Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[The Little Raven]

I'm sure there is a decent explanation for this percieved whomping of armor's usefulness.

I remember people claiming the 3e monk was overpowered at first, and there was a decent explanation for it: kneejerk responses to limited information are often wrong.

 

[frankthedm]

* A feat called Backstabber... since they've already got Sneak Attack, I wonder just what this does?

I'm guessing it lets you use your sneak attack on AoOs when foes leave your threatened area. That's the only way someone gives up their back without facing.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Interesting article. The crunchy bits are coming! And it was definitely a Sneak Attack on me. I go to sleep, just having posted something on out of combat roles for d20 modern, and planned at looking at the responses in the morning. But what happens? Suddenly, a Rogue sneak attacks the boards, there are no replies to my post, but several pages - hell, even threads - inspired by this WotC article!

My observations, comments and speculations so far:
- Healing Surges: The number probably describes how often you can use a Second-Wind like mechanic per day. (healing probably 1/2 or 1/4 of your normal characters hit points). My guess is that actually triggering such a surge requires using another per day or per encounter power (never an at will power). This means a Fighters time to call it a day is when he has had enough encounters to deplete all his Healing Surges - but this can never be only a single encounter, since there are not enough "triggers" for him available.

- Weapon Profiency: The list looks awfully short. I suspect that there will be no longer a profiency penalty for weapons, but a bonus (wether it's +1, +2 or +5 remains to be seen. I suspect towards the latter). This would imply that, unlike in 3E, Fighters don't automatically hit better - but their range of weapons they can employ will probably be bigger of others. It might even mean that Wizards could compete with a Fighter if wielding a weapon their proficient in (like a Staff) - at least in the pure to-hit area. I guess a major part of the actual combat power for a weapon stems from powers, not from anything else. (And a Wizard will use his Staff to sling fireballs, not to hit the enemy fighter over the head with it)

- Skills: The skill list is short, but it doesn't seem to miss anything I would find cruicial for playing a Rogue. But I really wonder how INT will factor in into skill points. As others, I liked playing smart characters (icluding Rogues) with loads of skills.
It's noticeable that the Rogue doesn't have Diplomacy on his list, which means he probably isn't the party's speaker anymore. (But who will be it? Warlords and Clerics? Fighters?). So he is still there "middle-man" (Streetwise) and can still read people (Insight). Lying and finding information, people or goods are also still covered.
The set of "social" skills might explain how social encounters can become more interesting for the party as a whole - if not one character can cover all social skills, that the party needs to work together to "survive" in a social encounter scenario.

 

[frankthedm]

I'm sure there is a decent explanation for this perceived whomping of armor's usefulness.

Rogues bypass armor seems to be fairly constant, but a big thing is, bypassing armor is NOT as big as it was in 3E. Even a fighter's Reflex defense is nowhere near as pitiful as his 3E touch AC was. But yes, now the fighter has GOOD reason to want to face foes other than the thieves guild. This is a GOOD THING^tm, the party is supposed to be facing dungeons filled with monsters, not towns filled with rogues.


In party balance wise, a rogue seems to be hurting for attack bonus, he does not have the "to hit" to go through AC.

 

[Dragonblade]

Anyone else have trouble viewing the article? The only way I can see it is by typing in the URL for the printer friendly version. Otherwise, I get an HTTP 500 server error.

Yet, when I went to my friend's house earlier and showed him the article we could pull it right up.

 

[Mentat55]

Overall, I think the rogue looks pretty good. I wish we could see some more of the trickster rogue build powers, because I am curious how Bluff, Intimidate, and some of these other skills might be used in powers, and how class powers might have lots of interesting non-combat applications, but I guess I must make due with what I have.

The limited choice of weapons is a bit surprising, but aside from the cudgel or sap, I think it captures the core flavor of the rogue nicely -- these are all smaller, concealable weapons. The rapier and shortbow are notable omissions.

I like the powers! 3.5E started to attack this with feats based around the rogue's sneak attack (like Ambush feats from Complete Scoundrel), but I think divorcing it from sneak attack is the way to go.

Sneak attack -- no mention of conditions that prevent its use! Immune to crit creatures is the obvious example, but my parties ran into the problem with concealment as well. The damage isn't as ridiculous now, so it doesn't need the same level of restrictions, probably.

Some thoughts:

1. The choice of two Rogue Tactics (Brutal Scoundrel and Artful Dodger) and their associated two builds seems rather limiting. But it does open up space (in the Martial Power supplement, for example) for something like the witty rogue build and Rapier-Sharp Wits as a new Rogue Tactic, and then a slew of powers that interact with this new, Int-based ability.

