Results 21 to 30 of 32
Thread: Question about sneak attack
-
01-16-2002, 01:53 AM #21
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- United Provinces of Ceril
- Posts
- 1,028
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Orginally posted by Lord Shaene
as for you Lord Eldred, shame on you, a debate expert yourself and you make a decision before you hear all the arguments, I should have you barred as a judge since you make decisions before the debate is over. .Lord Eldred
High Councilor of the
United Provinces of Cerilia
"May Haelyn bring justice to your realm"
-
01-16-2002, 01:59 AM #22
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- United Provinces of Ceril
- Posts
- 1,028
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Orginally posted by dmferry
In the Phb (3rd) page 47 states "if an rogue can catch a opponent when he unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can attack a vital spot for extra damage" it goes on that the victim must be denied his dex bonus and while the rogue has the advantage and the victim is flat-footed for the whole time the rogue attacks even when the rogue gets 2 or 3 attacks. They are all sneak attacks and do extra damage.
When the victims can act he is no longer flat-footed. Thats why all rogues should have Improved Init and a decent Dex. Murder machines :0
dmferry
sorry if I broke © rights :(
As far as copyright laws are concerned, I think we have permission to quotes stuff as long as we are not trying to make a profit off the quote. So I won't pay you the five dollars you requested ;)Lord Eldred
High Councilor of the
United Provinces of Cerilia
"May Haelyn bring justice to your realm"
-
01-16-2002, 02:04 AM #23
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- United Provinces of Ceril
- Posts
- 1,028
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Orginally posted by Lawgiver
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."
Lord Eldred
High Councilor of the
United Provinces of Cerilia
"May Haelyn bring justice to your realm"
-
01-16-2002, 04:56 AM #24
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 144
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Lord Shaene,you are missing the point behind the example I was setting forth with the flanking example.When I said the opponent is not engaged in combat with your party member,and he can focus on you,why should you get a flanking bonus at all??The whole thing is they leave the rules loose for ease of play,but they did not take into account all the factors.
I have always agreed that one should take full advantage of your abilities.But there comes a time when it gets ridiculous."Victory has a thousand fathers,defeat is an orphan."
-
01-16-2002, 05:17 AM #25
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 144
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
You know I just thought of something........Why do they have flanking rules at all???There is no facing in 3rd Edition D&D.I can remember only ONE instance where there is truly anything that resembles facing,and that is using a tower shield.So if the point of the bonuses to flanking someone has to come from them having their attention diverted correct??If the flankee is not engaed in combat with one flanker,means his attention is not averted,therefore no bonus.
Now what I just did was what every power-gamer does...finds something in the rules and exploits it.I looked at the rules and as a DM made a call for in my game.
Lord Shaene if you run your games where the rules are used as is,all power to you.That means you don't have someone in your gaming group who just constatnty rapes the rules.I unfortunately cannot."Victory has a thousand fathers,defeat is an orphan."
-
01-16-2002, 05:20 AM #26
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Posts
- 144
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Let me appologise to you Lord Shaene if I seem to be too defensive.I hate to type and sometimes it seems hard to get your point across when you try to do it in as few words as possible,cause I hate to type!!!:)I am not trying to be bumholish,just trying to make my point at the same time trying to see yours.
Thank you very much!!!"Victory has a thousand fathers,defeat is an orphan."
-
01-18-2002, 12:59 PM #27
You appologise Lord Swordwraith? Such etiquette, a pleasure to see.:)
-
01-18-2002, 01:10 PM #28
Lord Shaene, as for the original question...
We follow the book rule on this and allow each attack to be a sneak attack. At first it seemed kinda grey area, thinking that the defender became aware after the first attack. But consider how much time passes before the rogues additional attack(s) happen in the same round. Certainly not enought time to react. The following round however, any creature with basic survival instincts will act on the biggest threat, and being sneak attacked more than qualifies. This is how our game works anyway. Obviously this is not rule quoting.
But like I said, in our games, if a rogue sneak attacks he will generally become a target the next round. Our DM has a nasty crit die, and this has ended a few rogues.
-
01-18-2002, 02:57 PM #29
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Holland
- Posts
- 38
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Thank you Lord Eldred forget about the 5 dollars (ehh euro)
Riegan Swordwraith I agree that a sneaky thief who sneak attacks every monster it sees is very annoying. Every body had or has players like this and every DM has his own solutions.
The usual quotes :
Face
How wide a face a combatant presents in combat. Face is essentially the border between the square or rectangular space that a combatant occupies and the space next to it. These faces are abstract, not "front, back, left, and right," because combatants are constantly moving and turning in battle. Unless a combatant is immobile, it practically doesn't have a front or a left side—at least not one that can be identified on the tabletop.
Flanking
If a combatant is making a melee attack against an opponent, and an ally directly opposite the combatant is threatening the opponent, the combatant and the combatant's ally flank the opponent. A combatant gains a +2 flanking bonus on the attack roll. A rogue in this position can also sneak attack the target. The ally must be on the other side of the opponent, so that the opponent is directly between the combatant and the ally.
My solution : Use the same tactic / rules against him. If a rogue has 2 weapons (and all feats) and attacks with 2 weapons he gets lots of penalties and even more when he attacks with 4 attacks (2 weapons, 2 hands, lots of levels).
That means he is a high level and the opponents are even bigger and nastier than him.
1) To attack he must stand close enough and 2 or more attacks are a full action he can't get away. Hit him with every attack the nasty NPC/monster has. This will reduce his hitpoints. Keep up this attack and ignore the simple fighter attacks. He however flanks the NPC so you must kill him quick
2) If he waits in the shadow make a rogue who has atleast 3 or 4 levels of rogue more than him (look up sneak attack under rogue section). And sneak attack him then have a henchman flank him and bye bye thief. Maybe he is hiding in the shadow and the NPC thief hides beside him to attack the party.
3) Don't allow ranged attacks because the flanking rule doesn't applie to ranged weapons
4) Check his attacks. 2 weapons with 2 hands is no automatic 4 attacks. He has to have quite a few levels to make all 4 attacks count.
What I mean to say that you can beat this killer thief with the same rules that made the killer thief.
~dmferry
Rules from http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/srd.html
and I don't want money.
-
01-18-2002, 03:01 PM #30
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Holland
- Posts
- 38
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
okay I want money but not for the quotes :0
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks