NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ZombieRoboNinja" data-source="post: 3968320" data-attributes="member: 54843">Well, I think that's what "backstab" represented back in Ye Olden Dayes. 3e moved a bit towards making rogues "equally useful in combat" by making sneak attack more extensive. They're intentionally taking it even further in 4e, so rogues should be on par with fighters and wizards in terms of tactical usefulness. They're doing this by extending the list of creatures that can be "sneak attacked" and also by extending the circumstances in which rogues can "sneak attack." There will be special abilities (I imagine kinda like Improved Feint) that make "combat advantage" (the new "opponent is flat-footed") easier to achieve.All this does indeed make sneak attack a lot less "special." It seems like in 4e, if you're a rogue who can't set up a sneak attack almost every round, you're not doing your job in combat. I think of this as modeling the idea that a rogue needs to "fight smart" to get his job done. He needs to look for the opportune moment, the hole in the enemy's armor, because he's fighting someone with arms as thick as his thighs and without that advantage he's toast. Fortunately, the 4e rogue is a wily enough combatant to create his own opportunities. If you want a "kidney-stabber" rogue, I'll bet that's still an option, through an assassin "paragon path" if nowhere else. But with all the worrying about 4e being "too dark," surely moving the rogue away from the "evil assassin with a grisly knowledge of how to effectively murder humanoids" towards the "adventurer who uses his quick reflexes and quicker wits to turn the tables against his foes" can only be a good thing. ;-)</blockquote>

Verification