[3.5] The Rogue Handbook: A Fistful of d6

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The source of the air doesn't need to be behind the caster. For a 50 MPH wind to arise without using existing air, its source must have significantly more pressure than the ambient air. That means that air behind and beside the wind source will be sucked along due to the pressure differential. As the Gust moves forward, new air alongside the line will be sucked in as well, creating vortices that will continue to circulate air after the spell ends. You'll get a slight reduction in concealment while the Gust of Wind is in effect, but that 1 square (5') wide line will mix with ambient air in seconds.

Plus, unless you can already make out the target you want a clear line of sight to, your chances of randomly picking the right 5' wide line in miles of fog are pretty meager.

Every time you bring physics into D&D... well, you know the saying.

If that were true, you could simply use a Fireball effect to remove fog, because it would burn it off. Or use a Sleet Storm spell, because it would precipitate it out.

THIS IS NOT THE REAL WORLD. The laws of Physics DO NOT APPLY in the realm of D&D.

[ArcanistSupreme]

Maybe I missed it, but how does invisible blade rank among rogue PrCs?

[Curmudgeon]

Every time you bring physics into D&D... well, you know the saying.
...
THIS IS NOT THE REAL WORLD. The laws of Physics DO NOT APPLY in the realm of D&D.

They generally do, if you're following the rules.

This section on world-building assumes that your campaign is set in a fairly realistic world. That is to say that while wizards cast spells, deities channel power to clerics, and dragons raze villages, the world is round, the laws of physics are applicable, and most people act like real people. The reason for this assumption is that unless they are told otherwise, this situation is what your players expect.

[lsfreak]

Maybe I missed it, but how does invisible blade rank among rogue PrCs?

If you get rid of the inane requirements for it and replace it with something sane, it's pretty good, especially for a rogue with a dip in monk (though note that the feint becomes a swift action with errata). As written, it requires useless feats on top of an already-feat-heavy class.

[Curmudgeon]

If you get rid of the inane requirements for it and replace it with something sane, it's pretty good, especially for a rogue with a dip in monk (though note that the feint becomes a swift action with errata).

That's not right. It's still a free action, with a once per round limitation. That means you can cast a swift action spell, or trigger one from a wand, and also use Uncanny Feint in one round.

[lsfreak]

Ah, okay, must have misremembered. Significantly better than a swift action, noticeably worse than as-printed.

[PId6]

Maybe I missed it, but how does invisible blade rank among rogue PrCs?

It's in the PrC section. The requirements suck, but the benefits are decent, though the errata nerf is unfortunate. As lsfreak said, a 2 level dip in Monk goes very well with it (especially if you take the Carmendine Monk feat).

[Icewraith]

@ PId6

If you've managed to get near-full sneak attack and a good chunk of skirmish what spring attack does is allow you to always maneuver into position to use both damage sources even if your opponent is doing their best to not cooperate. A number of five foot steps, depending on positioning, will be enough for whatever it is you need to damage to mess up your full attack for a round but still be close enough to disallow charging.

Also, what bounding assault and rapid blitz do is they break one of the key limitations on a standard action attack: not getting your iterative (-5, -10) attacks and so forth. What two-weapon spring attack does is it is one of two ways I know off the top of my head to allow an off-hand attack and a main hand attack with a standard action (the other is a terrible feat). The interaction of the two abilities isn't very well defined since PHB II, which introduced the expanded spring attack feats, was published a couple years after complete adventurer. By strict RAW, at the very least it allows for +20/+20/+15/+10 attack with a standard action that allows you to move before and after the attacks and doesn't provoke AOOs. By what I'm starting to call "AYD" or "Ask Your DM" you have an extremely strong argument to get a +20/+20/+15/+15/+10/+10 (assuming you've kept full BAB on one gestalt side) standard action spring attack.

By keeping up full or near-full sneak attack and skirmish each of those attacks will have a ton of D6 riding on them, a level of LT Barb means you can either full attack and move to a single target or you can move on to other enemies if you think you'll kill your opponent before you've gotten half your attacks off.

