Alternate Sneak Attack

[lord_banus]

I've been having a little trouble with players of late being very powerful due to sneak attacks. They have developed a number of attack maneuvers all relating to getting opponents into flanking positions just for the extra damage which to me seems to be against the spirit of sneak attack.

So instead of the usual 1d6 additional damage, I am thinking of dropping the crit range by one. Sneak attacks are after all a form of a critical strike that is done deliberately rather than luckily. It really cuts down the damage a player can do but seems to be better feel for me.

 

[Tywyll]

I feel your pain

So instead of the usual 1d6 additional damage, I am thinking of dropping the crit range by one. Sneak attacks are after all a form of a critical strike that is done deliberately rather than luckily. It really cuts down the damage a player can do but seems to be better feel for me.

I completely agree with how powerful sneak attack is. Sometimes (often in fact) I think its too powerful. Meanwhile, my player's think its too weak.

Before altering the mechanic, you should perhaps look at what kind of encounters you throw at the party. A few undead, elementals, and constructs will have the rogues on the ropes and (often) feeling helpless. Throw other rogues at the group... a mixed party of fighters and rogues to use the same tactics against the PCs that they use on the NPCs.

If you neuter the SA, at higher levels, a rogue doesn't have much to offer. Sure he can blow through any trap built by man, but so can any spell the wiz or clr casts. Without the SA being a fairly reliable way of boosting damage, the rogue class becomes less and less worthwhile at higher levels.

Also, your idea would work if you used a Grim and Gritty system, or a Vitality/WP system. However, with the standard abstract HP system, you run into just as many dangers. Let me tell you, if you instituted something like what you are suggesting, you can expect to see all your rogue PCs carrying Scythes and other high multiplier weapons to compensate for the reduced damage output, and how silly will that look?

Finally, why do you think pulling off sneak attacks repeatedly is 'against the spirit' of Sneak Attack? Since Sneak Attack represents precision that can be achieved on a foe who's defenses are down, the fact that his being distracted by the fighter allows the rogue to slip a knife in his kidney seems about right to me. Divorce what the ability does from its name (which, for the record, I think was a poor choice).

Finally, you need to make certain you are using all the rules for tumble (make them have lots of negatives for fighting on slick, sharp terrain, or, better yet, use Monte Cook's contested tumble rules). That will help prevent them from tumbling into Flanking positions, especially if that AoO is a Trip attack.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I've been toying around with the idea of changing Sneak Attack for Critical Aim. An ability that works like SA but instead of granting a +1d6 damage lowers the crit range by one and raises the critical hit multiplier by one.

For instance: a dagger in the back will do 1d4 18-20 x3 when applied by a 1st level rogue.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I've been toying around with the idea of changing Sneak Attack for Critical Aim. An ability that works like SA but instead of granting a +1d6 damage lowers the crit range by one and raises the critical hit multiplier by one.

For instance: a dagger in the back will do 1d4 18-20 x3 when applied by a 1st level rogue.

You end up with even worse of a problem as detailed above. I see a lot of Scythe wielding rogues in your future. 19-20 x5? Yes please. Or falchions-- I'm not picky.

I don't think Sneak Attack is too powerful at all. I would classify it as THE core ability of the rogue class.

I will echo the sentiment: The problem is that the GM is not throwing the right kinds of encounters at the party if they keep using the same tactics over and over and sneak attack is getting too much of the spotlight. Undead, constructs, plants, oozes, foes with improved uncanny dodge, invisible foes-- the list goes on and on.

Wulf

 

[Grayhawk]

It seems that most people agree that sneak attack is balanced as it is, and if you do the math that's propably right.

But under certain circumstances sneak attack can be pretty overwhelming, like when a 9th Rogue with Improved Two Weapon Fighting hits with all 4 attacks and deals an extra 20d6 of sneak attack damage.

If (like me) you feel that this is way too much, you can rule that sneak attack only is usable once each round.

