Sneak Attacks!

[Dr. Zoom]

- you can only get ranged sneak attacks on opponents caught flat footed, or, if they are flanked and you fire into the melee...

Yes, you can make ranged sneak attacks on flat-footed opponents, but you cannot make them by firing into melee against an opponent flanked by two of your allies unless the opponent has lost his dex bonus to AC, which he does not lose by being flanked.

 

[WizarDru]

Treat it as you will, but as written, every time a rogue CAN do a sneak attack, she DOES do a sneak attack. With a rogue's low BAB, particularly on interative attacks, it balances out. Compare this to a fighter with a mighty longbow and a full feat-chain of archery abilities, and you won't think the rogue is doing that much damage, I assure you.

At low levels, sneak attack can seem devastating. IME, the higher the levels go, the less dangerous the sneak attack damage becomes, especially given the number of creatures unaffected by it. Try running your party with a rogue through 'Heart of Nightfang Spire', and then ask the rogue how powerful she feels.

If you and your players are comfortable with it, then Game On. That's all that really matters.

 

[Roland Delacroix]

At low levels, sneak attack can seem devastating. IME, the higher the levels go, the less dangerous the sneak attack damage becomes, especially given the number of creatures unaffected by it.

In my experience Sneak Attack is LESS powerfull at low level. I took a level of monk, so I had only +1d6 until level 4, but during that time I didn't do hardly any damage. I usually did 1d6+1 with a kusari gama. Our paladin was doing 2d6+2, and Smiting quite often on top of that. A fighter that focused on Strength could do even more. The few times I was able to get a Sneak Attack in I was still doing less damage.

Now that i'm up to +2d6 I feel i'm almost as good as the melee guys doing damage, IF i get in the right position and IF I hit anything. At mid levels i'm not sure if it will make a difference either, the Paladin will be getting 2 attacks per round and hitting almost all the time, about 4D6+8 a round with magic, while I will only hit once a round for 3d6+2 IF i'm not facing undead, constructs, oozes, etc AND I get in a good position.

 

[Caliban]

So our fix is to make sneak attack an action. This allows rogues to move and make a sneak attack in a single round. It does not allow a rogue with every TWF feat under the sun to take a half-dozen attacks and add 10d6 to every strike while using a full-round attack action.

Only a 19th leve rogue can add 10d6 on a sneak attack.

Theoretically, a 19th level rogue (BAB +14), with Ambidexterity, Two Weapon Fighting, Improved TWF, Combat Reflexes, Expert Tactician, Weapon Focus, Weapon Finesse, a 30 Dex, and two +5 Short Swords of Speed can make attacks of +30/+30/+30/+28/+28/+23/+23/+18. That's 8 attacks when making a full attack action against an opponent with no Dex modifier, or who he is flanking. That's potentially 88d6+40 damage (average of 348 damage, max of 568 damage) if all your attacks hit.

Unless of course that opponent happens to be a plant, ooze, undead, construct, has Uncanny Dodge, is under the effects of obscuring mist, blur, displacement, invisibility, darkness, any other form of concealment, has heavy Fortification on their armor, or is out of the reach of your weapons. All of which are quite common occurances at that level of play. Then (assuming you can reach your target) you only get 7 attacks with a full attack action, with a potential of 7d6+35 (average of 60 points) if all your attacks hit. If you can't do a full attack for some reason, it's only 2 attacks with a potential of 2d6+10 (average 17 damage). At 19th level, that's pitiful damage.

When sneak attack works, the rogue can be a demi-god of battle. When it doesn't/can't work, the rogue is a low-hit point, lightly armored fighter who doesn't do much damage.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

When sneak attack works, the rogue can be a demi-god of battle. When it doesn't/can't work, the rogue is a low-hit point, lightly armored fighter who doesn't do much damage.

And then the rogue dies. Many creatures have high hp, will survive the sneak attack, and then (like any intelligent creature) kill the lightly-armored, low hp guy who keeps poking it in the kidney with that rapier!

You're like a wizard... you live long enough to do something cool once, and they... you die! Very, very, very overpowering

 

[Gromm]

And then the rogue dies. Many creatures have high hp, will survive the sneak attack, and then (like any intelligent creature) kill the lightly-armored, low hp guy who keeps poking it in the kidney with that rapier!

You're like a wizard... you live long enough to do something cool once, and they... you die! Very, very, very overpowering

Creatures don't even need intellegence. You hurt anything really bad, and its going to strike at the thing that hurt it worst: You.

Sneak attack isn't overly powerful. After countless sessions I've seen it do tons of damage maybe twice. Rogues don't get more than 2 attack without Haste until 20th level, and even then they can't survive hand to hand combat very well.
Sure say, +5d6 sounds like a lot of damage, but it averages out to around 17 points of damage. Considering the second attack will probably miss this is still likely less than the fighter does with a single attack (and hes probably got about 3 at this point- with little chance to miss).
Sneak attack lets rogues play a being fighters for a while. It lets them do about the same damage overall, but only if they have a flanking buddy, and even then they can't take the hits to play wit hthe big boys. Not to mention Blur, a second level spell, stops a 20th level rouge from doing anything more than his usual 1d6+Str.

 

[reapersaurus]

Many guys (me not included) think that's overpowered and allow only the first one, that's why many others are confused.

I wouldn't say many guys.
I'd say that the majority of the people on this board feel it's OK to have the rogue compete with the fighter in combat in sneak attack scenarios.

 

[Darklone]

Ok reapersaurus, I just wrote about the impression I got cause everytime someone asks again about multiple sneakattacks per round, someone jumps from the shadows and talks about a needed fix to the rules...

Caliban: Thanks for the nice summary, we'll quote that one each time the next ones ask the same all over again ...

Personally I had more problems with barbarians and fighters with greataxes and greatswords doing hells of damage than rogues. But well, I got a DM who whines every time my char makes a sneakattack with 10 points of damage and thinks it's ok for the fighter to make whirlwind attacks against several opponents with more than 20 points of damage...

For every DM who thinks sneak attacks are overpowered: Send your rogue some skeletons to fight.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Sneak Attack sure ain't overpowered. You have to meet certain requirements (surprise your foe, flank him and the like), and he must meet certain requirements (no concealment of any sort, no construct, ooze, plant, etc.). Considering that the 1d6/2 levels is alright. After all, your sneak attacking rogue has to compete with fighting powerhouses (who have something like 2d6 + 18, crit 19-20/x3 at any occasion), mighty spells (no matter what the enemy is, rely on the wizard to have something to blast him, and that usually deals 1d6 per level, to several of your foes, if it doesn't kill them outright!) and your rogue has to remain in melee (while the wizard can stay back) and he's not made for this (while a warrior can handle this!)

 

[Shin Okada]

When reading those rules, sneak attack may seem to be overpowered. But trust me, just play with current rules for a while. You will surely notice that sneak attacks do not always work (so many opponents are immune) and a rogue cannot hit critters as often as Fighters/Barbarians/Rangers do. The rule is just good and well-balanced.

Once I run a short campaign centered on undeads and throughout those 3 or 4 sessions (about 2 month!), a rogue could make sneak attacks only once or twice.