Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[Zamkaizer]

Interesting reaction. Are you still as pleased when you realize you can't use any of your powers or sneak attack with a sap?

I, for one, am.

I see little about a weapon which, by it's very definition, works in an inefficient manner and is only truly effective when applied to the head, that lends itself to subtleties of technique and optimization of use. I would agree though, that the rogue would benefit from access to cudgels or blackjacks.

 

[Lizard]

My first reaction to the rogue write-up is... not enough options. 3.x rogues were one of the most flexible classes. I've played, DMed, or seen played at least 5 different core rogue archetypes, all of which were pretty distinct. Heck, even in 2.5 (Skills and Powers), there were more options for 1st level rogues than what 4E seems to be offering.

I am going to guess that there's a lot of "Options for all classes", and what we're seeing for the rogue is the 'freebies'. It would not surprise me if, for example, every class got a 'free' weapon proficiency at first level, over and above their class proficiencies.

If something like this doesn't exist, then, yeah, the classes have become a lot more restrictive. (And I think spelling out 'builds', instead of players discovering them organically, is a Really Bad Idea, but not one which remotely surprises me. But it has no real rules impact, and, since the fluff in 4e tends to give me migraines if I think too hard about it, I'm just going to ignore anything that doesn't have a mechanical effect.

 

[Sammael]

BTW, why would anyone pick Piercing Strike over Deft Strike? Is Ref generally so much lower than AC, that it's worth losing the ability to use the maneuver with two other weapons and the ability to move 2 squares prior to the attack?

 

[small pumpkin man]

I do like it, although I am getting slightly worried about the skill stuff, if the skill training feat still only gives one skill I'm going to be disappointed, although it's possible all classes get 4-6 skills, in which case I'll be happy.

Not surprised about the short weapon list though, the fact that they were making weapons more unique pretty much ensured that the list of available weapons was going to be shortened (I assume several weapons are going to have their stats combined).

 

[Reaper Steve]

Wow! Further proof that 4E is exceeding my wildest expectations about what D&D could become!

I'd go into detail about what I like, but that would pretty much mean a cut-and-paste of the article.

 

[WyzardWhately]

BTW, why would anyone pick Piercing Strike over Deft Strike? Is Ref generally so much lower than AC, that it's worth losing the ability to use the maneuver with two other weapons and the ability to move 2 squares prior to the attack?

Well, some of us suspect that AC is going to be Reflex + Armor Bonus. So, you'd basically be ignoring their armor bonus.

 

[Lizard]

BTW, why would anyone pick Piercing Strike over Deft Strike? Is Ref generally so much lower than AC, that it's worth losing the ability to use the maneuver with two other weapons and the ability to move 2 squares prior to the attack?

AC is Reflex+Armor Bonus. So against armored foes, it matters a great deal. Reflex is Touch Defense, for all practical purposes. Assume that, say, plate armor is still +8 armor, being able to avoid that is pretty nice...

 

[Silvergriffon]

A few thoughts:

chaotic evil
For those who were hoping (like I am) that Law and Chaos have gone away, it is possible that the reference to "evil or chaotic evil rogues" may indicate that Law and Chaos are presented as an optional advanced alignment system. Or maybe I'm reaching.

2 builds
Notice that everything under the two builds is presented as "suggested". I'm pretty sure that these are not restrictive choices, but rather sample paths for new players, possibly replacing the more detailed sample character write-ups of 3e.

thievery and stealth mandatory
I kind of like that rogues are returning to their thieving roots. For those of you concerned that this means the demise of other types of rogues, it could just indicate that if you want a swashbuckling scoundrel (or whatever) there are other ways to do it. Perhaps as possible paths for the fighter or through multiclassing and/or class training. In fact, I wish they named this class Thief and either retired the Rogue or saved it for a future class. Its also worth noting that we don't yet know the full extent of what is rolled into the thievery skill. It may have uses applicable to many different types of rogue.

too few weapons (and skills)
This could be because there are multiple ways to acquire new ones. Feats, multi-classing, class training, race, etc. And I actually prefer that sneak attack and other rogue powers shown remain usable only with a limited selection of rogue weapons.

 

[Ahglock]

Hence why I said "short sword" and not "Le petit stabby" or whatever.

I so want to wield the "Le petit stabby". I kill you, I kill you with my "Le petit stabby" +5.

 

[Lizard]

thievery and stealth mandatory
I kind of like that rogues are returning to their thieving roots. For those of you concerned that this means the demise of other types of rogues, it could just indicate that if you want a swashbuckling scoundrel (or whatever) there are other ways to do it. Perhaps as possible paths for the fighter or through multiclassing and/or class training. In fact, I wish they named this class Thief and either retired the Rogue or saved it for a future class. Its also worth noting that we don't yet know the full extent of what is rolled into the thievery skill. It may have uses applicable to many different types of rogue.

I can't see a problem with simply saying "You get 6 skills. Probably good to get Thievery and Stealth, but if you don't want to, you don't have to."