Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)
Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)
There is no restriction on melee weapons that disallows sneak attack damage.
In other words, it is rules legal for all melee weapons that do lethal damage.
There's nothing (in PF or 3.5) that says that rogues can't sneak attack with two-handed weapons.
Yeah I looked at it, i'm sorry, maybe I forgot to mention the part where it doesn't make sense (like in actual play) sneak attacks are supposed to be, well sneaky....how are you gonna be sneaky with a sword that is as big as you? maybe its kind of a misnomer?
I think there is a rule that says...
Thou mayeth Lay down the Smacketh with anything you can!
In all seriousness, there is no restriction on what you can SA with... Heck, if you have the foe flatfooted you'd get a SA with dang rock! *boink* Take that-Evil Doer!
GNOME
|
Yeah I looked at it, i'm sorry, maybe I forgot to mention the part where it doesn't make sense (like in actual play) sneak attacks are supposed to be, well sneaky....how are you gonna be sneaky with a sword that is as big as you? maybe its kind of a misnomer?
Sorta... it has a lot to do with how you PLACE your attack more than whether or not they know you are there really though. It is a definite change from previous editions but TBH it's not one that I mind. It certainly opens up new and interesting options for rogues for sure, and options are never really a BAD thing IMO.
Yeah I looked at it, i'm sorry, maybe I forgot to mention the part where it doesn't make sense (like in actual play) sneak attacks are supposed to be, well sneaky....how are you gonna be sneaky with a sword that is as big as you? maybe its kind of a misnomer?Sorta... it has a lot to do with how you PLACE your attack more than whether or not they know you are there really though. It is a definite change from previous editions but TBH it's not one that I mind. It certainly opens up new and interesting options for rogues for sure, and options are never really a BAD thing IMO.
Yeah i totally agree here, improvements for the rogue are always welcomed, I just found it to be weird.
Lol, you can actually sneak attack with a rock huh?
Yup! Sneak Attack is about opportunity adn circumstance, not weapon.
What must you have to Sneak Attack?
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.
That's it: if you deny DEX to AC, or if the target is Flanked you get your SA. :) Just bear in mind if you throw the rock, you cannot flank with it ;)
I remember the bad old days of 1st/2nd ed when you had to "Backstab" and could only ever do it once... blah blah blah... :D
GNOME
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Watch 'The Gamers' by Dead Gentleman for the awesome backstab with the ballista.
The Gamemaster: You're going to backstab him with a ballista?
Nimble the Thief: Uh huh
The Gamemaster: With a f^&*ing siege weapon?
Nimble the Thief: Uh huh
Followed by a search through the rules and after it is allowed, a giant mess...
apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5
No, they didn't. Rogues can sneak attack with two-handed weapons in 3.5, too.
Considering that it is already hard enough for the rogue to contribute to combat in a meaningful way I would allow him to sneak attack with a sofa if the need arises.
If he can sneak attack with a sofa, could he use a love seat as a merciful weapon? :p
GNOME
A two handed weapon is sub-optimal for a rogue, to say the least, unless he rolls a lot of 18's. So, there aren't balance reasons to disallow it.
I don't agree at all, quite the reverse. While a twf rogue might have a higher OPTIMAL dpr, the two-handed rogue is a lot more reliable since he can do at least SOME damage even without sneak attack. Not to say, he's far less feat intense.
Just look at 3rd level human rogues:Str rogue, str 18, dex 12 (PA, prof (g-sword), w/e)
Single attack: Greatsword +5 (2d6+8)
Single attack flank: Greatsword +7 (4d6+8)
Full attack is the same
Dex rogue, str 12, dex 18 (twf, weapon finesse, focus)
Single attack: Shortsword +7, 1d6+1
Single attack flank: Shortsword +9, 3d6+1
Full attack: Shortsword +5/+5, 1d6+1/1d6
Full attack flank: Shortsword +7/+7, 3d6+1/3d6
EDIT: If you're on a higher point buy, you'd probably want to increase the lower stat by 2; in both cases it would help them, though it would only help the TWF in the damage department.