 

[AeroDm]

Making sneak attack useable only once per round makes the dual wielding option even less attractive. There is an excellent essay on dual wielding (the link escpaes me atm) that shows mathematically how dual wielding is only affective when you are able to add extra damage dice- via magical qualities or sneak attack.

I can certainly understand how you could see SA as overpowering, especially when the little halfling two-fisting some daggers out damages the raging barbarian by a solid margin... however, over the course of a campaign many encounters will be faced where SA doesn't work. Put the same halfling and barbarian against a animated stone statue (DR 8 immune to crit/sneak) and the halflings d4 can't even come close to penetrating the DR while the barbarian is still smashing it to pieces.

SA is balanced by situations, so it is only overpowering when the DM allows it to be.

 

[Grayhawk]

Making sneak attack useable only once per round makes the dual wielding option even less attractive.

True, but I'm implementing other rules to make TWF more attractive.

Also, I feel that if a DM has to consciously thwart a special ability to keep it in line, it's propably unbalanced to begin with.

 

[Inari]

Heh... outdamaging then ehh? Load of bull****

I've very VERY often witnessed how the barbarian can outdamage the rogue on a regular basis...

Recently, right before me and a friend of mine started a session, we took a simple one-on duel... I had a lvl 4 rogue/lvl 8 unfettered dual-wielding two dire devanian bastard swords +2... I had a +17/+12 to hit with each weapon, meaning I got 4 attacks, and 4 sneak attacks, that summing up to 1d10+7 weapon (1d10+5 offhand). And this was against a barbarian6/berserker6 simpleton with a greataxe +4... he got to go first (just for fun) and mauled me down for 90 something damage in three strikes... meaning I had something like 3 left in HP... fair enough, my turn, and he allowed me to get my sneak attacks (just for kicks). Guess what... I hit with all of my weapons, scoring 3 critical hits, and 12d6 sneak attack... even with that, I was just able to get 110 damage. After that, I forfeited, as I had no hopes of surviving to the next round...

In my opinion, the rogues are good for skills... not much more... They have an impressive list of abilities, but they can't come close to what the barbarian has in damage output, or damage input (those things can take a scary amount of damage before they die... I saw him face up to a hill giant with 4 barbarian levels, wielding a two handed weapon with power attack... scary stuff I tell you! And he managed to withstand 5 hits, before taking the giant down (I helped, but still... power!)).

So don't you dare to argue that the rogue's SA is unfair... even with dual-wielding, the rogues aren't that scary when opposed by the barbarian...

 

[AeroDm]

Heh... outdamaging then ehh? Load of bull****

I've very VERY often witnessed how the barbarian can outdamage the rogue on a regular basis...

Recently, right before me and a friend of mine started a session, we took a simple one-on duel... I had a lvl 4 rogue/lvl 8 unfettered dual-wielding two dire devanian bastard swords +2... I had a +17/+12 to hit with each weapon, meaning I got 4 attacks, and 4 sneak attacks, that summing up to 1d10+7 weapon (1d10+5 offhand). And this was against a barbarian6/berserker6 simpleton with a greataxe +4... he got to go first (just for fun) and mauled me down for 90 something damage in three strikes... meaning I had something like 3 left in HP... fair enough, my turn, and he allowed me to get my sneak attacks (just for kicks). Guess what... I hit with all of my weapons, scoring 3 critical hits, and 12d6 sneak attack... even with that, I was just able to get 110 damage. After that, I forfeited, as I had no hopes of surviving to the next round...

I'm a little confused... didn't you outdamage the barbarian in this example?

Grayhawk- what did you do to make dual wielding more attractive. I'd be interested to see what you came up with.

 

[Inari]

I did outdamage him indeed, but only because of three critical hits! If they would've been normal hits (which by all rights they should've been) then I wouldn't have had a chance... plus, the barbarians have a LOT more HP than your average rogue.