'Sneak attack' really just means "exploit unawareness or distraction to launch precise blow". It's a somewhat misleading name, I might suggest, although actual sneaking would also fall under the description.
see, "exploiting weakness or unawareness" If I stepped on a nail, I am not longer clueless about pokeys and hurties on the ground and am now paying ALOT of attention to where the pokey/hurty came from.
I would think that would even bee more evident when some bugger nearly killed me with a dagger to the lung, Am I going to be "unaware" of him 6 seconds later? I would need to have a REALLY short attention span...
Now On my wife? that would probably work.
|
I would think that would even bee more evident when some bugger nearly killed me with a dagger to the lung, Am I going to be "unaware" of him 6 seconds later? I would need to have a REALLY short attention span...
My pseudo-definition was 'distraction or unawareness'; being flanked is, I would say, an example of the former. You're fighting two people at once, on either side of you.
Nope those are covered in the Sleath skill discriptions (I posted it above in a spoiler). The best you can do in combat with the sleath skill (BTB) is sniping which gives one ranged attack at an opponent more than 10 ft away from you, and takes a - 20 on your sleath check to remain hidden.Right, but I'm suggesting to Pendegast that if he wanted to use a written rule to use Stealth the way he's doing it...well...illegally...is to allow Sneak Attacks in melee in the same manner as sniping. It would work, although that's not what the rule is intended for.
See, it the Rogue starts more than 10' away, begins a Stealth movement in order to try and get a sneak attack in...I could see it happening, andI'd allow it if the Rogue is good enough, because it relies on more rolls to accomplish it.
I'm just saying, rather than outright break the rules, bend that one to his advanatage...
;-)
I see now, I would agree to that idea too for a character concept. Personally I think with things like hide in plain sight maybe the use of sleath in combat should be looked over a little more.
My pseudo-definition was 'distraction or unawareness'; being flanked is, I would say, an example of the former. You're fighting two people at once, on either side of you.I would think that would even bee more evident when some bugger nearly killed me with a dagger to the lung, Am I going to be "unaware" of him 6 seconds later? I would need to have a REALLY short attention span...
Yes but then wouldnt you turn your attnetion more to the guy doing the more grevious damage? there by negating his chances to sneak attack again, unless he remanuvevered?
|
|
Yes but then wouldnt you turn your attnetion more to the guy doing the more grevious damage? there by negating his chances to sneak attack again, unless he remanuvevered?My pseudo-definition was 'distraction or unawareness'; being flanked is, I would say, an example of the former. You're fighting two people at once, on either side of you.I would think that would even bee more evident when some bugger nearly killed me with a dagger to the lung, Am I going to be "unaware" of him 6 seconds later? I would need to have a REALLY short attention span...
You'd then need an extra mechanic to give a bigger advantage to the other flanker; I can't see that the extra rules required to implement this realistic approach are going to find wide support. However, if we are honest, D&D combat hasn't ever seemed to be aimed at being a particularly realistic of real combat*... The Sneak Attack rules, as they are in 3.5 and the new version in PFRPG, are mostly an attempt, I would say, to graft some sneaksy combat flavour onto D&D's class-based system and the rules are aimed at being balances and maximising fun; the flanking rules with which they interact are aimed at increasing tactical interest in D&D combats. I think that the 3.5 version of sneak attack was OK and the PFRPG version much better (with so many more creatures sneak-attackable) but other people are concerned about the balance of it or the flavour of it, but 3.x is what it is and sneak attack is the rogue in combat.
*Let's be honest, if you take your attention away from any competent combatant wielding, say, a sword, you're going to end up dead. The combat rules are supposed to simplify a lot of ducking and weaving and so on, and the rogue's supposed to be especially good at exploiting that, even if the opponent decides to concentrate on him. It seems to me that it effectively assumes that the opponent won't suicidally concentrate on one competent opponent at the expense of the other; that means a lot of detail has indeed been summarised, but for all that D&D combat now has lots of options and tactics, it clearly doesn't map on to actual combat in an obvious way, at least not so far as I can see.
Well, all that coupled with more HD for the rogue means he will stand in the fight longer.
Used to be if a baddy got back stabbed by a gob of damage, then next action, said baddy would turn attention to where the biggest hurt would be. Thought being hopefully the rogue would have enough time to tumble/run out of the way (and move back in again a few rounds later to get another sneak attack in)
With this mechanic as it is any enemy who is up against more than one character, one of of which is a rogue, allows that rogue a sneak attack on every single attack the rogue has available, in every single round, with no way of stopping it or canceling it out, puts too much power in the rogues hands.
