Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Stormheim 05-12-07, 09:03 PM	According to the Skip Williams articles (All About Sneak Attacks, Parts 1-4), it is possible for a Rogue to perform multiple Sneak Attacks under certain conditions. My DM won't let me use that rule on the basis that, once you get beyond a certain level, a Rogue would be doing more damage per round than a Fighter of the same level in the same position (assuming that any Str bonuses, etc., were the same for both characters, positioning was the same, etc.), on the basis that the Fighter is trained to kill and therefore in melee combat should always be the character potentially doing the most damage. He also argues that any opponent can equally defend against more than one opponent as it's a fantasy fighting system. However, if that were true, there would be no need for the Improved Uncanny Dodge skill that a Rogue gets at 8th level, and would also throw the whole Flanking rules out. Another argument he put forward was that, in combat, any target character is not concentrating only on the opponent in front of him, but looking around to assess other threats, so would see you coming. However, he wouldn't accept that, if that were the case, the Rogue would just wait until he was looking the other way before attacking. To a certain degree, I must admit that I don't totally agree with Skip, in as far as I don't think if the Rogue is frontally assaulting an opponent he should be able to Sneak Attack if only the flanking rules apply- after all, he is face-to-face with his opponent and therefore technically not flanking. What I'm after is other DMs opinions on the use of multiple sneak attacks, and arguments I can use to persuade my DM to let me use it if you agree that it is a fair tactic to use.
DarkRhystar 05-12-07, 09:28 PM	According to the Skip Williams articles (All About Sneak Attacks, Parts 1-4), it is possible for a Rogue to perform multiple Sneak Attacks under certain conditions. Of course it is. It's blatantly obvious that you can get as many Sneak Attacks as you have attacks if your opponent is flanked or denied his Dexterity bonus. It comes from the rules. Your DM should read them sometime. My DM won't let me use that rule on the basis that, once you get beyond a certain level, a Rogue would be doing more damage per round than a Fighter of the same level in the same position (assuming that any Str bonuses, etc., were the same for both characters, positioning was the same, etc.), on the basis that the Fighter is trained to kill and therefore in melee combat should always be the character potentially doing the most damage. Fighters suck. Almost every class and its animal companion can out damage a Fighter. Seriously, what does the Fighter get to make it this awesome damage machine? +2 damage from Weapon Specialization? Laughable. He also argues that any opponent can equally defend against more than one opponent as it's a fantasy fighting system. However, if that were true, there would be no need for the Improved Uncanny Dodge skill that a Rogue gets at 8th level, and would also throw the whole Flanking rules out. He can argue it till he's blue in the face and still be wrong. Another argument he put forward was that, in combat, any target character is not concentrating only on the opponent in front of him, but looking around to assess other threats, so would see you coming. However, he wouldn't accept that, if that were the case, the Rogue would just wait until he was looking the other way before attacking. There is no formal facing in D&D 3.5. None. Zip. Ziltch. It's an artifact of an almost dead era. Let it die gracefully. To a certain degree, I must admit that I don't totally agree with Skip, in as far as I don't think if the Rogue is frontally assaulting an opponent he should be able to Sneak Attack if only the flanking rules apply- after all, he is face-to-face with his opponent and therefore technically not flanking. What I'm after is other DMs opinions on the use of multiple sneak attacks, and arguments I can use to persuade my DM to let me use it if you agree that it is a fair tactic to use. Sneak attacking isn't necessarily stabbing someone in the back. Sneak attacking isn't hitting necessarily hitting someone when they're not paying attention. Sneak attacking is hitting someone where it hurts. Sneak Attack means you're hitting someone where they're most vulnerable/least protected/not currently defending. That is why you can get multiple sneak attacks. It's no longer Backstab. A Rogue isn't beaning some idiot when he's not looking, the Rogue is zeroing in on the enemy's weak spot and hitting it hard.
Cariyaga 05-12-07, 09:33 PM	It does seem slightly odd that with BAB extra hits, and TWF, you can do up to 40d6 damage sneak attack at level 20...But I'm not arguing it! Though I'm gonna need lots of dice...
DarkRhystar 05-12-07, 09:39 PM	It does seem slightly odd that with BAB extra hits, and TWF, you can do up to 40d6 damage sneak attack at level 20...But I'm not arguing it! Though I'm gonna need lots of dice... Meanwhile, the Wizard can wiggle his finger and kill people 7 levels earlier. He doesn't even need dice.
Cariyaga 05-12-07, 09:45 PM	But only if he sees you. You can't target what you can't see.
