Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Sean Reynolds' new company press release
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="eyebeams" data-source="post: 1808863" data-attributes="member: 9225"><p>Enh. There's nothing wrong with a feat allowing you to sneak attack undead, provided the right narrative trash is wedded to it. And narrative trash -- not "logic" -- is the justification for the way undead work, because none of us has ever seen a real zombie or what-have-you. Here are a few justifications:</p><p></p><p>1) The rogue learns a secret ki technique that allows him to charge his weapon attacks with internal energy in a way that attacks normally untouchable vital spots but can't be distracted by being in direct combat with the creature.</p><p></p><p>2) The rogue learns to break bones and rend flesh with focused strikes, like a karateka breaking wood, but can't be distracted by being in direct combat with the creature.</p><p></p><p>3) The rogue learns the way an undead creature moves so that, as long as it can't reflexively guard against the rogue by sensing it, its natural movement carries it right into the rogue's weapon.</p><p></p><p>Blah, blah, blah. </p><p></p><p>All in all, it's a bunch of bollocks -- but class abilities are a bunch of bollocks. Me, I prefer to let the player decide exactly what "style" a sneak attack takes. Maybe a given rogue could actually be a great warrior, but is only confident when he can surprise the enemy. maybe the rogue is hitting vital organs when sneak attacking a normal guy. Maybe a rogue just gets to load her arm and really whale on someone who can't tell it's coming. Who knows? Who cares? If one guy playing a rogue narrates his sneak attack by saying, "Since he can't tell I'm coming, I raise my weapon and swing all out!" does saying "That's actually Power Attack" make me a good DM?</p><p></p><p>No. It makes me a jerk.</p><p></p><p>As long as play balance is still there, folks should be free to narrate their class abilities as they see fit, as long as that narration doesn't try to get anything for free. Logic? Enh. That's something I apply post hoc.</p><p></p><p>I think that the above is a really *really* important DMing principle, because D&D's feats and applying "logic" can lead to bad play for a particular reason: Players and DMs get the idea that they can *only* describe actions that are implied by their feat set. A fighter player feels he can't say "I pull back for a mighty swing!" without Power Attack, for instance. Let this happen, and combat degenerates into the hated "I hit him with my sword." No fun for anybody. Feats and class abilities should never keep players from describing something cool that can be contained by what's on the sheet.</p><p></p><p>Now, would this undead-choppy feat be balanced? It really depends on how undead heavy the game is. This sort of thing is really a lot like the mounted combat feats. In a game where 90% of the action takes place in tiny dungeon corridors, those feats are a ripoff. In a game with next to no undead, shost strike is also a ripoff. Oddly, in a game with lots and lots of undead,you lose a precious feat, but you can also whack undead for a nice amount of damage that even the party fighter with improved crit envies you for. That crit immunity is across the board, and not just a rogue-nerfer, and when everyone (except for clerics) is nerfed, getting that feat is most assuredly not a further insult. </p><p></p><p>What would concern me is games where undead make an occasional appearance. Then, the rogue blew a feat on a one-trick pony (so to speak), but is this much different then Mounted feat guy in the dungeon? I don't know.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="eyebeams, post: 1808863, member: 9225"] Enh. There's nothing wrong with a feat allowing you to sneak attack undead, provided the right narrative trash is wedded to it. And narrative trash -- not "logic" -- is the justification for the way undead work, because none of us has ever seen a real zombie or what-have-you. Here are a few justifications: 1) The rogue learns a secret ki technique that allows him to charge his weapon attacks with internal energy in a way that attacks normally untouchable vital spots but can't be distracted by being in direct combat with the creature. 2) The rogue learns to break bones and rend flesh with focused strikes, like a karateka breaking wood, but can't be distracted by being in direct combat with the creature. 3) The rogue learns the way an undead creature moves so that, as long as it can't reflexively guard against the rogue by sensing it, its natural movement carries it right into the rogue's weapon. Blah, blah, blah. All in all, it's a bunch of bollocks -- but class abilities are a bunch of bollocks. Me, I prefer to let the player decide exactly what "style" a sneak attack takes. Maybe a given rogue could actually be a great warrior, but is only confident when he can surprise the enemy. maybe the rogue is hitting vital organs when sneak attacking a normal guy. Maybe a rogue just gets to load her arm and really whale on someone who can't tell it's coming. Who knows? Who cares? If one guy playing a rogue narrates his sneak attack by saying, "Since he can't tell I'm coming, I raise my weapon and swing all out!" does saying "That's actually Power Attack" make me a good DM? No. It makes me a jerk. As long as play balance is still there, folks should be free to narrate their class abilities as they see fit, as long as that narration doesn't try to get anything for free. Logic? Enh. That's something I apply post hoc. I think that the above is a really *really* important DMing principle, because D&D's feats and applying "logic" can lead to bad play for a particular reason: Players and DMs get the idea that they can *only* describe actions that are implied by their feat set. A fighter player feels he can't say "I pull back for a mighty swing!" without Power Attack, for instance. Let this happen, and combat degenerates into the hated "I hit him with my sword." No fun for anybody. Feats and class abilities should never keep players from describing something cool that can be contained by what's on the sheet. Now, would this undead-choppy feat be balanced? It really depends on how undead heavy the game is. This sort of thing is really a lot like the mounted combat feats. In a game where 90% of the action takes place in tiny dungeon corridors, those feats are a ripoff. In a game with next to no undead, shost strike is also a ripoff. Oddly, in a game with lots and lots of undead,you lose a precious feat, but you can also whack undead for a nice amount of damage that even the party fighter with improved crit envies you for. That crit immunity is across the board, and not just a rogue-nerfer, and when everyone (except for clerics) is nerfed, getting that feat is most assuredly not a further insult. What would concern me is games where undead make an occasional appearance. Then, the rogue blew a feat on a one-trick pony (so to speak), but is this much different then Mounted feat guy in the dungeon? I don't know. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Sean Reynolds' new company press release
Top