Rogue/Barbarian sneak attack while raging?

[IceBear]

Yup...raging isn't bezerking.

IceBear

 

[Corwin]

Perhaps I am biased because I played a barbarian/rogue in 3e for many months, but I am firmly in the "can" camp.

I too would like to hear a few rationalizations from the "can't" camp regarding the barbarian's ability to use a bow while raging. This seems to fly in the face of the "must concentrate and be patient to attack" belief.

As Caliban and others have shown, the rules don't seem to prevent this. It's also not unbalanced at all. I've been there and it's no worse than a straight barbarian or straight rogue in power.

I also think WizarDru has something with his little treatise on preconceptions. I've noticed it too when dealing with people who still hark back to the olden days when barbarian rage was mindless berzerker fury, killing friend and foe alike until everyone was dead. And rogues were thieves who had to slowly sneak up on their targets to back stab them.

 

[kreynolds]

Hey. Can a Rogue/Barbarian walk and chew bubblegum while raging? I'd say no. Raging takes a lot of concentration. It even requires a concentration skill check of like, 30 or something, right?

 

[hong]

Hey. Can a Rogue/Barbarian walk and chew bubblegum while raging? I'd say no. Raging takes a lot of concentration. It even requires a concentration skill check of like, 30 or something, right?

To avoid biting off your tongue, sure.

 

[Weeble]

So you think Raging makes the Barbarian partially blind? Sorry, I missed the part where Raging gives your opponents concealment.



That text indicates that you need to see the target clearly. That's it.



And a barbarian/rogue can do both. A barbarian/rogue is both a rogue and a barbarian, he is not just a barbarian who happens to sneak attack. Also, your view of the barbarian is not the only one. A barbarian rage can also be a coldly murderous state where they focus on rippinhg your throat or spleen out.

You seem to be trying to enforce your personal view of barbarians on the rules, and on other players. You shouldn't be telling people that they can only roleplay their class the way you would play it.

A sneak attack doesn't require rational thought, it just recquires the ability to recognize a vulnerable spot and attack it.

Also, Raging doesn't negate your ability to pick your shots or targets. If it did, you wouldn't be able to tell friend from foe, and would just attack everything indiscriminately.

I have to agree with those that follow the rules. For all intents and purposes, a Barbi/Rogue should be able to sneak rage, according to the rules, that is. I think I would not allow it (as a house rule.) Well, maybe I would. Maybe the sneak attack would be described in non-game mechanics terms as a ruthless critical hit. Who knows? I think each DM here should either follow the rules strictly, or house rule it the other way. What other way is there to do it?

 

[Dr. Zoom]

I also asked Sean K. Reynolds about this question. This is his response.

I don't see why not. Sneak attacks don't require patience and concentration (as described in the no-nos list under Rage), and if you'd allow a barbarian to use Improved Critical while in a rage you ought to allow sneak attacks, too.

 

[Magic Rub]

Just so long as you remember that your rule prohibiting sneak attacks while raging is the house rule I don't think anyone will really care one way or the other. But by the actual rules of the 3e PHB, the combination is perfectly legal.

Yess indeed I guess then it is one of our house rules, & not unlike yourself, in the end I really don't care all that much one way or the other. If our rule is ever changed I will take advantage of the new benefit. Until then, ah? er? ummm... Vive le liberation! <insert pic of me with a big ol' stupid ass grin here as none of the Emotes would do>

Originally posted by Caliban
And a barbarian/rogue can do both. A barbarian/rogue is both a rogue and a barbarian, he is not just a barbarian who happens to sneak attack.

I know my point is that I don't think they should sneak attack while raging. But that's now a dead issue as per my blurb to Storm Raven

Originally posted by Caliban
Also, your view of the barbarian is not the only one. A barbarian rage can also be a coldly murderous state where they focus on ripping your throat or spleen out.

Ouch! Stop it, you're making the baby cry. Won't someone please think of the children!

Originally posted by Caliban
You seem to be trying to enforce your personal view of barbarians on the rules, and on other players. You shouldn't be telling people that they can only roleplay their class the way you would play it.

Nope, just attempting to illustrate my point as clearly as possible. I have obviously not done so in an effective manner. My intent is/was not to tell people how to play there characters, my apologies to anyone who is/was offended.

Originally posted by Caliban
A sneak attack doesn't require rational thought, it just requires the ability to recognize a vulnerable spot and attack it. Also, Raging doesn't negate your ability to pick your shots or targets. If it did, you wouldn't be able to tell friend from foe, and would just attack everything indiscriminately

See above *Storm Raven reply*

This was fun, thanks!

 

[Illuminae]

But in my little world where I am all powerful I will limit the poor, raging and sneak attacking Rogue/Barbarians in my world to choosing one or the other.

Thats just evil, man...barbarians are already poor (as in $), you know, and they have angry little children to feed with the corpses of whom they kill...

BUT MY QUESTION IS:

CAN YOU CAMP IN A CAMP LIKE A CAMPER CAN CAMP IN A CAMP?



ihohhiohiohihihohihoiho
uaheuaheuaueuaeuha

So, now whos confused in here, huh?!?!

 

[Gromm]

As far as official responses, I asked Skip way back when 3e first came out and he said you could definately rage and sneak attack at the same time (sorry don't have the old email anymore, that was a computer or two ago).

(Insert usual comment on people giving house rules that contradict the written rules as being right in the Rules forum)

 

[Corwin the Confused]

I have e-mailed Skip about my question two times and I have receive no reply. I know he is busy. And I know that some might perceive me as "picking nits". But for me picking nits is a class skill and due to my many skill points, above average intellegence and low wisdom, I simply can not help myself.

BUT, I would like to know what our "FOUNDING FATHERS" of 3E intended.

I do not wish to make any proclaimations of what is correct. I just like things to make sense and my low wisdom and I agree that to sneak attack the Rogue?Barbarian would need to concentrate. Just as "we" think that the Rogue/Barb would need to concentrate to open locks. (Opening locks is not restricted, so the Can CAMP should be for it.) But "we" think it simply doesn't make sense to be able to open locks without concentrating.

I would however not wish to tell anyone what they can or cannot do in a roleplaying game.

So if anyone can get an answer form the "FOUNDING FATHERS" I would greatly appreciate it.

We have two conflicting view of what Skip has said in this thread. So, please no remembering of what Skip told you on an e-mail in a not so distant galaxy.