Forums: Index > Watercooler > Giving Swordsages Sneak Attack

Giving swordsages the Sneak Attack of a Rogue on a round in which they don't activate any maneuvers.

Thoughts? --Ghostwheel 01:48, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

In fact, what about giving all medium-BAB classes that don't already have sneak attack the sneak attack of a rogue on rounds in which they don't activate any class abilities? --Ghostwheel 20:20, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
Oh, wow. Sneak attacking clerics of pelor.--ThirdEmperor 21:50, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
That would badly hurt the rogue, and make sneak attack boring. The swordsage, okay. Every mid bab class? No it would unbalance the game throughly, some mid bab class are fcking kickass already. As I said earlier, it would really kick originality in the balls. --Leziad 22:35, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
Why would it hurt the rogue badly? Isn't the rogue more than its sneak attack? What about its other abilities? If the only reason people take rogue is for the sneak attack... :-/
The point isn't to make wizard-level classes (cleric, druid, etc) even more powerful--and I don't think adding 5d6 to damage if they achieve flanking at level 10 is going to do so, especially since they don't usually invest in the twf-tree, can already get it (UMD + Hunter's Eye spell), etc. The point is to give medium-BAB classes who don't have much strength in combat (lurk, divine mind, etc) a semi-viable option that could be half-way decent even if all they did was get into a good position and full attacked. How would it unbalance the game? --Ghostwheel 23:30, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
Okay just give me a minute to optimize and break every medium BAB class ever.--ThirdEmperor 23:35, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
Show me a worst case scenario? (Remember, applies in a round that you're not activating any class features.) Is it worse than over 800 damage from a single attack? --Ghostwheel 23:46, November 25, 2009 (UTC)
why do medium bab builds need sneak attack? its just doin too much. scouts and ninjas no longer need their damgae dealers. why skirmish when i can go toe to toe? ninja's don't need to make opponents flat-footed any more. why the need to hand out more free damage? they have their gimmiks to play with--NameViolation 00:30, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Umm, what other abilities? Skill points? Trapfinding? Trapsesnse? Evasion? Uncanny Dodge? The improved versions of those? The random high level stuff? That's all just as easily acquired as SA with hunter's eye or ignored because you get better things from your class features, and they are also things that excite me less about playing a rogue than SA does. I like my piles of dice when I'm playing a rogue, and giving that to everyone else really feels like it steps on rogue toes. It's also a slap in the face since it's what other people do when they don't have anything else worth doing. My entire combat shtick is their backup plan, and that sucks. I don't even care if it's balanced, it dilutes uniqueness. I'm not saying that giving everyone a scaling damage thing to do as a standard action or whatever is a bad idea, it's one I've toyed with lots and one I cheer for when I see it in homebrew, but it should probably be more unique that just giving everyone SA as a backup. - TarkisFlux 00:56, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
That was one option--can you think of any others that would let characters do rogue-level damage even when their class abilities don't support it? Perhaps something else might be better, and I'm open to suggestions. --Ghostwheel 01:17, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Depending on how the stacking ends up working, Rogues might be getting 20d6 sneak attack when the other classes are getting 10d6. --Ideasmith 01:33, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
The effects on NPC classes might be a concern. It looks to me like Aristocrats and Experts might be more effective in combat than Warriors, and maybe even Fighters. --Ideasmith 01:33, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
also "not using their class abilities".. so if my druid is wildshaped into a puma or something, pouncing on them is just an attack, so all the attacks get SA. or a Fully buffed melee-cleric getting free SA, just doesn't balance to me. THat entirly takes the point of being a rogue out of the game. sure you got skills, and some stuff after 10Th thats ok, but when the rage mage casts tensfers transformation, rages and can still have SA its rediculous. also it lets clerics out do fighters in the dps department with melee. If a mid-bab class can't hold its own its either crap or you're not playing it right, and a free "gestalt" with rogue is unnecessary. --NameViolation 02:41, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
  1. It wouldn't stack with rogue SA, or any other precision-based damage.
  2. Ignore NPC classes for a moment--we don't really care about them as far as PCs go.
  3. If a druid or cleric is playing to the extent of their abilities, it's not a rogue-level question anymore. But what if a cleric's been stripped of all his buffs, and is down to his utility spells? Or if the druid's been forced out of wildshape, and something's stopping him from wildshaping again? Or he's using the shapeshift variant?
So if not sneak attack, what about instead +1d4 damage per two levels if no class abilities are activated? Or does anyone else have any other ideas? --Ghostwheel 03:14, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

These are very specific situation, and giving SA to every mid bab class WILL break the rogue-level of power anyway. The cleric can and will cast his buff, the druid will and can use wildshape. Applying the rogue's trick to everyone is a extremely risky (battle sorcerer gain full SA, make an even better gish). Make some mid bab class outright better in combat than full-bab class (not all full bab class WANT to be ubercharger). Mid bab used to be a penalty, but giving full SA to all mid bab class is making mid bab effectively better than full-bab. Did I say it utterly killing originality? --Leziad 03:31, November 26, 2009 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of giving out sneak attack to any large set of classes, even if you drop the die size, for the same reasons I gave above. I also don't understand the point of giving a large set of classes SA or other infinite use backup mechanic without taking anything away. In your cleric / druid examples, good for their opposition! They're a tough class built around a limited use, daily recharge ability set. If you've run them out or otherwise blocked off their options they're not supposed to have anything else to turn to. Aside from a general dislike of x/day mechanics, why do you even care if they don't have something less awesome than the rest of their stuff to fall back on?
That said, It's not the d6s that bother me as much as it is people encroaching on the rogue's shtick and people not otherwise paying for their new bonuses. I could totally see a cleric (or pally for that matter) who could burn a turn undead for level/2 d6 bonus damage on a single hit (because it sits unused most of the rest of the time anyway). And I could see a wizard or sorcerer with an all day standard action ranged touch bolt of energy of their choice (move action to change types or whatever), but I'd probably charge them a spell slot from each level for it. I don't know what I'd do for bards. I don't know what I'd do for druids, but I find the idea of them being out of wild shapes and spells and animal companions ludicrous anyway. I don't know what I'd do for monks besides cry. I don't do psionics so I don't know what they'd get. I'd give the swordsage something useful to do on a turn while refreshing his maneuvers instead of sitting their asking for people to hit him, that way he can get back to his shtick and not need backup abilities. - TarkisFlux 06:37, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
I can see where you're going here, but consider this, a psionic warrior is a fighter with medium BAB and psionics which is a fair trade I suppose, but now he gets SA and is four or so times as good as a fighter. You could probably do it if you said it could only be done while no other abilties feats, spells or psionics are active, but then it would be more complex than grapple. Sorry but it's a bad idea all in all.--ThirdEmperor 07:49, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
The biggest reason I posted this was because I've sometimes heard people say that classes like the swordsage are weak, and they cited the fact that the swordsage doesn't get sneak attack as a reason for this. What do you guys think? --Ghostwheel 09:24, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Like the Swordsage how?--ThirdEmperor 09:46, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
Swordsage weak? the one from Book of 9 swords aka the Broken book of overpoweredness? idk, my groups have banned that book so hard. there are like 3 feats allowed form it, and even that took all day arguing for superior unarmed strike. IF people think its weak, they aren't doing it right. plain and simple. if they know how to set up combat in their favor its rediculously powered, if they dont then they should just be a rogue and flank all day. --NameViolation 15:22, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
Never mind the obvious inadequacies and terrible naming of the previous post (and the fact SUS is a pretty lame feat anyway), Swordsages are bad not because they don't get sneak attack, that's a stupid idea. They're lackluster because they have a terrible recovery mechanic, have pretty lame disciplines except for Tiger Claw and Diamond Mind. Shadow Hand's teetering on the edge of lame/good because it's really dependent on the enemy for its strikes, because it deals quite a bit of ability damage which is bad later on in levels or even against specific opponents. Stone Dragon is a 'meh' discipline, but it's in the middle there. They just don't have enough good maneuvers to justify their terrible recovery mechanic; one for a full-round action? Dude, no. Maybe one for a move action or something like that; but a Warblade gets them all back as a swift action and the Crusader doesn't run out. Ever (Sure, his mechanic's a total gimmick, but he really shouldn't run out...). There's also the medium BAB; the swordsage is a martial character who can't martial all that way. They try to save this with Weapon Focus, but it's just not the same as busting out a Warblade with Time Stands Still. But, for some strikes; iterative attacks don't matter. But, look at Desert Wind; it's boosts are all ABOUT iterative attacks.
The Swordsage is not a bad class, it's just behind the Warblade. The Crusader's flittering around somewhere punching the earth or something... --TK-Squared 16:25, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
Hello I'm new. Awesome forum. Just found it on Google. tks for the Great community we have here :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Ad blocker interference detected!

Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.