Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11
    Senior Member blitzmacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    el paso
    Posts
    250
    Downloads
    24
    Uploads
    0
    Wanting to sneak attack should be a rogues main goal in combat. Think about it, a rogue lives a life trying to get the most from any situation from the least amount of work and the least amount of danger to themselves. That is the life of a rogue, but if they are trying to bend the rules to suit their needs then they are bad players and no longer roleplaying. The rules regarding the sneak attack are there for a reason and cover the action fairly well. If they don't then the DM takes rules, and if the player wines about it give them some cheese and drive on.
    Cattle die and kinsmen die,
    thyself too soon must die,
    but one thing never, I ween, will die, --
    fair fame of one who has earned.
    HAVAMAL

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Caercas
    Posts
    131
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Well Said Blitzmacher
    Lord Shaene Conlynd
    Regent - United Provinces of Haelyn

  3. #13
    Senior Member blitzmacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    el paso
    Posts
    250
    Downloads
    24
    Uploads
    0
    Thank you Lord Shaene
    Cattle die and kinsmen die,
    thyself too soon must die,
    but one thing never, I ween, will die, --
    fair fame of one who has earned.
    HAVAMAL

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Caercas
    Posts
    131
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    You are most welcome!
    Lord Shaene Conlynd
    Regent - United Provinces of Haelyn

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    144
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I am not disputing the actual backstab.When the target is unaware or unable to defend himself,ie "flat-footed".THAT is not the problem.The problem comes with the flanking.Rogues get that extra damage when they flank someone.Lord Shaene I specifically said that if the flankee is NOT engaged with the person who you are using to Flank,then that means his attention is not being diverted,therefore you cant hit those sweet spots.

    You have to "limit" flank attacks and backstabs because they did leave those rules kind of loose.When I said limiting them,I was meaning making a judgement call on those rules.The reason you have to is because of those pesky power gamers.For example.A rogue in our FR game,who is 8th level(multi-classed from hell and back....But mostly rogue),ALWAYS out-damages our Fighter,monk,paladin,and quire often our sorceror combined!!!!How you may ask??Cause he only atacks when he flanks,whether or not the opponent is engaged,has multiple attacks,and uses two weapons.So he makes four attacks with his bonus damage attacks on each attack.And that is going by the rules!!!The rules are not perfect.They would be if no one abused them like this,and technically a case can be made that it is the DM's fault,but before this,it was not necessarry!!!
    "Victory has a thousand fathers,defeat is an orphan."

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Your House
    Posts
    201
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    That sucks. That definately should be limited. I think that the victim should be able to become aware after the first barrage of attacks. Its naturally difficult to fight two people at once, but if both are in sight or accounted for, then it should become quite a bit easier. (Plus how many vital spots can their be?) If its a problem, consider a sneak attack a called shot, apply an initiative penalty for the concentration, and allow only the called shot for that round. I can't think of a better fix.
    Explain how this is a signature, its not my handwriting.

    The hardest part was teaching the bunnies to hug. -Duke Phillips

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    38
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    In the case of the rogue you are talking about.... don't let him flank. The bad guy can easily understand who damaged him because he hit him hard and who damaged him just because he knew where to strike. So he should turn to the rogue.
    Also present some challenges to the PCs; MAKE the rogue act on 1-vs.-1 as the rest PCs, or on a 1-6 basis, surrounded possibly by 6 nasty mid-level fighters (with Power Attack and some similar feats to deal more damage). Don't let him get away constantly ;)

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Caercas
    Posts
    131
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Ok first things first, it seems you are all talking about how to limit power gamers and abusive players, Ok my original question was about if a thief can attack twice per round with one weapon, when the thief has a legal opportunity to use his sneak attack, should he be allowed to use the sneak attack on both attacks according to the rules. you are all giving examples on how not to let a thief flank or how to penalize him or give him a challenge. my thief fights one on one all the time, but when given the oppurtunity to do a sneak attack i will and i would like to get the most benefit out of it according to the rules. you never see a wizard turn down an opportunity to use a fireball by going into melee range and fight with a dagger, or a priest takes his war hammer and fight undead without trying to turn the undead first etc. etc..
    reigan you mentioned someone being flanked and not engaged. if a fighter is fighting someone and you flank the enemy with him , he must be engaged with someone or he is not defending himself. if he chooses to fight and defend the thief then there is no chance for a sneak attack although he is then giving the fighter a better chance to hit him. but if he chooses to defend the fighter then a sneak attack exists. in real life if you were attacked by two people, wouldnt you make sure there was a wall behind you so you couldnt be flanked? but say you couldnt then the guy in back of you has a huge advantage doesnt he, especially if he is a master at attacking people from that position such as a thief who hones his skills to do massive damage in that situation. I can go on and on about how other classes have just as big of an advantage when the situation is right. so don't try and downgrade a thiefs ability, if he is smart and crafty enough to make the situation in his favor and deal out big damage that is his reward. if the thief is getting a sneak attack on every attack it seems its the Dm who is screwing up not the thief he's just doing what comes natural.
    Lord Shaene Conlynd
    Regent - United Provinces of Haelyn

  9. #19
    Senior Member blitzmacher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    el paso
    Posts
    250
    Downloads
    24
    Uploads
    0
    Well said Lord Shaene
    Cattle die and kinsmen die,
    thyself too soon must die,
    but one thing never, I ween, will die, --
    fair fame of one who has earned.
    HAVAMAL

  10. #20
    Senior Member Lawgiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Murray, KY
    Posts
    1,054
    Downloads
    9
    Uploads
    0
    I have already stated that both attacks should be given the benefit of sneak attack if they occur in the same round. I fully agree with you that a theif's ability should not normally be limited. I'm all for a theif taking full advantage of his abilities, just not abusing them. Just as any DM and player group would be extremely frustrated if all a wizard did was cast fireball or some other specific spell in everysingle combat situation. It gets frustrating when every combat sequence degrades to mindless dice rolls and a fixed series of actions. "Orcs! Oh look a fireball... FAAAWOOOP!!! Oh well! Maybe we'll get to fight something next time."
    Servant of the Most High,
    Lawgiver

    Isaiah 1:17
    Learn to do good; Seek justice, Rebuke the oppressor; Defend the fatherless, Plead for the widow.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.