A short guide to the Essential Thief's movement tricks

[Prestidigitalis]

I'm AFB, but I seem to recall that Thug's trick doesn't limit the OA to just the Thief. If he's adjacent to anyone else, he's also getting OA'd by them.

Sadly, the text is "Until the end of your next turn, enemies you flank provoke opportunity attacks from you if they shift."

I usually see parties built together so if someone is playing a melee rogue, they're destined to have a flanking buddy.

I "usually see" that too -- but only in my sweeter dreams. Our group just doesn't do that much. We also have a high enough mortality rate that anyone who does work well as a flanking partner may well get replaced by someone else who doesn't.

Depending on your set up, I could also see Unbalancing trick carrying over well. If you're getting off turn attacks (And with the new Sneak Attack you'd better be).

Sure, but if you are in that kind of setup, you probably have flanking too, so how much is it really going to help you personally?

 

[Mengu]

The only thing is, I'm not sure that using Acrobat's Trick twice, consecutively, in one turn would count under the double move rules. Can someone remind me of the exact wording of the most recent version of "double move"? (I'm assuming it's been updated at some point since the PHB.)

The relevant bits are:

Same Move Action: To double move, you have to take the same move action twice in a row on the same turn.

One Speed: When you double move, add the speeds of the two move actions together and then move.​

You are taking the same move action twice. If you are speed 6, acrobat's trick gives you climb speed 4, your One Speed would be 8 for the double move.

Catch Hold -- that's what I was referring to. Anyway, so long as the distance you needed to move was less than double your speed minus 4, it wouldn't matter. Let's hear it for elves and canonical 50 foot cliffs!

For the non-elf, it's not too terribly big a difference. with a double move, you could normally climb 6, the acrobat trick lets you climb 8. With the elf when you get to 10, it starts to look a bit crazier, but they really are only going from 7 to 10, so not that big of a difference there either. And if you're a dwarf or gnome you are going from 5 to 6, barely a difference.

There was already some crazy stuff you could do with a fleet footed elf druid with boots of spider climbing, though that did require an athletics check.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

For the non-elf, it's not too terribly big a difference. with a double move, you could normally climb 6, the acrobat trick lets you climb 8. With the elf when you get to 10, it starts to look a bit crazier, but they really are only going from 7 to 10, so not that big of a difference there either. And if you're a dwarf or gnome you are going from 5 to 6, barely a difference.

Oh, the speed isn't much more, granted. I'm more impressed by the bit about not needing to make an Athletics check. No chance of failing and making no progress or even falling, and it means that one of the big reasons for a Thief to have a high Strength score is removed.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Acrobat's Trick:

Awesome. In our party we get a lot of work to have flanks (even for people who aren't the rogue) so it's double awesome.

Tactical Trick:

Perhaps not as great as you think - with any of the "shift a couple of squares" powers, it's a snap to get a flank against anyone your allies are next to. It's also fairly rare to need a long OA-free run when your allies are mingled into your enemies.

Ambush Trick:

This one really fills a niche. "noone is next to the enemy I want to kill" is a big targeting issue.

Escape Artist's Trick:

I like this one. It's possible to shift to a really dangerous flank and then back again, for instance. A good example of why tactical trick might not be all that good.

Sneak's Trick:

Essentials rogues get utility powers, right? I'd be seriously considering picking up some of the regular rogue powers if stealth was your goal.

*** The dividing line.

Well, some of your picks are a bit redundant. You're not likely to see situations where escape artist's trick can't fill the task you have tactical trick for.

Tumbling Trick:

The cleave is good. Killing a minion is well worth losing a couple of points of damage on a prime target for.

Unbalancing Trick:

Definately not a pick for a selfish rogue, but proning is a powerful tool. It's just a shame you can't prone someone THEN shift away.

*** Another dividing line.

Thug's Trick:No, it will probably stay and fight, and what better target than you, the high-damage, low-defense Thief?

