Ridley's Cohort
First Post
oops
Last edited:
Sneak Attack: A Little Too Powerful?
- Thread starter Azlan
- Start date
Hokay, now after reading the entire thread, I can reply. *Tosses his hat in*
To Azlan: First, I'd like to comment on what you said about orcs.
No, it is not a chess game. It is about survival. The Average orc has an Int of 9. The average Kobold and Hobgoblin has an average Int of 10. The orc's int is 1 below a human's, and the kobold/hobgoblin is the same.
This means that the orcs are likely going to be smart enough to prepare just a little. They're not going to full out charge, unless they want to get killed. As you pointed out, a company of orcs is little match for a 5th level party. Ergo, if your a group of orcs, you want to be sure to take down something a little tougher then young apprentaces and novices. Thus, tactics are in order. Not to mention the fact that a leader, atleast an orc with some class level has an int of 10, so someone has to have the brains.
Next, Iw ould have to agree that a rogue's sneak attack balances it for combat. With the low hit points, BAB, and attacks, the sneak attack is what makes a Rogue worth playing in a combat-oriented campaign. Yes, the rogue is going to shine in a surprise round, or in a city adventure, because these are what rogues are made for. However, pound for pound, fighting Big Nasty Creatures, atleast One Big Nasty Creature, the fighter is going to wax them. With more AC due to armor and less to dex, the fighter will get hit less, and stay longer due to his higher hitpoints, and do more damage.
True, this is more for medium to high levels, but really, it's not smart for a rogue to get up there in hitting range, when he has 6 to 12 hps at first levels.
Next, I'll agree that it's a little more difficult to hit with the sneak. Yes, if you're flanking. Let's see him jump up to flank something with a 10' reach, that fast. How about non humanoid creatures, that are obviously immune? Have you ever tried to sneak attack something that *Flies*? Any spellcaster (or creature with wings) will likely take to the air as a first move, and since a rogue can't flank with ranged weapons, he ain't doing that much.
And, no, these factors do not try to negate the rogue's ability, to make him feel worthless, but they are balanced to A) Let the fighter have a moment to shine, and B) offering variety.
Also, while we're at it, although changing topic a little, are your wizard, your cleric shining in combat? Can they get the big boom spells out, with the fighter and rogue in the way? When there are lots of enemies, they get to shine, not just the fighter with Cleave. All those undead the Rogue *Can't* sneak attack are dusted by the Cleric's turning ability.
If you're concerned about letting your characters shine, then offer them opportunities to shine, as aposed to pitting them against the same thing and always one outdoing the other. Got a creature that flies? Slap a fly spell on the fighter, and let him rain death upon it. Undead? Cleric! Horde? Wizard!
To Azlan: First, I'd like to comment on what you said about orcs.
No, it is not a chess game. It is about survival. The Average orc has an Int of 9. The average Kobold and Hobgoblin has an average Int of 10. The orc's int is 1 below a human's, and the kobold/hobgoblin is the same.
This means that the orcs are likely going to be smart enough to prepare just a little. They're not going to full out charge, unless they want to get killed. As you pointed out, a company of orcs is little match for a 5th level party. Ergo, if your a group of orcs, you want to be sure to take down something a little tougher then young apprentaces and novices. Thus, tactics are in order. Not to mention the fact that a leader, atleast an orc with some class level has an int of 10, so someone has to have the brains.
Next, Iw ould have to agree that a rogue's sneak attack balances it for combat. With the low hit points, BAB, and attacks, the sneak attack is what makes a Rogue worth playing in a combat-oriented campaign. Yes, the rogue is going to shine in a surprise round, or in a city adventure, because these are what rogues are made for. However, pound for pound, fighting Big Nasty Creatures, atleast One Big Nasty Creature, the fighter is going to wax them. With more AC due to armor and less to dex, the fighter will get hit less, and stay longer due to his higher hitpoints, and do more damage.
True, this is more for medium to high levels, but really, it's not smart for a rogue to get up there in hitting range, when he has 6 to 12 hps at first levels.