At the very least it should be limited to a single attack per round.
The precise strike of the duelist has language for this. Sneak attack should as well.
This sort of mechanic is just as abusable as old polymorph/WS was.
4 sneak attacks in 6 seconds is just silly, its not even sneaky at that point,it just turns the rogue intoa cuisinart any time there is 1 2 on 1 in combat.
Heck, the wizard could summon a rat, to be the second combatant and this mechanic would techincally work. All the rat would have to do is "exist". Thats a broken mechanic.
|
|
Used to be if a baddy got back stabbed by a gob of damage, then next action, said baddy would turn attention to where the biggest hurt would be. Thought being hopefully the rogue would have enough time to tumble/run out of the way (and move back in again a few rounds later to get another sneak attack in)
Of course, there's no facing now, so that behaviour is supposed to be implicit in the rules (such as the fact that a full attack can be split between multiple opponents, for example).
The damage looks big to those of us that played a lot of 1 and 2e, of course, but it's worth considering that hit points are now pretty big too...
You can't really avoid getting spotted when you attack, without banking the stealth. However, nothings stopping you from then making a stealth check to disappear back into your cover.
Guerrilla forces could make a tactic from this. Fire bow, move/hide. It wouldn't work in the open, but in a forest or even tall plains...
Well, all that coupled with more HD for the rogue means he will stand in the fight longer.
Used to be if a baddy got back stabbed by a gob of damage, then next action, said baddy would turn attention to where the biggest hurt would be. Thought being hopefully the rogue would have enough time to tumble/run out of the way (and move back in again a few rounds later to get another sneak attack in)
With this mechanic as it is any enemy who is up against more than one character, one of of which is a rogue, allows that rogue a sneak attack on every single attack the rogue has available, in every single round, with no way of stopping it or canceling it out, puts too much power in the rogues hands.
At the very least it should be limited to a single attack per round.
The precise strike of the duelist has language for this. Sneak attack should as well.This sort of mechanic is just as abusable as old polymorph/WS was.
4 sneak attacks in 6 seconds is just silly, its not even sneaky at that point,it just turns the rogue intoa cuisinart any time there is 1 2 on 1 in combat.Heck, the wizard could summon a rat, to be the second combatant and this mechanic would techincally work. All the rat would have to do is "exist". Thats a broken mechanic.
Hmmmm... It is my experience that the sneak attack damage is, well, damaging, but that depends on what you compare it to. A properly built fighter can easily dish out just as much damage on a full attack. And he's more likely to land his blows, probably.
So yeah, rogue with 2WF and the improved versions have lots of attacks that can hurt baddies alot (or PCs) but to say that it's over the top, well, I have to disagree.
As someone else said here, it's more of an ability to hit where it really hurts, not an insta-kill effect. (The assassin has a fine ability in that direction ;-) ) And you are still dependant on a partner, perhaps said rat until it gets squished. A fighter just flicks out his greatsword/axe and starts whacking away. And he doesn't need some often hard to achieve setup... ;-)
Just my thoughts on the subject...
Gworeth
Yea well my wifes character is a 8th level rogue/ 1st level duelist.
She can dish out 4 attacks the do 5d6 damage (inculding the damage of the rapier) with an increased threat range of 18-20 (thanks to the rapier) and she carried around oil of keen edge (so she could crit on a 15) that means there is a capability to enter combat and get in 4 attacks doing 10d6 damage (if she rolls 15 or higher everytime)
Thats 200 possible damage in 6 seconds,
Sounds unlikely huh? it happened two nights ago (although the actual rolled damage was 130 something)
We started discussing the whole thing because I brought up the idea, ummm do you guys (the players) WANT an NPC rogue to be able to do the same thing to you?
think about an 11th level fighter being caught in a fight with two 8th level rogues.
He's in HUGE trouble.
What about a 16th level fighter with two 8th level rogues? Who would win that (would be interesting)
My wife's character curently has +30 stealth (boots of Elven kind,cloak of elven kind,shadow hide armor and +15 from skill)
So pretty much she wanders around invisbile due to her rogue talent of fast stealth (allowing her to move at full speed while still being stealthy)
So it doesnt take her long to flank anything (although you still have to remind her to do it, she keeps trying to fight things head on...its kinda funny)
Now next question.
She fights two handed, with two rapiers, she has +7/+2 and she has improved two weapon fighting.
This gives her four attacks.
Could she, in the proper situation, properly stealthed, attack TWO different adjacent targets, in a suprise/ambush round getting TWO sneak attacks against TWO targets EACH?
I allowed this two night ago...beause well it seemed logical given her stealth, an ambush that they had 20 minutes to set up, the fact she was behind them both, the fact that another PC "went first"and was infront of them both and NPCs.
It's just an incredibly powerful ability.
I almost like the lower HP and only one backstab and monsters of lower HP in 1e. Combats seemed to last the same amount of time (3-4 rounds) but 1d6+1 damage meant something....
What do you all think?
Yea well my wifes character is a 8th level rogue/ 1st level duelist.
She can dish out 4 attacks the do 5d6 damage (inculding the damage of the rapier) with an increased threat range of 18-20 (thanks to the rapier) and she carried around oil of keen edge (so she could crit on a 15) that means there is a capability to enter combat and get in 4 attacks doing 10d6 damage (if she rolls 15 or higher everytime)
Thats 200 possible damage in 6 seconds,
Sounds unlikely huh? it happened two nights ago (although the actual rolled damage was 130 something)
Well... first off... Sneak attack damage doesn't get multiplied on a crit (just think of the carnage with a scythe's x4 multiplier and the addition of sneak attack *shudder*), so that's not that great an issue. The extra damage from the duelist, well, pass on that one, it depends on what type of damage it is...
Secondly, choosing two rapiers should give you a -4 on both attacks, being rather harsh on your rogue's attack modifier. So again, that does put a dampener on the fun. ;-)
Yea well my wifes character is a 8th level rogue/ 1st level duelist.
My wife's character curently has +30 stealth (boots of Elven kind,cloak of elven kind,shadow hide armor and +15 from skill)
So pretty much she wanders around invisbile due to her rogue talent of fast stealth (allowing her to move at full speed while still being stealthy)
So it doesnt take her long to flank anything (although you still have to remind her to do it, she keeps trying to fight things head on...its kinda funny)Now next question.
She fights two handed, with two rapiers, she has +7/+2 and she has improved two weapon fighting.
This gives her four attacks.Could she, in the proper situation, properly stealthed, attack TWO different adjacent targets, in a suprise/ambush round getting TWO sneak attacks against TWO targets EACH?
I allowed this two night ago...beause well it seemed logical given her stealth, an ambush that they had 20 minutes to set up, the fact she was behind them both, the fact that another PC "went first"and was infront of them both and NPCs.It's just an incredibly powerful ability.
I almost like the lower HP and only one backstab and monsters of lower HP in...
Hmm... +30 stealth modifier? Could happen I suppose. But I'm not sure that competence bonuses stack, and if you are using PF you should also be aware of the fact that boots of elvenkind gives a bonus to acrobatics. Just a little thought there.
And now to your question. No, she can't make two attacks in a surprise round. At least that is how I see it. You can make a standard action in a surprise round and attacking with two weapons require a full-round action as far as I know. But if she moves in, she can attack once, then hope she can beat their initiative, then make a full-attack attacking each foe twice. Hope this doesn't take all the fun out of her rogue.
Cheers!
There are feats that enable you to use two weapons in an Attack of opportunity. In the Minis handbook there is double hit. I would rule a surprise attack would be an Attack of opportunity. There are also feats that make it so when you hit an enemy ith an attack of opportunity that enemy is flat-footed until the end of the round. Forgot whats it called, but it was fun to play with Machete; the Cuisinart of doom.
Of course you need impr. 2 weapon fighting and a base attack of 6, but that is redundant and needless to say. For double hit.
Anything with improved uncanny dodge is virtually immune to sneak attacks as long as the attacker is no more then 4 levels higher then them in any class that gives sneak attacks.
Drow clerics arent known to have improved uncanny dodge.
Hmm... +30 stealth modifier? Could happen I suppose. But I'm not sure that competence bonuses stack, and if you are using PF you should also be aware of the fact that boots of elvenkind gives a bonus to acrobatics. Just a little thought there.Cheers!
So where is that? I cant find that change?
3.5 boots and cloak gave +5 to move silent and hide respectively. Shadow hide on the armor gave +5 to hide.
Before we converted the character, she had +10to one skill and +5 to the other.I didnt find (and still cant) a change to those magic items. So when the skill was combined I just combined the bonuses (+15) she has ranks in the skill, skill focus (half-elf) and its a class skill, so she gets +15 from that, so she has +30 to the roll.
and its not really about ruining the rogues fun, so much as it needs some limitations the way its playing out (too powerful).
