Post/Author/DateTime	Post
detectevil 01-21-04, 08:55 AM	Every once in a while a thread about rogues dealing more damage than fighters will pop out. It has been like this almost forever. Than some sneak attack devotee comes to say "the rogue only deals this kind of damage in very specific conditions". Bull:censored:. Rogues do sneak attack damage on a regular basis. If it was really that rare, fighters would not be complaining that much. My real complaint is that Sneak Attack has become THE most important rogue ability. From the less than useable Back Stab in 2ed, it now comes to the point where some people say if a rogue PrC doen't have sneak attack, it's useless. But is sneak attack really that important for rogues? Isn't the rogue class, as presented in the PHB, much more like a ninja than a rogue? Think of some classic rogues from fiction. Indiana Jones, McGyver, and, to some degree, maybe even Sherlock Holmes. Sure, once in a while you will see some of then sneak behind an unaware guard and catch him off guard... but didn't Rambo and Charles Bronson use to do the very same thing? So, as I see, sneak attack is much more of a Combat Manouver than a class ability, which rogues would be just more often able to perform. Problem is, rogues without sneack attack would be somewhat useless in combat, and that does become a bit of a problem in D&D. Well, what do typical rogues do in combat? They hide, they throw daggers, they run around alot, but as a whole, they are even more difficult to hit than fighters. I would say a class bonus to AC wouldn't be out of order. And would even help when making a swashbuckler concept from the Rogue/Fighter combo. Dodge and Mobility feats are not out of order either. But, of course, more opinions are always welcome.
Salla 01-21-04, 09:15 AM	I would call Indiana Jones, MacGyver, and Sherlock Holmes Experts (the NPC class) rather than rogues, myself. Holmes might be a Ranger, though, what with the Tracking and obvious 'favored enemy: humans', then add Watch Detective maybe ... If I were to try to create a Ninja, sans Prestige Classes or Oriental Adventures/Rokugan, I'd multiclass Rogue and Monk. The fact that Rogues have the potential to deal more damage than fighters says more about the Fighters than the Rogues. Just about EVERYBODY has more damage-dealing potential than the Fighter. It's less that the Rogue needs nerfing than the Fighter needs HELP. Major help. And, yes, Rogues can do sneak attack regularly ... IF the situation is right. Sneak Attack is very powerful, but can be very situational, especially if the opponents are prepared for it. Concealment negates it (obscuring mist, anybody?). Doesn't work on oozes, plants, constructs, elementals, or undead. Armor of Fortification cancels it. Being more than 30' away cancels it. And I'm sure there's at least three other ways to squelch it that I'm just not thinking of right now.
Pixieboy 01-21-04, 09:31 AM	Lol.. The whole concept is ridiculous.. Why would a rogue be able to target vital spots on magic beasts/aberrations any better than a fighter whose fought them. Should only work on humanoids.. And improved invisibility is ridiculous.. Make sneak attack a little better and do a system like the rangers favored enemy to against whom it works. You don't need to give battle abilities to every class. If someone doesn't want to play a class without battle abilities that's his problem. Next edition they'll probably give the bard a music attack.
