is this to big a disadvantage

[awa]

Okay i'm working on a homebrew campaign world it's based off iron heroes but iron heroes functions a lot like 3.5 in many ways. The thing i'm considering right now is reducing sneak attack damage to d4s for small creatures.

Small creatures already have the advantage of reduced food and water requirements(which is relevant to the campaign) a bonus to hide and hit and defense.

While designing the size small race i want to consider being size small a weakness and the reduced weapon damage from size small didn't seem enough.
Will this reduction in damage be crippling or not that big a deal
edit
also their are no meaningful casters so that's not a problem.

[SurlySeraph]

I would say this is a pretty big disadvantage, since small races are mainly good for sneaking and casting and you've pretty much removed casting. Small creatures have a hard time doing as much damage as larger creatures; Sneak Attack is the easiest way around that. You should allow it.

[Krazddndfreek]

It would be fairly crippling to small rogues, if it is similar to 3.5 as you say. The fistfuls of d6s you get from sneak attacks don't actually add up to much. 10d6 is 35 on average. That would be a 19th level character when his wizard buddy over there can instant death him in a number of different ways. Reducing it to d4s would reduce the average sneak attack damage of a 19th level rogue to a measly 25 bonus per attack. The benefits of size don't really scale. And when you just have a bag of holding to carry all of your gear, their weight doesn't really matter either. The cost of such gear was paltry to begin with, as you know. So, again, reducing sneak attack damage to d4s would be very crippling for small characters.

I probably got ninja'd by this time but it was fun writing.

EDIT: I just realized that a caster isn't a viable comparison, but even other melee combatants with a high strength score and decent magic items will be able to thoroughly outdo a rogue with 1d4 sneak attack damage.

[awa]

the games not going to get past level 10 and their are no magic items would that change the equation a great deal

[Mongoose87]

It doesn't really make sense. Sneak attack damage comes from hitting vital spots, not from the size of your blade.

[Tyndmyr]

Doesn't make sense either roleplaywise or mechanically.

It'd be easier to say "Rogues, you can't play small races".

[awa]

the idea was that small races would take this penalty representing that even if you stick a knife in a vital part a smaller knife would do less damage in exchange for other bonuses.

[Tanaric]

+1 to hit and +1 size AC do not compensate for lower damage dice across the board. It really would be easier to just say that they can't play a small race if you don't want them doing as much damage.

Also, if somebody stabs your lung with a 6 inch knife vs. an 8 inch knife, it's going to do considerably less precision damage why?

[jmbrown]

the idea was that small races would take this penalty representing that even if you stick a knife in a vital part a smaller knife would do less damage in exchange for other bonuses.

A knife is a knife. Sneak attack represents where you hit more than the power of the hit. A razor blade across your neck will do the same damage as a dagger across it. Small sized is disadvantageous enough with their slow speed, massive penalties to grapple, and equipment they have to pay to get resized.

[The Glyphstone]

That's represented by the fact that their weapons already do smaller base damage. It's really an unnecessary and unfair nerf to Small-sized rogues - compared to a Medium character, a Small character has
1)Smaller weapon dice
2)Likely a lower strength score
Both penalizing their melee damage. Thus, the only Small characters who can pull their weight in melee are the ones getting bonus damage from non-Strength based sources, such as Sneak Attack.

If you're fixed on doing this, none of us can stop you, but it really is overkill.

Out of curiosity, does this mean a Large rogue would do d8's for sneak attack damage?

[Kallisti]

the idea was that small races would take this penalty representing that even if you stick a knife in a vital part a smaller knife would do less damage in exchange for other bonuses.

Yes, and this is reflected in the recuced damage from the weapon itself, which will be down a die size for small. Sneak attack, on the other hand, should remain a d6 even for smaller or larger creatures. Otherwise being Small hurts a lot, and being larger would somehow make your attacks more precise, accurate, and carefully aimed. So every Large or larger creature would benefit disproportionately from rogue levels. And you'll get a whole party of half-giant Psychic Warrior/Rogues. Letting sneak attack dice scale with size is probably not a good idea.