itwasntme 05-12-07, 09:47 PM	if your talking about finger of death news flash alot of people are going to save agest it a problem with the spellcasters is there great when you do super nova type moves sure they won that battle but the rest of the battle/war going on that day is still going on and they wasted ALOT of there resources not to mention high level spells have alot of cost (XP or Gold) Problem with Sneak attack is with options like Improve Faint the other people could use there BaB it help them ignore being Fainted along with all other bonuses agest it so agest high end Tank types there BaB is realy high and they will get a Big fat bonus on there check agest you another problem with the rouge is the ability / list of creatures he CAN sneak attack if your talking about playing in a game with only humans or other humanoid type creatures then sure no problem If you happin to fall under the multibol Sneak Attacks go ahead and do it becouse if the DM knows the rules and the game or just about anyone you fight that will happin very Rarely so let your DM know about that let him do a little Reading (Help him out) And if he is still saying NO becouse of some dumb reason (He might have a good one) Then i dunno what to say thats your DM for ya
itwasntme 05-12-07, 09:57 PM	Of course it is. It's blatantly obvious that you can get as many Sneak Attacks as you have attacks if your opponent is flanked or denied his Dexterity bonus. It comes from the rules. Your DM should read them sometime. Fighters suck. Almost every class and its animal companion can out damage a Fighter. Seriously, what does the Fighter get to make it this awesome damage machine? +2 damage from Weapon Specialization? Laughable. He can argue it till he's blue in the face and still be wrong. There is no formal facing in D&D 3.5. None. Zip. Ziltch. It's an artifact of an almost dead era. Let it die gracefully. Sneak attacking isn't necessarily stabbing someone in the back. Sneak attacking isn't hitting necessarily hitting someone when they're not paying attention. Sneak attacking is hitting someone where it hurts. Sneak Attack means you're hitting someone where they're most vulnerable/least protected/not currently defending. That is why you can get multiple sneak attacks. It's no longer Backstab. A Rogue isn't beaning some idiot when he's not looking, the Rogue is zeroing in on the enemy's weak spot and hitting it hard. Fighters suck. Almost every class and its animal companion can out damage a Fighter. Seriously, what does the Fighter get to make it this awesome damage machine? +2 damage from Weapon Specialization? Laughable. with a commint like that im surprized that you dount know how fighters could acouly do things maybe you should read books like tomb of battle PHB 2 complete warrior and other things like that it helps With the comment to animol Compianons doing better in damage then a fighter or other warrior type i find to be the Laughbol thing sure there nice but they can easyoly be delt with play the game as long as i have or in the type of games i have and you'll find that agest half the subjects out there your little friend the pet animol just gets mowed down by some warrior type (Im saying warrior type becouse it could be a barbian or something eles) Now if your talking about Core only? then i can understand but if your not talking about core only then im guessing your problebly going to say a super nova type move or something that should be baned (like how pun pun was made) or shouldnt be used (Unlimited wish arguements i hear) There are ways for the rouge to sneak attack Yes but there are a great number of ways how to ignore them your DM should know some of them at least i wouldnt mind if you could creature Multibol Sneak Attacks a round just so long as your following the rules of the game
DarkRhystar 05-12-07, 10:43 PM	with a commint like that im surprized that you dount know how fighters could acouly do things maybe you should read books like tomb of battle PHB 2 complete warrior and other things like that it helps The problem is that while it's all great and nifty, almost none of it is specific to Fighters. That material which is specific to Fighters is such that a high level casting of Divine Favor or Bite of the Wearbear is enough to make the Fighter cry. I'd quote more of your post but with spelling and grammar mistakes aplenty, it's painful to read.
Neutronium_Dragon 05-12-07, 10:50 PM	> a Rogue would be doing more damage per round than a Fighter of the same > level in the same position From the designers' own mouths (or keyboards) back when 3E was released, *this is how it is intended to work*. The rogue was balanced on the assumption that he would be able to use sneak attack on most attacks when facing opponents who are vulnerable to it. (Which means most anything beyond the standard immunity suspects: elementals, constructs, undead, and oozes.)
runestar 05-12-07, 11:01 PM	Guys, lets not get sidelined into a "fighter sucks" debate here...;) I agree with Neutronium_Dragon, high potential damage is there to offset the problem of low odds. Yes, your rogue could deal a lot of damage in some scenarios. But in just as many, if not more other occasions, he is going to be stymied by a variety of factors such as concealment, immunity to crits etc. Plus, with poor HD, it may not always be such a good idea to stand toe to toe with that red dragon or pit fiend just so you can get your full attack in. When you average out the damage dealt per encounter, the fighter should come out for the better compared to the rogue.:)
Inigo Carmine 05-12-07, 11:11 PM	It does seem slightly odd that with BAB extra hits, and TWF, you can do up to 40d6 damage sneak attack at level 20...But I'm not arguing it! Though I'm gonna need lots of dice... The problem is that it's a best case scenario. If you stack a bunch of tiny creatures into a tight enough space, a wizard can be doing damage 1000s of d6 damage with a single casting of fireball at 5th level. Compared to a fighter at lv 20, the rogue has: - Lower attack bonus because of lower BAB - Less High-BAB attacks (though rogues usually go the TWF route to overcome this) - If they do take the TWF route, that's a furhter hit to their attack bonus Rogues are much less likely to even be able to hit their enemy than fighters. Also keep in mind that sneak attack requires a rogue to either flank the enemy, or deny them their dex bonus to AC. While neither of these is very difficult to achieve, it will not be happening 100% of the time they attack. Appropriately challenging enemies with uncanny dodge themselves are much less likely to be sneak attackable, along with a good 1/3 of the enemies in the Monster Manual (undead, elementals, constructs, many abberations, etc). Also, many armor-wearing enemies will likely have some sort of fortification (not just to screw over a rogue; i personally fear a crit from a scythe more than a rogue's sneak attack). And of course, the easiest foil to a rogues sneak attack is a simple level 1 spell: obscuring mist. Remember that any amount of concealment completely negate's a rogue's sneak attack. All of this fails to take into consideration another factor as well. Rogues generally have less HP and AC than a dedicated frontline combatant. If an enemy does see them as more threatening than the fighter, the rogue is going to go down a lot harder on anything that doesn't involve a reflex save for half damage. A rogue's ability to sneak attack on all qualifying attacks hardly makes him powerful. It's the only thing that makes him worthwhile in combat instead of useless after the first round (much like in second ed). Even then, he hardly compares to a dedicated fighter, generally regarded as mediocre at best in combat.
Cariyaga 05-12-07, 11:38 PM	I agree with all of the above, except that in my character's case, he has amazing AC. 21 at level 3.
runestar 05-13-07, 03:01 AM	I agree with all of the above, except that in my character's case, he has amazing AC. 21 at level 3. That AC is good, but far from amazing or phenomenal...:P
Geogoose 05-13-07, 03:16 AM	To the OP: 1. Rogue may potentially do more damage than a fighter. This assumes rogue has option to full attack action, sneak attack criteria met, monster is vulnerable to sneak attacks, etc. Fighters and other full BAB melee classes can pump out nearly as much damage in a full attack even without Sneak Attack due to higher BAB, two handed weapons, high STR, power attack, etc. Any those same full BAB classes do not depend on meeting any criteria beyond being within 5' of the enemy. 2. Facing rules are gone. Sneak Attacks take place when opponant cannot fully defend themselves (flanked, denied DEX bonus, etc.). For instance, a flanked opponant is assumed to be dividing his attention between the two or more attackers and at a disadvantage because of that. Sneak attacks from flanking take advantage of the brief instants the defender must divert thier attention 180 degrees from the sneak attacking character. 3. Your DM seems to be suffering from chacter sheet shock. He sees the big numbers on a rogues sneak attack ability and is forgetting to go in game and try it out before swinging the nerf bat. First and foremost rogues do not get to apply sneak attack in every encounter let alone every attack.
