I know, I know. But I was reading a thread today where one of the topics was the TWF rogue and whether or not it could put out massive amounts of damage.
As I understand the system, there is no discrepancy disallowing a rogue from dealing sneak attack damage on every attack of a full attack. Therefore, a TWF rogue would deal more damage than a single-weapon rogue, provided that all attacks hit.
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.
I'm just wondering if I've got the rules right. I seem to remember 3.5 having some serious issues with rogues, sneak attack, and full-attacks and I'm wondering if it carried.
Indeed you are correct, and the TWF rogue is a classic 'build'. However, the question is that 'hitting' thing. TWF applies a -2 to hit, and a rogue is a 3/4 BAB class, and they can't pull this stunt unless they are full-attacking a flanked opponent. This also means putting yourself at great risk as rogues generally have lower AC and hit points than fighters (who you are most likely to be flanking with) so you can become the number one target of the thing you are fighting if you do inflict a lot of damage.
So you better kill it...
Its a feat-heavy max-out option, but it is a classic one. In larger parties, we've had a TWF rogue and a ranged Rogue, and the TWF rogue was more of a secondary combatant than a sneaky thief, as a lot of the feats he would have taken for greater skill use were soaked maxing out TWF. Problem with TWF, at last recollection, is if you have to take something head-on, using Bluff to distract it negates your ability to full-attack, so you just have to be more careful how you use the build in combat.
Yeah, basically, under ideal circumstances the two-weapon rogue will outdamage the single weapon rogue, usually. However, it's more feat-heavy as has been noted, and a lot of the times you attack, you won't be able to do a sneak attack full attack, either because you have to move more than 5ft. into sneak attack position, or because you can't sneak attack at all (elementals and oozes mostly, nowadays).
In those cases the single weapon rogue usually wins out, as he has more feats to blow on damage-upping stuff and survivability stuff. The first round of combat, the single weapon rogue usually deals far more damage than the TWF rogue.
Now with the APG there's a feat that lets you consider a target flanked if someone else is in melee with it, no matter your position. This makes ranged sneak attackers viable (they certainly weren't before, not as a main tactic anyway). The drawback is that they are very slow to start up; they require at least 3 feats to do ranged sneak attacks somewhat effeciently (point blank shot, precise shot, and the APG one), and before that, you have a hard time with damage.
I'd say there's basically three main combat builds for the rogue:
- Dual-wielding. Classic, highest damage possible during full sneak attacks but very feat heavy and not very mobile.
- Two-handed weapon. Much more light on feats, more mobile, decent damage on standard attacks. Requires high strength though.
- Ranged/switch hitter. Play as melee in the beginning, get weapon finesse. Start building up the ranged attack a few levels in, so you can pull your own weight levels 1-3. Medium feat intensive and the least strict in terms of ability scores.
I'd say there's basically three main combat builds for the rogue:
- Dual-wielding. Classic, highest damage possible during full sneak attacks but very feat heavy and not very mobile.
- Two-handed weapon. Much more light on feats, more mobile, decent damage on standard attacks. Requires high strength though.
- Ranged/switch hitter. Play as melee in the beginning, get weapon finesse. Start building up the ranged attack a few levels in, so you can pull your own weight levels 1-3. Medium feat intensive and the least strict in terms of ability scores.
I think there's a fourth:
- fencer, use one weapon one-handed, but make use of single attacks by aiming for Spring Attack, or using Improved Feint or other tricks. Use of Combat Expertise means less hits but more survivability, you aren't so much trying to kill foes as tie them down.
I'd say there's basically three main combat builds for the rogue:
- Dual-wielding. Classic, highest damage possible during full sneak attacks but very feat heavy and not very mobile.
- Two-handed weapon. Much more light on feats, more mobile, decent damage on standard attacks. Requires high strength though.
- Ranged/switch hitter. Play as melee in the beginning, get weapon finesse. Start building up the ranged attack a few levels in, so you can pull your own weight levels 1-3. Medium feat intensive and the least strict in terms of ability scores.I think there's a fourth:
- fencer, use one weapon one-handed, but make use of single attacks by aiming for Spring Attack, or using Improved Feint or other tricks. Use of Combat Expertise means less hits but more survivability, you aren't so much trying to kill foes as tie them down.
