Ampersand: Sneak Attack

[mach1.9pants]

deleted

 

[mach1.9pants]

Anybody else notice there isn't a range limitation on Sneak Attack?

[lie]Of course I did![/lie]
Good point-can you get combat advantage at range? (apart from rogue in the suprise part of the encounter)

 

[frankthedm]

If you tear off its bikini, will it try to marry you?

That's just the start...

Now, maybe it was pure coincidence Mike Mearls switched the Ogre mage's Cone of Cold over to Lightning Bolt. I suspect otherwise.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Good point-can you get combat advantage at range? (apart from rogue in the suprise part of the encounter)

And of course you can- if you can use the crossbow or sling- d'oh my brain is slow

 

[Voss]

I am VERY pleased the designers placed limitations on the weapons the rogue gets to sneak attack with. An attack that is supposed to be about striking with surgical precision should have to be done with a weapon that HAS surgical precision. My only disappointment is that they will allow slings to deal sneak, but at least there will be no more "sneak attacking with a great axe" B.S.

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


@mach- hand crossbow. That seems signficant. If the rogue is more than 50' out, he isn't doing so well.

 

[Silvergriffon]

Why not daggerborn?

Only if they have boobs.

 

[mach1.9pants]

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

That is a part of a real big question- how will 4E deal with subdual?

@mach- hand crossbow. That seems signficant. If the rogue is more than 50' out, he isn't doing so well.

I dunno, slings have a decent range in most editions

 

[Rechan]

Only if they have boobs.

I have the feeling Daggerborn's boobs are too sharp to be of any use.

 

[Sammael]

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.

Feats and Powers are the only meaningful choices; the rest - weapons, armor, and skills - is pretty much pre-selected. And call me bitter, but the only reason I can see at the moment is that the PH now comes with a built-in incentive to buy the future "Complete Rogue." Or subscribe to DDI to get the "bonus online weapons package." Whatever.

What particularly puzzles me is that the shortbow, an iconic rogue weapon (q.v. Order of the Stick) is no longer on the list. This means that, if I don't house-rule it back in, my rogue player, who's built his entire combat concept on the shortbow (and he's played his character from level 1 to level 20 over the course of 5 years), will not be able to re-imagine his character. This is... not good. I can understand the lack of some of the more obscure weapons, but c'mon - shortbow?

Generally, the other stuff is nice, but, overall, I don't like it.

 

[Victim]

We might be needing too much into the lack of mention of attribute mods in several places. If the effects of stats are clearly spelled out in other areas, then they might not be mentioned in the class section.

However, since stat modifiers seem to be increasing with level, then adding INT mod to skills trained might be problematic.