D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] Rogue's Sneak Attack

[Lela]

There are monsters too tall to sneak attack?

Where the heck did that come from?

 

[two]

too tall to sneak attack

There was an obscure sage ruling I thought a while back, that made it into the errata...I haven not checked for sure though...

It was to the effect that a halfling rogue could NOT sneak attack a giant because it could not "reach vital areas," etc.

Something like anything bigger than 2 sizes increase you can't sneak attack or something. I'd better go back and check.

Ring of Blinking? yeah nice item. It still not work against fort armor, minor (minor mind you) cloak of displacement, uncanny dodge, etc.

But yeah I feel for you. Rogue16 is definately in the "akkk my main method of damage puts me right next to that XXX and my d6 hit dice and lame con makes it an owiieee every time!"

Plus, naturally, when you DO connect the sneak attack dice damage probably is less than 50. 50 points of damage at level 16 is a yawner for a melee cleric, paladin, fighter, druid, ranger, and any of the serious or semi-serious spell casters. I guess that makes pretty much every class.

 

[Dr_Rictus]

I have a 16th level Rogue who recently got a Ring of Blinking. So when it's activated, he pretty much gets to sneak every time (unless the creature is immune - which I'll admit it happening more and more).

In fairness, though, let's note that he also gets a 20% miss chance on each of his attacks. And at 16th level, the improved invisibility necessary to get the same benefit at no penalty isn't all that hard to come by in a well-stocked party. Plus, any sentient foe who hasn't sprung for a potion of blur (dirt cheap at that level) for just such a situation should probably have his head examined.

What that means about the balance of sneak attacks at high level, I don't know. I'm just saying that it becomes more about who has what spells and much less about setting up flanking and such. (Which in turn makes it somewhat an issue of whether the ring of blinking is appropriately priced).

 

[Dimwhit]

Ring of Blinking? yeah nice item. It still not work against fort armor, minor (minor mind you) cloak of displacement, uncanny dodge, etc.

But yeah I feel for you. Rogue16 is definately in the "akkk my main method of damage puts me right next to that XXX and my d6 hit dice and lame con makes it an owiieee every time!"

Plus, naturally, when you DO connect the sneak attack dice damage probably is less than 50. 50 points of damage at level 16 is a yawner for a melee cleric, paladin, fighter, druid, ranger, and any of the serious or semi-serious spell casters. I guess that makes pretty much every class.

Ring of Blinking - you're right. There are still ways to negate it. But it take the pressure off me having to try to get into sneak position.

My Rogue does have an awesome bow now, so I only need to get within 30' of the creature I'm attacking. Besides, I have a good CON and over 100 hit points, so I can take the hits.

It's true that I do less than 50 points in an attack, but it's not often that anyone, even our amazing Barbarian, does more than that in an attack. We don't have ultra-powerful characters, and the magic is kept in check, so we're not killing Dragons in 3 rounds or anything. So because of that, my Rogue holds his own.

He's also the best utility character I've played. He can do it all, and I have a blast with him.

Anyway, I'll stop. Just glad I get to keep using him as I have in the past.

 

[Lela]

I wouldn't agree about the vital areas thing. For taking on giants there are plenty of vital areas in the feet alone. Look at that big blood vescil (sp?) that runs across the top. Also, note the Achilies Tendon in back. A giant is going to have a lot of strain on that tendon.

Also, the way you use the weapon (twisting, digging in, angling, changing direction, etc.) can account for the increased damage. You managed to get between a bone or under a muscle and tear at it. It's going to have an effect.

The "Vital Area" doesn't always have to be an internal organ. And, since the blood vescil in the foot will do less damage it actually reflects the high HP a giant has better.


The main reason I don't agree on that has nothing to do with flavor though. Many people say they can't explain Evasion (and thus don't like it). This is similar. It's a mechanic. It makes the system work. Deal with it. Not everything in life can be explained.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

In fairness, though, let's note that he also gets a 20% miss chance on each of his attacks. And at 16th level, the improved invisibility necessary to get the same benefit at no penalty isn't all that hard to come by in a well-stocked party. Plus, any sentient foe who hasn't sprung for a potion of blur (dirt cheap at that level) for just such a situation should probably have his head examined.

What that means about the balance of sneak attacks at high level, I don't know. I'm just saying that it becomes more about who has what spells and much less about setting up flanking and such. (Which in turn makes it somewhat an issue of whether the ring of blinking is appropriately priced).

well at the really high levels rogues should also have access to true seing so things like blur shouldn't be much of an issue. Only problems are immune creatures and fort armor really.

 

[two]

that's the real problem...

The defense against sneak attaks are always a lot easier/cheaper than the rogue's counters. Blur works up to level...what?

How much does an "always on" true seeing item cost?

How much does your standard mithril buckler of heavy fortification cost? (useable by all classes).

Besides stopping sneak attacks, heavy fort also kills crits dead. Not an inconsiderable advantage. At all.

One might argue that by the time the rogue has true seeing, most everyone will be fortified to some extent.

Oh and previously when I said "50 points of damage" I did not mean per attack, I meant per round. Usually a rogue that is forced to move only gets 1 sneak attack in (unless it's a 5' step) while the fighter/cleric/barbarian/paladin/whatever can just move once and then full attack, getting multiple attacks as long as the bad guy does not run like a wuss.

At higher levels Ring of Blinking + bow + rapid shot - 20% miss chance per attack would be almost ok damage most of the time --probably. If only there were not so many sneak attack immune things out there.

 

[Mista Collins]

On some levels I think it is too good. Though I generally am for buffing the fighter instead of nerfing the rogue. Yeah the fighter does more damage on average, but really considering the lack of anything but fighting talent there should be about 0 situations in the game where the rogue out damages the fighter. Really specific non class oriented scenarios where a rogue happens to do more damage sure, but just doing more damage every time he wins initiative or when he flanks heck no IMO.

So in other words does the rogue do to much damage for someone with 8 skill points some cool class abilites and tons of class skills maybe not, does the fighter do too little daamge for someone with 2 skill points and crap class skills heck yeah.

Overall the fighter is much better than the rogue in combat. You have to realize that for the rogue to be most effective (at lower levels) he needs to be flanking with an ally. What happens when the rogue is all on his lonesome. Now flip this situation around with a fighter. The fighter can handle is own without an ally flanking.

As for the skill point difference the fighter makes up for it on the number of feats he can take. A 6th level rogue will only have 3 feats (4 if human) and a fighter will have 7 (8 if human). Not only does the fighter have a greater number of feats, but he also has the ability to use any armor or sheild. A rogue doesn't have these options. His best defense in combat is tumbling.

So in the end, in combat a fighter is much better than a rogue hands down. The fighter generally has a greater AC, better attack bonus, more HP, and doesn't need an ally to do a lot of damage.

But the rogue is still my favorite class, hands down.

 

[drnuncheon]

I wouldn't agree about the vital areas thing. For taking on giants there are plenty of vital areas in the feet alone. Look at that big blood vescil (sp?) that runs across the top. Also, note the Achilies Tendon in back. A giant is going to have a lot of strain on that tendon.

I think the source of the ruling is this from the PHB:

"A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach."

J

 

[Lela]

That's rather vague. I can see why they would ask the Sage on it. Rings of something that wasn't edited properly.

Well, if that's the actual rule, go with it. It just doesn't feel right.

Edit: What page is that?