Next, I'll agree that it's a little more difficult to hit with the sneak. Yes, if you're flanking. Let's see him jump up to flank something with a 10' reach, that fast. How about non humanoid creatures, that are obviously immune? Have you ever tried to sneak attack something that *Flies*? Any spellcaster (or creature with wings) will likely take to the air as a first move, and since a rogue can't flank with ranged weapons, he ain't doing that much.
And, no, these factors do not try to negate the rogue's ability, to make him feel worthless, but they are balanced to A) Let the fighter have a moment to shine, and B) offering variety.
Also, while we're at it, although changing topic a little, are your wizard, your cleric shining in combat? Can they get the big boom spells out, with the fighter and rogue in the way? When there are lots of enemies, they get to shine, not just the fighter with Cleave. All those undead the Rogue *Can't* sneak attack are dusted by the Cleric's turning ability.
If you're concerned about letting your characters shine, then offer them opportunities to shine, as aposed to pitting them against the same thing and always one outdoing the other. Got a creature that flies? Slap a fly spell on the fighter, and let him rain death upon it. Undead? Cleric! Horde? Wizard!
sbwoodside
First Post
Xarlen said:
Yeah... I'm taking the opportunity to teach my players some tactics by subjecting them to same. One of the things I like about 3E D&D is that it gives you the bonuses for height, charge, cover, etc.
So, you got your 5 orcs, they're all CR 1/2 or whatever, but they're all above the characters on a balcony shooting crossbows down at them. The orcs'll get a couple of rounds off before the party can figure out how to get at them, say by a staircase, which can be defended with cover. And the orc behind the one at the top of the staircase uses a reach weapon over his buddy, etc.
It's not chess. I'm not trying to beat my players. I want to see if they're smart enough to beat the orcs. And learn some tactics for themselves.
Anyway, I would up the EL of the encounter quite a bit in this case because of the circumstantial factors, it's much harder than just meeting the same orcs in a corridor or on a field.
Exactly.
Simon
http://simonwoodside.com/dnd/
WizarDru
Adventurer
Okay, I've read all the way through the thread, now. Reapersaurus is correct....many of us don't see anything wrong with the rogue, or with the sneak attack ability (and for rerefences sake...the rogue isn't the only class with sneak attack, just the only core class with it).
Now then, let's talk.
First off, let's start doing an examination of the rogue's dynamic both within and outside of a party of characters. So far, a large part of the examination has only picked and chosen specific examples, including the party when it helps the argument, ignoring them when it doesn't.
D&D 3E is all about resources.
Who has them, how are they used and how fast do they use them are the primary questions.
To wit: Rogues can only get access to sneak attack if certain conditions are met. The defender must be capable of taking criticals (i.e. not a construct, undead or a host of other beasties), have his DEX bonus denied him and not have an evasion-type ability (such as other rogues and barbarians). The defender must be no more than 30' distant for a ranged attack, or usually 5' for a melee sneak attack.
Therefore, unless the rogue is EXCEPTIONALLY fast, chances are that she's going to need help to perform a sneak attack. Chances are that the rogue is taking her cue from the fighter, who engages the beastie (in our 1-on-1 scenario) while the mage stands back. The cleric may engage, but most likely is buffing...clerics have that flexibility, to a point. Still, likely only the fighter will risk getting too close, as he's the only one who can take the punishment. Even the rogue risks an awful lot to do the sneak attack.
At varying levels, the rogue's sneak attack will be more or less impressive, but will never keep scale with the death-dealing potential of a fighter or mage. Compare the empowered-maximized fireball, the finger of death, the power-attacking bull's strengthed weapon focus/specialized magic-weaponed flaming greatsword to the mid-range sneak attack. A party dynamic means the front-line fighter will be armed to the teeth. Even buffed, the rogue isn't dealing that much death. The numbers have been run countless times before, but the threads are long gone. I'm sure someone could run them again, but it's not really necessary.
This is the resources issue, again. If the cleric has one Greater magic weapon memorized, it goes to the fighter. Bull's strength? Fighter first. The rogue will get Cat's Grace, of course. But let's remember...the fighter is using bigger, nastier weapons. A Sword of Subtlety, for example, is just not as devastating as a greatsword fully powered up. At low levels, the fighter hits much more often (let's not forget...to sneak attack, you have to hit first) and at high levels, he's doing much more damage. With a fighter's high BAB, he can power-attack for a sickening amount of damage (never mind the potential for keen, improved criticals...)