[awa]

You're convince on the grounds of flavor.
all the races were home brewed and the one size small races was ending up with two many abbilities so i considered weakening by this method but you've convinced me that percison damage probably should remain unaffected by size

edit
all custom races and classes and no magic means size large rouges will never be an issue

[jmbrown]

You're convince on the grounds of flavor.
all the races were home brewed and the one size small races was ending up with two many abbilities so i considered weakening by this method but you've convinced me that percison damage probably should remain unaffected by size

A suggestion: fix what's broken I.E. the race with too many abilities :smallwink:

[Tyndmyr]

Yeah, if it scales in both directions, that allows some ridiculous stuff. Really, really huge rogues with the ability to obliterate someone. Tiny, incredibly sneaky rogues that can't do a damn thing.

It completely breaks the entire rogue playstyle.


Yeah, if one race is broken, fix the race. Don't change the entire game around it.

[Myrmex]

A knife is a knife. Sneak attack represents where you hit more than the power of the hit. A razor blade across your neck will do the same damage as a dagger across it. Small sized is disadvantageous enough with their slow speed, massive penalties to grapple, and equipment they have to pay to get resized.

A girl was stabbed recently by her ex-boyfriend 48 times all over her body, including her throat. The first stab was in the throat, actually. The stabbing was done with a pocket knife, a 2.5 inch blade. The fact that the blade was so small, despite being stabbed in the throat is probably why she isn't dead.

[edit]
You know there's a "if you can't reach it, you can't sneak attack it clause" in sneak attack? You could rule for certain monsters, the rogue's weapon is too small to penetrate to get a vital spot.

[Vizzerdrix]

A girl was stabbed recently by her ex-boyfriend 48 times all over her body, including her throat. The first stab was in the throat, actually. The stabbing was done with a pocket knife, a 2.5 inch blade. The fact that the blade was so small, despite being stabbed in the throat is probably why she isn't dead.

[edit]
You know there's a "if you can't reach it, you can't sneak attack it clause" in sneak attack? You could rule for certain monsters, the rogue's weapon is too small to penetrate to get a vital spot.

So obviously he lacked sneak attack.

[Dixieboy]

So obviously he lacked sneak attack.

I am now officially very, very uncomfortable.

[Boci]

You know there's a "if you can't reach it, you can't sneak attack it clause" in sneak attack? You could rule for certain monsters, the rogue's weapon is too small to penetrate to get a vital spot.

|How do you come up with concrete ruling for that? At what point do opponents become too big for my dagger wielding halfling rogue to SA? Wjat about my shortsword wielding human rogue?

[ericgrau]

Taking away the equivalent of 3d6 to damage at level 20 outweighs the +1 to hit and AC, as a 1d6 weapon enchantment and a +1 to hit and damage are the same cost. Bonuses to skills are already countered by lower speed when sneaking/tumbling. Etc. So without caster classes, do you just not want people to play small races?

Btw, when doing this much homebrewing, be prepared to be in for a world of balance hurt. Check every monster for CR adjustments unless you stick with humanoids, offense/defence imbalance due to magic gear changes, etc. But if you can plan a lot, good luck to you.

And being backstabbed usually hurts. Anecdotal stories are typically exceptions not the rule, and disturbing.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

A fan of Crocodile Dundee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01NHcTM5IA4) I take it?

[PhoenixRivers]

No need to nerf the dice. Just follow the rule: "You can't sneak attack a creature if you can't reach its vitals".

So no melee rogues sneak attacking a mounted knight without a serious jump check.

A foot soldier? That's fine, though.

[PinkysBrain]

While designing the size small race i want to consider being size small a weakness
Why would any player want to adventure with someone who has a scaling penalty to his abilities for being small? A couple of contextual downsides to being small are fun ... being unable to handle CR appropriate encounters entirely is no longer fun.

[Boci]

No need to nerf the dice. Just follow the rule: "You can't sneak attack a creature if you can't reach its vitals".

So at what size catogory can I no longer SA opponents with a dagger? What if I switch to a shordsword?


So no melee rogues sneak attacking a mounted knight without a serious jump check.

What if I said that my rogue stabbed the knight's leg artery through a gap in his armour?

[Dallas-Dakota]

Or just kill the mount.

Which would cripple a knight who's fighting style is based on being mounted....

[PhoenixRivers]

So at what size catogory can I no longer SA opponents with a dagger? What if I switch to a shordsword?
Simple to find out: If your character's vertical reach can't reach a torso, you can't reach a vital.