Yes it's feat heavy, but if we're talking Gestalt, you can get a number of important feats from a 2-level fighter dip, a 2 level ranger dip, scout levels divisible by four (IIRC), being human, flaws if your DM allows them, etc. Note that these are all full BAB classes that you'd want to take anyway, along with at least three levels of Swashbuckler. This is why I specifically mentioned Gestalt, because it's true you don't normally have the feats to do all this and get a decent number of sneak attack dice to put damage behind your attacks. However it's a build that virtually guarantees you'll be able to get off your first four attacks (assuming AYD, RAW can go either way) and at higher levels your first six, and you have the freedom to maneuver to make them all sneak attacks AND skirmish attacks.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

@ PId6

If you've managed to get near-full sneak attack and a good chunk of skirmish what spring attack does is allow you to always maneuver into position to use both damage sources even if your opponent is doing their best to not cooperate. A number of five foot steps, depending on positioning, will be enough for whatever it is you need to damage to mess up your full attack for a round but still be close enough to disallow charging.

The only problem is that you only get one shot, rather than a full attack by using things like Travel Devotion, Belt of Battle, Pounce, or other means of getting a full attack and moving more than 10'. Heck, Training Dummy of the Master.

Also, what bounding assault and rapid blitz do is they break one of the key limitations on a standard action attack: not getting your iterative (-5, -10) attacks and so forth. What two-weapon spring attack does is it is one of two ways I know off the top of my head to allow an off-hand attack and a main hand attack with a standard action (the other is a terrible feat). The interaction of the two abilities isn't very well defined since PHB II, which introduced the expanded spring attack feats, was published a couple years after complete adventurer. By strict RAW, at the very least it allows for +20/+20/+15/+10 attack with a standard action that allows you to move before and after the attacks and doesn't provoke AOOs. By what I'm starting to call "AYD" or "Ask Your DM" you have an extremely strong argument to get a +20/+20/+15/+15/+10/+10 (assuming you've kept full BAB on one gestalt side) standard action spring attack.

That's all very well and good for Gestalt, assuming you can manage it, but that isn't very viable for most games being run. For a regular game, those feats are nearly worthless because you only get the BAB to qualify very late in your career.

By keeping up full or near-full sneak attack and skirmish each of those attacks will have a ton of D6 riding on them, a level of LT Barb means you can either full attack and move to a single target or you can move on to other enemies if you think you'll kill your opponent before you've gotten half your attacks off.

You can't pounce AND Spring Attack. Charge is a full-round action. So is Spring Attack. Mutually exclusive.

Yes it's feat heavy, but if we're talking Gestalt, you can get a number of important feats from a 2-level fighter dip, a 2 level ranger dip, scout levels divisible by four (IIRC), being human, flaws if your DM allows them, etc. Note that these are all full BAB classes that you'd want to take anyway, along with at least three levels of Swashbuckler. This is why I specifically mentioned Gestalt, because it's true you don't normally have the feats to do all this and get a decent number of sneak attack dice to put damage behind your attacks. However it's a build that virtually guarantees you'll be able to get off your first four attacks (assuming AYD, RAW can go either way) and at higher levels your first six, and you have the freedom to maneuver to make them all sneak attacks AND skirmish attacks.

Again, you are talking gestalt, which almost never happens.

[Zen Master]

A friend of mine once made a strength based rogue - focused on high attack bonus, so more SA's actually land, as well as crits and tripping (with a halberd, as I recall). Despite being build on a bugbear, it was easily the most powerful character in the group - which was however, fairly un-optimized.

I wonder if anyone has done anything similar? And if it would be valuable to the guide?

[DragoonWraith]

A friend of mine once made a strength based rogue - focused on high attack bonus, so more SA's actually land, as well as crits and tripping (with a halberd, as I recall). Despite being build on a bugbear, it was easily the most powerful character in the group - which was however, fairly un-optimized.

I wonder if anyone has done anything similar? And if it would be valuable to the guide?

While that could easily be effective, it's not taking great advantage of the Sneak Attack, and could be done better by a more melee-focused build, really. So while it works, it's kind of questionably "Rogue", since it's more a 2h Weapon build with some Sneak Attack dice tacked on.