Eldren 01-21-04, 11:12 AM	Pixieboy: You make a reasonably valid argument for Sneak Attacking aberrations; most other creatures have a generally definable anatomy that a Rogue can take advantage of, but the anatomy of an aberration is usually pretty alien, and might make it difficult to find vital organs, etc., that allow the Rogue to deal their additional damage. Ultimately, it comes down, I think, to the fact that they don't want to limit the ability so much that it becomes about as useful as the 1st Edition and 2nd Edition backstab feature that the Thief class (which is now the Rogue in 3rd Edition) had. Sneak Attack can be foiled by a variety of things, but be wary of a Dungeon Master who's constantly throwing those things at you. Constantly throwing constructs, undead, plant creatures, incorporeal creatures, beings wearing armor of Fortification, etc., at a party just indicates to me that the DM is targeting the Rogue. It's little different than slinging constant iron golems at a party that's heavy with spellcasters. Creatures like this should be used on occasion, just to insure that things remain challenging, but I don't know that they should be encountered more often than others; if anything, I would tend to think encounters like this are a lot more rare than encounters with living beings with an assaultable anatomy. Golems cost a lot to create, intelligent undead tend to hide far away from places adventurers are likely to find them (at least until they have a power base that insures they can take on most challenges; never try to "beard" a lich in its den...), and plant creatures only tend to be found in specific climates, or underground (like myconids). Sure, it's frustrating when a twinked-out Rogue comes along with multiple attacks and deals +30d6 of damage at higher levels. When I say "twinked out", I mean Rogues who have been constructed so that they're receiving Sneak Attack about 80%+ of the time. This is most Rogues I've seen in play; feats that let them get a single Sneak Attack (like "Quicker Than The Eye" from "Song & Silence"), items that let them get Sneak Attack (like a Ring of Invisibility), other feats that give them a much better chance of Sneak Attack (like "Improved Initiative", which combined with the Rogue's high Dexterity, almost insures they're the first one to go in a round where no one's surprised), and their own natural abilities (like Hide)... these are all methods an intelligently-played Rogue is going to use to insure that they're getting as much bonus damage as possible. This is just kinda one of those "deal with it" things. Fighters can deal out tons of damage if their feat choices are carefully stacked together and if the Dungeon Master is pretty free and loose with optional rules feats (from the splatbooks, etc.). Clerics can deal out tons of damage from spells, and Paladins can really deal out the damage. You combine a casting of Eagle's Splendor with Smite Evil, "Power Attack", the Exalted feat "Sanctify Martial Strike", "Divine Might", and a Holy weapon, and an evil creature is going to be feeling the pain. So there are other classes out there which deal lots of damage.
BenjCano 01-21-04, 11:36 AM	Detect Evil, Just out of curiosity, when did damage-dealing become a competitive event? If the rogue should pull off an attack that deals more damage than the fighter, my point is so what? Are the amount of EPs the characters receive in each session dependant on their percentage contribution to the victory conditions? Or are the players, in fact, a group working together for the success of their goals, playing a game for their mutual enjoyment? If that's true, then what does it matter if the rogue is able to contribute 11.4% more damage in a given combat encounter than the fighter? Here's a more important question. Is the rogue class, as written, a balanced one? Why or why not? For my opinion, the answer's yes. Sneak attack is powerful, 'tis true. I think you're overlooking the utility that 8+ skill points per level offer, but those two things are very powerful abilities. And is the rogue similarly limited in exchange for these abilities? I believe, again, the answer to be yes. A 3/4 attack bonus is a limiting factor you should never underestimate. A d6 hit die and light armor procifiency makes the rogue marginally more suited for melee combat than the wizard. If studded leather wimpy boy wants to risk his precious hide in melee so as to get his sneak attack, then by the gods let him. It's not as if he doesn't have to take a larger proportional risk just to qualify for this fallible class ability. Rogue weapon proficiencies are another limiting factor, beaing largely unimpressive from a damage-dealing perspective, even with sneak attack. I remember a time in D&D when the goal of your PCs was actually to try and kill the monsters. Now, for some reason, you think the rogue is able to do that too well. So you want to hamstring him (no pun intended) because he's succeeding at his objectives a little too well?
Mirtek 01-21-04, 11:45 AM	Originally posted by BenjCano what does it matter if the rogue is able to contribute 11.4% more damage in a given combat encounter than the fighter? Because the fighter player will will useless and have less fun. All the fighter can is fight. He hasn't any usefull class skills and also only a few skill points. Fighting is the only thing left to the fighter. If the rogue is better in fighting and can do all these cool things (thx to his many skill points), what's the point of the fighter class? It's not fun for the fighter to watch the rogue pull of all the cool stunts (thx to his many ranks in jump, balance, tumble and so on) and when the things finally get down to the only thing at which the fighter player should excel have him outdone again by the rogue. Anyway, i do not think sneak attack is too powerfull nor did i experience rogues to fight better than fighters.
