Shuriken/Daggers: Rogue AOE Fail

[Incenjucar]

Honestly, I'm surprised that "splitting" isn't a feature of magical ranged weapons along with "returning" for thrown.

 

[Nifft]

And this is why you shouldn't bother with sending rules interpretation questions to customer service. They don't have access to any special information, and in a lot of cases they probably know less about the rules than some of the people here.

Yup.

CustServ has always been spotty at best.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Cryptos]

You know, I'm honestly considering ditching the rogue weapon requirements on powers and sneak attack.

Between things like this, and the sheer silliness of the Blinding Barrage crossbow attack, and how it limits the ability of other classes to take and really benefit from Sneak of Shadows without switching out their weapons for one attack every encounter, and the fact that for some PC-playable races that they allow in the RAW can use bigger weapons than normal (Minotaurs, for instance), and... well, a lot of things, I just don't see the point in it.

Would it be so wrong to change it to "one-handed weapons, projectile and thrown weapons" and to let the rogue weapon proficiency list speak for itself?

I mean, rogues (and their group) already have to set up combat advantage to use Sneak Attack. I think that more than balances against rangers and warlocks having to spend a minor action to get their extra damage. If they want to spend a feat on a weapon, let them use it.

And then you've got powers like Blinding Barrage, which are very cool in terms of effect, but if they only work with a crossbow without taking a feat, completely break immersion.

I've already got people wanting to fulfill the roguish skill role in the party just taking Ranger and thievery so they can use bows or better weapons with their powers. Anyone see a problem with the change above, striking the specific list of weapons and just saying "one-handed weapons, projectile weapons, and thrown weapons"?

I think they screwed up by thinking they had to restrict rogues so much.

 

[Spatula]

Would it be so wrong to change it to "one-handed weapons, projectile and thrown weapons" and to let the rogue weapon proficiency list speak for itself?

I mean, rogues (and their group) already have to set up combat advantage to use Sneak Attack. I think that more than balances against rangers and warlocks having to spend a minor action to get their extra damage. If they want to spend a feat on a weapon, let them use it.

And then you've got powers like Blinding Barrage, which are very cool in terms of effect, but if they only work with a crossbow without taking a feat, completely break immersion.

I've already got people wanting to fulfill the roguish skill role in the party just taking Ranger and thievery so they can use bows or better weapons with their powers. Anyone see a problem with the change above, striking the specific list of weapons and just saying "one-handed weapons, projectile weapons, and thrown weapons"?

Well, the rapier becomes pointless as a superior weapon. Which probably isn't a big concern of yours.

In more practical terms it means that dwarf, elf, and eladrin rogues become very popular, especially the elf & eladrin. All those races get automatic proficiency with military 1H weapons (hammers for dwarves, longswords for eladrins) or a military ranged weapon (longbow for elves). And the dwarves and eladrin have superior weapon-focus-type feats available to them as well. Human rogues would have to blow their extra feat on a weapon proficiency to keep up, while other races will simply be suboptimal in damage output. The difference between using a short sword (+3 hit, d6 dmg) and a warhammer (+2 hit, d10 dmg) is pretty big when you're dealing with powers that deal more than one [w] in damage.

As far as balance goes, all 1H simple weapons are as good as or inferior to the short sword, the shortbow is basically identical to the crossbow, and most thrown weapons are inferior to shuriken. So all of those weapons could be sneak attack-worthy without imbalancing anything, I would think.

 

[generalhenry]

you know the part that bugs me.... all the martial controllers based on the same awkward mechanism.

 

[Shazman]

Well, the rapier becomes pointless as a superior weapon. Which probably isn't a big concern of yours.

In more practical terms it means that dwarf, elf, and eladrin rogues become very popular, especially the elf & eladrin. All those races get automatic proficiency with military 1H weapons (hammers for dwarves, longswords for eladrins) or a military ranged weapon (longbow for elves). And the dwarves and eladrin have superior weapon-focus-type feats available to them as well. Human rogues would have to blow their extra feat on a weapon proficiency to keep up, while other races will simply be suboptimal in damage output. The difference between using a short sword (+3 hit, d6 dmg) and a warhammer (+2 hit, d10 dmg) is pretty big when you're dealing with powers that deal more than one [w] in damage.

As far as balance goes, all 1H simple weapons are as good as or inferior to the short sword, the shortbow is basically identical to the crossbow, and most thrown weapons are inferior to shuriken. So all of those weapons could be sneak attack-worthy without imbalancing anything, I would think.

The problem is that even if you have proficiency with longswords, or bows, you still can't sneak attack with them. There is only a small handful of weapons you can sneak attack with. Both a fighter with sneak of shadows and a rogue with greatsword proficiency still have to use a light blade, shuriken, dagger, or hand crossbow if they want to sneak attack. It specifically states this when describing sneak attack. It seems overly restrictive, and really makes sneak of shadows pointless for characters that rely on military weapons.