So, on a full attack when flanking the twf does better, but in all other cases I'd prefer the strength rogue for attack. That said, he's got worse AC, initiative and skills; which can be somewhat remedied by the additional feat of the strength rogue.
If going for a strength rogue, I'd probably go for heavier armor frankly and leave a lot of the "stealth" idea behind; you can still be an excellent lock-pick, trap disarmer and face without stealth, and if you occacionly need to scout you can use invisibility or remove your armor to improve your chances.
How are you going for better AC with heavier armor without giving up Evasion and better mobility? Unless you are talking about a multiclass characters I can't agree on thw rogues being better than twf rogues.
Evasion is very circumstantial, mostly useful against a single large enemy that might be able to throw powerful evocation at you (for example against some lich BBEG or a dragon) and while I agree the reduced mobility might be an issue, it only might. Picking up Gang Up instead of prof (greatsword) might be a good way if you're defensively-minded; then you can easily go with a longspear instead of a greatsword.
But as said, that's a matter of taste. One might want to go 16/14 rather than 18/12, but he'd still put out more damage on single attack and in non-sneak-attack circumstances.
My point was just that the 2H rogue isn't inherently sub-optimal, it's just that they have different strengths and fit well in different groups. If you're light on meleers in the group, a 2H rogue (maybe with a level of fighter) might be the best for reliability, but if you already have a good characters for that the skillfulness and circumstantially good damage of the 2wf might fit better.
I'm not saying the 2wf or archer rogue is worse in combat either, just that they all have different strengths which could be played to, and are too close in usefulness to easily be called "sup-optimal".
Those who don't understand how a rogue can make a sneak attack with a two-handed weapon never played Mark of Kri. (;
Although every time I picture a Rogue "sneaking up" behind someone with a Two handed Great Axe I chuckle I keep reminding myself it's not "Backstab" anymore, it's sneak attack.
I still believe a dual wielder with the 'Improved' and 'greater' two weapon fighting would be my choice.
Although every time I picture a Rogue "sneaking up" behind someone with a Two handed Great Axe I chuckle I keep reminding myself it's not "Backstab" anymore, it's sneak attack.
I still believe a dual wielder with the 'Improved' and 'greater' two weapon fighting would be my choice.
A rogue is not necessarily a sneaky thief (even if I love the archetype).
A brutal scoundrel, a bodyguard of a syndacate boss.. I can see it perfectly SA with a weapon good for his powerful build.
Rogues (and Fighters) can vary a lot.. I tink that you can play 10 games and have them seem a completely different class each time (and for fighter this is even more true).
Totaly agree. Ia m just old school and that image keeps popping into my head =)
In the DPR Olympics, the TWF rogue only marginally beats out the Falchion rogue, but spends significantly more resources to do it. Going with a 2 hander, you open yourself up to many more options. Since you don't need a single feat to perform the style, as opposed to a fairly intense chain, you can use feats to get sneak attack much more frequently, and you can sacrifice your dex some. Personally, I find the half orc falchion wielder to be my favorite rogue style, and would rather have it than a TWF.
Personally, I find the half orc falchion wielder to be my favorite rogue style, and would rather have it than a TWF.
Especially if you have the toothy racial trait for an additional attack. Sure, a twf-rogue could get that, too. But I think it's just so much cooler if you hit them with a big weapon before you bite them. :D
Personally, I find the half orc falchion wielder to be my favorite rogue style, and would rather have it than a TWF.Especially if you have the toothy racial trait for an additional attack. Sure, a twf-rogue could get that, too. But I think it's just so much cooler if you hit them with a big weapon before you bite them. :D
Before the APG, I liked a 2 level dip in barbarian for that. Rage works great on a str rogue. I made Bitey in the DPR Olympics off that.
Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)
Why a greatsword? Use the feat you would waste to take proficiency with the greatsword to take an elven curveblade instead. Odds on you have better dexterity than strength, so you can use Weapon Finesse (Finesse Rogue rogue talent) with it and getter better chances to hit. The greater threat range offsets the lower initial damage output ... and let's face it, it's a lot cooler!
Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)Why a greatsword? Use the feat you would waste to take proficiency with the greatsword to take an elven curveblade instead. Odds on you have better dexterity than strength, so you can use Weapon Finesse (Finesse Rogue rogue talent) with it and getter better chances to hit. The greater threat range offsets the lower initial damage output ... and let's face it, it's a lot cooler!
1 reason I can think of: Exotic Weapon Profficiency has a +1 BAB requirement.
Also, on this build it is not uncommon to have significantly higher str than dex. I usually go with 18 str 14 or 12 dex.
Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)Why a greatsword? Use the feat you would waste to take proficiency with the greatsword to take an elven curveblade instead. Odds on you have better dexterity than strength, so you can use Weapon Finesse (Finesse Rogue rogue talent) with it and getter better chances to hit. The greater threat range offsets the lower initial damage output ... and let's face it, it's a lot cooler!1 reason I can think of: Exotic Weapon Profficiency has a +1 BAB requirement.
Also, on this build it is not uncommon to have significantly higher str than dex. I usually go with 18 str 14 or 12 dex.
Really? Most rogues I've made and played with have been stacked on intelligence and dexterity. A feat is a feat at the end of the day, start with a rapier, take EWP at 3rd level and you still have the best of it.
|
Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)Why a greatsword? Use the feat you would waste to take proficiency with the greatsword to take an elven curveblade instead. Odds on you have better dexterity than strength, so you can use Weapon Finesse (Finesse Rogue rogue talent) with it and getter better chances to hit. The greater threat range offsets the lower initial damage output ... and let's face it, it's a lot cooler!1 reason I can think of: Exotic Weapon Profficiency has a +1 BAB requirement.
Also, on this build it is not uncommon to have significantly higher str than dex. I usually go with 18 str 14 or 12 dex.
Swashbuckler gives you a martial weapon pro. He might not be an elf.
Sneak attack might be a bit of a misnomer, but it's always important not to get too wound up about names in the game.
Sneak attack can be done whenever you catch someone without his dex bonus or when you flank him.
You don't have to employ stealth. If you can catch the bastard with his pants down, you get to sneak attack. It doesn't really matter whether you use a dagger, rapier, two-handed sword, or golem-powered siege engine. In fact, if you can get one of those cloaked spaceships and put a rogue on the gunner's helm, he can sneak attack people with planetary destroyers! :D
Player "We're cloaked, right?"
GM "Sure"
Player "We don't have to de-cloak in order to fire, right?"
GM "As soon as you fire, the cloaking field will collapse, just like the invisibility spell, but the first volley will come out of thin air."
Player "Neat, I use the super-enhanced optics to aim at the guy's kidneys and fire all weapons! That means sneak attack, since I have this space sneak attack feat!"
GM O_o "...okay. Your concentrated fire hits him in the kidneys. Well, it's centered on the kidneys - your primary weapon alone fires a beam that is 20 times as wide as he is tall, but you get him in the tender parts. And all other parts. You instantly obliterate him and the continent he was standing on. But roll your 3d6 for sneak attack, you've earned it!"
Player "Booyah!!"
