Ok, after the huge bru-ha-ha (which is still going on) about displacement affecting/not affecting sneak attack, I am thinking maybe a redefinition of SA might solve some of the inconsistencies.
Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her 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. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.
With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty.
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
That's the PRD. I am thinking about the following changes :
Sneak Attack: If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her 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. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied. Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the rogue can make his SA perception check (see below).
With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty.
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. To determine if the rogue can or cannot see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot he must make a perception test. The default DC for this perception test is 15. The following circumstances adjust the target number up or down, per the table below. A rogue may take 10 on this test if the DC of the check is 20 or lower. Any condition which blinds the rogue prevents sneak attack, and the rogue may not sneak attack a target he cannot see (such as invisible, or in total darkness without darkvision).
Sneak Attack DC's
Target Size Modifier....AC Size Adjustment
Concealment.............+1 per 5% of concealment miss chance
Target under Illusion...+2 per level of illusion spell
Distance to Target......+2 per 5 feet beyond first 20 feet
Lighting................+2 per level above normal, -2 per level below*
* Half penalties for Low-Light, negate penalties for darkvision
I think this would leave it working as it already does for the most part (not requiring a roll if the rogue is in normal light and there's no spells interfering with his senses.
If the target is concealed, covered by an illusion (such as blurr or displacement), in dim light, more than 20 feet away, etc then he might not. Note that the rogue gains some things he didn't have before in exchange for this modification. He can attempt to SA concealed enemies (obviously they still have to hit and then avoid the miss chance first), and can SA at ranges greater than 30 feet (although it quickly tapers off in effectiveness beyond 30 feet).
Adds an unnecessary die roll into every sneak attack. Not my cup of tea.
Nope, adds a die roll to every sneak attack that is an edge case. Note that if the DC doesn't rise to 20 (thanks to all those stupid edge cases that keep causing 600 message threads) you can just take 10 and not bother rolling. Even at 1st level a rogue is going to have (in all likelyhood) a +5 to perception with a single rank in it.
I don't like the mechanics change, personally. We already have fortification giving a chance of ignoring sneak attacks - just have creatures or spells that might CAUSE borderline cases have or give fortification of some level, and leave sneak attack as is.
Now that noticing traps is just a perception function rather than something relegated to rogues, sneak attack is the core ability of the rogue class. I don't think it needs to be reduced - especially now that there aren't flat DC 15 tumble checks to get into flanking positions!
I don't like the mechanics change, personally. We already have fortification giving a chance of ignoring sneak attacks - just have creatures or spells that might CAUSE borderline cases have or give fortification of some level, and leave sneak attack as is.
Now that noticing traps is just a perception function rather than something relegated to rogues, sneak attack is the core ability of the rogue class. I don't think it needs to be reduced - especially now that there aren't flat DC 15 tumble checks to get into flanking positions!
I'm not sure how it's 'reducing' it. Honestly it's expanding it, but saying that when you are doing things that you normally can't do, you have to pick out that spot not just attack and say you did.
Oh well, apparently either nobody reads the full text, or everyone ignores the text that says you have to pick out the vital spot and you can't sneak attack if any concealment exists.
I'm not sure how it's 'reducing' it. Honestly it's expanding it, but saying that when you are doing things that you normally can't do, you have to pick out that spot not just attack and say you did.
Well, we can agree to disagree then, I guess. I see it as reducing the utility of the class ability by adding new modifiers against situations where the rogue can normally accomplish the same task without any potential dice rolls.
Oh well, apparently either nobody reads the full text, or everyone ignores the text that says you have to pick out the vital spot and you can't sneak attack if any concealment exists.
I haven't seen anyone ignoring the RAW, personally. Concealment is a specific status, and when an opponent has it, they can't be sneak-attacked. Maybe your DM forgets to apply this rule when you're fighting in dim light, for example, but that is less a flaw in the game mechanics than the DM's memory. There's no rule saying that the rogue's player has to SPECIFY a vital spot when performing a sneak attack, just that the DM has to feel there's one there that the rogue could potentially strike at.
For simplicities sake, why not just make it so that Sneak Attack is part of a Standard Action against some one with Concealment or putting a cap on Concealment's ability to stop Sneak Attack? For instance, you might be able to sneak attack some one with 20% or less still, or something like that. As for the Standard Action, it would allow the Rogue to get off one attack, but not all of their attacks.
There's a lot of actions that would feel better if associated to a skill check. But the skill system is not perfect, and the sneak attack rules *need* some level of abstraction.
I mean, the situation where you can pick a vital spot, but rely on chance to hit, is a little strange.
Also, your DCs. It should be easier to pick a reachable vital spot on a pixie than on a dragon, and it should be also easier in bright light than in darkness.
Illusions shouldn't be subject to a perception check in addition to the will save : either the rogue disbelieves the illusion, and he sees the creature well enough, either he doesn't, and he can't pick a vital spot.
To sneak attack from a longer distance, there's already a feat, a PrC and a spell.
I think that instead of a skill check, I'd make a class ability. Maybe something like the death attack system, "observe the concealed target for three rounds allows SA on your next attack", or two rogue talents "Instinctive strike, you can sneak attack a concealed creature if you know its type, except if it is under total concealment; this does not negate the miss chance" "Improved instinctive strike, prerequisite instinctive strike, same but including total concealment".
Everyone wants to limit the strength of sneak attack.
I would suggest that instead of limiting whether sneak attack goes off with a whole new roll, you just use the existing attack roll to determine how well it goes off. For instance for every 1 higher the attack roll is than the targets AC, you can add 1 die of sneak attack damage, up to a maximum of the rogues sneak attack skill. So if the victims AC is 20 and the rogue has an attack roll of 22 the rogue could deal an extra 2d6 sneak attack damage, but if the rogue rolled better say a 25 they could deal 5d6 sneak attack damage up to a maximum of the limit provided by the class feature. No additional rolling, easy to keep track of, rogue hits people harder for rolling higher, and he always gets at least 1d6 with a successful sneak attack. Perhaps you could even add a feat that allowed them to automatically add 1 more die to it.
heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
Personally, I just made low-light vision a rogue talent that can be upgraded to darkvision. Rogues are sneaky and in the dark a lot - their eyes learn to adjust ;)
|
Eh, I'm planning the following house rules:
1. Precision-based damage such as sneak attack is negated by total concealment, but not lesser forms of concealment.
2. Displacement does not grant total concealment. (technically this may be RAW/RAI rather than a house rule, I just include it for clarity.)
This gets rid of the bizarre situation that results with concealment versus sneak attacks in RAW: 'I'll go wandering around the Rogue Quarter at midnight! The darkness will prevent the rogues from using their devastating sneak attacks on me!* I'm a genius!'
* yes, unless they have darkvision or a light source, yadda yadda. It's still a little daft.
My point of view is that sneak attack doesn't need to be made weaker; I'm perfectly fine with it applying against a massive majority of foes a lot of the time. I really don't mind that, and I haven't found it to unbalanced my games. YMMV, of course.
|
Why not just add the following text to the Blind-Fight feat:
You can make precision-based attacks against targets with concealment.
Then allow Blind-Fight to be taken as a rogue talent, which it probably ought to be anyway.
Shadow Striker (Ex): A rogue that selects this talent gains Blind-Fight as a bonus feat.
|
|
Rogues are already plenty effective before "spending resources" and giving them additional options is the opposite of hindering them.
So making them spend a talent to be able to sneak attack in conditions of concealment is not hindering them? I'd rather let them sneak attack in those conditions. Your 'giving additional options' is actually reducing their options. Every talent you add either doesn't get taken because others are more important, or does get taken and something else doesn't. Yes, that's a choice, but it is still more of a hinderance than 'you get to do sneak attack to concealed foes now'.
|
|
So making them spend a talent to be able to sneak attack in conditions of concealment is not hindering them? I'd rather let them sneak attack in those conditions. Your 'giving additional options' is actually reducing their options. Every talent you add either doesn't get taken because others are more important, or does get taken and something else doesn't. Yes, that's a choice, but it is still more of a hinderance than 'you get to do sneak attack to concealed foes now'.