Im rather worried that we are getting to the point where we will be fighting ALOT of Drow tonight, and there will undoubtedly (umm definately!) be several drow rogues, not to mention a drow arcane trickster or two.
So what I don't want is a band of wandering evil black psychopaths ripping my party in half with 4 sneak attacks, each and stealth rolls no one can hope to beat with their perception checks.But currently if the PC can do it, then so can the NPCs.
This is what Im studying an in my opinion, clearly "somethings broken"
I've never used "multiple sneak attacks" before in any campaign, before its ALWAYS been,sneak, attack (only one) sneak, attack.
Not "you flank them and then stab away!"
|
with sneak attack now affecting most monsters AND the Hitpoint Bump AND the decrease in MAD ( Disable device is now DEX and perception covers seeing traps, therefore rogues dont need INT anymore just physicals and Wisdom) the Rogue is a better choice for group damage dealer, and since sneaking has been hosed by scent, Darkvision, blindsense, blindsight, tremorsense (since 3.0 on) flanking is the only time i see sneak attack being used.
why the F*&k is every rogue Drizzt now??? why are TWF rogue WAY better than twf rangers? that seems like a mechanical mistake. and why does improved Feint suck so much?
with sneak attack now affecting most monsters AND the Hitpoint Bump AND the decrease in MAD ( Disable device is now DEX and perception covers seeing traps, therefore rogues dont need INT anymore just physicals and Wisdom) the Rogue is a better choice for group damage dealer, and since sneaking has been hosed by scent, Darkvision, blindsense, blindsight, tremorsense (since 3.0 on) flanking is the only time i see sneak attack being used.
why the F*&k is every rogue Drizzt now??? why are TWF rogue WAY better than twf rangers? that seems like a mechanical mistake. and why does improved Feint suck so much?
Well Remember 1e when there was really no TWF? Every rogue went around with a short sword in one hand and well nothing in the other.
They were the quintessential one handed fighter. (everyone else had a shield, cuz...what else would you do with the other hand, well that or a two handed sword)
My wife has never read the books, nor does she have an inkling who Drizzt is. She simply wanted to fight with two rapiers, and wanted to play a rogue (I was pushing her toward druid and it didnt work)
Drow were the first "ambi dextrous fighters" as in the orginal version of them, all Drow were Ambi. So why wouldnt they ALL fight with two weapons?
AS far as the current version or rogue, what else is he supposed to do? He doesnt get shield, and it takes ONE feat to two weapon fight so at least you are doing SOMEthing with that other hand.
TWF Ranger is a throw back to Drizzt anyway, (and for the record he could TWF because he was a Drow not because he was a ranger)
The 1e Ranger could wear platemail and cast M-u AND Druid spells.
Im not really sure the twf ranger should be any better than anyone else who twfs.
However, I instantly agree TWF ROGUES with sneak attack seems a broken mechanic to me.
I think they should only get ONE Sneak attack per round, NOT one with every attack.
And the whole thing about sneaking being broken because of all those blindsense/tremor sense issues...well thats another WotC issue that should be fixed. Sneaking should still be sneaking.
After all SMAUG the great dragon couldnt find bilbo exactly although he could sense he was there, and technically, that dragon would have had blindsense.
So you can still HAVE blindsense without it totally ruining other mechanics.
So where is that? I cant find that change?
3.5 boots and cloak gave +5 to move silent and hide respectively. Shadow hide on the armor gave +5 to hide.
Before we converted the character, she had +10to one skill and +5 to the other.I didnt find (and still cant) a change to those magic items. So when the skill was combined I just combined the bonuses (+15) she has ranks in the skill, skill focus (half-elf) and its a class skill, so she gets +15 from that, so she has +30 to the roll.
and its not really about ruining the rogues fun, so much as it needs some limitations the way its playing out (too powerful).
Im rather worried that we are getting to the point where we will be fighting ALOT of Drow tonight, and there will undoubtedly (umm definately!) be several drow rogues, not to mention a drow arcane trickster or two.
So what I don't want is a band of wandering evil black psychopaths ripping my party in half with 4 sneak attacks, each and stealth rolls no one can hope to beat with their perception checks.But currently if the PC can do it, then so can the NPCs.
This is what Im studying an in my opinion, clearly "somethings broken"
I've never used "multiple sneak attacks" before in any campaign, before its ALWAYS been,sneak, attack (only one) sneak, attack.
Not "you flank them and then stab away!"
