Sneak Attacks in the Rogue Class, WHY?

[MasterOfHeaven]

Well alot of campaigns considering Ive been playing d&d for the last 6 years, and before that I played alot of other fantasy RPGs (swedish though ). Well, theoreticaly it should be the same amount of roleplaying regardless of levels, but it just seems to me that at higher levels, the rules start to slow down the games, hence less roleplaying...

Well sorcerers should be powerful shouldnt they?

The amount of roleplaying is always up to the players, as you say, so higher levels shouldn't be an impediment to that. Yes, there is more to keep track of ruleswise at higher levels, but it's a neglible difference once you get used to it.

As for Sorcerers, of course they should be powerful, they are mighty adventurers, but should they be more powerful than the Fighters, the Barbarians, the Rogues, the Wizards (In low magic campaigns, scrolls and such are often badly restricted, and magic item creation is disallowed, destroying the one advantage Wizards have over Sorcerers, versatility) and so on?

Sorcerers should be kept on a relatively equal power curve to the other classes, else it lessens the fun for the players who are playing the Fighters, Barbarians, Rogues and Wizards when they see they can't do half as much as the Sorcerer can. Again, if you change the magic level in your campaign, you will have to deal with the problems it creates, and the class imbalance is just one of them.

 

[Storm Raven]

What? So you cant stand behind a target because its not in the rules? Come on.....

Since the target has no "front" and no "back" it is very difficult to stand "behind" him using the 3e combat rules. Sure you can add facing to the 3e combat system, but you can't complain about "backstabbing" as part of the core class abilities of the Rogue, since by the defninition of the game rules you cannot "backstab".

 

[LostSoul]

What I don't understand is why Fighters can't learn Sneak Attack.

Isn't Sneak Attack just a style of fighting?

If not, what is it, then? And if it is, why can't the guy who specializes in Fighting take it? If it's because Fighters don't know how to make precise strikes, why are they the ones with the good BAB? If it's because they aren't "sneaky" enough, why not tie Sneak Attack to Hide and Move Silently? or some other skill?

To me, it seems like a compromise, trading realism for game balance, that could have been solved by giving Rogues Feats to pick and choose from. Or free access to Sneak Attack at a faster rate.

Oh well.

 

[LostSoul]

If you want simple rules, go back to the original Star Wars game from WEG:
"player: I roll a 12, do I hit? GM: um. sure, sounds good"

Heh heh, so true.

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

What I don't understand is why Fighters can't learn Sneak Attack.

Isn't Sneak Attack just a style of fighting?

If not, what is it, then? And if it is, why can't the guy who specializes in Fighting take it? If it's because Fighters don't know how to make precise strikes, why are they the ones with the good BAB? If it's because they aren't "sneaky" enough, why not tie Sneak Attack to Hide and Move Silently? or some other skill?

To me, it seems like a compromise, trading realism for game balance, that could have been solved by giving Rogues Feats to pick and choose from. Or free access to Sneak Attack at a faster rate.

Oh well.

I've always rationalized it by saying the Rogues have special training in quick, precise strikes to opponents vital spots when they are unaware, or unable to defend themselves properly. Fighters recieve no such training, and so they do not get Sneak Attack. If you really want your Fighter to have Sneak Attack, though, you could just take a few levels of Rogue.

 

[LostSoul]

I've always rationalized it by saying the Rogues have special training in quick, precise strikes to opponents vital spots when they are unaware, or unable to defend themselves properly. Fighters recieve no such training, and so they do not get Sneak Attack. If you really want your Fighter to have Sneak Attack, though, you could just take a few levels of Rogue.

But since Fighters get all those Feats in so many different combat areas, why do they leave this one out? Seems strange.

It also seems strange that, if a Fighter wants to learn this new combat style, he has to focus more on attack than defense (lower hit points) but his accuracy and attack skill doesn't improve (lower BAB). That can easily be rationalized by the peculiarities of the Sneak Attack style; but why, then does the Fighter grab 8 skill points in areas he didn't have time to focus his study?

What I'm suggesting is a Fighter who sees the value of Sneak Attack and focuses his entire next level into learning that style. In the core rules, he takes a level of Rogue - and his intense combat training might also give him 8 ranks in Diplomacy or Read Lips.

Strange.

I'm thinking about turning Sneak Attack into a series of feats that takes Search and Spot ranks as requirements, and only functions in light armour. I'm not sure if it would be on the Fighter bonus feat list, but Rogues would have access to it at thier normal rate of advancement.

 

[apsuman]

What I don't understand is why Fighters can't learn Sneak Attack.



Oh well.

But they can, learn sneak attack.

The next time your fighter gains a level, instead of giving them d10 HP give them d6, and no bonus fighter feats.

increase their BAB by +0

give them +1d6 sneak attack and 4 (plus Int mod) skill points .


g!

 

[DMaple]

What I'm suggesting is a Fighter who sees the value of Sneak Attack and focuses his entire next level into learning that style. In the core rules, he takes a level of Rogue - and his intense combat training might also give him 8 ranks in Diplomacy or Read Lips.

Strange.

Its not "Strange" at all it is one of the 'features' of a class-based system. If bugs you that much don't play D&D.

Besides he's much more likey to put 8 ranks in Spot. *grin*

 

[LostSoul]

...and 4 (plus Int mod) skill points .

Why only 4?

I realize the rules behind getting a Fighter-Rogue Sneak Attack. I just don't see how you can justify the strangeness that might crop up.

 

[Umbran]

A fighter can learn sneak attack - by taking a level of rogue.

The immediate counter-argument is that he'll lose out on BAB, HP, etc, right? Well, consider that the sneak attack really is a completely different style of combat. Training for it just doesn't prepare you as well for stand-up, in your face fighting.

This is why we have multiclassing, folks

As for the main debate in this thread - a number of the posters are being reasonable in suggesting that perhaps D&D isn't the right system for the sort of play simonski wants.

Use the right tool for the job. Yes, D&D is simple and streamlined. And yes, one can make alterations in the system. But, if you have to rewrite and rebalance large portions of the system to get what you want, is the simplicity actually netting you a gain anymore?

This is exactly why multiple systems exist. No one rule-set does everything well. If you find that D&D doesn't give you the flavor you want, find something else that does.