Rogue exploit plus sneak attack

[sunrisekid]

Can a rogue combine one of their exploits along with sneak attack? I have a player who selected the "brutal scoundrel" build and selected the Backstabber feat. If this character gains combat advantage against a foe can they also apply that extra damage to, say, a Torturous Strike?

Consider these options:

STR 13 (+1)
DEX 16 (+3)
Brutal scoundrel (add STR mod to sneak attack)
Torturous Strike (2[W] +DEX mod; brutal scoundrels: add STR mod too)
Backstabber (sneak attack does d8 instead of d6)
dagger..

Potentially the character could do 2d4 +3 (DEX) +1 (STR) +2d8+1 (sneakattack) = 29 (max)

Am I handling this stuff correctly? Brutal scoundrels get to add their strength modifier to a torturous strike; brutal scoundrels also get to add their strength damage to sneak attacks; the backstabber feat bumps the sneak attack d6 to d8; flank the enemy prior to Torturous Strike (any other rogue exploit I suppose).

This seems like an awful lot of damage output for a first level character. If someone could verify (or counter) this for me I'd be grateful.

Maybe it really boils down to this: can a rogue add sneak attack damage to a power, so long as combat advantage is attained?

 

[malcolm_n]

seeing as sneak attack says one attack per round instead of one basic attack per round, i'd assume yes on the torturous Strike.

BTW, it's about 19 damage average with Combat advantage which would be when flanking (harder to do now with everybody moving) or winning initiative (still unknown how easy this is). Good thing there are Defenders or the baddies would be eating these guys to keep from dying.

However, it would do to point out that even the first level wizard can survive one sneak attack now from the above attack.

 

[hong]

Sounds about right. Bear in mind:

1. Torturous Strike is an encounter power, so they can't do it every round

2. Rogues are strikers, so they should be able to do damage

3. 29 damage max can take down a level 1 monster, but that would be a lucky roll

 

[hennebeck]

I might consider not adding both strength bonuses.

 

[Trainz]

ALso of note is that we still don't really know how often, within the 4th ed combat dynamics, the rogue will be able to sneak. If it ain't almost every round, then the rogue will suck as much as his 3rd ed counterpart.

If that is the case, the ranger appears to be a better choice for a striker.

 

[keterys]

Well, it'll be easier than 3rd at least. Creatures aren't immune to it and you don't lose full attacks for moving into flank, at a minimum. In addition, someone being prone or dazed or even just _hit_ by certain rogue abilities gives combat advantage, so that's much easier.

For heroic tier, 2d6 over 1d6 seems like a decent gap between the rogue and ranger. I'm worried that it might be 5d6 vs. 4d6 at 21-30... which would be a tad in the ranger's favor.

 

[zoroaster100]

Sunrisekid, do you actually know if the backstabber feat will increase sneak attack damage to a d8? That seems pretty powerful for a feat.

However, I don't think the total damage here is a problem. Torturous Strike is an encounter power, so it can only be used once per encounter. The first level fighter pregen could do 1d10 +5 to two opponents with her encounter power, Passing Attack. That is a total of 30 points maximum damage when added together. I believe strikers are supposed to be able to do as much if not more damage than defenders. With her daily attack, that fighter could do up to 35 damage to one opponent.

 

[Revinor]

Sunrisekid, do you actually know if the backstabber feat will increase sneak attack damage to a d8? That seems pretty powerful for a feat.

In heroic tier it would mean +2 damage with sneak attack (not on AoO, not without combat advantage, etc). I think it is normal for a feat to add 1 to damage or hit regardless of the conditions. If we look at 3rd ed, fighter spec was adding 2 to damage, regardless of the situation. Now, with rogue being THE damage dealer, it is more than possible it got similar feat (just a bit worse, as it is still situational).

At epic tier, it will be +5. For this I agree - it is a lot for a feat. On the other hand, there might be quite good epic level feats for other classes, so I would not panic too much. Rogues will need every bit to stay ahead with damage when everybody will be running with Christmas Tree of Items +5.

 

[Fiendish Dire Weasel]

It seems like a good amount of damage but keep in mind you have to compare it to Ranger or Warlock damage, plus some due to Rogues not doing this from range (and ranged attacks being easier than 3rd Edition due to friends not providing cover).


(Using Encounter Powers, Quarry/Curse, with Combat Advantage)
Rogue: +8 vs. AC, 2d4+2d8+5 damage (average 19)
Ranger: +8 vs. AC, 1d10+1d8+4 damage (average 14), shift 1 square before or after attack
Warlock: +6/+7 vs. Reflex, 3d6+4 fire damage (average 14), -4 to attacks for 1 round

Doesn't look too bad to me. In fact, looking at these numbers, I'm still not sure the Rogue is on par (though I'm still keeping an open mind until seeing it in action).

 

[sunrisekid]

Sunrisekid, do you actually know if the backstabber feat will increase sneak attack damage to a d8? That seems pretty powerful for a feat.

I'm sourcing the PHB lite posted on the boards here, version 1.3.1. But there are question marks in the section, suggesting that their source was not verifiable. However, even if the data is correct I'm glad to see I was more or less correct in the calculation.