You cannot apply precision-based damage when you cannot strike precisely due to concealment. Seems like common sense to me.
The fact that rogues cannot sneak attack a target with concealment is the hindrance. The option above is not.
|
|
You cannot apply precision-based damage when you cannot strike precisely due to concealment. Seems like common sense to me.
The fact that rogues cannot sneak attack a target with concealment is the hindrance. The option above is not.
Which means your rogue cannot knife someone in a dark alley. Which happens pretty often to my knowledge.
I still maintain that it takes away options by putting forth another option, because the limited number of options means one or the other will lose out. You don't think that is a hindrance, and that's fine.
|
|
Which means your rogue cannot knife someone in a dark alley. Which happens pretty often to my knowledge.
I still maintain that it takes away options by putting forth another option, because the limited number of options means one or the other will lose out. You don't think that is a hindrance, and that's fine.
Sure. Rogues stab people in all manner of areas. The rogue knifing someone in a dark alley could have low-light vision, darkvision, or an alchemical/magic item that grants similar qualities.
As for your second statement, I don't find versatility hindering.
For the record, I feel that your idea has some merit, since rogues are extremely skilled strikers. If I were to do it your way, I'd reverse the percentages, as such:
A rogue that successfully hits a target with partial concealment has a 20% chance to deal sneak attack damage, as their weapon finds a vital spot at the very last moment, and an 80% chance to deal regular damage. These values are halved (10%/90%) when striking a target with (full) concealment.
A system like this will not later beg questions that begin with "If I can strike precisely in areas of concealment, then why can't I..."
|
|
Sure. Rogues stab people in all manner of areas. The rogue knifing someone in a dark alley could have low-light vision, darkvision, or an alchemical/magic item that grants similar qualities.As for your second statement, I don't find versatility hindering.
For the record, I feel that your idea has some merit, since rogues are extremely skilled strikers. If I were to do it your way, I'd reverse the percentages, as such:
A rogue that successfully hits a target with partial concealment has a 20% chance to deal sneak attack damage, as their weapon finds a vital spot at the very last moment, and an 80% chance to deal regular damage. These values are halved (10%/90%) when striking a target with (full) concealment.
A system like this will not later beg questions that begin with "If I can strike precisely in areas of concealment, then why can't I..."
I should have clarified that they can't without some sort of magical assistance. Which 1st level halfling rogues don't have.
Your suggestion makes sense, but adds too much to already complex rules. Hence why I prefer dropping the binary 'can I sneak attack' rule of concealment.
heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
Halflings should have niether a bonus to charisma nor dexterity, they should have a penalty to both charisma and dexterity with a +4 racial bonus to constitution. and thier smelly layers of fat should Give a +2 natural armor bonus to AC. and they should have the troglodytes stench ability. and they should have thier strength penalty dropped. they should fart 30 foot cones of acidic gas at will that nauseate everyone within the radius on a failed fort save. the cones deal 1d6 acid damage too. no save for the damage though.
this is a more accurate representation of the halfling.
this is a more accurate representation of the halfling.Creepy.
well, hafllings are 3 feet tall and wiegh 300 pounds, why else do they suck so horribly as rogues? it says so in a 3rd party pdf called the munchkin players guide. which was written to create laughter. it's a good thing i'm not a halfling. i'm a weeaboo. not one that looks like anywhere near my description of halflings though. everybody knows that the best rogue is a neko musume, nekomimi, nekomata or nekogami. all 4 are names for the same concept. they are petite, slender, sneaky, cute, acrobatic, perceptive, dextrous, agile, dangerous, and they make nice Moe Blobs. far better rogues than halflings, the only cost is that you are a little girl with cat ears.