Stormheim 05-13-07, 06:12 AM	Thanks guys - all very good points. Keep'em coming though - the more ammo the better. Cheers!!!!
Evil DM Mk3 05-13-07, 09:23 AM	Things that you CAN'T sneak attack: Amorphs, that is to say oozes and some abberations. Objects. Constructs. Undead. Elementals (I think, don't recall). Plants (Again I THINK) Anyone who has any level of concealment so a lot of the time not a night. Anything incorporeal. Things it is HARD to sneak attack: Rouges, rangers and barbarians. These all have either/or high spot and imp uncanny dodge at high levels. People in fortified armour. (% chance) Reach creatures (They tend to hit back before you can get close enough) Many meleeing creatures due to high AC. Things that have all round vision such as beholders. (No flanking) Things with Blindsight, Tremorsence etc. Things that are easy to sneak attack: Idiots. To two weapon fight a round of sneak attacks you need either Greater Invisibility or to be flanking. It is easy to get out of a flanking possition, just as any spellcasters are going to be able, by the time massess of damadge is possible, to de-invisible you. In theory yes you could crank out 60d6 (three attacks with each hand at level 20) of sneak damadge. And if you and the rest of the party have spent the time and effort to set that up you deserve it becasue it will be hard. Also the fighter is either an NPC class on steriods or a baby PC class. It is not fair to comapre it to anything.
runestar 05-13-07, 10:01 AM	I suppose that if your rogue could find a way of somehow accessing pounce and/or multiple attacks(such as polymorphing into some such creature), sneak attack could be even more scary. But it still does not let you work around immunities. Like...a hydra...:P Polymorph into a 12-headed hydra, move up to the opponent, flank with the fighter and let rip with 12 sneak attacks at full bab...:D
Egres 05-14-07, 10:51 AM	Seems that your DM has no experience with the 3.x. Ask him to let you play your rogue as the RAW state. He'll be the first to come here and admit he was wrong.
Eerongal 05-14-07, 11:54 AM	Ok, i've seen this topic before, about SA being broken. Last time i ran into one of these, i did a little damage comparison. I'm gonna do it again. Ok, let's assume level 12 characters (why? pretty high level without being insanely epic) We'll assume this stat array: 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, 8. Why? because it's fairly balanced, gives us a high stat, gives us a dump stat, even if pretty powerful. ok, let's say we have 3 characters: Wizard, Rogue, and Barbarian. Why? Wizard, because everyone knows he can do the damage. Rogue because he's the one in question, and Barbarian because it's another melee fighter to compare to. We'll assume the stats go like this, in order of str, dex, con, int, wis, and cha Wiz: 8, 12, 14, 18, 10, 16 Rogue: 16, 18, 12, 14, 8, 10 Barb: 18, 14, 16, 8, 10, 12 Let's assume they're all human for ease of use, i wont bother optimizing by race. As far as feats go, I'm only going to assume the important ones, and leave out the others. Wiz: Maximize spell Rogue: Weapon Finnesse Barb: Power attack, cleave, greater cleave Ok, now for the extra stats from 4, 8, and 12th levels. Let's assume the wizard puts it all in int, because he's a wizard. Our rogue likes his dex for his hit, so let's give him all of em in there, and our barbarian is the usual brute, putting it all in str of course. Now our stats currently look like this: Wiz: 8, 12, 14, 22, 10, 16 Rogue: 16, 22, 12, 14, 8, 10 Barb: 22, 14, 16, 8, 10, 12 Now let's do equipment. Once again, I only care about what's pertinent to the subject at hand: Damage. Let's assume 40K Starting gold, because i can never find the starting gold per level when i need it like right now, either way, it's pretty much fair because all of our characters get it anyways. Now, the wizard hardly has need for a good weapon, so we'll completley ignore his equipment, as none is really pertinent. For our barb and rogue, we're only gonna focus on their weapons, because once again, we only care about damage at the moment. So each of them will spend as close to 20K as possible buying a nice weapon, because they both want to drop the baddies as fast as possible. This means we can get a +3 weapon pretty easily, for a little over 18K depending on what we want (masterwork costs and such, almost negligable) so our rogue decides on this: A plain old +3 short sword. He needs all the extra hit he can get to keep up with the full BAB warriors. Our barb, being a little more adventerous decides on: a +2 flaming great axe because he thinks fire is pretty cool to hit stuff with. Ok, now that we have our heros, they go out on an adventure, and lo and behold, they get into a fight. Of course, this comes as no surprise to our heros, so they pony up to the challange. The barbarian friend enters rage, bringing his str to 26, a +8 bonus in total. Now, let's get to damaging. We'll start out with the barbarian, because his axe is itching for some action. We're currently in the land of our heros always hit, because it's more convinient for us. So our barb, 2 handing his axe of course, decides to go full power attack, because his attack bonus is pretty high with a +22/17/12 from just his weapon, str, and BAB. so that means he takes the -12 for a +24 (two handing) to damage. Currently, he has 3 attacks, and of course, hits with all of them. Once again, everyone hits all the time, because we're just that good. Now, here's his current damage output: 1D12+1D6(flaming)+38 (24+12(str and 1/2)+2(magic weapon bonus) We'll assume he rolls a 6 on each D12, and a 3 on each D6 to give us approximate damage. So his total for all 3 attacks is: 3*(6+3+38) which totals 141 in one round. Now, let's assume for fun that this drops the guy our barb was attacking. 