[Zen Master]

While that could easily be effective, it's not taking great advantage of the Sneak Attack, and could be done better by a more melee-focused build, really. So while it works, it's kind of questionably "Rogue", since it's more a 2h Weapon build with some Sneak Attack dice tacked on.

Well, yea - but no. Not the way my buddy and I envisioned it. It was kinda complicated tho - feat intensive, so to speak.

The trick we wanted to do was make a high-strength rogue in plate - capable of getting sneak attacks on tripped, flanked, surprised or otherwise dex-denied enemies. High strength plus improved attack bonus basically meant more sneak attacks actually landing - while still maintaining a rogue-ish feel.

Naturally, I don't remember the build.

[Greenish]

The trick we wanted to do was make a high-strength rogue in plate - capable of getting sneak attacks on tripped, flanked, surprised or otherwise dex-denied enemies.

Tripping doesn't cause the target to lose it's dex to AC, nor does it allow SA alone.

High strength plus improved attack bonus basically meant more sneak attacks actually landing - while still maintaining a rogue-ish feel.

Walking around in full plate with a halberd doesn't sound rogue-ish at all to me.

[Curmudgeon]

The only problem is that you only get one shot, rather than a full attack by using things like Travel Devotion, Belt of Battle, Pounce, or other means of getting a full attack and moving more than 10'.

The alternative I recommend here is Snap Kick, because you can add an unarmed attack to any of these melee attacks:

• standard action attack
• full attack
• attack of opportunity
• bonus attack

For the cost of one feat and some gp you can double the number of attacks you make on all normally single-hit attacks, including Spring Attack. (You can buy the Improved Unarmed Strike prerequisite in a variety of items that grant the feat.) Snap Kick pays off in more situations than pounce does. You can't use pounce on an AoO or a bonus attack, can you?

Also two corrections. With a Belt of Battle to add a move action, you can use the full attack action with Spring Attack.

You can't pounce AND Spring Attack. Charge is a full-round action. So is Spring Attack.

That's wrong, too. Spring Attack is an attack action (of undefined type) and a split move action. See Rules Compendium page 13.

[Zen Master]

Tripping doesn't cause the target to lose it's dex to AC, nor does it allow SA alone.

True. Can't ever hurt tho.

Walking around in full plate with a halberd doesn't sound rogue-ish at all to me.

Well no - I can see that. That particular character was very situation ... or planning ... based. He had a set of heavy armor, and did man the frontline sometimes. He also had a chainshirt, and sometimes went without armor at all.

Rogues can be many things - thugs, for instance. But you're right, there is something rather un-rogue'ish in wearing plate armor.

The build itself wasn't bad tho - and I'm quite sure someone here could improve on it. (actually, by some peoples standards it would have rated as abysmal, I guess - but it was easily the most powerful character in the group)

[Jorda75]

Anyone before mention the Precise Strike feat from Expanded Psionics HB or the grapple and stab/claw strategy? Just curious.

[Curmudgeon]

Anyone before mention the Precise Strike feat from Expanded Psionics HB

Assuming you're actually referring to Deadly Precision (since there's no "Precise Strike" feat there), the only mention should be that it's a bad choice.

Deadly Precision lets you reroll 1s on sneak attack dice. That means an average boost from 3.5 per d6 to 3.917. Since Rogues get 1d6 every other level, that's a gain of +0.21 points of damage per level. Compare that to Craven, which gives +1 point of damage per level, and you'll see that Deadly Precision is 5 times worse.

[lsfreak]

Deadly Precision lets you reroll 1s on sneak attack dice. That means an average boost from 3.5 per d6 to 3.917. Since Rogues get 1d6 every other level, that's a gain of +0.21 points of damage per level. Compare that to Craven, which gives +1 point of damage per level, and you'll see that Deadly Precision is 5 times worse.

Not to mention you can get the rerolling of 1's, plus a +2DC to your death attack (for assassins and the like) and an extra +2 profane bonus to damage and attacks against flat-footed targets, for 8000gp from bracers of murder (Drow of the Underdark). That's still probably not worth it for the damage benefits (flat-footed only sucks compared to denied Dex), unless you're in a stealth campaign where you can actually use your death attack.