The change is in the wondrous items section in the Pathfinder Beta page 368 under the heading Boots of elvenkind ( ;-)). Furthermore, and correct me here if I'm wrong y'all, but specific bonus types only stack if said types are dodge bonuses. Therefore, if you have a +4 competence bonus from one place and +5 from some other thing, only the highest will be figured in.
And again, the sneak attack is not that bad. In the campaign I'm in I'm playing a rogue, 12th lvl which means 6d6 sneak. I can dish out 4 attacks, on a full attack, naturally, and have a neat +20/+20/+15/+15 attackbonus with my daggers, yeah, I use daggers, they are throwable too ;-) Hard to toss that rapier or shortsword. That means a potential 24d6 + 4d4, and I only have a +3 dmg bonus. Max damage 170. Avg would be something like 104. If all attacks hit home. They rarely do. And again, sneak attack doesn't get increased on a crit. Read p. 101 in the beta under crits, or p. 38 under sneak attack, that should dispel any doubts.
Heck, the guy in our party I'm afraid of is the paladin. The way smite works now and with his twohanded sword... *shudder* A drow vampire Cleric had just dropped a blade barrier on this guys head, didn't save, but just gave her a stern stare, 5' stepped in and fullattacked her to the abyss... Didn't roll too well but dropped her in three easy chops for nearly 160 dmg. No crits....
If a rogue were left to 1 sneak attack a round, I'm sure we'd see lots of rogues concentrating on use magic device and stuffing wands of fire balls or lighningballs down the bad-guys throats... Or something like that. My point is, rogues are nice for low down and dirty fights, but if you need to get something killed real good, well, call in the fighter types... Rogues are just more... artistic in their killing ;-)
See? now you got me rambling... ;-)
Take care with them drows. They are a spiteful lot.
And again, the sneak attack is not that bad. In the campaign I'm in I'm playing a rogue, 12th lvl which means 6d6 sneak. I can dish out 4 attacks, on a full attack, naturally, and have a neat +20/+20/+15/+15 attackbonus with my daggers, yeah, I use daggers, they are throwable too ;-) Hard to toss...
yea I stand corrected.
I found the change (not sure i like it)Boots and cloaks of elvenkind always stacked when they were first made (back in 1e) Its probably something I never ever looked up after that.
BUT on the bright side it's a good thing because this business of the auto succeed stealth has been really stupid, its like she runs around with an always on greater invisibility.
Plus it all elf boots do now is +5 to acrobatics, maybe she will ditch those and use the pair of pider climb slippers that have been floating around (we have had two in the party for EVER) that would be way cooler anyway.
I Guess in 3.5 boots were for move silent, cloak was for hide.
I didnt really know what to do with the combined skill, and Ididnt see that entry in magic items (I didnt assume thy really changed much of the items...guess I should have looked huh?)
Yea well my wifes character is a 8th level rogue/ 1st level duelist.
My wife's character curently has +30 stealth (boots of Elven kind,cloak of elven kind,shadow hide armor and +15 from skill)
So pretty much she wanders around invisbile due to her rogue talent of fast stealth (allowing her to move at full speed while still being stealthy)
So it doesnt take her long to flank anything (although you still have to remind her to do it, she keeps trying to fight things head on...its kinda funny)Now next question.
She fights two handed, with two rapiers, she has +7/+2 and she has improved two weapon fighting.
This gives her four attacks.Could she, in the proper situation, properly stealthed, attack TWO different adjacent targets, in a suprise/ambush round getting TWO sneak attacks against TWO targets EACH?
I allowed this two night ago...beause well it seemed logical given her stealth, an ambush that they had 20 minutes to set up, the fact she was behind them both, the fact that another PC "went first"and was infront of them both and NPCs.It's just an incredibly powerful ability.
I almost like the lower HP and only one backstab and monsters of lower HP in...
Hmm... +30 stealth modifier? Could happen I suppose. But I'm not sure that competence bonuses stack, and if you are using PF you should also be aware of the fact that boots of elvenkind gives a bonus to acrobatics. Just a little thought there.
And now to your question. No, she can't make two attacks in a surprise round. At least that is how I see it. You can make a standard action in a surprise round and attacking with two weapons require a full-round action as far as I know. But if she moves in, she can attack once, then hope she can beat their initiative, then make a full-attack attacking each foe twice. Hope this doesn't take all the fun out of her rogue.
Cheers!
So we've been running it differently lately.
Allowing all the 4 attacks to be sneak attacks.
