PDA

View Full Version : Sneakier sneak attack variant



ericgrau
2013-09-21, 11:06 AM
Sudden Sneak Attack (rogue ACF)
Lose: You may not sneak attack at will. Generally you may sneak attack only once per encounter, even if the attack misses. However if new foes arrive or there are foes who have otherwise have not observed your sneak attack, you may sneak attack again against one of them. Even an invisible rogue's sneak attack may be observed, but not if both the rogue and his victim are out of sight. Regardless, you must also meet all the regular requirements for a sneak attack.

Gain: Add an additional +1d6 sneak attack damage on every level. This totals to +2d6 on odd levels Gain +2d6 sneak attack damage on every single level rather than the usual sneak attack progression. All rogue sneak attack damage is subject to the restrictions in this variant, even if you take levels in another class that grants regular sneak attack.

- - - - - - - - - -

This variant is more for the fluff of a sneakier rogue than the exact damage amount. That could be adjusted. A TWF flanking rogue sneak attack just doesn't seem sneaky enough to me. This variant is often worse in open combat. But it allows tactics like eliminating a strategic target before a fight begins, or sapping a foe who must be captured. Or chain ganking weak guards without being noticed. The victims may not be as happy, especially when they are players. But there is always uncanny dodge, a large hp pool, AC and so on. Plus creatures tend to drop in a couple rounds in D&D anyway. Even at level 1 most foes will only drop into the negatives (a common level 1 experience), not die. The drawback is that even for D&D it is a bit all-or-nothing. It's a bit disappointing to start the first fight in a game session with the nothing side.

Because the effectiveness of this variant varies with campaign style and player style, it should never be forced onto all rogues. Rather it is for those who want to fulfill a certain character concept.

toapat
2013-09-21, 11:23 AM
in order for this variant of Sneak attack to even matter, it would have to be +2d6 damage / Level of rogue, so 40d6 at 20.

also, if im reading this correctly, this is more of an alphastrike then a sneak attack

ericgrau
2013-09-21, 11:27 AM
Yeah, probably. And yes it is, though alpha strike implies that there is a follow up and there isn't always. Especially in the best sneaky usages like infiltration, picking off one by one, or hit-and-run scenarios.

Amnoriath
2013-09-21, 11:38 AM
Sudden Sneak Attack (rogue ACF)
Lose: You may not sneak attack at will. Generally you may sneak attack only once per encounter, even if the attack misses. However if new foes arrive or there are foes who have otherwise have not observed your sneak attack, you may sneak attack again against one of them. Even an invisible rogue's sneak attack may be observed, but not if both the rogue and his victim are out of sight. Regardless, you must also meet all the regular requirements for a sneak attack.

Gain: Add an additional +1d6 sneak attack damage on every level. This totals to +2d6 on odd levels, Gain +2d6 sneak attack damage per level rather than the usual sneak attack progression. All rogue sneak attack damage is subject to the restrictions in this variant, even if you take levels in another class that grants regular sneak attack.

- - - - - - - - - -

This variant is more for the fluff of a sneakier rogue than the exact damage amount. That could be adjusted. A TWF flanking rogue sneak attack just doesn't seem sneaky enough to me. This variant is often worse in open combat. But it allows tactics like eliminating a strategic target before a fight begins, or sapping a foe who must be captured. Or chain ganking weak guards without being noticed. The victims may not be as happy, especially when they are players. But there is always uncanny dodge, a large hp pool, AC and so on. Plus creatures tend to drop in a couple rounds in D&D anyway. Even at level 1 most foes will only drop into the negatives (a common level 1 experience), not die. The drawback is that even for D&D it is a bit all-or-nothing. It's a bit disappointing to start the first fight in a game session with the nothing side.

Because the effectiveness of this variant varies with campaign style and player style, it should never be forced onto all rogues. Rather it is for those who want to fulfill a certain character concept.
The problem with this is you just rendered the rogue useless in combat. Even if he can deal 40d6 on a strike he only gets one chance. On average that is 140 damage, an Ubercharger of half that level can deal double that without any worry of precision damage limitations.
However the concept actually might be in the right place. Two-weapon fighting has always taxed a rogue's limited amount of feats just so it can have a place in damage. If you could develop this almost like an Lurk's augment where the points are dolled out per encounter and it can do more than just damage(attribute damage, cripple, trip, touch attack...etc) this could make einhander rogues, single weapon+wand, or even ranged rogues very viable(not including flasks).
http://dndtools.eu/classes/lurk/

ericgrau
2013-09-21, 11:42 AM
This is intended to be a little weak in open combat, and a little strong in infiltration and other stealthy usage. It does depend on the campaign, party and player build. But it's not meant to be used by every rogue in a campaign world, only an ACF for certain styles. I never consider high op things like uberchargers as part of the normal baseline when considering something new. Nor is any option exclusive from other options; many options may be included in a varied build. To re-emphasize, the exact amount of damage is not the point at all, set it to whatever.

