Crippling Strike Clarification please

[Datchi]

I'm about to level my rogue to 10th level and of all the special feats that can be taken I really like crippling strike. However, it seems from the way it reads in the 3.5 PHB that every time I attack and sneak I also do 2 strength damage. In theory I have a full round attack hit 4 times do lots of damage but also do 8 strength damage giving my adversery -4 to hit and damage. This seems a little too good to me.

My question therefore is, is this correct or should it be once per round or something entirely different, like number of times per day. I'm fairly sure we'll house rule it but wanted to get some feedback from you all first.

 

[Egres]

I'm about to level my rogue to 10th level and of all the special feats that can be taken I really like crippling strike. However, it seems from the way it reads in the 3.5 PHB that every time I attack and sneak I also do 2 strength damage. In theory I have a full round attack hit 4 times do lots of damage but also do 8 strength damage giving my adversery -4 to hit and damage. This seems a little too good to me.

My question therefore is, is this correct or should it be once per round or something entirely different, like number of times per day. I'm fairly sure we'll house rule it but wanted to get some feedback from you all first.

2 points of Str damage for each succesfull sneak attack.

It's not so good.

10 points of Str damage, worse than a standard Ray of Enfeeblement (that give a not stackable with itself though) penalty, would mean 25d6 of Sneak Attack damage!

 

[Caeleddin]

You are right. EACH successful sneak attack will lower the target's Str by 2. If you flank him and have 4 attacks a round, and all hit, you lower his Str by 8.

 

[Datchi]

Thanks for the responses.

I seems a wee bit broken to me, I appreciate you have to hit with all 4 attacks (5 if the wizard casts haste) but -8 or -10 to strength seems pretty obscene. Average damage from my kender would be around 80 damage which is a lot but to get -10 strength -5 to hit and damage seems overpowered to me, against a big critter it seems very good, anyone have a view

 

[Caeleddin]

Usually the Rogue will only get off 1 attack due to movement requirements unless he strikes from complete hiding and initiates the battle that way. For a Rogue to Flank in combat, he'll usually be in the middle of the enemy formation as he is the only guy in a typical party that can Tumble his way there safely. Sure, he'll get off 1 attack (because of his Tumble). Then he gets tarred by the target's buddies.


Remember, when people start dropping in agony (which is what a crippling strike is; anyone that has ever been hit by real pain will know how that will affect your Str), the instigator of that agony will become the centre of a lot of attention. Even the dumbest creature will know this. Ergo, the Rogue gets tarred.

 

[LordSloth]

I tend to do my flanking in a carefull fashion. take a cautious approach on turn 1, maybe not even attacking anything at all, see who engages who and then go flank somewhere on the sides. You still cant do more than 1 full round before attracting a lot of attention and moving away, but its worth it if you can do some serious strength damage (and survive

 

[Caeleddin]

LordSloth - And feathered Darned Rogues!

 

[Saeviomagy]

-5 to hit and damage

At these sorts of levels a bard (for instance) can be giving +3 to hit and damage without needing attack rolls, or to risk his hide...