• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Ampersand: Sneak Attack

Khuxan said:
How do they know what level he is? From the level of power he uses? You don't have to tell the PCs the name of the power, just describe its effects. Might they be able to guess? Sure. But that indicates a very high familiarity with the system - at which point, your best bet is probably adapting powers or introducing new ones from new books.

And by the time the first power is used (which may not be the wizard's highest-level power), the encounter has begun and there's little opportunity for planning.

That's one way to determine an NPC's level ("counting magic missiles" ;), but I was also thinking of *rings*, because a wizard who has no magical rings on his fingers is < level 11. In any case they'd identify his 'tradition' if they get a glimpse at his 'implement' (and potentially ruin the encounter if there are protection spells from elements in 4E).
 

log in or register to remove this ad


ThirdWizard said:
Everyone needs to get to the point where this doesn't mess with their sense of verisimilitude, and everything will then work out for the best. Once you accept this, things become much easier.

*hands out kool-aid*

Now I want to play Exalted.
 

Just Another User said:
I understand your and the other point of view, it is just that it don't work for me, I would be ok if it was a videogame or a board game, you have 1 "positioning strike" token, you play it and that is it, but in a role play game I want a little more ...consistency? Believability? Realism? pick your favorite.


Another problem I have with Encounter powers, now from the PC point of view, let's take the monster X as an example, it have the dreaded per encounter ability A (which is not magical at all) it can use it only once for fight after which we don't fall for it anymore because we have seen it... and yet we fall for it every time we fight an exemplar of the monster X. well, D'uh!!! (can't really enter in specific becasue the only per encounter abilities of monsters were magical in nature, so maybe they really can't be used more than once in a short period, but I'm willing to bet that in the monster manual there will be many monsters with P/E abilities that logically could work more than once in a fight but they just don't)
You are focussing on only one of the offered options to explain per encounter or per day limitations, and try to apply it to all situations. But there are multiple explainations, they can work together, and they might even change depenging from the situation.

It is usually not important to think about a concrete explaination. It's not as if the players or Cs have time to research it - they are buys with the adventure. But knowing that there is an explaination, and if you really bothered to explain the situation, you could, that's enough.
 

Primal said:
That's one way to determine an NPC's level ("counting magic missiles" ;), but I was also thinking of *rings*, because a wizard who has no magical rings on his fingers is < level 11. In any case they'd identify his 'tradition' if they get a glimpse at his 'implement' (and potentially ruin the encounter if there are protection spells from elements in 4E).
If he actually has a Ring. Just because he can have one doesn't mean he has one.

And the thing with the implement is definitely a feature.
I mean, if I look at a guy with heavy armor and a sword, I probably know that he's going to use the sword in combat, right?
If I see a Cleric with a Holy Symbol of Gruumsh I don't exactly expect him to stay in the background and casting only healing spells...
 

Primal said:
That's one way to determine an NPC's level ("counting magic missiles" ;), but I was also thinking of *rings*, because a wizard who has no magical rings on his fingers is < level 11. In any case they'd identify his 'tradition' if they get a glimpse at his 'implement' (and potentially ruin the encounter if there are protection spells from elements in 4E).

1st level characters can wear rings on their fingers. Heck, they can wear eight! And 30th level characters can be totally ring-less. I would, in fact, imagine most would be (magical) ring-less, lest the PCs keep acquiring magical items constantly (which is something they said they fixed).
 

ThirdWizard said:
1st level characters can wear rings on their fingers. Heck, they can wear eight! And 30th level characters can be totally ring-less. I would, in fact, imagine most would be (magical) ring-less, lest the PCs keep acquiring magical items constantly (which is something they said they fixed).
Eight? I count fourteen.
 

Random Thoughts and Speculation

Standard attacks seem to be OUT for player characters. With abilities like Deft Strike as an at will attack, there doesn't seem to be much reason to do a regular, normal attack. I'm cool with this.

[W] probably includes strength. I think this because 1) if it does not, then strength stops giving a damage bonus to the brawny rogue, since he'll mostly be using at will attacks, and 2) if it does not, then paladin smites are completely unaffected by your strength score, which I think is implausible. So I'm assuming its included.

Daggers - big stabby knives, and shuriken - little throwy knives. This is probably for the best. I never liked that all daggers came perfectly balanced for throwing. In real life, not all knives are throwing knives. They're small, so you CAN throw them, but that's probably best represented by rules for throwing random objects like daggers, warhammers, chairs, etc.

The rogue-with-a-rapier was a 3eism. Now, someone needs to be fighting with a rapier, and it might be the rogue- but one way to handle this, I'm thinking possibly the best way, is to make the rapier genuinely better than the shortsword, and then charge the rogue a feat to access it. This would suck in 3e because the damage difference is so small, but if in 4e this is not the case, it would be worthwhile.

I know people are going to miss sneak attacking with greatswords, but honestly, its not just about the sneak attack. Its also about Deft Strike and other attacks that don't make as much sense when you do them with a giant cleaver.

I'm one of the biggest pro-swashbuckler backers around here. I'm not sure if the rogue will satisfy my swashbuckler needs. Guess we'll find out. It does satisfy my lunatic-with-a-knife-who-stabs-you-in-the-face needs.

In my opinion, the proper ranged weapon for a rogue is a hand crossbow. I am so glad this is back. 3e screwed over weapons like that on a structural level. It was generally a bad idea to use a ranged weapon that denied you iterative attacks AND the ability to move, and being charged a feat for the right to suck that way was not cool. Especially when the dagger was right there, begging you to take it instead. If I can play a rogue with a rapier who has a rules viable reason to draw a concealed handbow and shoot someone while dueling someone else, I will be a happy player. Even if the only swashbuckler available to me is not a defender.

Crimson Edge scared the crap out of me until I realized that saves happen pretty fast these days.

I'm glad for the inclusion of shuriken, and I'm cool with the name. I think its a waste of time to heavily divide eastern and western fantasy. It forces you to do double duty, trying to create two separate versions of things that are functionally identical. Like small, throwable blades.

The names on the abilities seem fine. Crimson Edge is about as flashy as it gets. Its inevitable that we get SOME flashiness, because there's a limited number of descriptive names for things like "a strike themed after leaving an ongoing wound," but quite a lot of different ways one might want to do such a thing. When possible abilities outnumber possible realistic names, you have to get a little flashy to make everything work.

It DOES look like miniatures are more required. I simply don't think it will be as easy to handwave positioning as it was before. This will require an adjustment for me, because I typically ran my fights by drawing, in pen, on a sheet of notebook paper. I know that's awfully low budget, but it got the job done. Now I'll want to actually use a grid. This is more work for the DM, but at least it looks like work that produces value. If using a grid and miniatures lets my players do things like trick an ogre into stumbling off a dock into the water, I'll be happy to do the labor involved in getting the materials and setting up.

My overall verdict is that I could be happy playing this character, and so could my friends. And that's all I really care about.
 


Man, I can't believe WotC is just letting the dead article sit there like that. Either put something there or take down the teaser link on the main page.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top