Your prime stat is dex. Your defense competes with that of most defenders, and if you want you can push it higher. A rogue's fragility comes in his low surges mostly - and if your DM's monsters care about your surge count, then he's metagaming quite heavily. ("I don't care if I die, at least I made it more likely that they'll die two fights from now!")

Feinting Trick:

Yeah, this one stinks, and it stinks in the specific situation that one of it's designers said it was intended to be used in.

However if you happen to use the dragon that introduces duellist rogues, then it has it's benefits.

 

[Prestidigitalis]

Saeviomagy and others:

I think the reason for the difference in our assessments comes down to one thing: my choices are based on the idea of a Thief who can operate equally well in melee or at range, without much dependence on party members, and even if there isn't a whole lot of helpful terrain to make peek-a-boo sniping easy.

So, for example, if a defender simply closes to melee range, the Thief can use Tactical Trick at range, or in melee but without having to get around opposite the defender. This can be important if the defender simply moves to the closest square instead of trying to edge around behind.

Saeviomagy said: "Your prime stat is dex. Your defense competes with that of most defenders, and if you want you can push it higher."

I guess you could say "competes" if you mean "is within 1 or 2 points, mostly". Unless you push Dex to 20, you are 1 point behind an AC 17 scale-wearing two-weapon fighter, 2 points behind a typical Swordmage, and 3 points behind an AC 20 plate+shield Paladin or Knight. In fact, the only characters with a worse AC are Wizards or Sorcerers who don't take an AC feat (leather or Unarmored Agility) and those hapless Con-based Shamans that everyone keeps expecting to be updated.

But the bigger problem with being a flanking-based Rogue is that you are easily flanked yourself, and because you are inflicting high damage smack in the middle of the pileup, you are quite likely to get ganged up on unless you have more than one defender covering your back.

Anyway... One of the most interesting changes to Rogue's quest for CA appears in the Essentials chapter on Knights. What Rogue (of any stripe) would not want to be paired with a Knight using the Defend the Line stance? A single feat (Vicious Advantage, upgraded to Expert Sneak at paragon) and you can have CA just about at will, and at range. So oddly enough, at the same time WotC introduced a Rogue that can operate almost completely independently, they added an option that makes a Rogue that depends entirely on teamwork (the Brutal Scoundrel) even more powerful. At least, if the Knight can be convinced to use Defend the Line exclusively or nearly so.

Thanks for the input, everyone. Obviously I'm not up to writing a real guide for CharOp yet. This was more just my thoughts on the topic.

 

[WalterKovacs]

And by "within 1 or 2 points mostly" you mean "has the same or better AC when the defender is marking the target, or better yet, has their aura up"? In which case, the to-hit roll for either of you is the same, and attacking you provokes an attack [or auto-damage, etc] from the defender?

 

[Prestidigitalis]

And by "within 1 or 2 points mostly" you mean "has the same or better AC when the defender is marking the target, or better yet, has their aura up"? In which case, the to-hit roll for either of you is the same, and attacking you provokes an attack [or auto-damage, etc] from the defender?

Well, again, it depends what you mean. Exactly how many targets are you assuming the defender has marked? Does it include the ones that are two or more squares away from the defender, as in the case below?

xxmmxx
xxmRmF
xxmmxx

I was positing a case where the Rogue presents a big fat juicy target once it positions itself in the middle of the melee. That's what I drew (okay, typed) above. It happens, and that F-for-Fighter up there can't do a damn thing to protect that Rogue.

I presume that you will now posit a controller of some sort which will zap all of those little m's. With a Reflex attack or some method of leaving the Rogue out of it, the Rogue might not even get hit at all. But controller attacks tend to be low-damage, so the odds are pretty good that most of those m's will still be around another round to attack the Rogue again. Alternatively, the Rogue can use some kind of shifty encounter power to thread a path out of the horde, but of course at that point the flanking-based CA goes out the window again.