All of this still only assumes one target. Add in multiple targets, and the whole dynamic changes, still to the fighter's benefit. With higher BAB, cleave, greater cleave, and the like, the fighter is dropping targets much faster. Higher hit points allow him to take the punishment to dish it out. A rogue with significantly fewer hit points may be dishing out some damage, but is hitting less often, and is going to take some serious punishment herself.
All of this isn't to say that a rogue can't do horrible damage, if she chooses. She can. But the situations in which she can are far more limited than for a fighter of equal level. This is true at first level, and true at 20th level.
Now, if you're running a game there are few combats, and mostly against single opponents, this may not appear to be the case. But within the context of a standard dungeon crawl, where hit points and healing can run low and you may have four to twenty encounters before leaving....things are different. That rogue is going to be much more cautious against six girallons than the fighter is, you can be sure. Especially if there are more on the way. Who cares if you can sneak attack and kill one immediately, if the next one will pummel you into unconciousness if they simply manage to hit twice?
If the issue is that the rogue, when sufficiently buffed by mages and equipment, and backed by a competent fighter is overshadowing the fighter....then the DM is not presenting the players with enough appropriate challenges to the group. This isn't to say that the DM is playing the monsters wrong...it's to say that more elements are needed. Don't punish the players for playing well, and don't target the rogue for being efficient. Instead, create situations where each character shines. The undead, for example, are underrated for the CRs...if there is no cleric in the party. One ghoul or ghast could create a TPK with it's paralysis ability at CR2 or CR3, for example. But the CR assumes that clerics are available, and able to turn it relatively easy. There are plenty of creatures that ignore sneak attacks and criticals, which are often the fighter's chance to shine. Undead are for the cleric. Outsiders are usually for the spellcasters. Ranged combat (i.e. at greater than 30' feet) can be a hideous thing, and the fighter and mage excel here, not the rogue.
By the same token, that group of orcs we've mentioned....they can be buffed by a mage or evil cleric, correct? Imagine five orcs, all with shield, expeditious retreat, bull's strength, equipped with two healing potions and with one level of warrior. And that doesn't require a majorly high-level shaman or spellcaster. The EL would be specificaly higher, of course, but it would have to be to deal with higher level players.
Ultimately, the point is this: under the right situations, in the right locations, with proper support, the rogue is devastating, and can even out-perform a fighter under similar specific situations. However, over a broad range of applications, the fighter will outperform the rogue more often than not, and over any protracted series of combats, such as a typical dungeon-crawl, the rouge's abilities will level out below the fighter's...not above.
I base this opinion not off of conjecture, but the last two years of 3E play. A rogue with strong support is deadly, no question. But unbalanced? I respectfully disagree.
Now then, let's talk.
First off, let's start doing an examination of the rogue's dynamic both within and outside of a party of characters. So far, a large part of the examination has only picked and chosen specific examples, including the party when it helps the argument, ignoring them when it doesn't.
D&D 3E is all about resources.
Who has them, how are they used and how fast do they use them are the primary questions.
To wit: Rogues can only get access to sneak attack if certain conditions are met. The defender must be capable of taking criticals (i.e. not a construct, undead or a host of other beasties), have his DEX bonus denied him and not have an evasion-type ability (such as other rogues and barbarians). The defender must be no more than 30' distant for a ranged attack, or usually 5' for a melee sneak attack.
Therefore, unless the rogue is EXCEPTIONALLY fast, chances are that she's going to need help to perform a sneak attack. Chances are that the rogue is taking her cue from the fighter, who engages the beastie (in our 1-on-1 scenario) while the mage stands back. The cleric may engage, but most likely is buffing...clerics have that flexibility, to a point. Still, likely only the fighter will risk getting too close, as he's the only one who can take the punishment. Even the rogue risks an awful lot to do the sneak attack.