Really? Most rogues I've made and played with have been stacked on intelligence and dexterity. A feat is a feat at the end of the day, start with a rapier, take EWP at 3rd level and you still have the best of it.Hi all, I'm gonna run a campaign soon and one of my friends wants to play a two handed greatsword rogue with the Swashbuckler's alternate class feature found in the advanced player's guide. While I don't much mind him doing that, we did had a conversation over it, because, apparently they removed the restrictions that rogues had in 3.5, anyways, a rogue doing sneak attacks with a melee two handed weapon (Bows seems rather logical i guess)is rather dubious to me, what are your thoughts on this? (How would you rule this one out?)Why a greatsword? Use the feat you would waste to take proficiency with the greatsword to take an elven curveblade instead. Odds on you have better dexterity than strength, so you can use Weapon Finesse (Finesse Rogue rogue talent) with it and getter better chances to hit. The greater threat range offsets the lower initial damage output ... and let's face it, it's a lot cooler!1 reason I can think of: Exotic Weapon Profficiency has a +1 BAB requirement.
Also, on this build it is not uncommon to have significantly higher str than dex. I usually go with 18 str 14 or 12 dex.
They your characters are not focusing on damage output. There is nothing wrong with that, but it is less optimal for to focus on dex. It does less damage and costs you a feat.
My damage focused rogues tend to go something like str 17, dex 14, con 12, int 12, wis 12, cha 12 on 20 point buy, with cha being next most important.
I've had great luck playing a rogue with a two-handed reach weapon. The extra mobility granted by staying out of opponents' reach really helps line up flanking.
Next time I build a rogue, I plan to use a Scorpion Whip.
I've had great luck playing a rogue with a two-handed reach weapon. The extra mobility granted by staying out of opponents' reach really helps line up flanking.
Next time I build a rogue, I plan to use a Scorpion Whip.
How's that going to work without flanking?
Unless I am missing something, a Whip would work fine:
The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack.
When making a melee attack, you get a +2 flanking bonus if your opponent is threatened by another enemy character or creature on its opposite border or opposite corner.
Flanking requires the target to be threatened by an enemy (your ally), not necessarily by you. So, the Whip (scorpion) is a melee attack (even though it provokes AoO to wield it) so should qualify.
GNOME
I still believe a dual wielder with the 'Improved' and 'greater' two weapon fighting would be my choice.
I agree completely.
a rogue with two shortswords out damages a greatsword rogue.
Against low-AC enemies yes. High AC enemies let the greatsword rogue deal more damage than the TWF.
the -2 for TWF doesnt seem all that bad to me. Also double the 10% chance to threaten a crit isnt bad either.
Other points of internist:
While raging I doubt you can do precision.
You need to be the one flanking to sneak attack.
Clarifyinng Threat/Flank/SA.
To SA you must 1) Flank, or 2) have a target that is denied his DEX to AC
To Threaten you must be able to make a melee attack into the target's square. (with certain exceptions, such as the Whip as a weapon)
To Flank, (ie, receive the +2 Bonus to hit) you must 1) be using a melee attack, and 2) have an ally that also threatens the target that is located opposite the Flanker.
So Whippy McWhipperson a rogue armed with a Scorpion Whip and Tad Von Threatensen are fighting a Whosdat Whosdere! Tad moves to be able to attack the Whosdat, and is now threatening it. Whippy moves across the from Tad so the Whosdat is between them. Tad (Threatening) is providing the 'book-end' to Whippy's Flank with his Scorpion. The Whosdat attacks Tad and the results don't matter. It is Tad's turn again: Tad is *not* flanking as Whippy is not Threatening (Whips do not Threaten, even though they have reach and are melee attacks) so he makes his attack without the +2 for Flanking bonus.
(Whippy)(open)(open)(Whosdat)(Tad) would be the layout.
Whippy Flanks, but does not Threaten (he is fully qualified to SA, as well); Tad Threatens but does not Flank. If Inga Interference with her Glaive got just in front of Whippy, Tad would now be both Flanking and Threatening. Inga is also both Threatening and Flanking.
(Whippy)(Inga)(open)(Whosdat)(Tad) would be the layout now.
Or, maybe I am missing something?
GNOME
|
|
the -2 for TWF doesnt seem all that bad to me. Also double the 10% chance to threaten a crit isnt bad either.Other points of internist:
While raging I doubt you can do precision.
