1 Sneak Attack per Round?
- Thread starter Stargher
- Start date
Zhure
First Post
Sorry, Rogues get to use Sneak Attack every chance they get.
At high levels, many monsters will be flat out immune (constructs, undead, oozes). Similarly leveled classed characters will be immune due to Uncanny Dodge (Barbarian, other Rogues) or will wear fortified armor (Fighter) or have a really high AC or initiative (Monk, Wizard).
Even if you catch a viable target flat-footed, probably only your first and maybe second attack will hit, then it's unlikely to work the rest of the fight. Partially because your target won't let himself be flanked or be flat-footed again, and mostly because your target will do everything in his power to put the rogue out of the fight.
This still means the rogue is useful in combat, since he's drawing down fire that could be used to completely cripple a party mage, but it also means his chance of surviving is small.
The same principles apply at lower levels, too. We've been running the game for well over a year and the Rogue still can't compete with the Fighter in open combat. Only in the opening round does he perform as well. It's made up by the Rogue having lots of non-combat abilities.
Greg
At high levels, many monsters will be flat out immune (constructs, undead, oozes). Similarly leveled classed characters will be immune due to Uncanny Dodge (Barbarian, other Rogues) or will wear fortified armor (Fighter) or have a really high AC or initiative (Monk, Wizard).
Even if you catch a viable target flat-footed, probably only your first and maybe second attack will hit, then it's unlikely to work the rest of the fight. Partially because your target won't let himself be flanked or be flat-footed again, and mostly because your target will do everything in his power to put the rogue out of the fight.
This still means the rogue is useful in combat, since he's drawing down fire that could be used to completely cripple a party mage, but it also means his chance of surviving is small.
The same principles apply at lower levels, too. We've been running the game for well over a year and the Rogue still can't compete with the Fighter in open combat. Only in the opening round does he perform as well. It's made up by the Rogue having lots of non-combat abilities.
Greg
MasterOfHeaven
First Post
No. Look, a lot of people occasionally start to think Sneak Attack is too powerful, and I understand why, but when you really sit down and look at it this isn't the case. An equal level Fighter will almost always outperform the Rogue in damage output, and his damage isn't limited to creatures subject to critical hits.
The Sneak Attack is also the _only_ way for a Rogue to do any significant amount of damage in combat, and if you take it away from him (or even weaken it) he will basically be reduced to what the Thief was in 2nd Edition... he scouted the enemy, basically stood around firing a shortbow in combat, and if there was a lock or trap, he tried to disarm it.
Thieves in 2E were basically dead weight in combat, with the exception of a (rare) backstab, and it's a great thing that 3rd Edition has changed that. Just put the Rogue up against a few Undead or Constructs, and note how incredibly ineffective he is in combat. The Sneak Attack may seem like a bit much at times, but it's not nearly as bad as it looks on paper, and taking it out or weakening it will only make your Rogue players feel useless in combat.
The Sneak Attack is also the _only_ way for a Rogue to do any significant amount of damage in combat, and if you take it away from him (or even weaken it) he will basically be reduced to what the Thief was in 2nd Edition... he scouted the enemy, basically stood around firing a shortbow in combat, and if there was a lock or trap, he tried to disarm it.
Thieves in 2E were basically dead weight in combat, with the exception of a (rare) backstab, and it's a great thing that 3rd Edition has changed that. Just put the Rogue up against a few Undead or Constructs, and note how incredibly ineffective he is in combat. The Sneak Attack may seem like a bit much at times, but it's not nearly as bad as it looks on paper, and taking it out or weakening it will only make your Rogue players feel useless in combat.
AGGEMAM
First Post
Stargher said:
No, I don't think so.
A 20th level rogue could get up to 55d6 worth of damage in one round (60d6 if all attacks critted) but that is nothing compared to a 20th level figther maximum of 300d8 in one round (1200d8 if attacks critted) even without any special damage from sword abilities.
Corrected to the absolute limit
Last edited:
shilsen
Adventurer
Not necessary, in my opinion. Sure, 3 sneak attacks in a round for +10d6 each sounds bad, but if you stop to consider what a 20th level fighter can do (not to even mention the 20th level spellcasters, whether arcane or divine), it isn't that overpowering. Another thing to remember is that sneak attack is highly dependent upon situation and opposition, which negates a good deal of its power.
One sneak attack per target per round wouldn't be out of line. It reduces the rogue's butt-kickingness in combat, but it could be arguing that butt-kicking in combat is really the fighter's or barbarian's schtick, and the rogue already has plenty of chances to shine when it comes to traps, locks, and other non-combat obstacles. In-game, you could justify this by saying that a sneak attack requires time to line up the shot so that it hits the target right where it counts. (Kicking them in the junk, as Lidda would say.)
MasterOfHeaven
First Post
I have to disagree with that assessment, Hong. Combat is a vital part of the D&D system, and the Rogues sneak attack is the only abililty the class has that allows them to do well in battle. It would make them the only class that couldn't do much in a combat situation.
AGGEMAM
First Post
Re: Re: Re: 1 Sneak Attack per Round?
Of course this powergaming in the most extreme and best possible circumstance but here goes.
Character: 20th level Fighter, wielding a mercurial greatsword (dam 2d8, crit x4), and using Whirlwind Attack and Great Cleave, having Expert Tactician. Flying. Face in 3D 5x5x10 feet.
Circumstance: Surrounded by 140 Bats (Tiny, up to 4 creatures in a cube, even cubes occuppied by others) and a flat-footed great wyrm dragon (or diety, or similar).
Whirlwinds all the Bats and for each bat gets a cleave attack against the large critter followed up by whirlwinding and gaining an extra attack from ET to the large critter, a grand total 282 attacks.
Oops. (Sligthly undercalculated it the first time)
Each attack will do 2d8, and 8d8 on critical hit (happening 92% of the time) 564d8 worth of damage (half against the dragon) 2256d8 if all attacks critted (again half against the dragon).
There wasn't that simple.
Now that is not going to happen every day. But I could probably make a totally viable smack calculated on avarage numbers that did more than 1000 points of damage in round.
1000 point of damage should minimum for any smack anyway since that is what Creeping Doom does and that is a 7th level Druid spell.
-Eä- said:
Of course this powergaming in the most extreme and best possible circumstance but here goes.
Character: 20th level Fighter, wielding a mercurial greatsword (dam 2d8, crit x4), and using Whirlwind Attack and Great Cleave, having Expert Tactician. Flying. Face in 3D 5x5x10 feet.
Circumstance: Surrounded by 140 Bats (Tiny, up to 4 creatures in a cube, even cubes occuppied by others) and a flat-footed great wyrm dragon (or diety, or similar).
Whirlwinds all the Bats and for each bat gets a cleave attack against the large critter followed up by whirlwinding and gaining an extra attack from ET to the large critter, a grand total 282 attacks.
Oops. (Sligthly undercalculated it the first time)
Each attack will do 2d8, and 8d8 on critical hit (happening 92% of the time) 564d8 worth of damage (half against the dragon) 2256d8 if all attacks critted (again half against the dragon).
There wasn't that simple.
Now that is not going to happen every day. But I could probably make a totally viable smack calculated on avarage numbers that did more than 1000 points of damage in round.
1000 point of damage should minimum for any smack anyway since that is what Creeping Doom does and that is a 7th level Druid spell.
graydoom
First Post
Sneak Attack isn't overpowered because you have to fulfill specific conditions to get it. Yes, there are a bunch of tricks to doing this, and a good rogue usually wins initiative so that's one SA there... but after that, the rogue has to either get into a flanking position or be invisible or something like that. At high levels, most monsters have some protection against annoyingly invisible adventurers, and a smart monster will have some henches to make sure no one flanks him.
AGGEMAM: Interesting situation... of course, how often is that going to happen? I don't think we're really concerned about the absolute maximums if every single thing is set up perfectly; we're more concerned about what they can do in actually combat situations where they don't have 140 bats coincidentally all around them.
AGGEMAM: Interesting situation... of course, how often is that going to happen? I don't think we're really concerned about the absolute maximums if every single thing is set up perfectly; we're more concerned about what they can do in actually combat situations where they don't have 140 bats coincidentally all around them.
Similar Threads
AD6_gamerati_skyscraper
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
April 16 2024 -
May 31 2024 -
June 3 2024 -
June 4 2024 -
June 18 2024 -
July 16 2024 -
September 17 2024 -
October 1 2024 -
November 12 2024 -
February 18 2025