There is, however, a feat in Dragon Compendium that's called Precise Strike. Trade a number of sneak attack dice from all your attacks, and add +1 to your attack roll for each die (per attack) sacrificed. Potentially worthwhile if you're running around with tons of +d6 and not enough +atk and want to land Crippling Strike/Staggering Strike/Wounding when your DM optimizes monsters to insane levels of AC, or with crazy Hunter's Eye boosting. There's also the issue that it's Dragon material.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

A supplemental guide on how to apply said fistful of d6's can now be found here

[PId6]

A supplemental guide on how to apply said fistful of d6's can now be found here

Looks pretty good. I've added a link to it in the links section. I'll add it to other places and incorporate some of the advice once I do a more comprehensive update next week (been fairly busy this week).

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Looks pretty good. I've added a link to it in the links section. I'll add it to other places and incorporate some of the advice once I do a more comprehensive update next week (been fairly busy this week).

Yea, it'll get more comprehensive when I get a chance to fluff it out

[idkwhatmynameis]

I'm not sure if someone already mentioned this, so sorry if they did, but the bonus feat special ability should be marked as totally amazing. By RAW, you can take any feat, ignoring pre-requisites, which means if you start at say, level 10, you can directly take perfect two-weapon fighting skipping all the rest.

[lsfreak]

I'm not sure if someone already mentioned this, so sorry if they did, but the bonus feat special ability should be marked as totally amazing. By RAW, you can take any feat, ignoring pre-requisites, which means if you start at say, level 10, you can directly take perfect two-weapon fighting skipping all the rest.

I'm not sure where you're getting that. Unless specifically noted as ignoring requirements, all feats need them, regardless if they're bonus feats or not.

At 1st level, a monk may select either Improved Grapple or Stunning Fist as a bonus feat. At 2nd level, she may select either Combat Reflexes or Deflect Arrows as a bonus feat. At 6th level, she may select either Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as a bonus feat. A monk need not have any of the prerequisites normally required for these feats to select them.

If the ranger selects archery, he is treated as having the Rapid Shot feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.

If the ranger selects two-weapon combat, he is treated as having the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.

A rogue may gain a bonus feat in place of a special ability.

[Noticeable lack of bolding]

[Koury]

A rogue may gain a bonus feat in place of a special ability.

[Noticeable lack of bolding]

Fixed!

[idkwhatmynameis]

Quoted from the Monster Manual, page 7.
"Creatures often do not have pre-requisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat."
That is the only time "bonus feat" is defined, and as such those are the rules for gaining bonus feats unless specifically written otherwise. You'll notice any other class which grants a bonus feat, like the fighter, scout, warblade, etc., has the clause that you must still meet pre-requisites for that feat. This one doesn't. I will admit though, this is extremely cheesy and twisted, but may be worth mentioning.

And before someone says "Creatures aren't characters", DnD would not work under that assumption, at all.

[lsfreak]

Quoted from the Monster Manual, page 7.
"Creatures often do not have pre-requisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat."
That is the only time "bonus feat" is defined, and as such those are the rules for gaining bonus feats unless specifically written otherwise. You'll notice any other class which grants a bonus feat, like the fighter, scout, warblade, etc., has the clause that you must still meet pre-requisites for that feat. This one doesn't. I will admit though, this is extremely cheesy and twisted, but may be worth mentioning.

You forgot the rest of the passage, however.

Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B). Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat.

The passage only applies to bonus feats marked with a superscript B, and thus, those found in monster entries.

[Gametime]

Quoted from the Monster Manual, page 7.
"Creatures often do not have pre-requisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat."
That is the only time "bonus feat" is defined, and as such those are the rules for gaining bonus feats unless specifically written otherwise. You'll notice any other class which grants a bonus feat, like the fighter, scout, warblade, etc., has the clause that you must still meet pre-requisites for that feat. This one doesn't. I will admit though, this is extremely cheesy and twisted, but may be worth mentioning.

In a section devoted explicitly to reading monster stat blocks. Are there any monster stat blocks where a monster with rogue class levels has selected a feat it does not qualify for as a rogue bonus feat? Because, if not, I don't think the support is there.