That's 10% less to hit.
And you can absolutely sneak attack in a rage, and nothing in RAW prevents it. Hell, PF doesnt even stipulate you can't use combat expertise in a rage.
Ever seen a violent prison shanking? Perfect example of rage precision.
the -2 for TWF doesnt seem all that bad to me. Also double the 10% chance to threaten a crit isnt bad either.Other points of internist:
While raging I doubt you can do precision.
That's 10% less to hit.
And you can absolutely sneak attack in a rage, and nothing in RAW prevents it. Hell, PF doesnt even stipulate you can't use combat expertise in a rage.
Ever seen a violent prison shanking? Perfect example of rage precision.
While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any
Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills
(except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability
that requires patience or concentration.
I would say SA falls into this category.
-2 to attack isnt a 10% penalty, unless you only rolled a d20, and the AC you had to hit was 20.|
|
the -2 for TWF doesnt seem all that bad to me. Also double the 10% chance to threaten a crit isnt bad either.Other points of internist:
While raging I doubt you can do precision.
That's 10% less to hit.
And you can absolutely sneak attack in a rage, and nothing in RAW prevents it. Hell, PF doesnt even stipulate you can't use combat expertise in a rage.
Ever seen a violent prison shanking? Perfect example of rage precision.
While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any
Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills
(except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability
that requires patience or concentration.I would say SA falls into this category.
-2 to attack isnt a 10% penalty, unless you only rolled a d20, and the AC you had to hit was 20.
if it takes concentration or patience how can you twf while hasted and be that precise?
by that logic you shouldnt be able to weapon finess in a rage, or shoot a bow, or use dodge
|
|
I would say SA does NOT fall into that category. It is not a skill, first off. Secondly, it requires no more patience or concentration than does normal combat. We can't conceivably say that rage prevents a barbarian from making melee attacks - that way lieth madness.
We can say that rage prevents him from casting spells, picking locks, and even being stealthy.
A -2 to attack may not be a -10% penalty, but it does mean the likelihood of a hit goes down by 10%.
If you normally hit on an 11 - 50% ChanceToHit.
With a -2 penalty, you now hit on a 9 - 40% CTH.
I would say SA does NOT fall into that category. It is not a skill, first off. Secondly, it requires no more patience or concentration than does normal combat. We can't conceivably say that rage prevents a barbarian from making melee attacks - that way lieth madness.
We can say that rage prevents him from casting spells, picking locks, and even being stealthy.
A -2 to attack may not be a -10% penalty, but it does mean the likelihood of a hit goes down by 10%.
If you normally hit on an 11 - 50% ChanceToHit.
With a -2 penalty, you now hit on a 9 - 40% CTH.
Your first point is made null by the "or ability that..." part of the quoted text.
Secondly, sneak attack is the rogue picking out a vital spot on the enemy and striking that spot, it doesnt come at an attack penalty, but does require some concentration. Rage is blindly attacking the target with more violent attacks.
And no, Id also rule that Weapon Finesse is not usable during a rage.
As for the -2 attack penalty: Its a gamble id take for an extra attack. I am not saying I agree with the 1 attack is 5%, unless BAB20 means you always hit :P
While a 2h rogue has a lower AC I did a play test of a twf rogue and a 2h rogue...at level 9(when the TWF rogue would have 4 attacks) and the only time the TWF rogue won in dmg was on a full attack sneek attack action. I don't have the builds in front of my right now. Elven chain does help the lower dex of the 2h rogue. Or if you want to waste the feat for med armor anything mithrel works too. The 2h rogue seems to have more feats to play with because he doesn't need the TWF feats. He also only needs 1 weapons can be expensive.
As for RP wise sneak attack with a 2h weapon works for me. The rogue would be more of a lightly armored fighter than a rogue. This lightly armored fighter just takes advantage of openings for extra damage with his 2h weapon.