141 is pretty hard of an attack. So, he decides to cleave at the guy next to him, adding another 47 (one attack) into the picture, now our damage total is 188. Not too bad. With this pretty basic, simple barbarian build we come to 141 or 188 damage depending on cleave, etc. Even if that last attack DIDN'T hit because we're taking that -12 from PA, we're still clocking in at 94/141 (w/cleave). Heck, if we only hit once we did 47! 94 With a cleave! Now, let's get to our rogue. Let's assume he got into some kind of flanking position with our barbarian, because if he didn't, then all this means nothing. At level 12, our rogue friend has 6D6 sneak attack, with 2 attack, and a +9/+4 bab. As we said earlier, our rogue friend hits with each attack, because here no one misses, as it's only fair. For his attack bonus, we've got him clocking in at +18/+13. Not too bad.His total damage bonus is +5, because of his +3 short sword and +2 dex. Wow, that seems kinda low, let's hope sneak attack fills in the gap. Here's his total attack damage: 1D6+6D6+5 Once again, we are going to assume all 3's on these D6's to get approximate average damage, overall damage we're looking at: 2*(3+(6*3)+5) For a grand total of 52 damage. Wow..I was hoping SA would really help out here, but it looks like it kinda fell short. That 52 damage from both attacks seems kind of low compared to the barbarians 47 on a SINGLE attack. Anyways, the rogue doesn't conern himself too much, because he's not really meant to be a frontline fighter anyways, like the barbarian is. Now, let's get into all things wizardly. Our wizard decided to be a blaster today, and prepared himself some maximized fireballs. He of course decides to hurl one for 12D6. But wait, it's maximized, so of course we're getting all 6's rolled. The enemy needs to make a save, but since the fighters all got to hit with all attacks, every enemy he hits fails their save because it's only fair. So after everything is taken into account, on any one enemy we've got: 72 fire damage. That's pretty good. And that's only on one enemy. Wait a minute...This spell is an area spell. With a 20ft radius nonetheless.. Chances are i got more than one enemy, because i probably wouldnt waste an area spell if there was only one enemy. Naturally, we can assume any number of targets were in the area of the blast, but for modesty's sake, let's assume only 2 were caught in it. That's a total of 144 damage to 2 enemies. Now that's pretty good, and we have the potential for even higher! Let's rewind and assume for a second the enemies made their saves. uh oh! they only get half damage! That means 36 damage a piece! Bringing us to only 72 total damage for both. Wait. 36 damage on one target isn't TOO bad considering that the rogue only deals a total of 52 with full sneak attacks and all hits. And considering the enemy making their save is kinda like 'missing' if the rogue misses all his attacks, he deals 0 damage! Hey, I'm pretty cool with this 36 damage each afterall! Now, i hope you find damage comparison is fairly helpful, and I'm not just rambling away with my time. Once again, these builds are fairly quick and simple, someone could optimize a build much better than these, but we're just trying to look at some generalizations. As you can see, full SA on every attack is NOT broken. Especially since you require special circumstances to use it, whereas the barbarian needs to just start hitting, or the wizard flinging spells. The rogue NEEDS his enemy to be flat footed or flanked. This won't happen ALL THE TIME. ~~Eerongal
DarkRhystar 05-14-07, 12:58 PM	Your proof fails. Wiz: Maximize spell Rogue: Weapon Finnesse Barb: Power attack, cleave, greater cleave Oh yeah, Barbarian gets 3 feats and the rest get 1? Give the Rogue some fun stuff like Craven or Shadowblade to make it more even. Wiz: 8, 12, 14, 22, 10, 16 Rogue: 16, 22, 12, 14, 8, 10 Barb: 22, 14, 16, 8, 10, 12 18 + 3 = 21. Not 22. Now, let's get to damaging. We'll start out with the barbarian, because his axe is itching for some action. We're currently in the land of our heros always hit, because it's more convinient for us. So our barb, 2 handing his axe of course, decides to go full power attack, because his attack bonus is pretty high with a +22/17/12 from just his weapon, str, and BAB. so that means he takes the -12 for a +24 (two handing) to damage. Currently, he has 3 attacks, and of course, hits with all of them. Once again, everyone hits all the time, because we're just that good. Now, here's his current damage output: 1D12+1D6(flaming)+38 (24+12(str and 1/2)+2(magic weapon bonus) Against something his CR, he'd never hit. Assuming all hits is poor thinking. How do you get 12 damage from strength? 22 Strength yields +9 damage. 28 Strength after raging yields +13 damage. How about the +22 AB? 12 (BAB) + 2 (Weapon) + 6 (Strength) gives +20 AB. Toss on Greater Rage for +23 AB. Now, let's get into all things wizardly. Our wizard decided to be a blaster today, and prepared himself some maximized fireballs. He of course decides to hurl one for 12D6. But wait, it's maximized, so of course we're getting all 6's rolled. The enemy needs to make a save, but since the fighters all got to hit with all attacks, every enemy he hits fails their save because it's only fair. So after everything is taken into account, on any one enemy we've got: 72 fire damage. Fireball caps at 10d6. Gives a reflex save for half. Deals the most resisted damage type. Is subject to evasion. Not to mention that wasting a level 6 slot on a maxed fireball is a poor idea. Now, i hope you find damage comparison is fairly helpful, and I'm not just rambling away with my time. Once again, these builds are fairly quick and simple, someone could optimize a build much better than these, but we're just trying to look at some generalizations. As you can see, full SA on every attack is NOT broken. Especially since you require special circumstances to use it, whereas the barbarian needs to just start hitting, or the wizard flinging spells. The rogue NEEDS his enemy to be flat footed or flanked. This won't happen ALL THE TIME. Your point is well-taken, but this comparison is filled with flaws.
Eerongal 05-14-07, 01:30 PM	Your proof fails. Oh yeah, Barbarian gets 3 feats and the rest get 1? Give the Rogue some fun stuff like Craven or Shadowblade to make it more even. 18 + 3 = 21. Not 22. Against something his CR, he'd never hit. Assuming all hits is poor thinking. How do you get 12 damage from strength? 22 Strength yields +9 damage. 28 Strength after raging yields +13 damage. How about the +22 AB? 12 (BAB) + 2 (Weapon) + 6 (Strength) gives +20 AB. Toss on Greater Rage for +23 AB. Fireball caps at 10d6. Gives a reflex save for half. Deals the most resisted damage type. Is subject to evasion. Not to mention that wasting a level 6 slot on a maxed fireball is a poor idea. Your point is well-taken, but this comparison is filled with flaws. Well, considering I'm at work, and going COMPLETLEY from memory, i expected some flaws/inaccuracy. Also, i was working out the math quickly in my head, so there again, i expected to not be exactly spot on. Also, i was trying to work from core only, so your points of feats like Craven or Shadowblade are moot points. If we take into consideration all of the suppliemnts/add-ons, we can easily boost everyones damage no problem. And like i said, these are NOT optimized builds, just quick builds i whipped together. Also, the barb doesnt exactly NEED cleave and greater cleave, i just added it for emphasis on the point of how PA can help to increase your damage. Also, if need be, the barbarian can safely ease up some on the PA to make sure he hits, the point I'm trying to get across with it is that if he utilized PA to get his hit bonus similar to a rogues, his damage potential sky rockets. If he needs to lessen this PA to hit, well, then the rogue hardly stands a chance of hitting at all. Also, we're assuming all hits because we're looking at a damage potential, not an average due to losing hits. Naturally, you'll lose alot of damage if you're missing more hits, I'm not trying to take this into account. As far as fireball capping at 10D6, that was certainly my oversight, however, we can easily switch this to cone of cold with a lesser maximize metamagic rod (we didn't buy anything for the wiz, remember?) for the same damage. Also, as far as the save, i addressed this as the fact that failing there save would essentially be the same as the always hit bonus our melee friends got. And of course it doesnt take into account the resistances, evasion, etc. In the same manner that our damages for the melee characters didnt take into consideration DR, immunity to SA, etc. So once again, I'm going to point out that this is just a quick, crude comparison to get my point off, but your feedback is certainly appreciated, and i apologize for the mathematical/memory errors in certain aspects of the comparison, but i feel that my point still stands.
Krusk 05-14-07, 03:23 PM	i would like to point out a few things. wizard/sorcerer- drops fireball dealing 10d6 to a 30 foot radius? that hits a lot of people. Apparently we are assuming optimal conditions, because the rogue can sneak attack every single round with full attacks. so lets say they are all packed nicely in 5 foot squares with no space between them. Thats a lot of damage, far more than even 60 d6 that the rogue can get by level 20. And this can be done at level 10. Fighter/barbarian/any melee full BAB class- they do more damage overall. Im not gonna optimise out some numbers for you but lets say he is doing 2d6+20. seems a fair number considering greatsword and decent str+magic enhancements + str bonus right, probably little under? his 2d6+20 at four attacks a round by level 16, that is 8d6+120. thats pretty close to 60d6. Lets assume optimal conditions now. he can power attack his entire +20 to damage instead of hit. thats an additional 30 per swing, and he is getting 4 because optimal conditions lets assume they all hit. BEcause we do assume all the rogues attacks hit. Ok now lets look at divine classes under optimal conditions. This one will be shorter because it is quite similar to the arcane class conditions. One change, flame strike over fire ball. it now tops out at 15d6. no other change. does this mean that all three of those examples are broken? no it means that under the right conditions they can do good ammounts of damage. thats it. a rogue can get 60D6 sneak attack in one round, hell even 80D6 if you do it right. step 1- buy 2 weapons of speed step 1.5- take two weapon fighting step 2- position yourself flanking with the enemy. step 3- hope they do not readjust. step 4-full attack step 5- hope they are not undead, plant, construct, or wearing full fortification The conditions above do not signal broken, they signal either well optimised, luck, skill, or any combination of the three.
DarkRhystar 05-14-07, 03:45 PM	So once again, I'm going to point out that this is just a quick, crude comparison to get my point off, but your feedback is certainly appreciated, and i apologize for the mathematical/memory errors in certain aspects of the comparison, but i feel that my point still stands. Fair enough. :)
Doodle 05-14-07, 04:19 PM	> a Rogue would be doing more damage per round than a Fighter of the same > level in the same position From the designers' own mouths (or keyboards) back when 3E was released, *this is how it is intended to work*. The rogue was balanced on the assumption that he would be able to use sneak attack on most attacks when facing opponents who are vulnerable to it. (Which means most anything beyond the standard immunity suspects: elementals, constructs, undead, and oozes.) Perhaps a better quick crude comparison is this: Assume level 12 Assume Power Attack and Weapon Focus for Fighter Feats and TWF and Weapon Finesse for Rogue Feats Give both characters same attack Bonus To lower Fighter Attack Bonus to Rogue Level put those point into PA damage. Relevant Stats: Fighter 16 Str Base +3 levels +4 item = 25 Rogue 16 Dex Base + 3 levels +4 item = 25, plus 14 str Relevant Equipment (same cost) Fighter: +3 Greatsword Rogue: +2 Shortsword (X2) Attack bonuses: Fighter: 12BAB + 7 Strength +3 Weapon +1 WF = 23 Rogue: 9BAB +7 Weapon Finesse +2 Weapon -2 TWF = 16 Strength Damage bonuses Fighter = 10 (7*1.5) Rogue = 3 (2*1 + 2*0.5) So, the fighter has 7 points of attack bonus over the Rogue which he can convert to 14 bonus damage via Power Attack (this makes the attack bonus between the fighter and rogue equal). He also has a weapon which does +1d6 (3.5 average) damage over the rogue and is +1 damage more from magic. He also has a higher strength mod to add an additional 7 to damage This totals 25.5 bonus damage. At that level the rogue gets 6d6 sneak attack damage which equals 21 bonus damage. Hrm... what's that about sneak attack doing more damage??? Things change a bit from level to level - feats permitting we can give the Rogue ITWF, or lower levels so the fighter gets 2 attacks and not 3, etc. etc. But the point is the damage is close - not even counting the limitations on the types of creatures sneak attacks work against. Me.
