Sneak Attack--Help me stop my DM from banishing it!

[Piratecat]

Again, I don't see cause to nerf sneak attack, here.

Nor do I. In a game which is often criticized for slow and dragging combat, I'm all for significant damage. The trick is making sure that the rogue doesn't get all the glory; that's when I roll out minions so that the wizard gets to wipe out dozens of monsters in one fight.

Has anyone done the math to compare an avenger's average (more predictable) damage to a rogue's spike damage?

 

[Destil]

Nor do I. In a game which is often criticized for slow and dragging combat, I'm all for significant damage. The trick is making sure that the rogue doesn't get all the glory; that's when I roll out minions so that the wizard gets to wipe out dozens of monsters in one fight.

Has anyone done the math to compare an avenger's average (more predictable) damage to a rogue's spike damage?

Avenger damage is actually a bit spiky, but in an awesome way. Their high crit chance means it's less of a 'hit hit miss' and more of a 'hit hit crit' curve.

An avenger with a big high-crit weapon, last time I saw the math done, comes out pretty well if they're always triggering the re-roll ability. They start to fall behind at Epic, supposedly, but there's a lot of factors at work there and it's pretty feat/build dependent (this was before the dragon feat that gives them a 19-20 crit on their oath target, and I believe that was the real issue between them and daggermasters at the time).

The re-roll is basically a +5 to hit given the general 'to hit' values in 4E (though a rogue with a dagger and piercing strike is often at +4 to +6, all told).

 

[ProfessorCirno]

The whole "undead can't be sneak attacked" never made verisimilitude sense, either.

If it stands and moves - especially if it's a humanoid form - then it has weak spots. It has load bearing parts of its body that neccisarily hold more strain then other parts.

Now in 2e, it was "backstab" (which also didn't make sense because stabbing them in the back is no more deadly then stabbing them in the front, less so in many cases). The basic idea was that you stabbed them in the "organs," whatever they may be, and thus it didn't work on most non-humanoid enemies, or even humanoid enemies that were a bit too big.

However, that was changed to sneak attack (and good because, like I mentioned, "backstab" didn't really make sense). The idea here is just that - it's an attack that catches them off guard and hits them in a weak point. Now for some monsters it kinda makes sense like oozes, but even with undead and constructs, there's always a weak spot.

Here's the biggest catch though.

Combat is abstracted. It always has been. HP has always been abstract, the "combat round" has always been abstract, the whole fighting has always been abstract. Backstab and sneak attack both have also always been abstract. If a fighter can somehow attack a cube of acid jello with a longsword, then a rogue can stab it with a dagger. The same, then, with a zombie.

 

[SteveC]

I'd advise anyone who thinks that undead don't have vulnerable spots and can't have critical effects to go watch Army of Darkness. I'd say that whole movie is about Ash doing horrible damage to specific body parts of the badguys.

As someone who's first 4E character was a drow rogue, I can say that, yes, they do a lot of damage, but there are also a lot of disadvantages they have to take into account. If you don't play a rogue with an eye towards survival, you may do a lot of damage, but you'll soon be overwhelmed and killed.

Beyond that, some of the striker classes do more damage out of the gate, and the rogue is one of them. After a few levels, things really tend to equalize quite a bit.

But most of all, the rogue (and strikers in general) are the GM's friend! They help a combat go quickly and decisively (either way: the all striker group I ran for had a "with your shield or on it" mentality). One of the things that 4E gets criticized for is slow or grindy combats. It's the strikers who fight that tendency!

So let the rogue have his fun, since it comes with some heavy strings attached!

 

[KarinsDad]

Characters are second level with a 20 in the primary stat and a post-racial 16 in whatever secondary stat. They are assumed to have combat advantage and quarry, if applicable. Enemy has an AC of 16 (14+Level).

Ranger: Twin Strike w/ Greatbow and Weapon Focus: 16.71 DPR.
Rogue: Sly Flourish w/ Dagger (Backstabber and Expertise feats): 18.70 DPR.

Not quite sure where you are getting these DPRs.

Ranger to hit = 1 half level +5 stat +2 greatbow +1 magic bow = +9

Rogue to hit = 1 half level +5 stat +3 dagger +1 magic dagger +1 rogue weapon talent +1 expertise +2 combat advantage = +14

It's harder to get combat advantage for the Ranger at level 2. Practically the only way to get it is to fire from a dark area into a lit area shy of an ally having a special ability. The melee Rogue has several ways to accomplish CA and this is one of the advantages that Rogues have. On the other hand, they risk melee attack range to accomplish this.

AC 16 means that the Ranger hits 65% of the time (per shot) and criticals 5% of the time. .65*8.5 (6.5 greatbow + 1 magic +1 weapon focus) +.05*14 + .65*8.5+.05*14 + (1-(.95*.95))*6 (critical quarry) + (.65*.95+.3*.65)*3.5 (non-critical quarry) = 15.87875 DPR

AC 16 means that the Rogue hits 90% of the time and criticals 5% of the time. .9*20.5 (2.5 dagger + 5 dex + 3 cha sly flourish + 1 magic +9 sneak attack) +.05*29 = 19.9 DPR

Without CA, AC 16 means that the Rogue hits 80% of the time and criticals 5% of the time. .8*11.5 +.05*13 = 9.85 DPR


You could give the Ranger CA because an ally might sometimes give it to him, but the more likely scenario is that the Rogue typically outbeats the Ranger by 4 DPR (or 25% more damage) per round. Granted, there will be rounds when the Rogue does not have CA, but there will also be rounds where the Ranger doesn't have Quarry.

