-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Blog: Sneak Attack Vs. Backstab 3/28/12
- Thread starter Boarstorm
- Start date
S
Sunseeker
Guest
Remember, in 3.x, the edition they're taking these backstab rules from, Fireball scaled up to 15d6. Other spells went higher(I remember one "Save or Fry" spell a friend used a couple nights ago called for 32d6 on a failed save), but I can't remember what spell it was.
The latter part of your post is something that they have in Deadlands that I really liked. You could increase the number of die certain attacks used, but you can also increase the die type(up to d12). And I think that would be a great way to allow for customization is to provide feats/options/utilities/features that could improve the die type as well as the die volume.
Not really, just what I always pictured it in my mind. Im really "Eh" on using HP as a measure of damage outside of combat.
Take for example, you run a sword through someone not in the context of a fight. They die right? No, they take 1d8+5 and because they have enough hit points they say "Tis but a flesh wound!". Or it could be double damage, or insta crit, which he may still live through.
As a DM, I just RP the guy dead.
HP is a reliable and fun model for damage in fights. Outside of fights, I try to not use it, and I apply that to the rogues backstab. Problem with that is, he HAS no RP advantage, and backstab is therefore (under this approach) relegated to a pure combat mechanic.
3e assassin Im guessing? Have to admit, not that familiar.
However, whether a save or something else, I would just prefer backstab to contribute to the takedown mechanic without being HP based in the RP sense.
Vyvyan Basterd
Adventurer
I quoted you, but this is a general question for all those who share your opinion.
What if each class had options available to them that dipped into other fields? Sort of cross-training while still focusing on the classes' strengths. What if a Figter or Rogue could choose options described as minor magical training that allows them to use a combat-focused minor magic ability that was limited to X times per day? Would that type of Daily or Encounter (I understand people's issues with Encounter abilities as well, thus why I stated x/day) ability for martial characters be something you could live with in D&DN?
Janaxstrus
First Post
It feels right, because it was exactly like this in 3e. I never had anyone get to level 20 as a Rogue (usually multi-class or never reach that level), so it's never actually happened. I think the 6d6 I have right now on my Rogue/Spell Thief is about my max ever.
S
Sunseeker
Guest
Characters shouldn't have to multiclass(in any fashion), especially not into magic, to function normally. If they do, class design is broken and needs to be reworked.
Honestly if they made the DDN Fighter the Slayer/Knight with a few more stances and a little more flavor, I think I'd be happy as a pig in poop.
Janaxstrus
First Post
Fireball stopped at 10d6, same as backstab.
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
Hm. I have to say I don't think this is good.
Firstly, I don't think other classes need a rule to do extra damage if they want. It also adds an unnecessary choice that is unlikely to be relevant later in the game. Characters with advantage already do more damage: they hit more frequently.
Providing the rogue with a set of choices as they increase in level is sensible. It's unclear whether the choices will be genuine or forced however.
Sneak attack should be optional, but a special feature of rogues alone. If they intend it to do serious damage, it shouldn't be so trivial to achieve as having advantage (presuming flanking grants this). It should be either some damage frequently or lots infrequently (this could be a way to differentiate dirty fighters from assassins).
Firstly, I don't think other classes need a rule to do extra damage if they want. It also adds an unnecessary choice that is unlikely to be relevant later in the game. Characters with advantage already do more damage: they hit more frequently.
Providing the rogue with a set of choices as they increase in level is sensible. It's unclear whether the choices will be genuine or forced however.
Sneak attack should be optional, but a special feature of rogues alone. If they intend it to do serious damage, it shouldn't be so trivial to achieve as having advantage (presuming flanking grants this). It should be either some damage frequently or lots infrequently (this could be a way to differentiate dirty fighters from assassins).
Vyvyan Basterd
Adventurer
Sorry I wasn't clear. I'm not talking about multiclassing at all.
Using the article as an example, the Rogue could choose:
*Sneak Attack
*Weapon Training
*Skill Trick
*Minor Magical Trick
I'm talking about stuff built into the class directly.
