Unearthed Arcana Varient Rogue - Sneak Attack for Fighter Feats

[TheEvil]

In Unearthed Arcana, one of the varient class features for the rogue is to substitute bonus feats as a fighter for sneak attack. The question is this: Should the rogue's levels count at fighter levels for the purposes of feat qualification?

 

[EyeontheMountain]

Oh, god no.

I can think of a dozen ways to make a fighter much more deadly with a half dozen feats than a few d6 of sneak attack. Not even remotely balanced.

I am also worried about soem of the multi-class feats in somplete scoundrel, which are similar to this question.

On allows a scout/ranger's levels to stack for skirmish and favored enemy

Another allows a rogue/swachbuckler's levels to stack for sneak attaack and some swachbuckletr abilities.

Very strong.

 

[TheEvil]

I am somewhat torn on the question myself, but I am leaning toward the Bonus feats counting the rogue levels as fighter levels. Sneak attack is a lot to give up.

 

[wildstarsreach]

I would allow the Rogue to change out a d6 of sneak attack changed out for fighter feats not to exceed an equal balance of d6 of sneak attack and fighter based feats.

 

[rgard]

In Unearthed Arcana, one of the varient class features for the rogue is to substitute bonus feats as a fighter for sneak attack. The question is this: Should the rogue's levels count at fighter levels for the purposes of feat qualification?

Do you mean Weapon Specialization? If you do, that is Fighter exclusive. Can you give some examples?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[TheEvil]

Do you mean Weapon Specialization? If you do, that is Fighter exclusive. Can you give some examples?

Thanks,
Rich

Weapon Specialization is the easiest example, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting would be another. To be honest, it never occured to me that there would be anything other then Fighter exclusive feats that this question might apply to.

 

[Votan]

Absolutely. Losing sneak attack and being restricted to Fighter Bonus feats is already a major punishment. I think that this is the least that should be considered.

 

[Mistwell]

Absolutely. Losing sneak attack and being restricted to Fighter Bonus feats is already a major punishment. I think that this is the least that should be considered.

I agree. Fighter feats instead of sneak attack is already a fair trade, if a tad powerful. They are not actual fighters, just a short hand was of giving the list of feats without having to spell it all out. You still have to meet the prerequisites like always, and a rogue does not meet those prerequisites because they do not have the required levels of the fighter class.

 

[TheEvil]

I agree. Fighter feats instead of sneak attack is already a fair trade, if a tad powerful. They are not actual fighters, just a short hand was of giving the list of feats without having to spell it all out. You still have to meet the prerequisites like always, and a rogue does not meet those prerequisites because they do not have the required levels of the fighter class.

I... don't think he meant what you think he meant...

 

[TheEvil]

I would allow the Rogue to change out a d6 of sneak attack changed out for fighter feats not to exceed an equal balance of d6 of sneak attack and fighter based feats.

Yes, but what is you view on rogue levels counting as fighter levels for the purpose of feat qualification?