 

[Reigan]

You are only level 2, the game will change quite a bit over the next few levels. As others have pointed out, one of the biggest challenges a 4e dm will come across is avoiding combat grind. He may well end up wishing you could do more damage.

Perhaps your dm needs to "up" his game rather than nerfing you. A good combination of terrain effects, controller monsters that daze or slow, hard hitting artillery etc. will do the trick.

 

[sigfile]

Not quite sure where you are getting these DPRs.

That would be my DPR spreadsheet. Which, as you've just pointed out, seems to have a bug -- it's adding 5% to the miss chance. I'll get that ironed out.

I'm not willing to grant the Rogue combat advantage "just because" without also giving it to the Ranger. Stealth, ally abilities, powers, and feats can all be used to gain CA at range. The Ranger gets to work for his DPR, too.

 

[MrMyth]

"Biased" is an ugly word. "Lazy" is more accurate.

Fair enough, and apologies if the term came off a little harsh! I wasn't trying to imply any agenda on you part, just that the math breakdown used was one that would inherently favor the ranger.

And, honestly, I'm not sure if I disagreed with your actual point at hand, about Sneak Attack - I mainly was just trying to make clear that the earlier math didn't show the entire picture. No offense was intended!

 

[KarinsDad]

That would be my DPR spreadsheet. Which, as you've just pointed out, seems to have a bug -- it's adding 5% to the miss chance. I'll get that ironed out.

I'm not willing to grant the Rogue combat advantage "just because" without also giving it to the Ranger. Stealth, ally abilities, powers, and feats can all be used to gain CA at range. The Ranger gets to work for his DPR, too.

No, but you are willing to give Quarry to the Ranger automatically.

Ranger with CA: 17.75375
Ranger w/o CA: 15.87875
Ranger with CA w/o quarry: 14.15
Ranger w/o CA w/o quarry: 12.45

Rogue with CA: 19.9
Rogue w/o CA: 9.85

Let's be realistic here. Stealth rarely gives CA in many combat scenarios. In order to get hidden and hence get CA from Stealth, the Ranger has to find a location that has total concealment or superior cover. As a general rule, NPCs don't have hidden little nooks and crannies floating around their lairs

Yes, one might find this in the woods, but it's a somewhat rare occurance in the game system.

It would much easier for a Rogue with the Cunning Sneak Rogue Tactic to gain CA via Stealth than it ever would be for the Ranger with a bow to gain stealth.

Stealth used to be just cover or concealment to use. That's no longer the rule. The best the Ranger can typically do is fire without CA on round #1 without superior cover, and then move into superior cover. On round #2, move back to just cover and fire with CA. In such a scenario, he could gain CA every other round just by moving into and out of superior cover every other round. Course, a good DM wouldn't just let this happen every single encounter either.

As to other PCs giving CA to the Ranger, yes that can happen. However, it doesn't happen every single round. It might happen a couple of times per encounter. And, the Ranger probably won't be using Twin Strike on most of those "I now have CA" rounds. He'll more likely use an Encounter attack power or even a Daily attack power, trying to set up his own abillities.

The Defender, on the other hand, is going to try to set the Rogue up for flank every single round.

When there is 10 DPR difference between CA and no CA for the Rogue, you know that the players are going to try to set up CA for the Rogue whenever possible. They are not going to go out of their way to do that for the Ranger as frequently because the difference is so slim.

So yes, I suspect that the 19.9 DPR Rogue attacking with CA will happen most of the time. The 17.75375 DPR Ranger attacking with CA will happen a lot less frequently, probably at most half of the time in the best of cases.

And note: CA is not the same as things like a +2 power bonus to hit. So yes, other PCs will often give buffs to both the Rogue and the Ranger, but CA is a different beast.


Another thing to look at is average damage.

The Rogue in your example here does 20.5 average damage if he hits.

The Ranger in your example here does either 12 average damage (one attack hits) or 20.5 average damage (both attacks hit).

From your "spike" theory above, it would appear to the DM that the Rogue is spiking more than the Ranger. The Ranger only does 20.5 damage 56% of the time. The Rogue does 20.5 damage 95% of the time.

Sure, the Ranger will get the occasional round of 30 points of damage. But the Rogue is slapping down 20 points of damage nearly every single round.

 

[sigfile]

No, but you are willing to give Quarry to the Ranger automatically.

Sure am. Here -- I'll give Quarry to the Rogue, too. He can spend a minor action and point at the nearest enemy.

I don't particularly care, in a DPR discussion, how situationally challenging Combat Advantage may be to get. Unless you can put a hard number to it, you either grant it or deny it to all combatants. Given that we're discussing Rogues, here, everyone gets it.