| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| daemon71507-24-07, 02:27 PM | Okay so swift abusher allows you to stack rogue and scout levels for skirmish. So my question is--- Can u sneak attack/skirmish.. ie....add the skirmish damage and sneak attack damage... example... move 10' and attack with dagger for sneak attack(with a 4th level scout and 3rd level rogue.. )bonuses would be skirmish +2d6 and sneak attack +2d6 for a total of 1d4+4d6... IS THAT POSSIBLE?????? |
| Pangeon07-24-07, 02:33 PM | Yep. |
| mostholy207-24-07, 02:43 PM | To apply skirmish damage and sneak attack damage, an attack has to meet the requirements for each. For Skirmish you have to move >10'. For sneak attack you have to flank or target needs to be denied DEX to AC vs. your attack. If you've met both preconditions, you may apply both sets of precision damage. Remember that skirmish damage for scouts progresses much more slowly than SA for rogue. So your example of a scout4/rogue3 would only do +1d6 skirmish and +2d6 SA. With Swift Ambusher, you would do skirmish damage as a scout7 (+2d6) and SA damage as a rogue3 (+2d6). While a rogue7 (of the same class level) would do +4d6 SA and only have to meet the SA preconditions to apply the extra damage. |
| Hsien07-24-07, 03:07 PM | To apply skirmish damage and sneak attack damage, an attack has to meet the requirements for each. For Skirmish you have to move >10'. For sneak attack you have to flank or target needs to be denied DEX to AC vs. your attack. If you've met both preconditions, you may apply both sets of precision damage. Remember that skirmish damage for scouts progresses much more slowly than SA for rogue. So your example of a scout4/rogue3 would only do +1d6 skirmish and +2d6 SA. While a rogue7 (of the same class level) would do +4d6 SA and only have to meet the SA preconditions to apply the extra damage. Mostholy2 is right, that it is not a straight addition of sneak/skirmish dice. Swift Ambusher allows you to add the Scout/Rogue levels to determine what the effective Scout level would be for Skirmish damage. Sidenote: I hate to admit that MostHoly2 is correct... In an online wrestling league years ago, The AGW, fought a guy named MostHoly several times...and he was always a very tough opponent. But digress...Sorry man, it may not be you, it's just the name. |
| mostholy207-24-07, 03:55 PM | Not that MostHoly. Sorry. Notice the non-capitalized letters and the 2 in the name. The name is supposed to be ironic in that MostHoly indicates some sort of religious importance. However, as most religions promote humility, anyone taking the title of "Most Holy" would be breaking with those tenents. In addition, being mostholy2 suggests that the title bearer is not the "Most" holy, but only secondary in Holiness in some sort of heirarchical religious structure/order (which in itself can considered to be in violation of any tenents of humility). |