PDA

View Full Version : Don't forget Skirmish!



Hefty Lefty
2007-05-16, 02:33 PM
I was reading Complete Adventurer the other day, looking at one of my favorite classes, the Scout, when I decided to make a Human Scout for an upcoming campaign. Then, when I looked into the Feats in Complete Adventurer, I saw a lot that said a PC needed "xd6 Sneak Attack". Can I take the feat if I have "xd6 Skirmish" (or "xd6 Sudden Strike," for Ninja, for that matter)?

Meat Shield
2007-05-16, 02:39 PM
Its the DMs call. But most DMs would allow this sort of thing I believe as sneak, skirmish, and sudden strike damage types are all considered 'precision damage'.

shuntsu
2007-05-16, 02:42 PM
I think Sudden Strike counts as Sneak Attack (according to the book), but not Skirmish, which operates a bit differently.

Skjaldbakka
2007-05-16, 02:51 PM
Somewhere in complete adventurer there is a sidebar that addresses that very question. My gut tells me that Skirmish counts, but whether it counts or not will be in that sidebar.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-05-16, 02:54 PM
Sidebar Page 8.

Sudden Strike is treated as SA for the purpose of qualifying for feats, classes etc.

Skirmish is not.

Hefty Lefty
2007-05-16, 03:01 PM
Ah Crap!

Well, thanks for the help anyways.

kanachi
2007-05-16, 03:06 PM
the suport for skirmish (and the scout for that matter) is very limited

Arbitrarity
2007-05-16, 04:20 PM
Improved skirmish FTW!

Hurlbut
2007-05-16, 05:46 PM
Improved skirmish FTW!
Oh yeah, but you have to explain that one, I know I found it in a site. Really kick up the Skrimish ability a notch.

Meat Shield
2007-05-16, 09:00 PM
Well, I prolly would have allowed it.....grumble grumble....kids these days....

Hefty Lefty
2007-05-17, 05:12 AM
Wait a sec... I read the sidebar on Page 8, and it doesn't mention Skirmish at all.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-05-17, 05:17 AM
Wait a sec... I read the sidebar on Page 8, and it doesn't mention Skirmish at all.

No, exactly.

Skirmish is not treated as SA for qualifying purposes etc.

squishycube
2007-05-17, 05:18 AM
Am I the only one inclined to respond in sinister tones: "exactly"?

Charity
2007-05-17, 08:51 AM
Am I the only one inclined to respond in sinister tones: "exactly"?


No, exactly.

Er ... no?

Simu-irony

AtomicKitKat
2007-05-18, 04:23 AM
I'd allow it. Mmm. Staggering Hamstringing Skirmishes FTW! You wouldn't do much damage, but the other guy would be getting dizzy from all the cross-town traffic.:smallbiggrin:

the_tick_rules
2007-05-18, 10:07 AM
i wouldn't allow it. the sneak attacks and the other that imitate it depend of the subject being unaware or flanked. skirmish works even when the subject is completely aware of it.

Were-Sandwich
2007-05-18, 10:48 AM
What's the deal with Skirmish anyway. I can sort of see it working with melee attacks, but seriously, "My arrows hurt more because I'm running when I shoot you" makes no sense at all. (I am aware of the 'Wizards and Dragons ec' arguement)

Tellah
2007-05-18, 12:39 PM
What's the deal with Skirmish anyway. I can sort of see it working with melee attacks, but seriously, "My arrows hurt more because I'm running when I shoot you" makes no sense at all. (I am aware of the 'Wizards and Dragons ec' arguement)

Well, it's precision damage, so I think of it as moving quickly into an advantageous position. The level 3 scout moves ten feet into a small depression in the battlefield and crouches, gaining +1 AC, and is now able to aim at a more open point in his target's defenses.

YPU
2007-05-18, 12:58 PM
Well, it's precision damage, so I think of it as moving quickly into an advantageous position. The level 3 scout moves ten feet into a small depression in the battlefield and crouches, gaining +1 AC, and is now able to aim at a more open point in his target's defenses.

Yea, think of it that way. Another example. The scout draws his bow at an fighter, so the fighter raises his shield and tries to pose a as small as possible profile. Because of those things he doesnít notice in time the scout actually didnít shoot but moved so that the fighter could be shot in the back where he now had a huge opening in his defence. But indeed that trick only works a time or three and people know it. So you do the same but actually donít move and do fire the first time, and then simply mix it.

LeeMon
2007-05-18, 01:51 PM
I did that once in Battlefield 1942...

I was a rocketeer in a garage, when a tank rolled up and spotted me. It would take 3 or 4 hits to take the tank down. The tank's cannon had near-zero area-of-effect and couldn't penetrate walls, but the machinegun would kill me in an instant if he could draw a bead on me.

Quickly, I dove into the gap between two doorways. I peeked out the left doorway, fired a rocket, and dove back in before he could lock on to me. After waiting a second to reload, I dove out the right doorway, fired again, and went back to cover. I reloaded, went out the right door again (to find him looking at the left doorway), fired, and hid again.

Then I waited three seconds. The sound of a tank turret sweeping back and forth was my reward. He was unable to choose one door, and risk being wrong; but, by forcing himself to move in order to get a lock no matter which way I went, he made the one 100% incorrect choice. I popped out the right again and shot a rocket; before he could draw a bead, his tank exploded.

That's how I picture skirmish; the character attacks vital points by mastering the fake-out. The scout is well-trained at hitting the part of you you didn't think you needed to protect.

