Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Shard O'Glase" data-source="post: 162687" data-attributes="member: 1134">Well I have no problem with sneak attack.&nbsp; My problem is when you balance classes for combat, and then don't bother to balance them for out of combat, which means the fighter(and others like him) sucks.&nbsp; Sneak attack at low levels adds a good punch you have to set it up which can be trying, but immunity is rare except for some sucker undead you bump into.&nbsp; High levels you can deal it out all the time, but immunity is more common. (ring of blinking, many more immune creature, armor fort etc.)&nbsp; The accuracy argument for the rogue really blows though.&nbsp; Sure if you take a 20th level fighter, and a 20th level rogue the fighter has an AB a whole 5 better, yeah for him. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:"&nbsp; data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" />&nbsp; But at the lower levels we are talking a 1-2 difference, then it grows to3-4 and ends up at 5.&nbsp; So yes the fighter at high levels on average gets one more successful hit than the rogue does, I'm very proud of him since he is doing about 10 points or more less damage per hit at those levels.&nbsp; I'd say about 50% of the time you can get a sneak attack with a rogue, which means 50% of the time you are doing better damage than the fighter.&nbsp; The other 50% of the time you either unable or unwilling to set up a situaiton where you can get sneak attacks, and therefore do less damage.&nbsp; Yes a dm can vary this making it even harder to get sneak attacks.&nbsp; But if he does, then does he also run you against golems all the time so the wizards spells aren't effective, does he also run you against tons of creatures with DR above the weapons the fighter uses so he isn't effective all the times etc.&nbsp; Basically if the DM is setting up that more than 50% of the time you can't achieve a sneak attack, then chances are he actually does see sneak attacks as too powerful, and is in game nerfing them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Shard O'Glase, post: 162687, member: 1134"] Well I have no problem with sneak attack. My problem is when you balance classes for combat, and then don't bother to balance them for out of combat, which means the fighter(and others like him) sucks. Sneak attack at low levels adds a good punch you have to set it up which can be trying, but immunity is rare except for some sucker undead you bump into. High levels you can deal it out all the time, but immunity is more common. (ring of blinking, many more immune creature, armor fort etc.) The accuracy argument for the rogue really blows though. Sure if you take a 20th level fighter, and a 20th level rogue the fighter has an AB a whole 5 better, yeah for him. :rolleyes: But at the lower levels we are talking a 1-2 difference, then it grows to3-4 and ends up at 5. So yes the fighter at high levels on average gets one more successful hit than the rogue does, I'm very proud of him since he is doing about 10 points or more less damage per hit at those levels. I'd say about 50% of the time you can get a sneak attack with a rogue, which means 50% of the time you are doing better damage than the fighter. The other 50% of the time you either unable or unwilling to set up a situaiton where you can get sneak attacks, and therefore do less damage. Yes a dm can vary this making it even harder to get sneak attacks. But if he does, then does he also run you against golems all the time so the wizards spells aren't effective, does he also run you against tons of creatures with DR above the weapons the fighter uses so he isn't effective all the times etc. Basically if the DM is setting up that more than 50% of the time you can't achieve a sneak attack, then chances are he actually does see sneak attacks as too powerful, and is in game nerfing them. [/QUOTE]

Verification