I'm not saying it's impossible for a Rogue to survive in the midst of a dense melee. I'm saying that there are plenty of cases where it can get dicey in the extreme, and no amount of party strategy or synergy or cobbled-together bonuses will save the day. A Rogue's innate AC is on the low side, period, unless it is specifically built for high AC, viz 20 Dex + Hide Armor + Two Weapon Defense + Parrying Dagger, which a human can buy as early as level 4, at the expense of virtually everything else a Rogue's heart could desire.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Generally speaking, a balanced encounter will either have minions involved, or the number of monsters won't outnumber the party. Maybe one or two extra monsters at most.

So a scenario where the rogue is surrounded and only the fighter is anywhere around is a bit of a loaded scenario. Other party members do have some stuff to contribute, not just damage, but means of making it a bit harder for the party to surround one of their allies. Now, I do have some players who play strikers that charge in and get surrounded before the rest of the party can catch up, but that's more a lack of strategy/forethought than anything else.

Your list of people with worse AC sort of ignores a few factors ... A warlock doesn't use Int as his attack stat. So he can be in line with a rogue if he goes 18/18 and the Rogue doesn't go with 20 Dex. A rogue, especially a thief, has very little to lose if going with 20 Dex. The Cha/Str based tricks aren't too powerful, while Dex doesn't just improve AC, but also attack rolls and damage. A melee ranger gets hide (as does a barbarian), but they still need to put points into dex (16 and 14 respectively) to be on par with a rogue, which means taking away from their secondary stat (Wis, Con/Cha respectively, not counting the dual wielding barbarian). For shieldless classes, Rogue's AC is quite good, especially if the difference between a defender (who have the best AC in the game with a shield) is that the defender has an extra 2 points of AC from their heavy shield (or equivalent).

The rogue has mobility. While being stuck in the situation may hurt, if the rogue survives he can get out of it on the following turn. And on that turn he can yell at the leader, the controler, and any other players at the table for letting the rogue and the fighter take on the entire mass of melee baddies on their own. With the various tricks, the rogue can get in and out of flanks (escape artist even allows it on the same turn, and a number of tricks make flanking unneccesary). As such, the rogue can position itself close enough to the fighter to benefit from marking/aura, although it also requires the fighter get himself into good positioning as well. Any other allies in melee should hopefully do their job and make it a little more difficult for any one member of the party to be swarmed by minions or every monster on the field.

 

[Saeviomagy]

This:

xxmmxx
xxmRmF
xxmmxx

Turns into this if the rogue is at range

xxxxxxmmx
xFxxxxmRm
xxxxxxmmx

Unless you're fighting in narrow corridors, then strikers standing on their own against monsters that outnumber the party 3 to 1 are likely get surrounded and ripped apart whether they're at range or in melee. Either scenario is a result of bad tactics from the party or brilliant tactics from the monsters. Especially when it's managed against the extremely mobile rogue.

Tumbling trick's main benefit only requires you to have a 12 strength, at which point you can squish a minion each round that you use it in addition to keeping up the pressure on your primary target.

Again, the only power on the list that I can see no use for is feinting trick, because the entire concept behind it is critically flawed (ie - that rogues will spend any significant amount of time without CA).

 

[Prestidigitalis]

This:


Turns into this if the rogue is at range

xxxxxxmmx
xFxxxxmRm
xxxxxxmmx

Unless you're fighting in narrow corridors, then strikers standing on their own against monsters that outnumber the party 3 to 1 are likely get surrounded and ripped apart whether they're at range or in melee. Either scenario is a result of bad tactics from the party or brilliant tactics from the monsters. Especially when it's managed against the extremely mobile rogue.

Tumbling trick's main benefit only requires you to have a 12 strength, at which point you can squish a minion each round that you use it in addition to keeping up the pressure on your primary target.

Again, the only power on the list that I can see no use for is feinting trick, because the entire concept behind it is critically flawed (ie - that rogues will spend any significant amount of time without CA).

Valid points. I overstated my case. As I said in an earlier comment, I was creating a build more than a generic guide, and the build was for a generalist Thief who could operate nearly indepently. There are builds for which Tumbling Trick could definitely come in handy. I still like the 5 I put at the top best though.