At varying levels, the rogue's sneak attack will be more or less impressive, but will never keep scale with the death-dealing potential of a fighter or mage. Compare the empowered-maximized fireball, the finger of death, the power-attacking bull's strengthed weapon focus/specialized magic-weaponed flaming greatsword to the mid-range sneak attack. A party dynamic means the front-line fighter will be armed to the teeth. Even buffed, the rogue isn't dealing that much death. The numbers have been run countless times before, but the threads are long gone. I'm sure someone could run them again, but it's not really necessary.
This is the resources issue, again. If the cleric has one Greater magic weapon memorized, it goes to the fighter. Bull's strength? Fighter first. The rogue will get Cat's Grace, of course. But let's remember...the fighter is using bigger, nastier weapons. A Sword of Subtlety, for example, is just not as devastating as a greatsword fully powered up. At low levels, the fighter hits much more often (let's not forget...to sneak attack, you have to hit first) and at high levels, he's doing much more damage. With a fighter's high BAB, he can power-attack for a sickening amount of damage (never mind the potential for keen, improved criticals...)
All of this still only assumes one target. Add in multiple targets, and the whole dynamic changes, still to the fighter's benefit. With higher BAB, cleave, greater cleave, and the like, the fighter is dropping targets much faster. Higher hit points allow him to take the punishment to dish it out. A rogue with significantly fewer hit points may be dishing out some damage, but is hitting less often, and is going to take some serious punishment herself.
All of this isn't to say that a rogue can't do horrible damage, if she chooses. She can. But the situations in which she can are far more limited than for a fighter of equal level. This is true at first level, and true at 20th level.
Now, if you're running a game there are few combats, and mostly against single opponents, this may not appear to be the case. But within the context of a standard dungeon crawl, where hit points and healing can run low and you may have four to twenty encounters before leaving....things are different. That rogue is going to be much more cautious against six girallons than the fighter is, you can be sure. Especially if there are more on the way. Who cares if you can sneak attack and kill one immediately, if the next one will pummel you into unconciousness if they simply manage to hit twice?
If the issue is that the rogue, when sufficiently buffed by mages and equipment, and backed by a competent fighter is overshadowing the fighter....then the DM is not presenting the players with enough appropriate challenges to the group. This isn't to say that the DM is playing the monsters wrong...it's to say that more elements are needed. Don't punish the players for playing well, and don't target the rogue for being efficient. Instead, create situations where each character shines. The undead, for example, are underrated for the CRs...if there is no cleric in the party. One ghoul or ghast could create a TPK with it's paralysis ability at CR2 or CR3, for example. But the CR assumes that clerics are available, and able to turn it relatively easy. There are plenty of creatures that ignore sneak attacks and criticals, which are often the fighter's chance to shine. Undead are for the cleric. Outsiders are usually for the spellcasters. Ranged combat (i.e. at greater than 30' feet) can be a hideous thing, and the fighter and mage excel here, not the rogue.
By the same token, that group of orcs we've mentioned....they can be buffed by a mage or evil cleric, correct? Imagine five orcs, all with shield, expeditious retreat, bull's strength, equipped with two healing potions and with one level of warrior. And that doesn't require a majorly high-level shaman or spellcaster. The EL would be specificaly higher, of course, but it would have to be to deal with higher level players.
Ultimately, the point is this: under the right situations, in the right locations, with proper support, the rogue is devastating, and can even out-perform a fighter under similar specific situations. However, over a broad range of applications, the fighter will outperform the rogue more often than not, and over any protracted series of combats, such as a typical dungeon-crawl, the rouge's abilities will level out below the fighter's...not above.
I base this opinion not off of conjecture, but the last two years of 3E play. A rogue with strong support is deadly, no question. But unbalanced? I respectfully disagree.
).
Mortaneus
First Post
IMC, one limitation I placed on Sneak attack is that you cannot sneak attack a single target more than once a round.
This prevents the 20th level rogue with his dual wielded shortswords of speed and improved two-weapon fighting from getting into a flanking position and then taking a full attack action to do 77d6+* to a single target.
