Sneak Attack: A Little Too Powerful?

[ConcreteBuddha]

You wouldn't be disagreeing with me, because I never said the rogue archer was overly-powerful. I was refering to your comments about my bow sneak attacks.

Considering the title of this thread is "Sneak Attack: A Little Too Powerful?", I had assumed that you were using the example of the bow to illustrate to all of us how sneak attack was over-powered. If this is not the case, I apologize. If this is the case, I disagree.

 

[Weeble]

Considering the title of this thread is "Sneak Attack: A Little Too Powerful?", I had assumed that you were using the example of the bow to illustrate to all of us how sneak attack was over-powered. If this is not the case, I apologize. If this is the case, I disagree.

Fair enough, and no apology needed. If anything, even in the best of circumstances, an archer sneak attacking will likely get pummeled at some point. Sneak attacks have to be within 30ft for more reasons than preciseness, so most opponents can simply march their buts up and attack in one round, assuming another party member isn't threatening some of those spaces between the two.

 

[Azlan]

Well, this much is clear to me now...

1.) Some people here think it's not the rogue's sneak attack that needs fine-tuning, but the rogue's (or is it the fighter's?) abilities outside of combat. These people think that a fighter outshines a rogue in combat (and rightly so!), but not to a degree to where the rogue feels inadequate or ineffectual; whereas outside of combat, a rogue outshines a fighter to such a degree, to where the fighter does indeed feel inadequate and ineffectual, if not downright useless.

2.) A few people here (myself included) think the rogue's potential to deal damage in some combat situations (i.e. his sneak attack) needs some fine-tuning, albeit these people, few as they are, do not agree on the why's and how's it should be fine-tuned.

3.) Most people here think rogues (and fighters) are fine, just the way they are. (But then again, most people here think 3E D&D is fine, just the way it is.)

 

[reapersaurus]

2.) A few people here (myself included) think the rogue's potential to deal damage in some combat situations (i.e. his sneak attack) needs some fine-tuning, albeit these people, few as they are, do not agree on the why's and how's it should be fine-tuned.

The simplest and most reasonable fix for this person would be to make sneak attack only useable once a round.

That elegantly stops the abusiveness of the combos while still giving the rogue a powerful pop in combat.

 

[Thanee]

Which will probably lead to the spring-attacking greatsword-wielding rogue!

Just make more diverse challenges and the balance is just fine!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Malin Genie]

Huhm... That's why my archers like to use Improved Unarmed Strike or Spiked Gauntlets (if you allow to use a bow with them).

Not a chance

If you are still holding your bow, you cannot be 'armed' with spiked gauntlets - and similarly, if you are 'armed' with a bow, you cannot also use your Improved Unarmed Strike (same with 'bladed boots', Thanee.) If you drop your bow, of course, you can use your unarmed strike, gauntlets, boots etc.

Otherwise you run into situations like characters dual-wielding Greatswords and Unarmed Strikes and similar silliness.

Your campaign may differ (in which case, sign me up for the Greatsword + Spiked Gauntlets smack!)

 

[Darklone]

Some things to add...

Your campaign may differ (in which case, sign me up for the Greatsword + Spiked Gauntlets smack!)

I do allow guys who wield a reach weapon/polearm to make offhand attacks or AoOs with a spiked gauntlet/Improved US if someone closes. I think it's ok to attack with one hand while you still hold the other weapon BUT you are not allowed to make AoOs with the long thing then.

As for the rogues abilities outside of combat, Azlan... The thing that bugs me is the 4 times skill multiplier at character creation. It's a MUST to take rogue levels first IF you do it.

I don't see a reason why a rogue/wiz should be different from a wiz/rog. That's why houserules apply here in my case.

 

[WizarDru]

(But then again, most people here think 3E D&D is fine, just the way it is.)

I think that's a pretty telling statement, honestly.

 

[reapersaurus]

I think that's a pretty telling statement, honestly.

BS.

Anybody that isn't using SOME house rules for 3E is a slack-jawed idiot.

No offense.

 

[Thanee]

Or LN!

Bye
Thanee