range limit is one range increment? That's already the established distance for shooting people at no significant disadvantage and it would keep your effective range dependant on your weapon, which seems like a good thing to me.

I guess uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge should protect you from this the same way they protect from sneak attack and flanking.

Bear in mind that making it 1 point per level gets rid of the easy compatibility with existing abilities which refer to sneak attack die and reduces the extra damage by 1.

I've always found it odd how the class most likely to land a "precise" strike benefits the least from critical hits.

With your changes the rogue will finally deal critical damage, rather than slightly better damage!

I think a definitive list of conditions is probably the way to go. 'Detrimental' is too vauge a term. For a houserule at your table thats fine. But if you want to make it a 'legit' alternate rule, it needs to be better codified.

I agree.

Really like this idea.

Need a list though.

I would go with d4's.

At last! Rogues don't need flanking but...

Would you include Flanking in the list??

CasMat wrote:

Cheapy wrote:

Originally, there was such a list. But as I was making it, it got to the point where it was just easier to say all detrimental conditions. Less cross-referencing, making it easier on players and GMs.

Does the target have a condition? Yes? Great!

Petrified, dead and broken are a bit weird, but oh well.

The specifics of OA override the general of confusion, fwiw.

How about something like this?

Detrimental conditions include any condition which inflicts a penalty to ability scores, attacks rolls, damage rolls, skill checks, or movement speed. Any condition which prevents standard actions, move actions, or forces an opponent to roll twice and use the worse result also counts as a detrimental condition. Conditions which inflict a penalty to armor class count as detrimental conditions only if the apply the penalty to the attack the rogue is making.

I'm sure I'm missing something, or maybe including something unintended.

Yep.

All glory to the rogue - power attack inflicts a penalty to attack.
And rage forbids some standard actions, is a condition and gives a -2 on AC. Some UC barb archetype gets even further maulses i think.

So some limited listing might be better.

A list does seem necessary when you put it that way.

entangled, sickened, shaken, frightened, panicked, cowering, deafened, dazzled, stunned, staggered, nauseated, fatigued, exhausted, prone, blind, flat footed, helpless, paralyzed, and pinned.

Really like this idea.

Need a list though.

I would go with d4's.

At last! Rogues don't need flanking but...

Would you include Flanking in the list??

Flanking is included as the only non-condition that allows for this.

Here's the revised version.

I'm still not sure what to do about Prone, but I'll just leave that up to the GM based on circumstances. If you're 15 feet away? Yea sure, you'll get it. 60? That's debatable. On the other hand, all things being equal, prone gives a -20% chance to hit. That's penalty enough for a 3/4ths BAB class with no easy way to buff to-hit.

Also, still thinking about +1 per level vs +2 per 2 levels. I do like the fact that it mimics SA progression, making it slightly easier to figure out abilities that use sneak attack dice to determine the effect. And you do start out with just one extra point of damage, which is 2.5 points below the equivalent starting rogue. It will probably stay at +2 per 2 levels, but that might change.

The flat damage / d4 bit is addressed in an alternative rule. You are basically trading higher average non-critical damage for lower critical damage.

Bug Fixes:
* You no longer can flank a statue with someone, and then get +2 damage against anyone! Or get opportunities against that statue. Aka: You now only get the extra damage against the creature you are flanking. I just know someone would've tried to cheese that.

At first level, a vicious opportunist can take advantage of the suffering of others. 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. At 3rd level and every 2 levels thereafter the bonus to damage rolls increases by +2. If the vicious opportunist is not flanking, the creature must have a detrimental condition before the attack for the vicious opportunist to gain this bonus.

This ability replaces sneak attack. Abilities that trigger off of sneak attack instead activate off of this ability. For abilities that use the number of dice of a sneak attack to determine effects, the effective number of dice is equal to the bonus damage from this ability, divided by 2. For example, if a level 5 vicious opportunist has the Bleeding Attack rogue talent, whenever she attacks a creature with a detrimental condition, she gains a +6 circumstance to damage rolls. In addition, she does three points of bleed damage from the Bleeding Attack talent.

For the purposes of this ability, a detrimental condition is any condition listed in the Condition section of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, except for the following: Energy Drained, Incorporeal, and Invisible. See the PRD for more information on these conditions.

There are some effects in the game that mimic the effects of conditions, such as an Archon's Aura of Menace or using chill touch against an undead creature, but aren't themselves conditions. In cases such as these, the GM decides whether or not the rogue will receive the extra damage from Opportunities Aplenty.

In some cases, it may not make sense for the rogue to get the extra damage from Opportunities Aplenty. In these cases, it is up to the GM to decide whether the rogue will deal extra damage. For example, if a rogue fires three arrows at a prone medium-sized creature 60 feet away, even if he hits, the GM may rule that he does not gain the extra damage, due to the target being far away and prone. While the rogue would normally gain the extra damage at this distance, the prone target presents too small a target to aim at.

If a condition ends before you are able to hit a target, such as breaking a creature's Fascination by drawing a weapon, you do not get the extra damage.

Opportunities Aplenty can be adapted to be used by any class or archetype that gains Sneak Attack. In these cases, increase the damage at the same levels where the class or archetype would increase the sneak attack damage dice. For example, a ninja (Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Ultimate Combat) or a Sandman bard (Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Advanced Player's Guide) could use this ability. Even a Rogue could just use Opportunities Aplenty, without the other abilities presented in the Vicious Opportunist.

While the description of the ability hints at a mean-streak by the user of the ability, the player is encouraged to describe the ability however he likes.

Finally, when you first gain Opportunities Aplenty, instead of an extra 2 damage per every 2 levels, you can instead choose to roll 1d4 per two levels when the conditions of the ability are satisfied. Unlike the damage from the normal Opportunities Aplenty, this is precision based damage, and is not multiplied on a critical hit.

Once the final version is released, I'll post it here too. The archetype it is for will have methods to share this bonus to allies. The aim is to make it compatible with all other rogue archetypes.

I hope this replacement increases the enjoyment of combat for the rogues in your party.