Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[WhatGravitas]

There's really no need to randomize both "damage taking" and "damage dealt." In fact, if you randomize both, you increase the effect of bad luck, which as we all know by now disproportionately affects PCs. So you randomize only weapon/spell damage, because that makes things more uncertain in combat, thus adding excitement. And if you get unlucky in the "HP and damage" department, it's only for one encounter, not for the entire life of the character.

Additionally, healing is perhaps random as well. If we read the healing surges as available healing surges per day/whatever (because of the plural of "surges"), and the amount healed is partially random, we already have sort of random hit points - rolling hit points as well, would double the potential to screw a character ("poor rogue, rolled 1s on his level HD, and needs more healing and now he also rolls 1s on his healing!").

Cheers, LT.

 

[FireLance]

2. It requires a class ability to get an advantage when you surprise the enemy/act before them in combat? That doesn't seem right.

I think you still grant combat advantage if you're surprised. However, if you are not surprised, you no longer grant combat advantage to those who act before you in combat, except for rogues, who are specially trained to take advantage of that.

 

[AllisterH]

No one can do everything, which is also a core concept in D&D and also "realistic" from a role playing standpoint. Don't make D&D PCs cape wearing superheroes by default.

It really depends on what the skills are and what they represent. If skills represent the type of things a typical adventurer will do across their life, then yes, at 20th level, an adventurer should be better than he was at 1st level in all those skills.

Going through the 3.x skill list, the only skills that I can see an adventurer not naturally getting better at would be the Craft and Profession skills and maybe, Swim. But the others though? Definitely should be better. Hell, take Appraise for example and use a barbarian (a class that doesn't have it on its skill list and one that at first glance seems not likely to have any skill with it).

However, do you think Conan just before he became King wouldn't have seen/handled/examined more gems/diamonds/rubies/paintings/sculptures than a master appraiser or at the least, less likely to be taken in by a shady black market fencer when he tries to hock a blood red ruby he just stole than if he tried the same thing when he first left Cimmeria as a youth?

What I think 3.x did was have both "adventurer skills" and non-adventurer skills lumped under the same "silo".

What I think might happen in 4E (I hope) is that we will see the reintroduction of the secondary skills from 2E or at the least, a siloing of Craft/Profession into "background/hobby/apprenticeship" and THAT might use the 3E skill system.

 

[shilsen]

No one can do everything, which is also a core concept in D&D and also "realistic" from a role playing standpoint. Don't make D&D PCs cape wearing superheroes by default.

Too late. D&D PCs in 3e certainly are very akin to superheroes, and I'd argue that they always have been, to a significant extent. Or mythological hero, for that matter, which is pretty close to superhero. And I'll be damn glad if 4e just explicitly recognizes that and runs with it.

 

[Knight Otu]

I'm definitely hoping this is simply an incomplete preview, simply for the fact that some terms need defining, and without the complete set of character creation rules set along with this, makes it hard to descern what's truly in and what's actually out.

Well, the article does call this preview the "opening spread for the rogue class," so I think it is save to say that it is in some ways incomplete, but probably not in the way people may hope it is (I suspect much of the fluff is not part of the preview, but most crunch is part of it).

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Judging from the new DDM rules, you'll gain Combat Advantage in the same situations as, in 3.5, you'd be able to sneak attack. Flanking, invisible, opponent denied Dex to AC, and so on. There may be other situations that provide it as well ... higher ground, for instance. (That one, in particular, would fit well with the new "mobile combat" 4E is stressing.)

The big difference seems to be that Combat Advantage is a binary state: you either have it (and gain a bonus to hit and ancillary effects (like sneak attack)) or you don't. No more "+2 for flanking, +2 for invisibility;" it's just "+2 for Combat Advantage."

I imagine that there will be spells and character abilities (aside from invisibility the obvious tactical maneuvering) that will give Combat Advantage and/or provide it to other characters.

 

[Cam Banks]

I'm a huge fan of static hit points.

I've often said that there's plenty of randomness in the game itself, there's no need to make your character random either. That's why I like point buy ability scores and fixed hit points.

I never rolled hit points for the monsters in 3rd edition, either. I just don't think it's as big a deal or adds anywhere near the kind of flavor (or "realism") as folks claim it does. Certainly not as much as the other elements of the game do.

Overall, I really like this preview. I cringe at the use of "builds" (despite my preference for point buy characters) and I really, really hope none of the other classes has "gish" as a suggested "build option."

Cheers,
Cam

 

[Sitara]

Sweeet crunchiness. Can't wait to se other classes now. I like how classes are not TOTALLY generic, like they are in saga. ANyhow, will follow up with a more indepth analysis later.

So apart from the devs intruding overmuch on character creation... I think I largely like the mechanics. I am intrigued by the possibility (with class training) of doing a Vlad Taltos type character, and I don't even think I have to ignore anything to do it. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to do a club wielding street thug with no training in stealth or locks & traps, and that does bother me. Especially with brutality being a class subrole...

I think the fighter class will allow you to make a club weilding thug. Otoh if you want a knife-weilding burglar, rogues your guy. Justr a matter of paradigm shift really.

 

[Kirnon_Bhale]

I have experienced an epiphany with regards to shuriken.

I think that we are not placing them correctly. When going through the list of rogue powers I notice that they have not once mentioned shuriken on their own. Since I am certain they have not excluded them from their design of the class powers I conjecture that the weapon is actually rolled into the light bladed weapon category.

I would go so far as to say that it is possible that it has such a short range that it can be considered melee perhaps with reach. Usable for AoO's etc.

I cannot see them having shuriken in the class write up but not include them in the sneak attack section - since they are not crossbows nor a sling this leaves only small bladed weapons which in essence they are.

 

[Doug McCrae]

IF power attack is even 'in' 4e. Given what has been shown of 4E, the unquantifiable damage of a sliding scale power attack does not seem like something that will get in.

Yes, damage seems *much* more controlled than it was in 3e.