[idkwhatmynameis]

In a section devoted explicitly to reading monster stat blocks. Are there any monster stat blocks where a monster with rogue class levels has selected a feat it does not qualify for as a rogue bonus feat? Because, if not, I don't think the support is there.

Except, it specifically states creatures, and guess what? Human rogues are creatures. As for the superscript B, how does that have anything to do with it? That doesn't define Bonus Feat, it just helps DMs identify it when they read up a monster stat block so the players don't go "Hey, that monster has too many feats." I can just mark it with superscript B on my sheet if I really wanted to.

More on that.

[Gametime]

Except, it specifically states creatures, and guess what? Human rogues are creatures. As for the superscript B, how does that have anything to do with it? That doesn't define Bonus Feat, it just helps DMs identify it when they read up a monster stat block so the players don't go "Hey, that monster has too many feats." I can just mark it with superscript B on my sheet if I really wanted to.

More on that.

It specifically states that a creature may already have a bonus feat in its pre-rendered statblock, and that if it does, it need not meet the prerequisites for that feat. It goes on to say that these feats cannot be customized, making it clear that these feats are racial feats and not simply bonus feats derived from a list.

If you wish to customize the creature with new feats, you can reassign its other feats, but not its bonus feats.

Also, the preceding section explains the exact scope of this.

This introduction explains how to read each creature’s write-up.

That's it. That's all that the rules contained there apply to: the creature write-ups.

Also, despite your insistence that rogues are creatures, the book is clearly using the word as a synonym for "monster," and both are distinguished from player characters.

The line gives the creature’s feats. A monster gains feats just as a character does

A monster is not a character, and rules that apply to monsters (as is the case with this section) do not necessarily apply to characters.

Finally, even if you don't buy any of the above, I offer this.

Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B). Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat.

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat.

The Monster Manual, even if it does apply here to player characters, only lets you use a bonus feat you already have even if you do not meet the prerequisites. It says nothing about gaining the feat - since the language implies that the monster bonus feats are racial, this is not surprising - and so a character cannot select the bonus feats for which they do not qualify.

If this last interpretation is the only valid one, however, it would mean you could qualify for a bonus feat, select it, and then dump the prerequisites without losing access to the bonus feat.

[idkwhatmynameis]

Except it never states they are racial feats, but are Bonus feats, AKA exactly what the rogue gets, and if characters arent creatures this is what happens:

If creatures and characters are mutually exclusive sets, or even not the same thing, then everyone's been playing wrong since release. Magic Missile targets creatures, and Fireball only affects creatures and objects, and says nothing about characters, so clearly it shouldn't work on PCs or NPCs, only on monsters. Black Tentacles only grapples creatures, so PCs and NPCs are immune. Solid Fog acts even weirder, where only creatures are concealed, only creatures are slowed, and only creatures are penalized, but no sight of any kind goes through it.

And,
The initiative rules work primarily for characters: creature initiative numbers are arbitrary and unconnected to their dex, and characters act on their initiative, but combatants (probably includes some creatures, but not noncombatants) act on tied initiative. So without an initiative tie, creatures can't act in combat at all. Special movement modes are creature-only, so characters can't use a fly speed if they get one.


Also, as defined(in the monster manual, the only place which does so), a bonus feat does 3 things:
1. Allow you to ignore all pre-requisites for that feat unless stated otherwise(note it says creatures can not have the pre-requisites and still have the feat, meaning they ignore them) , in turn meaning you automatically qualify for it.
2. Let you use the feat without qualifying for it.
3. Let you have more feats than your HD would let you. (Duh)

And those rules don't just apply to how to read a monster entry, they also can apply to when you create a character. Last thing, note how in one of your quotes it says "this line gives the creatures feats." Yeah, that's every single player character. And guess what? A monster is a character since every single playable race is a monster. They're both creatures.

Also, these rules are being read extremely RAWly, and I think the designers meant to add a clause about the rogue having to qualify, but forgot to, so as it stands, they may do that. And personally, as a DM, I would outright ban this, but it's a loophole, kind of like Pun-Pun, and like the Word and the Wish(maybe you don't know these two, but they also exploit loopholes.)