Amnoriath
2013-09-21, 11:47 AM
This is intended to be a little weak in open combat, and a little strong in infiltration and other stealthy usage. It does depend on the campaign, party and player build. But it's not meant to be used by every rogue, only an option for certain styles. I never consider high op things like uberchargers as part of normal play. To re-emphasize, the exact amount of damage is not the point.

What is the point then? At high levels even if it hits it isn't going to kill a typical monster of comparable difficulty, especially if it is immune or has fortification. Look more closely at what I said. If you can't kill it, maim, cripple, debuff, distract, something else so that you can perform more and better in the encounter. If eliminating peons is all you intended this to do a typical rogues can already do that easily with the right items.

ericgrau
2013-09-21, 11:49 AM
Neither does regular sneak attack. This is a sneak attack alternative, not the entire rogue.

Amnoriath
2013-09-21, 11:52 AM
Neither does regular sneak attack. This is a sneak attack alternative, not the entire rogue.

Unfortunately though the majority of the rogue's comepetency in battle is from sneak attack. What is wrong with diversifying it, in trading overall damage for something else or just getting in the one good hit?

ericgrau
2013-09-21, 11:54 AM
No comments on infiltration scenarios? Oh well, time to move on to something else. I'll check back later in case there are more ideas though.

Amnoriath
2013-09-21, 12:00 PM
No comments on infiltration scenarios? Oh well, time to move on to something else. I'll check back later in case there are more ideas though.

So what, up the damage enough to ensure killing the peons? You do realize even if you kill them they still make a sound and infiltration likely involves multiple opponents. What you did was make sure the guard captain is dead but then the rest of the team knows it and is on full alert. Even if they don't you still have to wait a while until your "encounter" ends.

Djinn_in_Tonic
2013-09-21, 12:08 PM
No comments on infiltration scenarios? Oh well, time to move on to something else.

It is better in an infiltration scenario, yes. But only for one attack.

The issue is that in most encounters a high-level Rogue will regularly get at least 4 sneak attacks off if he's any good. And even 40d6 extra damage won't help him kill equal level opponents in one shot, while 10d6 is already sufficient to kill most mooks who might be on guard duty.

I like the idea of a single powerful strike, but I'm not sure this really does the job. I'd rather have the Assassin's Death Attack than this.

ericgrau
2013-09-22, 10:28 AM
So I'm getting that this isn't a complex/special enough of a change to bother with. Oh well.

What would people think about a slew of special attacks that could be done in place of sneak attack damage? The number of SA dice replaced determines the save DC or other DC. It wouldn't necessarily involve my original variant at all. Though some kind of hard to setup knockout might be one of the special attacks, without losing the ability to use normal sneak attack or other special attacks throughout the fight. Or has this already been done before, and are those previous homebrews what you guys are referring to?

Djinn_in_Tonic
2013-09-22, 11:57 AM
So I'm getting that this isn't a complex/special enough of a change to bother with. Oh well.

It's not that it's not special: it's that it's strictly worse than your other options. The game design doesn't really support this sort of action: you'd have to be basically insta-dropping a foe to make the later loss in damage worth it, and that suddenly means that single opponents don't threaten a Rogue any more. So the design is all sorts of wonky, although something of the sort would work great in a game that isn't D&D.


What would people think about a slew of special attacks that could be done in place of sneak attack damage? The number of SA dice replaced determines the save DC or other DC.

There are a number of Rogue feats that sacrifice Xd6 sneak attack damage to add effect Y to the sneak attack, where Y is a silence effect, ability score damage, movement reduction, and so forth. More of those could definitely be a good thing.

Xerlith
2013-09-26, 02:58 PM
I think that it's better if it's a feat that just doubles the number of dice on the first Sneak Attack you make. If it's to weak, make it the first Sneak Attack against each enemy.

The Oni
2013-09-26, 04:05 PM
I like it. More of a secret agent flavor than the lovable scoundrel type. But, again, gives you a huge disadvantage.

Since he's already got a secret agent vibe, maybe give him more "gadgets?" Or make him better with Wands, something of a UMD specialist? And he can use that when he gets into a combat that goes for more than a couple rounds.