What if I said that my rogue stabbed the knight's leg artery through a gap in his armour?

Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal. You can take a buzz saw, and physically chop the thing off, and with basic first aid, they'll live.

You stab someone in a lung, a heart, or the neck, and severely damage those? They're dead, without highly specialized immediate care. That's why vitals are called vitals, and extremities are called extremities.

[Boci]

Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal.

If the artery in your leg is cut whilst you are in battle, you are going to bleed to death pretty quickly. Wounds to the leg can be fatal. Hence the reasoning:


Simple to find out: If your character's vertical reach can't reach a torso, you can't reach a vital.

Is a bit problematic. Even if we assume leg wounds never are fatal* there are still many questions, such as can I sneak attack a collosal snake?

* Evidence for my claim that it can be:

The femur is the long bone between your hip and knee. Alongside your femur, lies the femoral artery. The femoral is one of the largest arteries in your body and cutting it can result in bleeding to death very rapidly. For this reason, proper attention to femur fractures is extremely important. Fortunately, the femur is a serious chunk of bone so it takes a lot of force to fracture it.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:k14VcX8G9JwJ:www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi%3FID%3D66+femoral+bleed+to+death+a rtery&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

and


The femoral artery is a main artery in the body that runs from the external iliac artery, near the stomach, all the way down both legs. It carries oxygen, among many other things, to the lower half of the body. Vital to the vascular survival of a person, if cut, an average person will typically bleed to death within 10 or 15 minutes without immediate medical intervention. Whenever the femoral artery is injured, it becomes a life and death situation instantaneously. The same actually holds true for all arteries, because they carry much of the body's blood supply.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:k14VcX8G9JwJ:www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi%3FID%3D66+femoral+bleed+to+death+a rtery&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Anyway, real world biology aside, is nerfing coming up with a houserule to deny the rogue their SA in even more situations really that good an idea?

[oxybe]

Anyway, real world biology aside, is nerfing coming up with a houserule to deny the rogue their SA in even more situations really that good an idea?

yes.

because he's a melee character and kord knows that being ineffective against undead, constructs, oozes, plants, incorporeal creatures and things immune to crits is not enough, that the small rogue should also be useless against things that are on the tall end of large, huge, and even bigger.

silly melee guys wanting to be effective in combat. this is a game made by wizards of course...

[Foryn Gilnith]

silly melee guys wanting to be effective in combat. this is a game made by wizards of course...


also their are no meaningful casters so that's not a problem.


Obnoxious casterfap is obnoxious.

[Blackfang108]

So obviously he lacked sneak attack.

I'm SO ending up in the abyss for laughing at this...

OTOH, I'm surprised she came through. Glad, but surprised.

The size of the blade is NOT an issue in this case. take your fingers. Place them on your neck to the side of your trachea, and feel around for your pulse.

That is either your Carotid(sp?) artery or your Jugular Vein, depending on which side of the neck you are on. It's a lot less than 2.5 inches to one of those from your skin. If either of those gets flayed open, you're screwed.

In the legs: take a paper cup and fill it with water. now remove the bottom of the cup. See what happens to the water? That's the effect of cutting the femoral artery, Phoenix. Sure, you CAN survive having your leg chopped off, but only if you cut off the artery as soon as possible.

The Arm Artery (can't think of the name offhand) has the same effect.

You don't need to hit thee torso, just the thigh or the groin.

[Ormagoden]

I can kill a man with the sharp edge on the lid of a can of cat food.
I don't see why a halfling couldn't do it with a 4 inch dagger.

The only way I'd take a hit to my SA damage like that is with adequate compensation...say something along the lines of being able to sneak attack everything with a discernible anatomy (undead and constructs) and a bonus to hit on sneak attacks equal to the number of my sneak attack dice.

[Project_Mayhem]

Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal. You can take a buzz saw, and physically chop the thing off, and with basic first aid, they'll live.


English Archers used to use a bollock knife, for groin/thigh stabbity on armoured combatants. You take a stab wound to the inner thigh in combat, you probly gon' die.

[Boci]

To the OP: I know you've gone against your initial idea of weakening SA, but I was thinking if you really wanted to make melee favorable for medium rogues you could use the RotW halfling rogue variant to give small rogues +1d6 SA for ranged attacks and -1d6 for melee. Personally I think this is should be an option for all rogues, but you could make it an actual rule.

[Optimystik]

Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal. You can take a buzz saw, and physically chop the thing off, and with basic first aid, they'll live.

How tall is a Small creature? 3 feet? That's certainly high enough to reach a kidney, or iliac artery, or intestines, or gonads. Heart and brain are not the only vital spots.

And what about ranged weapons? You can hit any organ with those. Would the SA dice increase to 6 if the mini-rogue is shooting?

[Tyndmyr]

Agreed. A dagger to the crotch definitely qualifies as a critical hit.

[Kurald Galain]

The thing i'm considering right now is reducing sneak attack damage to d4s for small creatures.
Sorry to pile up here, but that would be too big a disadvantage.


Small creatures already have the advantage of reduced food and water requirements(which is relevant to the campaign) a bonus to hide and hit and defense.
They also have the disadvantage of not being able to carry as much food and water. The (very minor) bonuses to hit and defense are balanced out by the lower movement rate and penalty to e.g. grappling.


Will this reduction in damage be crippling or not that big a deal
This will most likely mean your players won't play a small rogue. If that is your intent, it is better to simply state "small characters may not be rogues". If that is not your intent, then you should probably try something else.

[Tavar]

How tall is a Small creature? 3 feet? That's certainly high enough to reach a kidney, or iliac artery, or intestines, or gonads. Heart and brain are not the only vital spots.
I think his post was that while attacking medium or larger mounted characters, small creatures on foot couldn't get sneak attack, as they couldn't reach vitals, which makes sense.


Really, in a game like that, you probably wouldn't get small characters, period. They can't be rogue, melee, or casters(due to the lack of casters). That seems like it covers everything.

[Fhaolan]

Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal. You can take a buzz saw, and physically chop the thing off, and with basic first aid, they'll live.

Woah, no dude. Femoral artery. Very dangerous. It's possible to get lucky and live for a few minutes without medical attention, but basic first aid won't cover it. Advanced first aid, with cautorizing irons and tourniques, can do wonders, but most knights on horseback don't have that kind of resources at hand.

[ashmanonar]

Simple to find out: If your character's vertical reach can't reach a torso, you can't reach a vital.



Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal. You can take a buzz saw, and physically chop the thing off, and with basic first aid, they'll live.

You stab someone in a lung, a heart, or the neck, and severely damage those? They're dead, without highly specialized immediate care. That's why vitals are called vitals, and extremities are called extremities.

Vitals and extremities are both outdated terms. The head is technically an "extremity", yet it's more vital than anything else.

An artery cut anywhere on the body is a fatal wound, unless immediate emergency surgery is begun. Which ain't happening on a dirty, active battlefield.

[ashmanonar]

Agreed. A dagger to the crotch definitely qualifies as a critical hit.

I felt a great disturbance in my vitals, as if millions of men suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

[Lamech]

Hmm... scaling SA for size seems a bad idea. Also hydra polymorph on a rogue.

[Person_Man]

Iron Heroes already introduces an elaborate set of houserules and adds an entirely new set of classes (Archer, Armiger, Berserker, Executioner, Harrier, Hunter, Man-at-Arms, Thief, Weaponmaster, Arcanist, Dedicate, Myrmidon, Spiritualist) which are pretty balanced. Are you using these classes, or are you using standard 3.5 classes in an Iron Heroes world?

[awa]

im making custom classes using the iron hero classes as a template.

Their is only one sentient size small race in the campaign world who have other abilities that make them the best sneaky race.

The only magic using class has no real ability to cast in combat. so no fear of hydra rouges, also no magic items.

i might include a no sneak attack if you cant reach something vital for creatures of size gargantuan or bigger but other wise i don't think ill worry about it because even a creature 4 feet tall has arms that let them reach another foot or so at least.

I already allow sneak attacks vrs undead and constructs albeit at a penalty

[Myrmex]

How tall is a Small creature? 3 feet? That's certainly high enough to reach a kidney, or iliac artery, or intestines, or gonads. Heart and brain are not the only vital spots.

On a human, sure, but what about an ogre or a great wyrm?