BenjCano 01-21-04, 11:58 AM	Originally posted by Mirtek If the rogue is better in fighting and can do all these cool things (thx to his many skill points), what's the point of the fighter class? *Full Attack Bonus *Martial Weapon Proficiency *Heavy Armor Proficiency *Sheild Proficiency *d10 hit die *Unique feats *A good Fortitude save *An asscan of feats All other things being equal, a fighter will have 42 more hit points at 20th level than the rogue, and I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that four times out of five that differential is even greater with most fighters having a higher Constitution than a rogue. The fighter will also have, generally, a better armor class and an easier time improving his armor class than will the rogue (who must wait for things such as mithral bucklers before he can strap a shield on his wrist). I'm not trying to say that the fighter and the rogue are perfectly balanced. But they're balanced well enough that I don't care to go about changing things willy nilly. I think they're fine enough for the game, just shut up and play. One main reason I think that people, having seen their group's rogue overdamage their figher, come on here and gripe about the rogue's sneak attack being unbalanced is because it takes a good deal of skill to pull off a successful rogue, and when you succeed at your sneak attack wagon, you tend to succeed dramatically. If Joe Bob from the game club, D&D not really being his thing (which is fine) he's just there to hang out on Saturday mornings, doesn't invest the time and thought necessary for a propoerly minmaxed melee character, of course he's going to get a smaller return than Brian the Min-Maxer. There's an art to munchkining your shield tanks just like your rogue, only the rogue tends to deter the newbies and the easily frightened with the obvious limitations of the d6 hit die and light armor proficiencies. Incidently, it is not up to the rules to balance fun between player characters. The rules cannot do that, don't do that, and should not do that. There is one person responsible for making every character at his table feel like a valued member of the group, and he's the monkey sitting behind the screen. If he doesn't structure his game so as to make everyone feel valuable, then it won't matter how you nerf sneak attack, because the discrepancies are going to show up in another way. Rules do not a fun and balanced game make.
Eldren 01-21-04, 12:27 PM	BenjCano brings up some excellent points. Kudos to you, brother. :ayyyy!: The thing to remember about Rogues is that while they have the potential to deal lots of damage, they often have to spend a couple of rounds positioning themselves to do that damage; it means getting in the thick of the fight, with only their light armor, a high Dexterity and possibly some magical items enhancing their Armor Class, and flanking with a party member, or they have to count on getting the first strike from the combination of a high Dexterity and the "Improved Initiative" feat. The problem with this is, while the Rogue is busy positioning themselves for optimal damage, the Fighter is already in there slugging away at the monster. The Fighter is bringing to bear their considerable wealth of combat-oriented feats, which allow them to adapt their fighting style to whatever situation is at hand, and they're also using a high Strength, feats like "Power Attack" and "Improved Critical", and their high Armor Class (from wearing heavy armor) to deal massive damage and absorb massive damage as well. When a creature does get through a Fighter's heavy armor, they still have to contend with the fact that an intelligently-constructed Fighter (i.e., one with a reasonably high Constitution) is going to have a ton of hit points. Fighters may on occasion be easier to hit than a Rogue, but they aren't necessarily easier to knock down. A couple hits from a powerful attack can knock a Rogue out of action quick, while the Fighter just absorbs the damage, grits his/her teeth, and keeps swinging their weapon. d10s for hit dice aren't something to sneeze at, and it's part of the Fighter's appeal. Sure, people can point to the fact that a Rogue with "Weapon Finesse" is going to hit nearly as often as a Fighter without a feat (the only difference at that point being the Fighter's higher Base Attack Bonus), but is the Rogue going to do as much damage over the long haul? Sometimes they are, if they're intelligently played and if the Dungeon Master is always throwing creatures vulnerable to Sneak Attack and critical hits at the party. But there's a reason there's a variety of creatures in the game: To insure that no matter what class