"Accident of Math"???

[MerricB]

Remember, though, that most Rogues that expect to go toe-to-toe have at least 12 Con. 10 Con on a melee Rogue will get you killed at any level in most games I've seen. 12 Con gives about 21 HP. That will survive the ogre's attack a large majority of the time (the Ogre may do 9 to 23, but the chance of rolling either 22 or 23 is only 1 in 12 because of the normative tendency of the 2d8).

Indeed, but the chance is there. Over a large number of combats, it comes up quite a bit. (Not to mention the 3rd level rogue... for whom the Ogre is a proper challenge... really gets taken out by it!)

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

You're right on the sneak damage. *head slapping smiley*

Do you see what I mean about using rogue as your combat example, though?

Somewhat. I don't agree that combat shouldn't be the primary method of balancing characters; I feel that characters need to be balanced (somewhat) within combat, and also out of combat. In a classic dungeoncrawl, the rogue may get a few traps to disable, but generally that takes up only a small section of time. Combat is far more time intensive, and so if you spend 3 hours of combat sitting out of the game for the 10 minutes it takes for your rogue to say, "I've disarmed the trap"... well...

Cheers!

 

[Scribble]

But is all this math problem taking into account the various buffs and defenses?

 

[Gentlegamer]

Somewhat. I don't agree that combat shouldn't be the primary method of balancing characters; I feel that characters need to be balanced (somewhat) within combat, and also out of combat. In a classic dungeoncrawl, the rogue may get a few traps to disable, but generally that takes up only a small section of time. Combat is far more time intensive, and so if you spend 3 hours of combat sitting out of the game for the 10 minutes it takes for your rogue to say, "I've disarmed the trap"... well...

Well, one "combat challenge" of the rogue in dungeons is sneaking ahead of the party to scout and report on monster locations/hazards. Another is secluding himself in an alcove to get the perfect backstab in on a monster that the party lures to their location. Yet another is using his social skills (either play acted or through Diplomacy/Bluff rolls, etc.) to trick enemy characters into compromising situations (think Cugel the Clever).

I guess what I'm saying is that the "combat role" of a rogue (and other non-fighter types) is more expansive than having the numbers to go "toe-to-toe" in a melee with a fearsome creature. Balancing them based on this is much more interesting and leads to a richer, more varied play experience than making mere combat the cardinal upon which their effectiveness is measured.

 

[MerricB]

But is all this math problem taking into account the various buffs and defenses?

At low levels... yes. They don't really apply; the party doesn't have the resources for them.

At high levels... yes. They're the problem: they vary so much that the AC and Attack Bonuses are unpredictable.

Cheers!

 

[MerricB]

Well, one "combat challenge" of the rogue in dungeons is sneaking ahead of the party to scout and report on monster locations/hazards.

Err... I'd classify that as non-combat. It's important, but not combat.

Another is secluding himself in an alcove to get the perfect backstab in on a monster that the party lures to their location.

That's combat. And it's cool... but if the backstab doesn't take down the Ogre, the Ogre then flattens him. That's the problem - not that he can't contribute, but that the Ogre's damage is too high at that level.

Yet another is using his social skills (either play acted or through Diplomacy/Bluff rolls, etc.) to trick enemy characters into compromising situations (think Cugel the Clever).

A great non-combat role for the rogue.

I guess what I'm saying is that the "combat role" of a rogue (and other non-fighter types) is more expansive than having the numbers to go "toe-to-toe" in a melee with a fearsome creature. Balancing them based on this is much more interesting and leads to a richer, more varied play experience than making mere combat the cardinal upon which their effectiveness is measured.

I think you need to balance combat within itself, and non-combat within itself; I've started a new thread for this, so we should wander off there to continue it!

Cheers!

 

[Scribble]

At low levels... yes. They don't really apply; the party doesn't have the resources for them.

At high levels... yes. They're the problem: they vary so much that the AC and Attack Bonuses are unpredictable.

Cheers!

I'm not sure... I mean I understand what you're saying with the math... But it seems like it's being stretched to fit the problem in this case...

It;'s taking into account the ogre and the rogue, but doing so in an "extremes" situation...

And what about the other party members like the fighter or the cleric?

Again I understand what you're saying... I guess I just don't feel like that's the big problem when they say math problem... But I could be wrong. (I probably am...)

 

[Gentlegamer]

Ok, combat or not (I'm seeing combat-supportive actions as part of a holistic view of combat itself), there is more for a rogue to do and contribute than just make a few find/disarm traps rolls, so seeking to bolster his combat abilities as a class relative to the monsters isn't necessary for game balance (or desirable, in my opinion). See what I mean?

I'll meet you in the other thread!

 

[Scribble]

That's combat. And it's cool... but if the backstab doesn't take down the Ogre, the Ogre then flattens him. That's the problem - not that he can't contribute, but that the Ogre's damage is too high at that level.

Maybe thats it.. That's the issue I have with this... The rogue isn't the combat initiator.. he's the clean up guy... The tank gets out there cracks off a hit, and then the rogue should stick it with the final stab to the gut. It's what sneak attack, to me at least, is all about...

The dirty shot the enemy didn't expect... It's not a conan style ALALALALALALALALA sword swining over the head type thing...

 

[MerricB]

I'm not sure... I mean I understand what you're saying with the math... But it seems like it's being stretched to fit the problem in this case...

At low levels, monster damage is too high for any PC. The rogue is a convenient example, because the Ogre can take him down in one hit.

At high levels, the bonuses to hit are all over the place, so setting a "fair" AC is very hard.

Cheers!