2. Related to my 1st point, but perhaps one of the trade-offs in trying to make the new system work, and to avoid obvious exploits and problems off the bat, is that they have to narrow the initial set of options a bit. Essentially, go for quality over quantity. Could they achieve both quality AND quantity? Hard to say -- my experience in non-RPG things says this is difficult regardless of the discipline, but I am sure there are counter examples.

3. The only non-combat, non-trap related abilities the 3E rogue received was its skill list. Everything else--sneak attack, evasion, uncanny dodge, trapfinding, trap sense--pertain to combat and traps. So this approach to the rogue is not new; of course, it doesn't mean they couldn't have tried something new. But I think what we are seeing is one of the core design philosophies of 4E: balance each class in combat, and balance each class outside of combat, but don't balance these aspects with each other. Balanced combat options requires many different abilities, powers, etc., since there are so many facets to a fight, and because the way a wizard operates should be different that a fighter or rogue. Balancing outside of combat -- could it be they are achieving balance and relevancy for every class by primarily trying to tune the skill system? Already the ability mod + 1/2 level math makes it so the difference between a trained and untrained character is smaller than in 3E (where, at 1st level, the diff. could be easily be +5, and could exceed +20 at high levels).

After all, when people talk about non-combat abilities, it typically boils down to the skills they choose, and perhaps a few feats that interact with them. If each class has a skill space where it is immediately useful, and then through feats can choose other skills to fill out the character and do things that are non-canonical for the class (like a fighter with Diplomacy, for example), I think this is a good thing.

4. Skill choice: Hmm, the rogue gets two trained skills for free, then gets to choose 4 more from a list of 8 others. Seems limiting. But math says there are 70 unique combinations of 4 skills selected from a list of 8. That seems like a fair number of options -- certainly less than 3E, but that largely comes from consolidating the skill list. Certain combos probably make more sense than others. The only complaint I see here is that all rogues must be stealthy (but this seems a bit silly -- this is the D&D thief/rogue to a tee) and good at picking pockets, disarming traps, and opening locks (this objection I understand). But this is probably just like complaining about every rogue getting sneak attack -- each class is going to have defining features. It is the limitation of a class-based system.

 

[frankthedm]

Take a little time to learn how to use a Heavy or Regular crossbow and you will have some hefty range on your sneak attack. Not sure how you would work in combat advantage at such a distance - barring First Strike or perhaps Crimson Edge with a quick teleported retreat perhaps. However I am sure that it is a viable strategy.

Very viable for night time aand underground attackers. Lethally so.

 

[BASHMAN]

Overall, I think the rogue looks pretty good. I wish we could see some more of the trickster rogue build powers, because I am curious how Bluff, Intimidate, and some of these other skills might be used in powers, and how class powers might have lots of interesting non-combat applications, but I guess I must make due with what I have.

The limited choice of weapons is a bit surprising, but aside from the cudgel or sap, I think it captures the core flavor of the rogue nicely -- these are all smaller, concealable weapons. The rapier and shortbow are notable omissions.

I like the powers! 3.5E started to attack this with feats based around the rogue's sneak attack (like Ambush feats from Complete Scoundrel), but I think divorcing it from sneak attack is the way to go.

Sneak attack -- no mention of conditions that prevent its use! Immune to crit creatures is the obvious example, but my parties ran into the problem with concealment as well. The damage isn't as ridiculous now, so it doesn't need the same level of restrictions, probably.

Some thoughts:

1. The choice of two Rogue Tactics (Brutal Scoundrel and Artful Dodger) and their associated two builds seems rather limiting. But it does open up space (in the Martial Power supplement, for example) for something like the witty rogue build and Rapier-Sharp Wits as a new Rogue Tactic, and then a slew of powers that interact with this new, Int-based ability.

2. Related to my 1st point, but perhaps one of the trade-offs in trying to make the new system work, and to avoid obvious exploits and problems off the bat, is that they have to narrow the initial set of options a bit. Essentially, go for quality over quantity. Could they achieve both quality AND quantity? Hard to say -- my experience in non-RPG things says this is difficult regardless of the discipline, but I am sure there are counter examples.

3. The only non-combat, non-trap related abilities the 3E rogue received was its skill list. Everything else--sneak attack, evasion, uncanny dodge, trapfinding, trap sense--pertain to combat and traps. So this approach to the rogue is not new; of course, it doesn't mean they couldn't have tried something new. But I think what we are seeing is one of the core design philosophies of 4E: balance each class in combat, and balance each class outside of combat, but don't balance these aspects with each other. Balanced combat options requires many different abilities, powers, etc., since there are so many facets to a fight, and because the way a wizard operates should be different that a fighter or rogue. Balancing outside of combat -- could it be they are achieving balance and relevancy for every class by primarily trying to tune the skill system? Already the ability mod + 1/2 level math makes it so the difference between a trained and untrained character is smaller than in 3E (where, at 1st level, the diff. could be easily be +5, and could exceed +20 at high levels).