you are, there's something which is going to challenge you and make your special abilities not so special. Fighters don't want to fight puddings, oozes, etc., Wizards don't want to fight golems, Rogues don't want to fight undead or plant creatures, and Paladins don't always want to fight things that can lob Unholy Word or Blasphemy at will, although everyone always thinks of the Paladin as a class designed specifically to fight extraplanar evil (and they do have some unique abilities which make that easier). No one class is going to always be better than any other one class, and that's why, in general, the Core classes are "balanced". You have to look at them from the perspective of a group conglomerate. Collectively, the classes all combine to make for a challenging encounter. The Dungeon Master's job at that point is to use the resources from the Dungeon Master's Guide and the Monster Manual to challenge the PCs in spite of their abilities. Not to automatically defeat them, because we know the Dungeon Master could do that very easily. I still maintain that the ultimate goal is for the PCs to win the day, but the DM's job is to insure that victory doesn't come too easily. No one really wants to go see a horror movie unless they know at the end of the day, the large-breasted virginal princess is going to survive the fight (like in Freddy vs. Jason). No one wants to read a fantasy novel unless they know that at the end, after huge sacrifices, the heroes have won the day (like in the original Dragonlance books). Likewise, no one really wants to play Dungeons & Dragons unless they know that by the end of the campaign, with deaths and resurrections, friends lost and gained, and maybe even entire planes altered, the heroes are going to come out on top, and the players can feel pretty good about themselves as they put their beloved 20th level characters (or higher, if you're using the Epic Level Handbook) on the shelf, and pull out some crisp, white new character sheets, and start rolling the dice or distributing the points so you have a new 1st level character, to do it all over again.
detectevil 01-21-04, 12:30 PM	Oh, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!! It's not all about damage, you know! It's about character concept. It's about flavor. But it seems nobody get's what I'm trying to say, so just forget I've said anything.
Inigo Carmine 01-21-04, 12:37 PM	I would also like to make the point that I see too many DMs go easy on the rogue (and the wizards for that matter) The disadvantage of the rogue is his lower AC and HP. Even if they are outdamaging the fighter (and make an easier target), DMs have their monsters/NPCs only attack the fighter types, because they can take it better. If you have a softy DM who purposely only attacks the meat shields, then yes, any class besides the meat shield is going to be overpowered. The wizard's d4 hitdie and 18 AC might as well be a d100 hit die and 50 AC if no one is ever going to attack him. Also, as has already been stated, the fighter is probably the second weakest class, and not a good comparison. You're also pitting him in a situation that is not ideal for him, but ideal for the rogue (sneqak attack available). Give the fighter a mount (room to use it) and some related feats, and he'll outdamage the rogue without a problem. Send a swarm of little guys after the group, and the fighter's cleave/great cleave is going to be the winner of the day. have a cadre of archers attack the group from afar. The fighter's high AC and HP are going to be the best assets there.
The Hanged Man 01-21-04, 01:35 PM	Originally posted by BenjCano Incidently, it is not up to the rules to balance fun between player characters. Benj, I'm with you, I'm with you, I'm with you - until here. Obviously, "rules" don't make the game fun - the players do. But the rules should do everything possible to balance the different classes so that all classes are equally effective choices. They don't need to all be effective at the same things, but they all need to be equally effective. The DM should only have to fine-tune things to meet the needs of a specific campaign. Just like w/ players, DM's come w/ different skills. You shouldn't have to browse through Chonjurer's Problematic Spell Forum, the Min-Max boards, the Combat boards, and the class boards to figure out the many ways a PC can become too powerful. The RAW should do that.
heretic888 01-21-04, 01:49 PM	If I were to try to create a Ninja, sans Prestige Classes or Oriental Adventures/Rokugan, I'd multiclass Rogue and Monk. Better idea: use my class. http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111219 Heh. I love shameless plugs. :D