Marcus Majarra 05-14-07, 05:01 PM	You neglected one little factor in your comparison: you indicated that the fighter has some attack bonus he can shift to damage with Power Attack. By doing so, his attack bonus equals the rogue's. The thing is: since he's as accurate as the rogue, it'll turn out your rogue will statistically hit twice as often as your fighter in a full attack. Taking this into account, the rogue is effectively dealing much more damage than the fighter (around 40% more).
jadehawk 05-14-07, 05:06 PM	The idea that 10d6 sneak damage is excessive is just silly to me. In my last campaign I played a rogue who did all but 5 of his 20 levels in rogue (the others in thief acrobat). So he only did 7d6 sneak damage at the end and I got to say even when I rolled well I was only rolling comparable to what my Ogre Barbarian ally was rolling on a regular basis. Say you have a descent strength of 16, a 1d8 weapon, and 10d6 sneak. That means when you do get a sneak attack off (which as already mentioned is not always that easy or even possible) you are dealing an average 42.5 points of damage. I have a 6th level Goliath Barb/Psychic Warrior who deals nearly 30 points of damage on standard hits (and that is assuming he doesn't power attack). By 20th level I plan on dealing massive damage on a regular basis. The sneak attack damage gives the rogue literally a fighting chance in combat. With a moderate BAB and hit point total, a rogue needs to use all they can (hiding in concealment, building up AC, disabling opponents with sneak attack feats, etc.) just to compare in combat. I would say sneak attack damage does not make up for the damage potential of warrior classes, and that assumes a rogue can sneak all the time. Good thing rogues are useful outside of combat too.
jadehawk 05-14-07, 05:08 PM	You neglected one little factor in your comparison: you indicated that the fighter has some attack bonus he can shift to damage with Power Attack. By doing so, his attack bonus equals the rogue's. The thing is: since he's as accurate as the rogue, it'll turn out your rogue will statistically hit twice as often as your fighter in a full attack. Taking this into account, the rogue is effectively dealing much more damage than the fighter (around 40% more). Except the fighter would have 3 attacks per round and the rogue would only have 2.
Marcus Majarra 05-14-07, 05:14 PM	So too does the rogue. It's using TWF: Fighter attacks at +16/+11/+6 (for 2d6+27) Rogue attacks at +16/+16/+11 (for 7d6+3) The rogue is dealing slightly less damage per attack than the fighter, yet he's hitting more often in this scenario.
Doodle 05-14-07, 05:31 PM	^^^ Again... we are making gross simplifications while choosing an arbitrary level, without full feats, full equipment, etc. The point was that the rogue does not do significant more damage with sneak attack and your numbers bears this out. Fighter Damage: 34 + 34 + (34*0.5) = 85 Rogue Damage: 27.5 + 27.5 +27.5 = 82.5 Note that it's only one of the three attacks where the rogue is better than the fighter (16 vs 6) and this in no way doubles his output. Again, we didn't factor in any of the limitations of sneak attack - immune monsters, requries fullattack plus other conditions, etc. It was meant as a general comparison. The rogue can be made slightly better or worse through level comparison, feat choice, etc. but the premise that sneak attack ain't so hot compared to a fighter seems sound to me. Me. Me.
Cariyaga 05-14-07, 07:43 PM	I'm not saying that SA is OP. I'm just saying that considering that most opponents in most campaigns won't be immune to SA, and that you could reasonably do 40d6 in a round. That certainly isn't UP and isn't OP, it just seems a bit odd... And don't forget that both will be getting a flanking bonus considering that the rogue is able to SA. (I love Rei. He has 21 AC with +1 Mithral Chain shirt, at level 3. WHEE! Attack with impunity...almost)
DarkRhystar 05-14-07, 10:10 PM	I'm not saying that SA is OP. I'm just saying that considering that most opponents in most campaigns won't be immune to SA, and that you could reasonably do 40d6 in a round. That certainly isn't UP and isn't OP, it just seems a bit odd... And at the levels you can do that, Wizards can snap their fingers and pop out mansion. Your point is? :D
Cariyaga 05-15-07, 09:05 PM	That I'm not a wizard, and not a true fighting class, and I can do a good amount of damage.
Neutronium_Dragon 05-15-07, 10:12 PM	You are a fighting class. You're a fighting class in the same style as the monk and the ranger, based on skirmishing and opportunistic maneuvering rather than "tanking" like the fighter, paladin, and barbarian. Unlike thieves in 1E/2E, 3E rogues are expected to wade in there and fight things, rather than Hide In Shadows every time a fight breaks out.
pmurray@bigpond.com 05-16-07, 12:59 AM	My DM won't let me use that rule on the basis that ... Then your DM is not running a D&D/D20 game. He is running a game like D&D, but with combat mechanics that he just made up one weekend.
tos_shai_hulud 05-16-07, 01:23 AM	My suggestion is to play by whatever rules your DM goes by. If you don't like them, don't play a rogue. If you don't like any rules your DM uses, don't play with that DM. Then your DM is not running a D&D/D20 game. He is running a game like D&D, but with combat mechanics that he just made up one weekend. Actually, all D&D/D20 material says that the DM should feel free to change any rules he likes. While he is not playing standard D&D, he is playing D&D, but with his own rules. That is perfectly legal. Perhaps nerfed rogues make sense in his campaign. Or, perhaps they are just nerfed. Whatever the case may be, if the player wants to play in that game, he should get used to whatever rules that DM is using, whether they are standard or not.
Cariyaga 05-16-07, 07:03 PM	Note that I said not a true fighting class. Yes, they do fight, and often, but they have things that they are good at other than fighting, unlike Fighters. Many things, actually.