Im not sure on two rapiers being -4 though seeing as rapiers are counted as light weapon for the purpose of finesse, but not for off hand finding (thats retarded, one or the other please, no rule breaking weapons, i hate that)
Its going to be a moot point anyway, because shes finding alot of cool daggers.
We changed the character around a little, took away the duelist level and gave her a level in shadow dancer (playing with the "hide in plain sight" thing) Plus I think duelist is broken if it pretty much forces you to fight with one weapon instead of TWF, which everyone is going to do.
I think duelist needs a bit of a revamp, however thats for aother thread.
So after going with the "every attack is a sneak attack" You guessed it a Drow Rogue dropped (killed) the party fighter pretty much in the same manner the party rogue drops other big baddies.
It's alittle too finite in my opinion.
But we are working with it.
They were able to resurrect the fighter due to having found a randomly rolled scroll of true resurrection (litterally thats what cam up on the dice)
And Really for purposes for play testing, I wanted to fighter to continue anyway, so its good they had the scroll.
So on the question for magical items that dont stack, WHY does a cloak and armor that both give bonuses to skill NOT stack, but something like wearing two rings of protetion, or a cloak and a ring, or two items that give save boosts, why do things like THAT stack, but elf cloak and shadowy armor would not?
That seems well incongruent.
Just for arguemets sake however, for thse of you who think the fighter is bad because he gets "take over" because he has a low will save.
This fighter is not like that.
Out of the entire party (8th level fighter, 8th level rogue/1st level shadow dancer, 8th level Ranger, 5th level wizard/1st level fighter/2nd level eldritch knight, 4th level sorceror/4th level dragon disciple)
The fighter has the BEST will save.
Human 8th level fighter his saves are Fort 12 Ref 7 Will 12
He has a 16 wisdom ( I used a 20 point build, his first chance to up a stat he added one str, this time he added one to wisdom, he began the game with a 15)
He has iron will
a cloak of resistance +2
Magic armor that gaves +2 to all saves (found in game in the second darkness aventure path)
and he gets a +1 from bravery (so if its not fear his will save is +11)
So it just goes to show, that It's not the fighters achilles heal to have bad saves if you dont just dump all your stats into STR , CON and doing damage.
And a fighter wil a 32 AC can be just as easily dropped by a rogue, as he could have been by a bad will save. With 82 hit points and a 32 AC I see little I could have done with him at 8th level to make him "more rogue proof" , we could have put ALL those wis points in Con to have given him more HP and bought toughness instead of iron will, but then he'd be drooling at the dominate person the aboleth tossed out instead of laughing at him.
Over all it's a very balanced instead of heavy sided fighter, I feel the fighter CAN be viable at higher levels in pathfinder, and we are going to proove it by the end of this adventure path.
stuff
OK Pendagast. You're a nice man, but you're wrong on so many things in this thread.
A) Rapier is not a light weapon (but it can be used with weapon finess - as can spiked chain).B) Items giving you a competence bonus on stealth checks don't stack with other items (or potions) that give you a competence bonus on stealth checks.
C) A dualist can not use two weapons (or one weapin and a shield). If she do she lose the Precise Strike
D) A dualist can not use medium armor. If she do she lose her Canny Defense.
E) All the math in here are just math. Metagaming. Rogues doesn't hit that many times and If the do (foe with bad AC) they get killed. Bad AC and 1d8 HD.
F) Rogues need flanking etc. So it's not full attack every round. I think it's very very very strange that the move-and-attack problem is always a big deal when the fighter lobby get's going, but the move-and-attack problem is apparently never a big deal when peoble want's to talk about the flanking problem the rogue have. (I' not saying you are a part of the fighter lobby, I'm just pointimng out a fact here)
G) Rogues can't sneak attack all creatures. Some of these creatures are: Barbarians, other rogues, Incorporeals, Oozes, Elementals (and druids shifted into Elementals) and very large creatures.
H) Backstab? Who would want to play the rogue when a TWF, hasted 16 level fighter (or ranger) could attack 8 times per round and the rogue one time per round? Now that tripfinding is going to be a class feature for all classes who would play the rogue if the only could sneak attack once per round? Take away the sneak attack what do we have then? Nothing. They don't have a big strength score no weapon training, no fighter feats, no favored enemy, no smite, no rage and 3/4. BAB. A rogue, hasted or not, without sneak suck.
I) A high level wizard would have better things do do than summoning a rat, if the did the monster would first kill the rat then kill the rogue (or the other way round).