And what about ranged weapons? You can hit any organ with those. Would the SA dice increase to 6 if the mini-rogue is shooting?

That's not the rule, the RAW states:


Sneak Attack

If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.

The rogue’s attack deals extra damage any time her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and it increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied.

Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.

With a sap (blackjack) or an unarmed strike, a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual -4 penalty.

A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks. The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach.


Hmm... scaling SA for size seems a bad idea. Also hydra polymorph on a rogue.

RTFT.

[Optimystik]

On a human, sure, but what about an ogre or a great wyrm?

Unless they're undead or something, they have arteries too. "Whose vitals are beyond reach" refers to stabbing tentacles or other constructions without major blood supply.

The issue here is - is an artery a "vital" - basic medicine says yes.

And as long as the rogue is withing 30 feet, no vital spot is "beyond reach" of an arrow.

[taltamir]

Vitals and extremities are both outdated terms. The head is technically an "extremity", yet it's more vital than anything else.

An artery cut anywhere on the body is a fatal wound, unless immediate emergency surgery is begun. Which ain't happening on a dirty, active battlefield.

the lines before and after the bolded part of the quote clearly says that there is basic care... being, basic "first aid" can allow you to live...

And it is true.
Cut an artery (or heck, the whole foot off), and if you staunch the blood flow (say, with a belt) and sterilize the spot (with alcohol) to prevent infection, and you live.

[awa]

unless you go into shock and die from that

[Solaris]

A girl was stabbed recently by her ex-boyfriend 48 times all over her body, including her throat. The first stab was in the throat, actually. The stabbing was done with a pocket knife, a 2.5 inch blade. The fact that the blade was so small, despite being stabbed in the throat is probably why she isn't dead.

[edit]
You know there's a "if you can't reach it, you can't sneak attack it clause" in sneak attack? You could rule for certain monsters, the rogue's weapon is too small to penetrate to get a vital spot.

Yes, which makes for a good argument about not allowing sneak attack damage with a 2.5-inch blade. A Small-scaled dagger would likely be around six inches, not two and a half. That pocket knife doesn't even qualify as a utility blade, much less a weapon.


|How do you come up with concrete ruling for that? At what point do opponents become too big for my dagger wielding halfling rogue to SA? Wjat about my shortsword wielding human rogue?

You don't. If you want all concrete rulings, play a computer game. D&D is played with a DM for a reason.


Simple to find out: If your character's vertical reach can't reach a torso, you can't reach a vital.

Nonsense and blasphemy, we can't have people actually thinking about their play.


Irrelevant. With a modicum of medical care, No wound to the legs or arms is fatal. You can take a buzz saw, and physically chop the thing off, and with basic first aid, they'll live.

You stab someone in a lung, a heart, or the neck, and severely damage those? They're dead, without highly specialized immediate care. That's why vitals are called vitals, and extremities are called extremities.

Ideally, yes. Ideally, ignoring shock, someone will live if they have all their limbs blown off. In practice, with basic trained first aid the survival rate for a combat casualty* is something like seventy-five percent if they're treated within the first six minutes (you have about ten to fifteen minutes before you bleed out on just about every artery in your body, to the possible exclusion of the carotid and the definite exclusion of the aorta). Basic first aid is sixty percent rate, and it declines dramatically from there.
*: Medics, feel free to correct me - I'm going with some year-old data here.


I'm SO ending up in the abyss for laughing at this...

OTOH, I'm surprised she came through. Glad, but surprised.

The size of the blade is NOT an issue in this case. take your fingers. Place them on your neck to the side of your trachea, and feel around for your pulse.

That is either your Carotid(sp?) artery or your Jugular Vein, depending on which side of the neck you are on. It's a lot less than 2.5 inches to one of those from your skin. If either of those gets flayed open, you're screwed.

In the legs: take a paper cup and fill it with water. now remove the bottom of the cup. See what happens to the water? That's the effect of cutting the femoral artery, Phoenix. Sure, you CAN survive having your leg chopped off, but only if you cut off the artery as soon as possible.

The Arm Artery (can't think of the name offhand) has the same effect.

You don't need to hit the torso, just the thigh or the groin.

I can't imagine ol' Penknife Steve there managed to nick either of those vessels. I'm pretty sure he caught her in the trachea (I'd put money on someone surviving a cut that shallow and small if they were treated soon enough and didn't go into shock), or probably the muscle around them. Don't forget, this gal probably received treatment very rapidly.

Radial artery, and use a cup about two-thirds the size. Still not a good one to get whacked in. You're exaggerating for dramatic effect, but the point remains the same. After all, I've had buddies who lost their legs get treated some three-five minutes after the explosion and they've pulled through just fine (even if Smoke did die about three times).


Woah, no dude. Femoral artery. Very dangerous. It's possible to get lucky and live for a few minutes without medical attention, but basic first aid won't cover it. Advanced first aid, with cautorizing irons and tourniques, can do wonders, but most knights on horseback don't have that kind of resources at hand.

If you ever cauterize a wound, I will track you down and beat you. Tourniquet, good. Cauterize, bad. It barely helps, forms a clot that's really easy to break, and all that tissue you just scorched up will delay the healing process even longer. I know they teach that in old-fashioned first aid classes, but that's wrong.


unless you go into shock and die from that

Holy crap, someone who actually knows what they're talking about. Yes. As it turns out, humans are not simple machines. One of my buddies almost died simply from getting a finger blown off. Sounds crazy, right? I mean, there aren't any major arteries in the finger. You don't even really need a tourniquet if the wound's neat enough. He credits his NCO with keeping him focused enough to not go under. Without shock, you could probably survive ridiculous injuries.
(Naturally, I'm differentiating hypovolemic shock from the "Oh crap that hurts!" shock. You'll go into hypovolemic shock if you lose too much blood, end of story. Your mindset determines the "Oh crap that hurts" results. You'll have to pardon my not using the technical term - I'm more proficient at taking people apart than I am at putting them back together.)

[Blackfang108]

I can't imagine ol' Penknife Steve there managed to nick either of those vessels. I'm pretty sure he caught her in the trachea (I'd put money on someone surviving a cut that shallow and small if they were treated soon enough and didn't go into shock), or probably the muscle around them. Don't forget, this gal probably received treatment very rapidly.

Radial artery, and use a cup about two-thirds the size. Still not a good one to get whacked in. You're exaggerating for dramatic effect, but the point remains the same. After all, I've had buddies who lost their legs get treated some three-five minutes after the explosion and they've pulled through just fine (even if Smoke did die about three times).

Regarding PKS, Yeah, I figured the same. I was merely pointing out that they aren't that far under the skin. Again, PKS did not have Sneak Attack.

Thanks, that was bugging me. (and, I know. I just like the anaology.:smallbiggrin:)

Ooh, Man.:smalleek: Poor Smoke.:smallfrown: I'm glad your buddy pulled through.

[Boci]

You don't. If you want all concrete rulings, play a computer game. D&D is played with a DM for a reason.

WTF? My two options are play a class who's main ability can be taken away by the DM at whim or play a computer game? No middle ground? Oh well, Prince of Persia is a decent game...

[Volkov]

It would be fairly crippling to small rogues, if it is similar to 3.5 as you say. The fistfuls of d6s you get from sneak attacks don't actually add up to much. 10d6 is 35 on average. That would be a 19th level character when his wizard buddy over there can instant death him in a number of different ways. Reducing it to d4s would reduce the average sneak attack damage of a 19th level rogue to a measly 25 bonus per attack. The benefits of size don't really scale. And when you just have a bag of holding to carry all of your gear, their weight doesn't really matter either. The cost of such gear was paltry to begin with, as you know. So, again, reducing sneak attack damage to d4s would be very crippling for small characters.

I probably got ninja'd by this time but it was fun writing.

EDIT: I just realized that a caster isn't a viable comparison, but even other melee combatants with a high strength score and decent magic items will be able to thoroughly outdo a rogue with 1d4 sneak attack damage.

Yes but doing a full attack and pulling off three or four will hurt like hell. For the D6's any way.

[Zincorium]

Alright, two real questions here:

Is sneak attacking more realistic when smaller characters sneak attack for less?

I would say definitely not. If the issue is that the smaller character cannot hit vital points, then it's no sneak attack damage at all, not D4s instead of D6s. And if the small character can't hit vital points- does that mean they don't get criticals? Only deal half (or less) damage on melee attacks because they can only hit the lower extremities? The logic is the same and it applies to all classes.

