Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 4153818" data-attributes="member: 22424">You mentioned that this was "Red Hand of Doom". Which encounter was it? If you refer to the "Bell Tower" encounter (p.59), then the encounter is supposed to be with three hobgoblin veterans with 20 hit points each. Not exactly a description I would associate with 'mook'.Well, normally he should have struck in the surpise round, and then won initiative and struck again. A 6th level Rogue should do approx 4d6 damage with each attack, which will kill the hobgoblin with decent rolls. Without decent rolls, all bets are off.Incidentally, there are more options than just a sneak attack - poison was always available.In "Return of the Jedi", Han Solo tries to sneak up on a Scout Trooper to eliminate him silently. The trooper is a mook, a nobody, a "red shirt". At the crucial moment, he rolls badly and alerts the guard, provoking the Speeder Bike Chase. Just because the opponent is a non-entity in the plot doesn't mean that success should be assured.If we're looking at the same encounter, the Rogue can absolutely one-shot the hobgoblin (4d6 damage maxes at 24, vs 20 hit points). The Rogue can even take out the Bladebearer cited before he gets to act, but only with really good rolls (he must win initiative, hit with two sneak attacks, and do plenty of damage with both). But then, that Bladebearer is even less a 'mook' than the veteran.If the Rogue fails to roll sufficiently well, then of course he's not going to succeed. But that's not a flaw in the system - the ability to succeed doesn't imply the certainty of success.On to another of your examples:Alternately, in D&D the Fighter uses his AoO to Trip the hobgoblin, and the Wizard casts his spell. How is that any different?</blockquote>

Verification