Beyond invisibility, I never understood concealment denying sneak attack, since concealment has a miss chance and/or negative modifier built in to hit in the first place. With concealment denying sneak attack, it should affect similar abilities like the monks stunning fist, and why stop there.
I think the core of the argument for denying sneak attack is the concept of vital area and whether a rogue can strike it. But unless you are playing GURPS where you can make called shots to the eyes, head, arms, etc. with the appropriate modifier, then just remove the description for vital area (D&D uses abstract combat) and concealment qualifiers from sneak attack.
halflings are just large smurfs that are not blue till choked.
ducks
i mean leaps
well, hafllings are 3 feet tall and wiegh 300 pounds, why else do they suck so horribly as rogues? it says so in a 3rd party pdf called the munchkin players guide. which was written to create laughter....unintentional hilarity hooooooo!
it's a good thing i'm not a halfling. i'm a weeaboo. not one that looks like anywhere near my description of halflings though. everybody knows that the best rogue is a neko musume, nekomimi, nekomata or nekogami. all 4 are names for the same concept. they are petite, slender, sneaky, cute, acrobatic, perceptive, dextrous, agile, dangerous, and they make nice Moe Blobs. far better rogues than halflings, the only cost is that you are a little girl with cat ears.Creepy.
asian women are quite petite framed, i try to maintain that frame. japanese schoolgirls by the age of 12 are modeled and molded into the best darn weapons ever. of course i am nearly 10 years out of my prime. being 21 is nothing special, and this law only applies to japanese schoolgirls raised in japan, unfortunately, i had to be raised in north america and do not know the language at all. and my english, though it is my primary tongue, has been declining as my brain rots to anime, manga, and gaming. my social skills suck and i come across as creepy, my eyes are naturally golden, each one with 2 slit like pupils, i appear 10 years younger than i am and wear black kimonos on a daily basis. i live in northern california and despise the sun. i can't even use a microwave, not to mention succeed in attempting to boil a pot of water. gamer chicks are real.
|
heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
This just made my day!
This just made my day!heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
thank you for your enjoyment. i'm happy to make someone laugh.
|
|
thank you for your enjoyment. i'm happy to make someone laugh.This just made my day!heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
YW!
YW!thank you for your enjoyment. i'm happy to make someone laugh.This just made my day!heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
how did you feel about my other strange jests that the other posters deemed creepy?
|
|
how did you feel about my other strange jests that the other posters deemed creepy?YW!thank you for your enjoyment. i'm happy to make someone laugh.This just made my day!heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
Can I refuse to respond on the grounds that I might incriminate myself?
Can I refuse to respond on the grounds that I might incriminate myself?how did you feel about my other strange jests that the other posters deemed creepy?YW!thank you for your enjoyment. i'm happy to make someone laugh.This just made my day!heres why halflings shouldn't be rogues
all halflings are fat because they steal from the pantry, are slow because they are morbidly obese, have chronic flatulence ruining thier stealth, they eat 15 meals a day, name thier daughters lydia, and break locks based on thier fat fingers, thier feet are leathery and smelly like they have atheletes foot, they dropped out of the lesbian stripper ninja ways due to thier weight and the fact that they cannot seduce anyone. that is your standard halfling. male halflings have similar problems, only they are prissily gaily happy and wear tight leather daisy dukes.
who wants a 3 foot tall 300 pound creature trying to sneak and failing due to chronic flatulence
yes you can.
...this place got smurfed to hell and gone.
...this place got smurfed to hell and gone.
Yep!
Once smurfs show up.
The whole thing goes back to the village in a smurfberry basket...
Once smurfs show up.
The whole thing goes back to the village in a smurfberry basket...
Basket cases, smurf!
Are we there yet papa smurf?
I'm just waiting for the smurfy haikus to start.
I'm just waiting for the smurfy haikus to start.
Smurf is it time yet?
Smurffing this thread will be fun!So says Papa Smurf!
Has there ever been a thread dedicated to the hardy and noble smurf?
Yes, but its long since gone in the Off-Topic area. the Great Smurf Experiment, me believes.