Does it improve game balance?

Why would it? A small rogue does less damage than a medium rogue, and in exchange hits a little more often. Same as any other melee character. Sneak attack doesn't change the character's tradeoff. If the custom race isn't balanced when they can use sneak attack as a rogue, then what are they balanced as?

[Solaris]

WTF? My two options are play a class who's main ability can be taken away by the DM at whim or play a computer game? No middle ground? Oh well, Prince of Persia is a decent game...

You're already playing a game where the sneak attack can be taken away by the DM at whim. Undead, constructs, and critters with concealment. This is just an elucidation of something already in the rules and, perhaps, your first encounter with the fact that D&D is and was a game designed to be run with a DM who, from time to time, makes rulings rather than just reading the rules from the books. That's why the DM has to be a guy with some good sense in his head, 'cause otherwise he will pull what you're automatically assuming he would do.

FNGs, man. FNGs.


Alright, two real questions here:

Is sneak attacking more realistic when smaller characters sneak attack for less?

I would say definitely not. If the issue is that the smaller character cannot hit vital points, then it's no sneak attack damage at all, not D4s instead of D6s. And if the small character can't hit vital points- does that mean they don't get criticals? Only deal half (or less) damage on melee attacks because they can only hit the lower extremities? The logic is the same and it applies to all classes.

Does it improve game balance?

Why would it? A small rogue does less damage than a medium rogue, and in exchange hits a little more often. Same as any other melee character. Sneak attack doesn't change the character's tradeoff. If the custom race isn't balanced when they can use sneak attack as a rogue, then what are they balanced as?

I think Zinc just summed it all up quite nicely.

[Knaight]

If you ever cauterize a wound, I will track you down and beat you. Tourniquet, good. Cauterize, bad. It barely helps, forms a clot that's really easy to break, and all that tissue you just scorched up will delay the healing process even longer. I know they teach that in old-fashioned first aid classes, but that's wrong.

Quick clarification: Tourniquets are good when there is real risk of bleeding to death or similar. They are not a general use technique for every nick, scratch, and minor cut you get on a limb. There are an absurd amount of cases where people lost a limb because of a tourniquet, for some minor injury. Tourniquet happy idiots.

[Solaris]

Quick clarification: Tourniquets are good when there is real risk of bleeding to death or similar. They are not a general use technique for every nick, scratch, and minor cut you get on a limb. There are an absurd amount of cases where people lost a limb because of a tourniquet, for some minor injury. Tourniquet happy idiots.

Yes, of course. o_o

[Boci]

You're already playing a game where the sneak attack can be taken away by the DM at whim. Undead, constructs, and critters with concealment. This is just an elucidation of something already in the rules and, perhaps, your first encounter with the fact that D&D is and was a game designed to be run with a DM who, from time to time, makes rulings rather than just reading the rules from the books. That's why the DM has to be a guy with some good sense in his head, 'cause otherwise he will pull what you're automatically assuming he would do.

Currently, SA cannot be taken away by the DM at whim. There is concrete ruling on whether it applies or not. Is the opponent undead/ a costruct ect? If yes, then you cannot SA, if no then you can. Pretty clear. If the DM introduces a new rules reguarding SA, I want the new rules to be just as clear.

I have nothing wrong with a DM using rule 0. I have a problem with a DM using rule zero in a way that denies my character their SA and does little else.


FNGs, man. FNGs.

Huh, what does that mean? ****ing new guy according to google.

[Optimystik]

Huh, what does that mean? ****ing new guy according to google.

Fixed Number Generator? :smallconfused:


I think Zinc just summed it all up quite nicely.

I concur. This change is pointless.

[Vizzerdrix]

reminds me of when one of my old dms wanted to make small characters weaker casters on the ground of "bigger casters means bigger fireballs". Ooh boy did he end up regretting that one :smallwink:

[Fhaolan]

If you ever cauterize a wound, I will track you down and beat you. Tourniquet, good. Cauterize, bad. It barely helps, forms a clot that's really easy to break, and all that tissue you just scorched up will delay the healing process even longer. I know they teach that in old-fashioned first aid classes, but that's wrong.

