Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[Khuxan]

For those who are interested, I statted up a first-level elven rogue as best as I could. 28-point buy.

[sblock]Elf Rogue Level 1
Medium mortal humanoid (elf)
Initiative +4 Senses Perception +3, low-light vision
HP 26; Bloodied 12; Healing Surges 8
AC 16; Fortitude 12, Reflex 16, Will 11
Saving Throws +0
Speed 7
Action Points ?

Melee Dagger (standard; at-will) • Weapon
+3 vs. AC; 1d?+1
At Will Powers: Deft Strike, Piercing Strike
Encounter Powers: Elven Accuracy, Positioning Strike
Daily Power: [One]
Constant Powers: Group Awareness, Artful Dodger, Wild Step, First Strike, Sneak Attack, Rogue Weapon Talent

Alignment Unaligned
Languages Common, Elven
Feat Elven Precision
Skills Nature +2, Perception +8, Stealth +9, Thievery +9, Insight +6, Acrobatics +9, Dungeoneering +6
Str 12 Dex 18 Con 14
Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 12
Equipment hippogriff , dagger
Training and Proficiencies Leather; longbow, shortbow, dagger, hand crossbow, shuriken, sling, short sword[/sblock]

EDIT: I know the rogue gets one daily power, but since we don't know the details of any daily powers I didn't choose one. I wanted to limit this stat block to what we know.

EDIT 2: I forgot the bonus to attack for wielding a dagger.

EDIT 3: Good catch on the hp, MasterGarrow05

 

[Primal]

:\

I'm a little uncomfortable with the lack of club/sap/improvised weapon proficiency, and the forced Thievery skill, and I think I'll be throwing down some house rules unless the 4E club is some massive death dealer and Thievery has some serious use for an honorable fencer.

I also wish "shuriken" was "throwing blade" to represent "throwing knives, shuriken, and darts."

I also really wish they had shown at least one example of rogues doing special stuff with skills.

Naah, you gotta have Ninjas in D&D, so that's why you have to include shuriken in the weapon profs. Rapier? What's that? :\

Alright, seriously, I was disappointed -- it seems that while combat may have fewer *rolls*, it's become a *LOT* more complex and tactical in nature. And I pity the groups who try to play a 4E combat without minis (we have had no trouble doing so in 3E).

I *loved* to roll for hit points -- takes a lot of excitement out of the game if you have static HPs and Con modifier (as Ari hinted) no longer applies to HPs. If you know an NPCs level, you can pretty much estimate his HPs quite accurately. And two characters with the same Con and level have *exactly* the same amount of HPs, unless one of them has Toughness or similar Feats/Talents.

 

[Incenjucar]

I hope the full version of the class isn't so damn narrow. Disappointed. Especially if 4e multiclassing is as restrictive as it sounds like it might be.

Yeah, I'm thinking that this is just a really really partial look at the class. It's just also a very awkwardly chosen one that really should come with a few notes to prevent alarmism.

For the sake of rogue players, I -really- hope there aren't a lot of enemies who have any kind of damage resistant to non-blunt weapons.

--

Primal: I'm fine with the static and tactical stuff, at least while there's no context to put it in. I'm just mildly annoyed at seeing a possible reason to houserule already, considering I'm one of the least experienced or particular DMs around here (I got to DM a total of one adventure this century. ).

Hopefully, I'm missing something, but I'm pretty sure that I'll be removing those forced skill choices right out of the box, regardless. I have no interest in cramming the Thief down anyone's throats.

 

[mach1.9pants]

For those who are interested, I statted up a first-level elven rogue as best as I could. 28-point buy.
<snip>

Hey nice thanks, I would play one of those!

 

[The Ubbergeek]

I hope the full version of the class isn't so damn narrow. Disappointed. Especially if 4e multiclassing is as restrictive as it sounds like it might be.

BTW, classes are now in modern D&D as much set of skills and powers than a job path in itself. One should maybe stops thinking of such thing as 'restrictive' perhaps... it's a part of the whole.

and we only saw a bit of the whole class.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

Naah, you gotta have Ninjas in D&D, so that's why you have to include shuriken in the weapon profs. Rapier? What's that? :\

Alright, seriously, I was disappointed -- it seems that while combat may have fewer *rolls*, it's become a *LOT* more complex and tactical in nature. And I pity the groups who try to play a 4E combat without minis (we have had no trouble doing so in 3E).

I *loved* to roll for hit points -- takes a lot of excitement out of the game if you have static HPs and Con modifier (as Ari hinted) no longer applies to HPs. If you know an NPCs level, you can pretty much estimate his HPs quite accurately. And two characters with the same Con and level have *exactly* the same amount of HPs, unless one of them has Toughness or similar Feats/Talents.

Sounds a bit like, asia bad, occident good again. >>

Not really, if we don't see the rules.

But it can really screw things at random. And no, it don't removes excitement.

 

[Imban]

BTW, classes are now in modern D&D as much set of skills and powers than a job path in itself. One should maybe stops thinking of such thing as 'restrictive' perhaps... it's a part of the whole.

and we only saw a bit of the whole class.

They were a set of skills and powers in 3e. They appear to be much, much more restrictive now.

 

[CleverNickName]

Whereas presumably "sliding" (as in Positioning Strike and the pit fiend's exploding-minion ability) *does* provoke attacks.

So I see rogues doing damage while simultaneously sliding a foe right into their friendly neighborhood Defender. He shoots, he scores!

Still, it's all just clever vocabulary. I would have been happier with calling all movement "movement," and making different rules to suit it...rather than creating different ways of moving, and applying a single rule.

It's six of one and a half-dozen of the other, I suppose. I just got confused there for a minute. But I'm feeling much better now.

Keep in mind that these are shuriken too:
[picture]
"Throwing Knives" pretty much are slightly larger "shuriken", anyway.

Depends on the knife. You are right, of course. But really, what I was trying to say was it doesn't matter what you call them. If the word "shuriken" offends you, you could always call them something else..."heavy darts," "pointy bits of shrapnel" or "Iron Fingers of Xlagbnazz," it uses the same stack of weapon data.

 

[MaelStorm]

Hope I didn't come across as too much of a jerk about it.

LOL! No, not at all. I would have repeated the same mistake over and over. So no, by any mean thank you.

 

[Incenjucar]

The thing with "Shuriken" is that most people are going to link that directly to a specific culture.

When working with a "generic" system, you generally want to use "generic" names.

You don't call a short sword "wakizashi" as a default.