I'm not sure I follow... What is the reason for using a single one-handed weapon? I can see why if you have so low strength that the single-handed rogue weapons deal as much damage as the two-handed ones, but can you really go that low?
Even if you're defensive, it's good to be able to deal at least some damage. If nothing else then for the times when you're forced to fight an enemy alone (might depend on adventure characteristics though). Str 14+ and I can't see any reason for a one-handed weapon, unless there's some feat or ability I'm neglecting.
I'd say there's basically three main combat builds for the rogue:
- Dual-wielding. Classic, highest damage possible during full sneak attacks but very feat heavy and not very mobile.
- Two-handed weapon. Much more light on feats, more mobile, decent damage on standard attacks. Requires high strength though.
- Ranged/switch hitter. Play as melee in the beginning, get weapon finesse. Start building up the ranged attack a few levels in, so you can pull your own weight levels 1-3. Medium feat intensive and the least strict in terms of ability scores.I think there's a fourth:
- fencer, use one weapon one-handed, but make use of single attacks by aiming for Spring Attack, or using Improved Feint or other tricks. Use of Combat Expertise means less hits but more survivability, you aren't so much trying to kill foes as tie them down.I'm not sure I follow... What is the reason for using a single one-handed weapon? I can see why if you have so low strength that the single-handed rogue weapons deal as much damage as the two-handed ones, but can you really go that low?
Even if you're defensive, it's good to be able to deal at least some damage. If nothing else then for the times when you're forced to fight an enemy alone (might depend on adventure characteristics though). Str 14+ and I can't see any reason for a one-handed weapon, unless there's some feat or ability I'm neglecting.
I believe he may be referring to the ability of a spring attacker to more often than not always get to a flanking position, thus always land a sneak attack, where a two-weapon fighter won't necessarily have the mobility feats and may miss out the opportunity a few more times.
It is theoretical, and not something I've tried much (the 2 handed weapon build). Taken longspears and quick-draw, usually for the reach advantage, but never tried to max them out that way.
On a side note, Step Up is fantastic for any type of Rogue, enabling you to adjust to re-flank a monster that tries to 5ft step (or reduce your own vulnerability likewise)
I'm not sure I follow... What is the reason for using a single one-handed weapon? I can see why if you have so low strength that the single-handed rogue weapons deal as much damage as the two-handed ones, but can you really go that low?
Even if you're defensive, it's good to be able to deal at least some damage. If nothing else then for the times when you're forced to fight an enemy alone (might depend on adventure characteristics though). Str 14+ and I can't see any reason for a one-handed weapon, unless there's some feat or ability I'm neglecting.
TWF costs a feat, and is useless if you are making only single attacks per round. Using a two-handed weapon costs a feat or a class dip you don't want to bother with.
Using Improved Feint or Spring Attack mean you are only getting one attack per round.Using these means you can take advantage of Combat Expertise to stay safer - you don't do so much damage but you can tie down a foe. While you fight him, you can deliver single strikes that keep his attention; he turns his back to engage someone else and you are flanking for a lot more attacks and he knows it.
I'm not sure I follow... What is the reason for using a single one-handed weapon? I can see why if you have so low strength that the single-handed rogue weapons deal as much damage as the two-handed ones, but can you really go that low?
Even if you're defensive, it's good to be able to deal at least some damage. If nothing else then for the times when you're forced to fight an enemy alone (might depend on adventure characteristics though). Str 14+ and I can't see any reason for a one-handed weapon, unless there's some feat or ability I'm neglecting.TWF costs a feat, and is useless if you are making only single attacks per round. Using a two-handed weapon costs a feat or a class dip you don't want to bother with.
Using Improved Feint or Spring Attack mean you are only getting one attack per round.
Hmmm... In some circumstances I think I could agree. But spears/longspears are simple weapons with decent damage/crit, and while the rapier is better for crits, the critical damage from it won't be a big deal. For a 1st-level rogue with weapon finesse flanking, we're likely looking at rapier +5, 2d6+2 (avg 9) (18+x2) vs. longspear +5, 1d8+1d6+3 (avg 11) (20x3). And the longspear has the advantage of reach. With power attack instead of finesse, it'd be rapier +3, 11 avg vs longspear +3, 14. And half-orcs, which are a pretty good rogue race, gets falchions for free.