Sorry. My first aid training is forty years out of date. Even then when I talk about first-aid on these specific boards I tend to gear towards 'period' first aid that would have been common then. I should put a disclaimer in my sig.

[Sir_Elderberry]

reminds me of when one of my old dms wanted to make small characters weaker casters on the ground of "bigger casters means bigger fireballs". Ooh boy did he end up regretting that one :smallwink:

Dragons need a buff.

[Solaris]

Currently, SA cannot be taken away by the DM at whim. There is concrete ruling on whether it applies or not. Is the opponent undead/ a costruct ect? If yes, then you cannot SA, if no then you can. Pretty clear. If the DM introduces a new rules reguarding SA, I want the new rules to be just as clear.

I have nothing wrong with a DM using rule 0. I have a problem with a DM using rule zero in a way that denies my character their SA and does little else.

Yes, but him saying "You can't sneak attack unless you can reach its vitals" is reasonable - under a DM with a brain - and really shouldn't require complete and total elucidation. That, I think, was a bad idea that got worked into the game.


Huh, what does that mean? ****ing new guy according to google.

Yep. Don't take it personally - it's a military equivalent of "newbies".


Sorry. My first aid training is forty years out of date. Even then when I talk about first-aid on these specific boards I tend to gear towards 'period' first aid that would have been common then. I should put a disclaimer in my sig.

Ah, that explains it. No biggie.

[Boci]

Yes, but him saying "You can't sneak attack unless you can reach its vitals" is reasonable - under a DM with a brain - and really shouldn't require complete and total elucidation. That, I think, was a bad idea that got worked into the game.

"You cannot SA undead" is concrete. Its either undead or not.
"You can't sneak attack unless you can reach its vitals" is not so much. For example, PhoenixRivers would classify a mounted knight as out of reach, whilst I would disagree.

[Solaris]

"You cannot SA undead" is concrete. Its either undead or not.
"You can't sneak attack unless you can reach its vitals" is not so much. For example, PhoenixRivers would classify a mounted knight as out of reach, whilst I would disagree.

Right. That's why you're playing with a DM, because that's how the rules are actually written. You don't have concrete rules 100% of the time because it's impractical to write out concrete rules for 100% of the scenarios. I'm just failing to see how this is at all a problem.

[Tavar]

You can't sneak attack unless you can reach its vitals" is not so much. For example, PhoenixRivers would classify a mounted knight as out of reach, whilst I would disagree.

Why not? Remember, he's specifically talking about a small character attacking a mounted knight: considering that the character can only reach the knights foot, I don't see how he can hit much vital stuff.

[Optimystik]

The problem is that the OP's dilemma makes no sense. Either a short character can hit a vital spot or he can't - reducing the SA die does not account for either scenario. As long as you can reach a vital spot, it should be just as lethal whether you're short or tall. If you can't reach it, SA shouldn't apply at all. Changing the die from d6 to d4 shouldn't even be a question.

EDIT: And for what it's worth, I think a Small character should also not be able to SA a mounted knight, unless he's doing so with a ranged weapon within 30 feet.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Right. That's why you're playing with a DM, because that's how the rules are actually written. You don't have concrete rules 100% of the time because it's impractical to write out concrete rules for 100% of the scenarios. I'm just failing to see how this is at all a problem.Because it leads to arguments at the table. If the player thinks he can stab someone's gnads, the DM doesn't, and the RAW is unclear, it turns into a 5-minute debate while the other players wait for their turns. And if it's ruled against the player, the player feels gypped. That's not a good idea.

[Boci]

Right. That's why you're playing with a DM, because that's how the rules are actually written. You don't have concrete rules 100% of the time because it's impractical to write out concrete rules for 100% of the scenarios. I'm just failing to see how this is at all a problem.

Risk and reward. If a houserule is unclear and has the potential to lead to arguments, I want it to add a lot to the game. A new way to screw with rogues does not constitute that.


Why not? Remember, he's specifically talking about a small character attacking a mounted knight: considering that the character can only reach the knights foot, I don't see how he can hit much vital stuff.

He said a melee rogue, not a small melee rogue. And when I pointed out you could target a leg artery he didn't respond that I couldn't reach said artery, but that the artery was not a vital organ.