Eled_the_Worm_Tamer 05-20-07, 11:13 AM	Note that I said not a true fighting class. Yes, they do fight, and often, but they have things that they are good at other than fighting, unlike Fighters. Many things, actually. Hate to say this but the same can be said about neary every class other than Fighter in the game. Fighter is not the yardstick for balance in D&D 3.5 any more than the Cm is used to measure interstelar distances.
Stormheim 06-05-07, 07:24 PM	Thanks for all the input, guys, but I do have one observation which I hope you will constructively comment on. Assuming no other mods (Str, magic weapons, crit hits, etc.) and that all attacks hit: You have a rogue and a fighter who are both 3rd level, and are therefore both only making one attack each. If they are both using daggers against an opponent, the fighter is going to do 1d4 damage for a max of 4 points, whereas the rogue is going to do 1d4 + 2d6 sneak damage for a max of 16 points. If you take this to 20th level, the fighter is doing 4 times 1d4 damage for a max of 16 points of damage, whereas the rogue will be doing 3 x (1d4 + 10d6) for a max of 192 points!!!! While I realise this seems to be arguing against my being allowed to use the rule, this does seem to be a MASSIVE discrepancy of damage considering the rogue is not supposed to be a tank like a fighter is. Comments please?
Downtym 06-05-07, 07:29 PM	My DM won't let me use that rule on the basis that, once you get beyond a certain level, a Rogue would be doing more damage per round than a Fighter of the same level in the same position (assuming that any Str bonuses, etc., were the same for both characters, positioning was the same, etc.), on the basis that the Fighter is trained to kill and therefore in melee combat should always be the character potentially doing the most damage. Your DM is wrong. Fighters, on average, do less damage than Barbarians, Rangers, Rogues, Sorcerers, and Wizards. That's why they have a d10 hit die, can use any armor or shield, and can use any simple or martial weapon. They trade pure damage output for utility. A rogue, by the time they get multiple attacks, should be doing boat loads more damage than the fighter on any given single attack. This is the way of the world.
Eerongal 06-05-07, 07:30 PM	Thanks for all the input, guys, but I do have one observation which I hope you will constructively comment on. Assuming no other mods (Str, magic weapons, crit hits, etc.) and that all attacks hit: You have a rogue and a fighter who are both 3rd level, and are therefore both only making one attack each. If they are both using daggers against an opponent, the fighter is going to do 1d4 damage for a max of 4 points, whereas the rogue is going to do 1d4 + 2d6 sneak damage for a max of 16 points. If you take this to 20th level, the fighter is doing 4 times 1d4 damage for a max of 16 points of damage, whereas the rogue will be doing 3 x (1d4 + 10d6) for a max of 192 points!!!! While I realise this seems to be arguing against my being allowed to use the rule, this does seem to be a MASSIVE discrepancy of damage considering the rogue is not supposed to be a tank like a fighter is. Comments please? Well, the problem i see with that analogy, is the fact that you state 'no other mods', yet you cut out everything that other fighting classes rely on, yet you leave in sneak attack, which i would classify as an 'other mod'. So you're essentially saying 'ignore any and every advantage other classes can have and work with, and their damage sucks compared to sneak attack.'
Downtym 06-05-07, 07:38 PM	Thanks for all the input, guys, but I do have one observation which I hope you will constructively comment on. Assuming no other mods (Str, magic weapons, crit hits, etc.) and that all attacks hit: You have a rogue and a fighter who are both 3rd level, and are therefore both only making one attack each. If they are both using daggers against an opponent, the fighter is going to do 1d4 damage for a max of 4 points, whereas the rogue is going to do 1d4 + 2d6 sneak damage for a max of 16 points. If you take this to 20th level, the fighter is doing 4 times 1d4 damage for a max of 16 points of damage, whereas the rogue will be doing 3 x (1d4 + 10d6) for a max of 192 points!!!! While I realise this seems to be arguing against my being allowed to use the rule, this does seem to be a MASSIVE discrepancy of damage considering the rogue is not supposed to be a tank like a fighter is. Comments please? This example is unrealistic and silly. A 20th level fighter will not be using a dagger unless he's a gnome or halfling. And even then, he wouldn't use a dagger if his goal was damage output. Let's use a real weapon - the bastard sword. At 20th level, the fighter has, at least, an attack bonus of +20 (Base) +6 (Strength) + 5(Enchantment) + 2(Feats) for a total attack bonus of +33. Now, he might have improved critical - pretty useless at high levels since most of the enemies are usually immune to crits, but why not. So, his sword threats on a 17 to 20. So, his four attacks are 33/28/23/18 with a 1d10 + 6 (One handing) (9 (two handing)) + 4 (Weapon Specialization) + 5 (Magical Enhancement) weapon. So he deals 1d10 + 24 on a one handed hit and 1d10 + 27 on a two handed hit. Over 4 attacks, assuming average damage and all four hit that's 118 damage to 130 damage. But wait, we're not done yet. We forgot about the crit chance! A 17 to 20 crit is a 20% chance to crit. So, on average, every 5th hit, the fighter doubles his damage. Ouch. Oh, and we forgot power attack. Let's throw caution to the wind and power attack for 5 with both above examples: 138 damage one handed if all 4 hit assuming average damage and 170 damage two handed if all 4 hit assuming average damage. Yikes. If you crit on that two-handed power attack then ow. And really, the fighter above is what I would call "Plain Jane". Any fighter can get to these stats by 20th level. For better or worse, a fighter was not designed to do EXTREME BUCKETS OF DAMAGE. It was designed to be a class that once in combat stayed in combat until it was done. A rogue is a glass cannon - he can only move in when it's opportune and strike the enemy. Because once the enemy takes 190 damage - if its still alive - it's going to turn the rogue with his d6 hit dice into a thin smushy paste.
Krusk 06-05-07, 07:51 PM	in your example you do not allow the fighter to use his main class feature, feats, but you do allow the rogue to use his class feature. Also the fighter is still hitting a lot more than a rogue at 3rd level assuming all your conditions.