I see the point in spring attack, and it's a feat I'd take with the two-handed weapon build (it was part of what I meant with "higher mobility"). Improved feint is a good alternative though, didn't think about that. It's a very defensive build though, the damage is going to be really low with just a single standard attack. Especially if you have a mediocre strength and a single-handed weapon.
I think you're right that a one-handed option might be a good choice in some cases, but I think even with a feint/expertise build, in most cases a two-handed weapon will be better.
There are other factors you could add - for example, dipping Duelist can give you a flat bonus to damage that will multiply on a critical as will the Piranha Strikes feat, while Vital Strike can up the damage too. Is there an advantage to having a two handed weapon? Unless you are going for a strength build, not really. If you are going to go all out for rogue skills you will be a dexterity and intelligence build, and this concept synergises well with that.
I think that's the point - it's not a concept that a 'combat rogue' will take as optimal, but it's one that a 'skills monkey' can take and still be reasonably effective in combat. There is more to rogues than combat, after all.
There are other factors you could add - for example, dipping Duelist can give you a flat bonus to damage that will multiply on a critical as will the Piranha Strikes feat, while Vital Strike can up the damage too. Is there an advantage to having a two handed weapon? Unless you are going for a strength build, not really. If you are going to go all out for rogue skills you will be a dexterity and intelligence build, and this concept synergises well with that.
Yeah, duelist will surely make one-handed weapons better; I assumed for this discussion it was straight rogue (which is why I used simple weapons in the example).
Vital strike favors big weapons over small ones, and you don't need that much strength for two-handeds gain over one-handed.
I had never seen piranha strike though, don't have the sourcebook. It changes quite a lot in that Str 13 isn't needed anymore! Seeing it, I think I agree with you now that in most cases a one-handed weapon might be nicer. Instead of 14, 16, 12, 10, 10, 8 you can go 10, 16, 12, 12, 10, 10 which is much nicer for the feel of a skill monkey.
I think that's the point - it's not a concept that a 'combat rogue' will take as optimal, but it's one that a 'skills monkey' can take and still be reasonably effective in combat. There is more to rogues than combat, after all.
Oh, of course there's more than combat, to all classes! Even a skill monkey though, doesn't really need that high Int; 8 skill points per level is A LOT, especially with PF skill merging. For non-skill monkeys, I could (from an optimization point of view) drop int to 7 or something and still be quite skilled. For a skill monkey, int 10 or 12 seems enough anyway, if you don't need to take knowledges.
I do think that the archer build works well for skill monkeys too, though. High dex, low strength requirement and doesn't need more than a 10 or 12 in con, paired with being extra valuable for skills at lower levels (where it's weak in combat; later on, when some skills lose value, it gains power in combat due to the feats).
Oh, on a side note: If I in any way seem aggressive or seem to have a bad tone or such (I suspect this post might), I'm very sorry for that and don't mean it in any way. English isn't my native language, so I know my writing sometimes seems a little "stiff" and/or negative in the tone.
I agree, the archer build is good for the skill-oriented rogue too. In the party I am running the 'fencer' rogue in there are already several archers - a Druid follower of Erastil, an archery oriented bard and a fighter with a big bow, so I went with the fencer. It fitted the concept of a noble black-sheep character concept well and has worked well.
Oh, and you do not come across as aggressive at all.
And of course, with a single rapier, you have the inevitable Dread Pirate Roberts moments to ham up ;)
And of course, with a single rapier, you have the inevitable Dread Pirate Roberts moments to ham up ;)
Damn! My secret is out! I'm not really left-handed!
And of course, with a single rapier, you have the inevitable Dread Pirate Roberts moments to ham up ;)Damn! My secret is out! I'm not really left-handed!
Bluff check, flat-footed, BAM!
Using a two-handed weapon costs a feat or a class dip you don't want to bother with.
Orrrrr you're a half-orc.
I'm not sure I'd go with that, but it IS an option.