J) NPC with bad AC + high DPS = Dead NPC. That's why most rogues go for spring attack and / or needs a nice healer to help and a tank to get the monsters attention
K) And as Gworeth pointed out: you can't make two attacks in a surprise round; Sneak attack damage doesn't get multiplied on a crit.
And bye the way, to the OP. Smite is no longer "one smite = one attack".
I was recently disabused of that notion, too. Up to 40d6! Whew!
EDIT: Wait, doesn't he only get one attack with the off hand? Must have improved 2 weapon fighting.
Yes, he'd need the second feat version (if he's a rogue as is the case here).
40d6 is an average of 140, assuming you can bring it to bear. Chances of them all hitting even when you do get a full attack, though, are often pretty small.
Getting 10 d6 per sneak attack, though, doesn't come at +11/+6...
No it's 4 attacks. +11/+6/+1 and one for the off hand.
But you are right, 10 D6 sneak attack is not at lvl 15 (it's at lvl 19).
Like i said the rapier is a broken weapon. Just like the spiked chain, It's either light or its not.
DMG page 220 Elven chain: "this extremely light chainmail isa mde of very fine mithral links.....it is considered light armor and weights 20 lbs."
Thats light armor not medium.
So duelists can wear elven chain.
As far as fighting with one or two weapons, I cannot see the bonus to giving up two weapons as a duelist for the ultimate "meh" of 1 point of damage per level. with one exception, possibly over coming DR (4 attacks of 1d6 vs. say one attack of d6 +5 for example might come out better)
Other than that the nerfed precise strike is just worth ignoring.
as for rogues moving and sneak attacking, its the same as a fighter, but the rogue's one attack is going to be say 5d6, while the fighters one attack at that level is rarely anything near that.
Personally we dont really (and never had) have any real issues with movements vs. iterative attacks.
WE just finished a fight last night, drow barbarian, drow/cambion cleric and three drow monks (I ad libbed the monks because they are normally lawful and dorw are normally chaotic, but I wanted to try out monks against the PCs)
The party has a NPC 8th level ranger (thatd I keep trying to kill off but it hasnt happened yet), An 8th level sword and board fighter, a 5th wizard/1 fighter/2 eldritch knight (with a flying carpet...i keep trying to destroy that too), an 8thlvl rogue/1 shadow dancer (we changed her off duelist...it was just boring) an 8th level cleric, and a 4th level sorceror/4th dragon disciple (also painfully boring at this point)
So my point is with three monks (two 5th and one 8th) they were moving around all over the place, The fighter and the cleric are both wearing plate, so not even close to monk movement, closing for full attacks out of the question.
The EK on the flying carpet is an archer and a wimpus so trying to close with him is like trying to close with a freight train always traveling away from you.
Oddly the rogue closed with the drow barbarian (i thought she was going to die)
But did quite well for two rounds with 4 attacks and only 1d6 (she wasnt sneak attacking)
The fighter caught up to her, and while flanking they took him down.
The sorceress was flying as well, and was able to stay away from monk flurrying, the cleric held one of the 5th level monks.
The EK archer and the 8th level monk were exchanging ranged attacks (flurry of shurikens vs, bow)
and we had one 5th level monk high jumping trying to get the sorceress (low cieling)
After dropping the barbarian (who was geting healed alot by cambion cleric, which both pcs decided to ignore until the barbarian was down), the fighter and rogue took out the cleric (she almost got away, but thanks to rogue dagger throwing it didnt happen)
8th level monk kept trying to jump onto flying carpet to pummel annoying EK, but the EK was flying up side down using slippers of spider climbing (this was really funny actually).
finally the sorceress was able to get away from leaping monk guy. The fighter just coup de graced the held monk and the rogue cast web from her cloak of arachnidia on the leaping monk (duct taped him to a wall)
and the 8th level monk was able to get away.
That was a fight with ALOT of movement. And it was alot of intermingled close combat as well (preventing the ek or sorceress from using any area of effect spells like fireball)
no one seemed to complain if even their entire action for that round was a full move and only a move. It even happened to the npcs acouple of times.
During the whole fight the rogue was able to get in two iterations where she could full sneak attack, once three hit, once one hit.
and by the way, where did jason say that trapfinding was definately going to be available to all? As far as I know that just a request.
Like i said the rapier is a broken weapon. Just like the spiked chain, It's either light or its not.
