I apologize in advance if this topic has been beaten, burned, and buried but as I am somewhat new to PF and still adjusting to rules switch from 3.5, I have questions.
Overall I am happy with the most recent changes stealth, but I feel like denying a rogue the ability to sneak attack due to concealment in "dim lighting" is a real handicap to the idea of a stealthed rogue waiting in the shadows to SA his enemy.
Would it be overpowered to just rule that rogues as part of thier innate training can ignore concealment in dim lighting only?
Thoughts?
I see no problem w/ it. Rogues are supposed to fight from the shadows. Makes perfect sense to me.
As w/ all things, try it out and see how it works. If it proves to be unbalancing, go back to the normal rules.
Although I doubt it will be unbalancing, rogues need all the help they can get. :P
Sniper's Eye (Ex): A rogue with this talent can apply her sneak attack damage on ranged attacks targeting foes within 30 feet that benefit from concealment. Foes with total concealment are still immune.
Technically this doesn't apply to melee attacks, but just house rule that it does. Then dim lighting isn't a problem anymore.
@ClarkKent07.
Wellcome to the messageboards.
No, I see no problem with it and I agree with Strannik in that Rogues are supposed to fight from the shadows.
In fact, even one of the Devs (James Jacobs) has said he thinks it was a mistake to deny the rogue the ability to sneak attack due to concealment.
That is probably why Paizo published the “Shadow Strike” feat in the advanced player’s guide.
with it you can deal precision damage, such as sneak attack damage, against targets with concealment (but not total concealment).
I would give the feat to rogues for free.
Hrmm...the feat Shadow Strike is in all ways better than Sniper's Eye. And it's a combat feat, which I believe a rogue can take any combat feat as a Combat Trick from the Rogue Talent.
I wouldn't give it to Rogues for free necessarily, but there you go. You can legally just use the Rogue Talent you recieve at 2nd level to get Combat Trick, which in turn will allow you to get Shadow Strike which does exactly what you want. I think it's fair to ask a rogue to spend a feat or a rogue talent on it.
I would be fine giving Shadow Strike to Rogues for free, just b/c so many races already have low-light vision. It's basically forcing the human to spend that extra feat they get on Shadow Strike, which seems a little silly to me. <shrugs>
Ah, but shadow strike does more than negate concealment from dim lighting. It negates all but total concealment, which is much stronger, because its concealment from any source not just lighting conditions. Giving Rogues Shadow Strike for free is a little too good IMO (without giving everyone a free buff).
Now, if you want to give Rogues and martials something really nice to help increase their power relative to casters then I would offer all martial classes the option that you can take Two Weapon Fighting which automatically increases to included Improved and Greater variants at the appropriate BAB or they can take Power Attack and receive two feats (one at level 6, and one at level 11) that require Power Attack. Yes they're great bonus feats, yes all the martials can get something nice, and yes the caster gain nothing.
I may have resentment against casters.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is what I get for not looking up Shadow Strike before posting...
I'll agree w/ you that Shadow Strike might be a bit much then, but I have no problem allowing my characters sneak attacking in low light conditions, so I'll extend that advantage but not the others that Shadow Strike offers.
It's a good idea. James Jacobs, Pathfinder's Creative Director, has been wanting to see that restriction pulled from the Sneak Attack description. It is pretty crippling but any of the houserules suggested above would fix it quite nicely. If you want to do it "by the book" there are several work arounds that help to varying degrees. Picking a race with Lowlight Vision or Darkvision is a start. Shadow Strike is also a great feat. Also PF expanded Blind Fight into Improved and Greater. Combined with Shadow Strike it's a really powerful combo but comes at a huge feat commitment.
If you want to play a Human, or other non-heightened sight race, and don't want to use feats there are spells that grant both Darkvision and Lowlight Vision. However, the feats are more powerful than LLV or DV, since they negate concealment from more than just light levels.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It’s interesting but, ClarkKent07’s suggested house rule is both weaker and more powerful than Shadow Strike.
If I understand it correctly, the house rule lets rogues ignore concealment in dim light and this also means there is no miss chance. But this only applies to dim light and not to concealment caused by stuff such as Blur that also grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).
Whereas Shadow Strike let you deal precision damage, such as sneak attack damage, against targets with any concealment (but not total concealment), but the feat Shadow Strike doesn’t actually negate concealment or the 20 % miss chance.
I think ClarkKent07’s House Rule is fine although he could rule that 20 % miss chance still applies.
I would probably do something like this:
And perhaps:
BTW, I would also let rogues pick Improved Feint as a rogue talent without meeting the Prerequisites and let it scale so that they can Feint as a swift action somewhere around level 6-8.
Or create a home brew feat called swift Feint that lets rogues Feint as a swift action. Prerequisites: 6th-level rogue. Perhaps add Improved Feint as a Prerequisites.
Since rogues pretty much are one of the weakest classes in the game some rogue love wouldn’t be off.