Andrew 06-06-07, 01:24 AM	Your DM should kick your hit die up to a d12 to compensate you, then. As has been covered, rogues do more damage, but are less accurate. They also don't have the durability to stand in that position like a fighter does, and the damage they do (when their opponents are vulnerable to it) ensures that their opponent will deal with them first.
Stormheim 06-06-07, 01:58 AM	in your example you do not allow the fighter to use his main class feature, feats, but you do allow the rogue to use his class feature. Also the fighter is still hitting a lot more than a rogue at 3rd level assuming all your conditions. Yeah, ok, hands up to that point - I was sort of trying to factor out all the Str-based feats to try to give a level playing field for the example, but you're right that they DO need to be in there to make it a balanced example. Cheers.
Marcus Majarra 06-06-07, 01:10 PM	Yeah, ok, hands up to that point - I was sort of trying to factor out all the Str-based feats to try to give a level playing field for the example, but you're right that they DO need to be in there to make it a balanced example. Cheers. There's no such thing as a level playing field unless you allow both character the full extent of their abilities and equipment for a given level.
Merestil Haye 06-06-07, 01:20 PM	Thanks for all the input, guys, but I do have one observation which I hope you will constructively comment on. Assuming no other mods (Str, magic weapons, crit hits, etc.) and that all attacks hit: You have a rogue and a fighter who are both 3rd level, and are therefore both only making one attack each. If they are both using daggers against an opponent, the fighter is going to do 1d4 damage for a max of 4 points, whereas the rogue is going to do 1d4 + 2d6 sneak damage for a max of 16 points.Virtually every assumption you make favours the rogue. The fighter will have higher Strength, will have a better chance to hit with a given blow (your assumption, along with the rest of your conditions, mandates that the target have an AC of no higher than 4, and very few monsters have that low a regular AC), will likely be using a weapon with higher damage output, may well have feats to amplify his damage dealing, and all his damage gets multiplies on a crit, where the Rogue's does not. Additionally, you ignored the whole question of how likely the character is to be able to survive the full-round punishment the target can dish out. Against a reasonable opponent for CR3 (let's say an Ogre) the fighter is going to last longer on average and therefore get more attacks.
Drakken2672 06-06-07, 04:31 PM	Another thread to look at which was a little less hostile, was one I started recently called "Rogues sneaky sneaky" this has many good and valid points of comparison that would validate the arguments for the allowance of the actual game rules.
Cariyaga 06-06-07, 10:13 PM	Against a reasonable opponent for CR3 (let's say an Ogre) the fighter is going to last longer on average and therefore get more attacks. You must never have DM'ed, as CR assumes that there is a 4-person party; A rogue, cleric, wizard, and fighter. CR3 would be an acceptable challenge for the party above, not for your average fighter or rogue.
Merestil Haye 06-07-07, 06:24 AM	You must never have DM'ed, as CR assumes that there is a 4-person party; A rogue, cleric, wizard, and fighter. CR3 would be an acceptable challenge for the party above, not for your average fighter or rogue.Not true I'm afraid. The encounter system assumes that a party of four characters of a given Effective Character Level (ECL) will use approximately 20% of their resources overcoming an encounter of an Encounter Level (EL) equal to the ECL of a party member. A single creature has an EL equal to its Challenge Rating (CR). That is, it's not a particularly challenging encounter. Roughly speaking I'd expect a 1-on-1 fight between either character and an ogre to be a 50/50 proposition, assuming that the character in question had reasonably determined abilities and was reasonably equipped. Besides, I never said that the two would win - I said the fighter would last longer against the ogre, thus get more attacks in, and thus has the chance to deal more damage overall. Consider a typical 3rd level fighter. He's likely to have full plate, and let's kindly allow him a 13 Dex. So he has AC19. An average fighter will have 10 + 2*5˝ = 21 hit points from HD rolls plus maybe 6 from Con. A typical 3rd level Rogue can afford a chain shirt, and lets allow him 18 Dex, giving him an AC of 18. To simplify the maths a bit, give him a buckler on his off-hand - that's AC19. He'll have 6 + 2*3˝ = 13 HP, plus maybe 3 from Con. An Ogre gets +8 to hit. Happily, this means he hits either character exactly one half of the time. If he lands a blow he does an average of 16 damage. That's enough to leave the Rogue on 0 and disabled. The Fighter can take that blow and still be swinging. That is what I meant when I said that the fighter "will last longer" than the rogue - that he can take more punishment.
BigJohn42 06-07-07, 05:00 PM	8d6+120. thats pretty close to 60d6. *Nitpick* 120 points of damage / 6 = 20d6, assuming rolling "all sixes". To be fair, we'll assuming rolling all threes, making it 40d6. 40d6 + 8d8 = 48d6. This isn't even close to 60d6. Near as I can figure, you'd have to be rolling d4s in order for 120 to average out at 60 dice. */nitpick* I don't mean to take away from your overall point, but I'm trying to be fair.
FrozenSoul80 06-10-07, 02:33 AM	I don't have the time to read all the posts made, but my DM is exactly the same. No matter what I say he says "the rules do not state you get more than one". Your best arguement is to point out the articles you mentioned, as well as the article on page 84 of Dragon Magazine, issue 350 (December 2006). Also point out the fact that lessening your sneak attack count is unbalancing the rest of the party. This will make your character significantly weaker than the others. The main point is, sneak attack can only be preformed under favourable circumstances. It is pretty easy to move out of a flank with a 5 foot step after all. Apologies to anyone who has said the same thing. Like I said, I'm running short on time.
Marcus Majarra 06-10-07, 05:11 PM	No matter what I say he says "the rules do not state you get more than one". Actually they do. From the 2nd paragraph of the sneak attack description: "The rogue’s attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target."
FrozenSoul80 06-11-07, 01:42 AM	Actually they do. From the 2nd paragraph of the sneak attack description: "The rogue’s attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target." Ironically, I had pointed that passage out to him several times but he is certian he is right. The good part is at least I do it right in the games I run :)
Marcus Majarra 06-11-07, 01:46 AM	Well, we can't save them all.