Getting off-topic perhaps, I dunno, but if that's the case, sorry. :-)
My take on the Finessable weapons are much more on the line of how you use it. Is it brute strength or nimble, precise strikes? Can't really tell with that thar Spiked chain thingie, if that's strength driven or dex driven. Let the wise men of the martial arts battle that one out... (I always wondered why the scimitar was held out of the finessable weapongroup, and I know I'm not alone here..)But if you really want to make "your" rogue dangerous, give her dazzling display, stunning defense and a skill focus (intimidate) and have that charming looks (or personality ;-)) to go with it, and you'll be able to sneakety sneak everybody with brains for a few rounds without having to bother with flanking. And they are shaken to boot...
Ah... can't wait to wet me daggers in some dragonhide the next time we play... If my rogue doesn't run away screaming in fear with her +5 will save ;-) (at lvl 12!!) HeeHee...
Take care!
Like i said the rapier is a broken weapon. Just like the spiked chain, It's either light or its not.
Broken or not. It's not a light weapon
DMG page 220 Elven chain: "this extremely light chainmail isa mde of very fine mithral links.....it is considered light armor and weights 20 lbs."
Yes you are right altough tht's gonna change now (thank god), but I talked about your wife's shadow hide armor.
As far as fighting with one or two weapons, I cannot see the bonus to giving up two weapons as a duelist for the ultimate "meh" of 1 point of damage per level.
Sorry missed that, my bad :-)
as for rogues moving and sneak attacking, its the same as a fighter, but the rogue's one attack is going to be say 5d6, while the fighters one attack at that level is rarely anything near that.
When talking sword and board I agree, but with PA the are pretty good. But devestating blow (and PA) will out do any sneak attack. especially if you use an axe. So I say, give the sword and board fighters more love.
Personally we dont really (and never had) have any real issues with movements vs. iterative attacks.
neither do we.
and by the way, where did jason say that trapfinding was definately going to be available to all? As far as I know that just a request.
It wasn't Jason it was James Jacobs.The thread can be found here
as for rogues moving and sneak attacking, its the same as a fighter, but the rogue's one attack is going to be say 5d6, while the fighters one attack at that level is rarely anything near that.
When talking sword and board I agree, but with PA the are pretty good. But devestating blow (and PA) will out do any sneak attack. especially if you use an axe. So I say, give the sword and board fighters more love.
Personally we dont really (and never had) have any real issues with movements vs. iterative attacks.
neither do we.
and by the way, where did jason say that trapfinding was definately going to be available to all? As far as I know that just a request.
It wasn't Jason it was James Jacobs.The thread can be found here
hmmm dont think the fighter is high enough for devasting blow just yet.
With power attack limited to str bonus its kinda weak now, and as well as the fact that technically he needs every bonus to hit just to make sure he lands blows, its kinda risky to give up some. (think he's +15 with his first attack on longsword right now)Not sure giving away the rogues class feautre to everyone is such a grand idea (like i said make it available to few classes.)
And out of curiosity, if elven chain isnt going to be "light" anymore (which totally ruins a sacred cow....) whats the point of elven chain at all anymore?
I don't see that the rapier's broken, it's just a finesse weapon. Doesn't seem a particularly problematic description to me and I don't see why it would have to be 'light' as a result; the idea that some heavier weapons are finesseable seems pretty logical, actually.
Ok then why is it that a rapier is finessable and its slashing buddy the scimitar is not? Mechanically the same weapon, except one pokes and the other cuts.
If you allow that weapon to be finessable, then what else can be, by that thought process?It's either IN the category or NOT. Same thing goes for the chain thing. If you can fineese spiked chain why not flail? That arguement goes on and on.
Its not even a heavier weapon, the handaxe and light pick are both "light weapons" but are 2lb and 3lb.
The rapier is 2lb.
It is a "one hand weapon" that also doesnt follow the one hand weapon rule of being able to apply 1.5 str for dealing damage with two hands. Says you can't do that with it.
So.....IT IS A LIGHT WEAPON, written in the wrong category.
It seems to me that the ONLY reason, someone put it into the one hand category (but took away any abilities a one hand weapon actually has) is because they wanted to prevent it from being used as an off hand weapon with only a -2/-2 penalty.
Every sword fighting movie ive ever seen with rapiers or cutlasses in it going back to the 1930s and 40s has people fighting with two rapiers in it. Of all things to fight two weapon style with, two rapiers would be the easiest (well maybe two daggers is easier), ALOT easier than a longsword and shortsword combo that seems to be easily accepted.
The short sword by the way is the same weight as the rapier 2lb.