Viscount Einstrauss
2007-05-18, 01:55 PM
Easy solution- take a single level dip into rogue at some point followed by the Swift Ambusher feat from CS. Now you have full progression on both skirmish and sneak attack. You get your cake and can eat it too.

Morgan_Scott82
2007-05-18, 02:23 PM
Watch "The Patriot" The scene in which the Hero attacks the caravan of redcoats transporting his son is the most perfect example of skirmish in action I've ever seen put to film.

Hefty Lefty
2007-05-18, 04:21 PM
I talked to my DM and another PC (who thinks Scout is un-balanced, what do you guys think of that?), and he said it does not act as SA for the same reasons as The Tick Rules.

Fax Celestis
2007-05-18, 04:23 PM
...and another PC (who thinks Scout is un-balanced, what do you guys think of that?)...

Did you laugh at him?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-05-18, 04:24 PM
... Scout is un-balanced...

Why would they think that? :smalleek:

Aximili
2007-05-18, 08:24 PM
I talked to my DM and another PC (who thinks Scout is un-balanced,...)

I think he misunderstood "unbalanced' with "interesting and cool to play".

Hefty Lefty
2007-05-19, 03:23 PM
Well, he doesn't actually have the book, and I was telling him about the Skirmish's attack bonuses and AC bonus, the Fortitude save bonuses, the fast movements, the moderate BAB progression, and the 8xINT skill points. He's loves the rogue, and I we were comparing the two. Everytime he would say something the has, I would say the scout has it, too. He said that "If a new class is the same as a core class and more, it's over-powered." Is the scout over-powered? Is it better than the rogue at least?

Indon
2007-05-19, 03:26 PM
Well, he doesn't actually have the book, and I was telling him about the Skirmish's attack bonuses and AC bonus, the Fortitude save bonuses, the fast movements, the moderate BAB progression, and the 8xINT skill points. He's loves the rogue, and I we were comparing the two. Everytime he would say something the has, I would say the scout has it, too. He said that "If a new class is the same as a core class and more, it's over-powered." Is the scout over-powered? Is it better than the rogue at least?

Naa, there's plenty of stuff Rogues have that scouts don't, and Sneak Attack has a lot more versatility and raw damage potential than Skirmish does.

Hefty Lefty
2007-05-19, 03:28 PM
Yeah, I'm just going from memory here, but doesn't the Rogue's sneak attack get more powerful quicker than the Scout's Skirmish?

ZeroNumerous
2007-05-19, 04:40 PM
Rogue has UMD. Do you really need more to prove that scout isn't as effective?

Hurlbut
2007-05-19, 05:06 PM
Yeah, I'm just going from memory here, but doesn't the Rogue's sneak attack get more powerful quicker than the Scout's Skirmish?It's adjusted by the fact that skirmish ability give you more than just a damage dice source. But point out to your friend that a scout cannot use his skirmish as often as a rogue can since he only get 1 attack because he has only one standard action after moving, this is why a ranged scout is somewhat better than a melee orientated one, it's so you can get the extra arrow attacks feats that give you one extra damage dice (the second arrow's damage). That and you're attacking at distance (granted it's only 30 feet, 60 feet if you go with crossbow sniper), so they have to chase after you, can't get off full attack easily (there are exception like pounce and such :smallannoyed:)



Rogue has UMD. Do you really need more to prove that scout isn't as effective?
Don't forgot Open Lock.

ZeroNumerous
2007-05-19, 05:38 PM
Don't forgot Open Lock.

Wand of Knock. Really, UMD is all you need to prove that Rogue is better than Scout.

Hurlbut
2007-05-19, 10:18 PM
Wand of Knock. Really, UMD is all you need to prove that Rogue is better than Scout.
Huh? Well it cost nothing to open a lock if you use skill Open Lock, anyway just saying that's another one against Scout.

Teilos
2007-05-20, 11:53 AM
@ Hurlbut

You forgot "Greater Manyshot" (XPH). A scout 20 moves with his move action and fires three arrows each with full skirmish damage.

With the right bow that makes 3d10+15d6+3*Str+3*Magic Stuff. Still, it is inferior to thrower builds (who have a similar range). But it is decent for a skill monkey.

Aximili
2007-05-22, 05:22 PM
And, in favor of the scout, he gets perm freedom of movement + blindsight.
Yeah... yeah... a rogue can get that with magic items, but it's just cool to have these on full time.^^

Whenever my group needs a skillmonkey, i play a scout. But confess it's for the concept, not the ownadge.

FdL
2007-05-22, 05:45 PM
I like scouts better than pure rogues, as I'm used to playing more ranger-type characters, and they're a good mixture of ranger and rogue features.

Now that we're talking about Skirmish, I noticed there's a change for it in the CA errata. Now it says that the character has to move 10 feet from where he was, or something for which I understand that he has to end in a square 10 feet away. The text is not really unequivocal, and could be interpreted in several ways, though I understand that the spirit of this change is not allowing people to abuse the "move 10 ft." thing.

How do you interpret this change in the errata? I feel this feature is really powerful, and would like to know if I'm geting it right in my game.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-05-22, 06:03 PM
I think the errata is reasonably clear and in line with how you interpret it.

The skirmisher has to move at least 10 feet away from the starting position.


Page 12: Skirmish (class feature)
The second sentence of the skirmish class feature should read as follows (new text indicated in red): She deals an extra 1d6 points of damage on all attacks she makes during any round in which she moves at least 10 feet away from where she was at the start of her turn.
The extra damage applies only to attacks made after the
scout has moved at least 10 feet. The skirmish ability cannot be used while mounted.
This update should be made wherever the skirmish ability description is presented (see also pages 31, 56, and 177).