After all, when people talk about non-combat abilities, it typically boils down to the skills they choose, and perhaps a few feats that interact with them. If each class has a skill space where it is immediately useful, and then through feats can choose other skills to fill out the character and do things that are non-canonical for the class (like a fighter with Diplomacy, for example), I think this is a good thing.

4. Skill choice: Hmm, the rogue gets two trained skills for free, then gets to choose 4 more from a list of 8 others. Seems limiting. But math says there are 70 unique combinations of 4 skills selected from a list of 8. That seems like a fair number of options -- certainly less than 3E, but that largely comes from consolidating the skill list. Certain combos probably make more sense than others. The only complaint I see here is that all rogues must be stealthy (but this seems a bit silly -- this is the D&D thief/rogue to a tee) and good at picking pockets, disarming traps, and opening locks (this objection I understand). But this is probably just like complaining about every rogue getting sneak attack -- each class is going to have defining features. It is the limitation of a class-based system.

My Rogue/Master Thrower/Thief Acrobat in a 3.5 campaign has 0 ranks in Open Lock, Move Silently, Hide, or Disable Device. Jump, Tumble, Balance, Use Rope, got the most attention. The character is a tough sailor whose main weapon is a Harpoon, and cutlass for boarding actions. The Thief Acrobat stuff is so he can run around up in the rigging, swing down onto the deck, etc. So I guess he cannot be a rogue in 4e-- since he doesn't have "thievery" or "stealth".

As for the Armor being useless comment, I stand by it. Reflex defense is your AC without armor. The attack hits your Reflex-- thus, the armor does nothing to stop it from hitting you. If I'm wrong, please explain how so.

I can only make conjecture based upon the available evidence. Top secret hidden unavailable facts cannot really be used as evidence to counter my argument...

I guess I could infer that some Kewl Powerz are better than the ability to bypass armor, which is why it is not used so much-- but I stand by my statement that the ability to automatically bypass armor at will makes armor useless vs. that opponent.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

My thoughts..

Nothing like waking up on a weekend to find an awesome new &!

• Shuriken is almost certainly the generic term being used for thrown weapons.
• HP includes your Con score, my that's a departure from the d20 system!
• There seem to be quite a few healing surges, so I'm hoping that you can only use a certain number each encounter, or boss battles will be a little easy.
• I've no problem forcing skills on the character, but I'd also allow a passionate plea from a player to change one or both.
• No Initiative skill? That's.. odd.. I guess it's just your Dex mod + 1/2 level?
• Here's my secret hope: you get further skills equal to your Int mod, but they don't have to be class skills!
• Die size increase with shuriken - I think that's the new 'you're good with weapon X' and might also work for 'you use a weapon bigger than the PHB one'. At least the Pit Fiend mace was d12 and he was large and perhaps good with it?
• Sneak attack progression - my inner modron hates that it doesn't scale 2d6/4d6/6d6!!!
• Isn't it obvious that the [W] entry for all these attacks is the printing code for the sword-symbol from the miniatures stat cards?
• Piercing strike does seem too good. But it won't be. Perhaps AC is not just Reflex + Bonus after all? Perhaps AC represents a non-dodging defence. Defences currently scale from 10 + stat to 25 + stat, so why not have the best armour reach that at top level? Full Plate + 5 is AC 25 + Dex? Str? I mean, unless they heavily scale down Armour Bonus anyway, won't AC values be through the roof?
• Crimson Edge has a 'Miss' entry - which I guess is like the 'you saved against my fireball' of 3E. So Fireball will probably read something like 'Fire blasts area X. Int vs. Reflex for ? + Int damage. Miss: Half damage.'

 

[The Little Raven]

My Rogue/Master Thrower/Thief Acrobat in a 3.5 campaign has 0 ranks in Open Lock, Move Silently, Hide, or Disable Device. Jump, Tumble, Balance, Use Rope, got the most attention. The character is a tough sailor whose main weapon is a Harpoon, and cutlass for boarding actions. The Thief Acrobat stuff is so he can run around up in the rigging, swing down onto the deck, etc. So I guess he cannot be a rogue in 4e-- since he doesn't have "thievery" or "stealth".

If the only skills you worried about were Jump, Tumble, Balance, and Use Rope, then you're in luck, because Jump is in Athletics, Tumble and Balance are in Acrobatics, and Use Rope is either subsumed into other skills or an ability score check (so it's still possible). So, your guy will need Athletics and Acrobatics to cover those bases... and with a free Thievery and Stealth, he's got more stuff to do now... with two more skills to choose, for even more stuff to do. A couple feats in the right place (Weapon Proficiencies; no different than 3e, since harpoon and cutlass is not on the rogue list), and he's what he was before AND more.