That's 10% less to hit.
the -2 for TWF doesnt seem all that bad to me. Also double the 10% chance to threaten a crit isnt bad either.Other points of internist:
While raging I doubt you can do precision.
It doesn't work quite like that.
If you only hit on an 11-20, then you have a 50% chance to hit. If you take -2 on that, it becomes 13-20 or 40% chance to hit. This is a loss of 20% of your actual hits.
TWFing for a rogue is not brilliant for three resons:
1) You are already a 3/4 BAB class, with an additional -2 to hit on top of that.
2) You need a flanking buddy. Without one, you are just a squishy annoyance that cannot hit anything.
3) You are squishy. You have likely got worse HP and AC than whoever you are flanking with, and yet could be dealing the most damage if you have overcome the other impediments (that is, after all, the whole point of being a WWF rogue). As soon as whatever you are fighting works that out, you are squished.
I would say SA does NOT fall into that category. It is not a skill, first off. Secondly, it requires no more patience or concentration than does normal combat. We can't conceivably say that rage prevents a barbarian from making melee attacks - that way lieth madness.
We can say that rage prevents him from casting spells, picking locks, and even being stealthy.
A -2 to attack may not be a -10% penalty, but it does mean the likelihood of a hit goes down by 10%.
If you normally hit on an 11 - 50% ChanceToHit.
With a -2 penalty, you now hit on a 9 - 40% CTH.Your first point is made null by the "or ability that..." part of the quoted text.
Secondly, sneak attack is the rogue picking out a vital spot on the enemy and striking that spot, it doesnt come at an attack penalty, but does require some concentration. Rage is blindly attacking the target with more violent attacks.
And no, Id also rule that Weapon Finesse is not usable during a rage.
As for the -2 attack penalty: Its a gamble id take for an extra attack. I am not saying I agree with the 1 attack is 5%, unless BAB20 means you always hit :P
Sneak attack is not dex, int or charisma based.
A character with sneak attack can use it with Int 3 or Int 20 with the same effect, same with Dex and Cha. Sneak attack doesn't have an ability requirement to use and doesn't gain any advantages from hit Int, Dex or Cha.
In fact unless you take weapon finesse it is a strength based ability since it is reliant on an attack roll, which is strength based unless you do something to make it otherwise (like weapon finesse, zen archery, or a guided weapon).
Therefore a barbarian can use sneak attack while raging. It's just "Grr! I'm really angry I'm going to cut out your kidney extra hard now!"
Player "We're cloaked, right?"
GM "Sure"
Player "We don't have to de-cloak in order to fire, right?"
GM "As soon as you fire, the cloaking field will collapse, just like the invisibility spell, but the first volley will come out of thin air."
Player "Neat, I use the super-enhanced optics to aim at the guy's kidneys and fire all weapons! That means sneak attack, since I have this space sneak attack feat!"
GM O_o "...okay. Your concentrated fire hits him in the kidneys. Well, it's centered on the kidneys - your primary weapon alone fires a beam that is 20 times as wide as he is tall, but you get him in the tender parts. And all other parts. You instantly obliterate him and the continent he was standing on. But roll your 3d6 for sneak attack, you've earned it!"
Player "Booyah!!"
This made me giggle for quite a while. Thanks.
|
While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any
Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills
(except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability
that requires patience or concentration.I would say SA falls into this category.
But it doesn't say SA falls into that category. Therefore it's your houserule that it does.
|
|
And no, Id also rule that Weapon Finesse is not usable during a rage.
So following this logic, here are other things not allowed in a rage (correct me if I'm wrong):
Reflex saves (dex based ability)
Will saves (wis based ability)
Ranged attacks (dex based ability)
Dodge/mobility/spring attack (dex based ability)
Dex to ac (dex based ability)
Most combat maneuvers (need to think)
Technically initiative is dex based, so they can't act because they can't do anything dex based? They can't roll init so they can't take a turn?
Damn, never realized barbarians crippled themselves like that.