This becomes even more nessecary when you take a look at that feat they reveal in the latest dungeon where the target takes the sneak attack damage AGAIN next round. I doubt there are many opponents who can stand up to 154d6 over the course of two rounds of combat.
This prevents the 20th level rogue with his dual wielded shortswords of speed and improved two-weapon fighting from getting into a flanking position and then taking a full attack action to do 77d6+* to a single target.
This becomes even more nessecary when you take a look at that feat they reveal in the latest dungeon where the target takes the sneak attack damage AGAIN next round. I doubt there are many opponents who can stand up to 154d6 over the course of two rounds of combat.
WizarDru
Adventurer
Mortaneus said:
Could you post the stats on this feat? It sounds awfully unbalanced. It's certainly not something I'd judge an ability on. Especially when considered against Lingering Damage, which does an additional 1 point of damage per turn after a successful sneak attack. Are you sure this isn't an Epic level feat? What are the prereqs?
Mind you, at 20th level, the fighter can also be using those same +5 Swords of Speed with improved two weapon fighting, and he's doing it more often, and hitting more frequentlyand with power-attack, a higher strength, weapon specialization and some other nasty feats, he can be doing, on average, more damage over time.
Mortaneus
First Post
It's a feat from the Epic Level handbook. I think it requires 10d6 of sneak attack, among other things. I'm at work, where the copy of Dungeon unfortunately is not. It can fall to someone else to post the specs on it.
Still, even without the feat, being able to do 77d6 of damage in a single round is a bit broken, especially considering that I'm not even including damage bonuses.
Consider: 20th level Rogue. 2x Shortsword of Speed +3, Girdle of Giant Strength +6, Gloves of Dex +6, Weapon Finesse
STR 14(avg for a decent rogue fighter) +6 = 20 (+5)
DEX 20+6=26 (+8)
If all seven swings (3 base, 2 offhand, 2 speed) connect, then you're talking 77d6+47 in one round, with a max of 507 points, and an average of 316 points.
Let's compare this to a fighter of similar level:
20th level Fighter, 2x Shortsword of Speed +3, Girdle of Giant Strength +6, Gloves of Dex +6
STR 20+6=26 (+8)
DEX 14+6=20 (+5)
Damage per swing: 1d6+13 primary/1d6+9 offhand
Let's say he power attacks for 6 points (giving a similar attack bonus to the rogue) that's 1d6+19/1d6+15 per swing.
8 swings a round = 8d6+140, for a max of 188, and an average of 168 points. Doesn't even compare. Even if you add in Greater two weapon fighting, that's 209 max, 186 avg. Heck, let's make it 10 fighter/10 tempest. It's still only 230 max, 205 avg. And that's assuming the fighter's 4th primary attack hits, which will (with the power attack) be lower than the rogue's third primary attack.
(edited math)
Still, even without the feat, being able to do 77d6 of damage in a single round is a bit broken, especially considering that I'm not even including damage bonuses.
Consider: 20th level Rogue. 2x Shortsword of Speed +3, Girdle of Giant Strength +6, Gloves of Dex +6, Weapon Finesse
STR 14(avg for a decent rogue fighter) +6 = 20 (+5)
DEX 20+6=26 (+8)
If all seven swings (3 base, 2 offhand, 2 speed) connect, then you're talking 77d6+47 in one round, with a max of 507 points, and an average of 316 points.
Let's compare this to a fighter of similar level:
20th level Fighter, 2x Shortsword of Speed +3, Girdle of Giant Strength +6, Gloves of Dex +6
STR 20+6=26 (+8)
DEX 14+6=20 (+5)
Damage per swing: 1d6+13 primary/1d6+9 offhand
Let's say he power attacks for 6 points (giving a similar attack bonus to the rogue) that's 1d6+19/1d6+15 per swing.
8 swings a round = 8d6+140, for a max of 188, and an average of 168 points. Doesn't even compare. Even if you add in Greater two weapon fighting, that's 209 max, 186 avg. Heck, let's make it 10 fighter/10 tempest. It's still only 230 max, 205 avg. And that's assuming the fighter's 4th primary attack hits, which will (with the power attack) be lower than the rogue's third primary attack.
(edited math)
Last edited:
