PDA

View Full Version : Rogues, Sneak Attack & Improved Feint - effective strategy or not?



Helgraf
2007-02-12, 03:30 AM
This started out as a reply to another thread about the useful/uselessness of Rogues in combat vis a vis sneak attack. I found the concept expanding in my brain and decided to tackle it directly in its own thread.

There's a fairly simple way for Rogues to get sneak attacks all by themselves. Improved Feint. Humans, naturally, get the sweetness at level 1 if they take Combat Expertise as their first feat and IF as the other. Other races have to wait to level 3 to make it work. However, if you build a Cha-based Rogue, you can fairly easily develop a character than can reliably sneak attack humanoids and has better than 50-50 odds of being able to SA non-animal nonhumanoids right out of the gate with this combo.

To demonstrate, I've taken all the 3.5 MMI creatures and totalled out their BAB and Sense Motive (which in 95%+ of the time is just their Wis mod) to generate an average of what a CR 1 creature's ability to resist being feinted is. For completeness, I've listed all the creatures that cant be sneak attacked or can't be feinted (or both) at the end, but I do not include them in the calculations for determining average ability. After that part, I list the twinked Human Rogue build meant to take advantage of this at 4 point-buy levels : 25, 28, 30 and 32.

Creatures are listed by name, BAB, Sense Motive Total, Feint total. A number in brackets means they inflict a penalty on the feinter - so their effective feint is the number in the brackets. Text after the parenthesis will explain the source of the penalty.

Critter Summary Info

CR 1 critters:
Camel ((+2, +0, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Darkmantle ((+1, +0, +0 [4])) Nonhumanoid, -4 to Feint
Dog, Riding ((+1, +1, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Dwarf, Duergar War1 ((+1, -1, +0))
Elemental, Small (Any) ((+1, 0, +1 [5])) Nonhumanoid, -4 to Feint
Elf, Drow War1 ((+1, -1, +0))
Githyanki War1 ((+1, -2, -1))
Githzerai War1 ((+1, +0, +1))
Gnoll ((+1, +0, +1))
Gnome, Svirfneblin War1 ((+1, +0, +1))
Sprite, Grig ((+0, +1, +1))
Grimlock ((+2, -1, +1))
Homunculus ((+1, +1, +2))
Horse, Heavy ((+2, +1, +3 [11])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Horse, Light ((+2, +1, +3 [11])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Horse, Light War ((+2, +1, +3 [11])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Hyena ((+1, +1, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Krenshar ((+2, +1, +3 [7])) Nonhumanoid, -4 to Feint
Lizardfolk ((+1, +0, +1))
Manta Ray ((+3, +1, +4 [12])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Mule ((+2, +0, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Sprite, Nixie ((+0, +5, +5))
Octopus ((+1, +1, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Pseudodragon ((+2, +1, +3 [7])) Nonhumanoid, -4 to Feint
Shark, Medium ((+2, +1, +3 [11])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Snake, Medium Viper ((+1, +1, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Squid ((+2, +1, +3 [11])) Animal, -8 to Feint
Troglodyte ((+1, +0, +1))
Wolf ((+1, +1, +2 [10])) Animal, -8 to Feint

((Fractions rounding up to establish worst case))
+055 / 30 = ~ 1.83 - Avg +2
+104 / 30 = ~ 3.46 - Avg +4

The average for a CR 1 monster is a +2 to its feint roll; if it is a nonhumanoid shape the feinter takes a -4, if it is an animal, the feinter takes a -8.

For completeness, note that the following CR 1 creatures are either immune to sneak or feint attempts. If they're immune to sneak attack but not feint, then feinting still gives the advantage of going against their flat-footed AC.

Animated Object, Small ((+0, -5, -5)) *
Devil, Lemure ((+2, +0, +2)) **
Fungus, Shrieker ((e0, -4, -4)) **
Ghoul ((+1, +2, +3)) *
Giant Ant, Worker ((+1, +0, +1)) **
Giant Bee ((+2, +1, +3)) **
Monsterous Centipede, Large ((+2, +0, +2)) **
Monsterous Scorpion, Medium ((+1, +0, +1)) **
Monsterous Spider, Medium ((+1, +0, +1)) **
Skeleton, Wolf ((+1, +0, +1)) * **
Swarm, Spider ((+1, +0, +1)) **
Zombie, Troglodyte ((+2, +0, +2)) * **

* Immune to sneak attack
** Mindless - cannot be feinted

Based on the above data, a typical CR 1 monster falls into one of three categories:
Humanoid : d20 + 2 to resist Feint attempt.
Nonhumanoid : d20 + 6 to resist Feint attempt. (d20 + 2, and -4 penalty applied to feinter)
Animal : d20 + 10 to resist Feint attempt. (d20 + 2, and -8 penalty applied to feinter)

The Rogue build used for this experiment

Race: Human Class/Level: Rogue 1
A) 25 point buy : Str 10 Dex 12 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 16 (2 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 10 = 25)
B) 28 point buy : Str 10 Dex 12 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 17 (2 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 13 = 28)
C) 30 point buy : Str 10 Dex 14 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 17 (2 + 6 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 13 = 30)
D) 32 point buy : Str 10 Dex 13 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 18 (2 + 5 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 16 = 30)

4 each ranks in : Bluff, Tumble, Jump, Hide, Move Silently, Search, Spot, Listen, Open Lock, Disable Device.

Feats : Combat Expertise, Improved Feint

Equipment is not currently a crucial concern of the build; exploring the possibilities of following, say, Improved Trip is certainly valid, and in that case initial equippage is more important, but that discussion is not within the focus of this _particular_ approach.


As a result of the above, our rogue's Bluff looks like this:
A, B, C) d20 + 7 (4r, +3 Cha) on Bluff checks to Feint
D) d20 + 8 (4r, +4 Cha) on Bluff checks to Feint

Against humanoid shaped monsters, our rogue has a +5 or +6 advantage overall on his Bluff attempts; even against nonhumanoids he still retains a slim +1 or +2 advantage in the opposed check. Against animals, he suffers a -3 or -2 deficency; but he should be smart enough to know not to try and feint animals; still, in desperation it may be worth the effort to try and get the extra 1d6 damage; especially since (aside from a two-weapon build) the rogue only gets one attack a round anyway.

Part II will go to level 3 of the build and will analyze CR 3 creatures to see if skill advancement and selection of either Persuasive or Skill Focus (Bluff) is sufficent to maintain the current edge, if it expands it in favor of the rogue, or if the rogue starts to lose the advantage.

Kantolin
2007-02-12, 03:50 AM
I'm fairly sure that most people think rogues are useful with sneak attack, and feint is a good way to get it. It's just that fighters tend to hit harder. Of course, rogues have a ton of other things they can do in there, but hey...

Soo, excuse me if my below analysis is wrong, as this most mostly assumes you mean 'useful compared to a typical fighter insofar as dealing melee damage is concerned'.

Now, the major problem at level 1 is that sneak attack damage hasn't ramped up in particular. The rogue is most likely using a rapier or a shortsword, which both deal 1d6 damage. So that's 1d6(Rapier/Shortsword) + 1d6 sneak attack.

The fighter with a greatsword deals 2d6 damage with a (marginally, admittedly, at level 1) better to-hit due to his heightened BAB.

Therefore, the two do similar damage, although the fighter gets strength * 1.5 due to using a two handed weapon and likely has a higher strength. Said fighter can then do this after running halfway across the room, while a rogue (even with improved feint) needs to use his move feinting.

Now, a mild perk to the rogue occurs if the enemy has a lot of dexterity; making them flatfooted makes the rogue more likely to deal more damage. But that requires the monster to have a dexterity of at least 14.

Explanation:
If it's 11 or below, feinting doesn't effect their AC.
If it's 12-13, removing their dexterity modifier to AC is equal to the +1 BAB fighters get
If it's 14 or higher, feinting is better than the +1

However... getting feint at level 1 (Or 3 for nonhumans) means you don't have weapon finesse until level 3 (or 6 for nonhumans). Therefore, you are very likely to have more trouble connecting than a fighter in general, as the above statement assumes that both the rogue and the fighter have the same strength score. And a lower to-hit lowers potential damage (Unless the enemy has a miserable AC or a ludicrous AC)

So at level 1... the fighter reliably does more damage. This trend continues as levels scale, but that's if the fighter takes power attack with a two-handed weapon, which is optimal.

<Muse> I wonder how that quite pans out with a fighter using a one-handed weapon? I think that snerks things in favor of the rogue, provided the stars are aligned.

Oh... this also doesn't take into account any of the various things that may cause concealment, straight down to taking mild cover behind a bush, tree, or low wall. Remember, concealment snuffs sneak attack.

Edit: As a note, though, I believe just keeping bluff maxed becomes plenty when you reach mid-to-high levels, as relatively few things have sense motive. So going with Skill Focus(Bluff) probably isn't worth your time, especially compared to weapon finesse, and especially as a rogue can eventually just take 10 on it.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-12, 04:16 AM
I always skip on feint. Flanking is generally pretty dang easy to get, and doesn't force you to sacrifice a full attack.

daggaz
2007-02-12, 05:22 AM
I'd agree with bears on that one. Its usually easy to flank (remember you will be putting mad ranks into tumble the first few levels anyhow), and there are other things you could drop your precious feats into, like improving your ranged attack, taking weapon finesse (for dex based rapier wielding rogues), or taking combat reflexes so you can hit EVERYONE who ever gives you an AoO (what rogue doesnt have a good dex mod?).

Ikkitosen
2007-02-12, 06:26 AM
Consider how many rounds you need feinting (i.e. when you don't have a flank). In each of those rounds you gain 1 lot of sneak attack damage.

Now if you take TWF you get many more attacks, so even if it takes you a round to tumble into a flanking position you'll make that back within 1 round of getting your increased number of sneak attacks.

For a solo rogue feint may be good - and for sudden strikers too - but otherwise I wouldn't bother.

Shrew
2007-02-12, 08:26 AM
Sort of related to this. We had a small disagreement on the sneak attack at high levels. A rogue with multiple attacks is flanking someone. One player says "sneak attack should only count on your first attack". This lead to a debate, that ended quickly with the DM saying "it matters little, illusions are immune to sneak attacks, now make a reflex save everyone."

My understanding of the rules say sneak attack counts for every attack. Is this wrong?

Were-Sandwich
2007-02-12, 08:29 AM
no, you're right.

Ikkitosen
2007-02-12, 08:33 AM
Yep, every single attack that qualifies. Did your target stop being flanked after your first attack? No.

NullAshton
2007-02-12, 08:39 AM
Does your target see you after the first attack? Yes, with invisibility and hide checks.

Were-Sandwich
2007-02-12, 08:44 AM
unless you use sniping.

ken-do-nim
2007-02-12, 08:49 AM
On the other hand, feint is great for ninja characters.

NullAshton
2007-02-12, 08:58 AM
unless you use sniping.

Or various methods involving hide in plain sight and insane hide checks ,yes.

Rigeld2
2007-02-12, 09:12 AM
Does your target see you after the first attack? Yes, with invisibility and hide checks.
Doesnt matter. Hes flanked.

Ikkitosen
2007-02-12, 09:18 AM
Does your target see you after the first attack? Yes, with invisibility and hide checks.

The target you are flanking likely saw you before your first attack too - makes diddly squat difference!

silvermesh
2007-02-12, 09:43 AM
Does your target see you after the first attack? Yes, with invisibility and hide checks.

the problem with this line of thinking is two-fold.

1) the rules as written explicitly state that if you are eligable to sneak attack, you do so with ALL of your attacks during this time.

2) you are assuming that the target can react when it isn't his turn. this is false. everything that happens in a round is expected to be happening within a very small amount of time. if you beat your opponent on the initiative check, and are "surprise attacking" him with your sneak attack, your first attack doesn't make him become aware, as all your attacks happen too quickly for him to react. his reaction happens on HIS turn, not yours.

The part about flanking has already been covered, but to reiterate. the enemy can see you, use his AC bonus from dodge on you, and you can still sneak attack him if you're flanking him. awareness has nothing to do with it, when you're flanked it means you can't effectively guard yourself from all sides at once, and both are distracting you enough that it makes it difficult from both sides.

barawn
2007-02-12, 09:50 AM
I always skip on feint. Flanking is generally pretty dang easy to get, and doesn't force you to sacrifice a full attack.

With a Wand of True Strike, Improved Feint for a mid-level rogue is pretty useful. Every other round you get a guaranteed hit, plus sneak attack bonus, and since you've got Combat Expertise, you might as well throw in a boost to your AC every other round as well.

Keep in mind Improved Feint doesn't require you to attack that round. Since it's a move action, you can do something else that round, and then make a full attack next round.

It's also useful without WoTS cheese, though. If you need to heal yourself with a wand, feint in the same round as well.

(Of course, it's also useful against high-level rogues when you can't flank them).

Person_Man
2007-02-12, 09:56 AM
Feinting only applies to your next melee attack and takes a move action to use. Because of this, its generally a very poor way to add damage.

The Invisible Blade was able to Feint for every attack, but WotC nerfed it with an errata so that they could only do it once a round.

The simplest way to qualify for Sneak Attack damage every round is to flank. Have the party Druid summon a bunch of animals. Or have a fellow party member cast Improved Invisibility on you. Or buy a Ring of Blinking. There's also a first level spell in Complete Scoundrel called Armor Lock or something similar that denies the target their Dex bonus, so even if your party members are jerks and won't help you and you're too poor to afford a good Ring, you can invest in Use Magic Device and buy a wand of Armor Lock.

A Wand of True Strike is a bad idea, because you're spending two rounds to get 1 attack. Mathmatically, you're much better off spending two rounds making 2 or more attacks. While there's a chance you may miss, there is usually a much higher probability of dealing far more damage.

NullAshton
2007-02-12, 10:01 AM
the problem with this line of thinking is two-fold.

1) the rules as written explicitly state that if you are eligable to sneak attack, you do so with ALL of your attacks during this time.

2) you are assuming that the target can react when it isn't his turn. this is false. everything that happens in a round is expected to be happening within a very small amount of time. if you beat your opponent on the initiative check, and are "surprise attacking" him with your sneak attack, your first attack doesn't make him become aware, as all your attacks happen too quickly for him to react. his reaction happens on HIS turn, not yours.

The part about flanking has already been covered, but to reiterate. the enemy can see you, use his AC bonus from dodge on you, and you can still sneak attack him if you're flanking him. awareness has nothing to do with it, when you're flanked it means you can't effectively guard yourself from all sides at once, and both are distracting you enough that it makes it difficult from both sides.

The attacks happen within a 3 second timeframe. For a level 20 rogue with three attacks, thats an attack every 2 seconds. I'd sure NOTICE in that two seconds that someone just stabbed me with a dagger, and I'd be able to react.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-12, 10:03 AM
Barawn: one sneak attack landed every two rounds is a terrible ratio. Two full attacks will do much more.

Telonius
2007-02-12, 10:16 AM
The attacks happen within a 3 second timeframe. For a level 20 rogue with three attacks, thats an attack every 2 seconds. I'd sure NOTICE in that two seconds that someone just stabbed me with a dagger, and I'd be able to react.

While the Rogue's hits take place within a two second span, so do the flanker's. If the flanked target shifts his defense over to the rogue, he opens up his defenses to the fighter (or whoever) on his opposite side. Flanking, at all, generally gives you +2 to attack, whether you're a rogue or not, because it's easier to hit somebody you're surrounding. They have to guard against attacks coming from opposite directions.

It also makes sense that if it's easier for you to hit somebody, it's easier for you to hit a vulnerable area with precision. So yes, even if the target isn't surprised by a flanking attack, there's nothing he can do about it. (At least until his turn, when he can move to give himself a better position). Unless the target can move as a swift or immediate action, it makes sense for all flanking attacks to get sneak attacks, if any do.

barawn
2007-02-12, 10:27 AM
Barawn: one sneak attack landed every two rounds is a terrible ratio. Two full attacks will do much more.

Mid-level rogue. A rogue doesn't get 2 attacks until 8th level. Doesn't get 3 attacks until 15th level. Around 7th to 10th level, it's not that bad.

I'm not going to argue that flanking isn't better, of course!


A Wand of True Strike is a bad idea, because you're spending two rounds to get 1 attack. Mathmatically, you're much better off spending two rounds making 2 or more attacks.

Uh, unless you have a 50% chance or less of hitting, and you don't have any other way of getting sneak attack damage. If you can flank, freaking duh do it. But otherwise, that sneak attack damage can easily be higher than what you'd do in two rounds! Plus a 95% guaranteed hit is better than 2 50% chances to hit almost any day of the week: sure, you'll hit twice 25% of the time. You'll also miss completely 25% of the time.

7th level rogue, +4d6 sneak attack damage. +6 BAB, fighting something at his party's CL. Say, the Ogre Barbarian in the SRD. Has an AC of 19. Assuming a modest +3 on BAB for the rogue (via enhancement/ability), he's got a 50% chance to hit the guy. Assuming a longsword, that's 1d8+3 damage per round.

You're telling me that 2 50% chances of doing 1d8+3 damage (average of 7, max 22, min 4, zero 25% of the time) is better than a 95% chance of doing 1d8+4d6+3 damage (average 19 points, max 35, min 8, zero 5% of the time)?

Sam K
2007-02-12, 10:45 AM
The attacks happen within a 3 second timeframe. For a level 20 rogue with three attacks, thats an attack every 2 seconds. I'd sure NOTICE in that two seconds that someone just stabbed me with a dagger, and I'd be able to react.

Yes, but your reaction would be something along the lines of laying on the ground, bleeding all over the place, wondering which of your vital organs was just perforated.

If we're gonna be realistic and all...

NullAshton
2007-02-12, 10:55 AM
Yes, but your reaction would be something along the lines of laying on the ground, bleeding all over the place, wondering which of your vital organs was just perforated.

If we're gonna be realistic and all...

And if we're going to be realistic and all, might as well start shooting catgirls. D&D has no rules about reaction times other than being flat-footed, which is already in there. But once flatfooted, you're usually not flatfooted any more in the present combat, so a rogue turning invisible during combat and then full attacking someone would still only get one sneak attack.

Ikkitosen
2007-02-12, 11:04 AM
Mid-level rogue. A rogue doesn't get 2 attacks until 8th level. Doesn't get 3 attacks until 15th level. Around 7th to 10th level, it's not that bad.

I'm not going to argue that flanking isn't better, of course!



Uh, unless you have a 50% chance or less of hitting, and you don't have any other way of getting sneak attack damage. If you can flank, freaking duh do it. But otherwise, that sneak attack damage can easily be higher than what you'd do in two rounds! Plus a 95% guaranteed hit is better than 2 50% chances to hit almost any day of the week: sure, you'll hit twice 25% of the time. You'll also miss completely 25% of the time.

7th level rogue, +4d6 sneak attack damage. +6 BAB, fighting something at his party's CL. Say, the Ogre Barbarian in the SRD. Has an AC of 19. Assuming a modest +3 on BAB for the rogue (via enhancement/ability), he's got a 50% chance to hit the guy. Assuming a longsword, that's 1d8+3 damage per round.

You're telling me that 2 50% chances of doing 1d8+3 damage (average of 7, max 22, min 4, zero 25% of the time) is better than a 95% chance of doing 1d8+4d6+3 damage (average 19 points, max 35, min 8, zero 5% of the time)?

You're drastically underestimating the rogue, whose main stat is Dex and who will almst certainly have Weapon Finesse. At 8th we're talking +6 BAB +5 Dex (at least! with Cat's Grace or Gloves of Dex or Race or whatever likely more!) +1 MW weapon = +12. TWF (ITWF next level) makes 3 attacks at +10/+10/+5. That is how a rogue gets a lot of damage, not 1 hit every other round.

barawn
2007-02-12, 11:15 AM
You're drastically underestimating the rogue, whose main stat is Dex and who will almst certainly have Weapon Finesse. At 8th we're talking +6 BAB +5 Dex (at least! with Cat's Grace or Gloves of Dex or Race or whatever likely more!) +1 MW weapon = +12. TWF (ITWF next level) makes 3 attacks at +10/+10/+5. That is how a rogue gets a lot of damage, not 1 hit every other round.

You're also twinking the Rogue. I wasn't suggesting that it's the best way to go. I'm suggesting that it's effective. Which was the original point of the post.

Attilargh
2007-02-12, 11:15 AM
But once flatfooted, you're usually not flatfooted any more in the present combat, so a rogue turning invisible during combat and then full attacking someone would still only get one sneak attack.
Assuming, of course, that the invisibility ends after the rogue makes his first attack, which is not always true. Ninja levels and Greater Invisibility, for instance, let people remain invisible even while attacking.

Ikkitosen
2007-02-12, 12:00 PM
You're also twinking the Rogue. I wasn't suggesting that it's the best way to go. I'm suggesting that it's effective. Which was the original point of the post.

Twinking? I guess we think differently. I'd call it "being effective". In a world of wizards and clerics it's tough for the poor rogue.

Rigeld2
2007-02-12, 12:18 PM
And if we're going to be realistic and all, might as well start shooting catgirls. D&D has no rules about reaction times other than being flat-footed, which is already in there. But once flatfooted, you're usually not flatfooted any more in the present combat, so a rogue turning invisible during combat and then full attacking someone would still only get one sneak attack.
Noone cares about invisibility. If you flank a target, you get Sneak Attack. On every attack. Theres no if ands or buts.

Helgraf
2007-02-12, 12:24 PM
Firstly, thank you everyone for your contributions so far; I'll make just a few points here.

A) Yes, flank is a wonderful way of getting sneak attack; it's great when your team actively works to help you get flanking. This isn't always the case, or possible, however. But yes, when you can get it, flanking is obviously the superior way to get your sneak attack in (barring an opponent with a freaky high AC based on Dex and dodge bonuses (or other AC bonuses lost when flat-footed)).

B) Yes, TWF gives you penalized chances at two sneaks a round if you start the round within 5 feet. This is an alternate sneak-attack build that I've seen used before and it can be effective - especially when your team is helping set up the flank either directly or through summoned/conjured critters and such.

C) The general - but not absolute - consensus seems to be that going the Improved Feint route is not worth the bother compared to other methods of getting more sneak attacks; that one is better off selecting other feats.

Now, all of this said, my goal here is to try to get a feel for the effectiveness of IF (SA) vs. monsters of equivalent CR; this is admittedly a somewhat skewed viewpoint since a matching CR critter is meant to be a match for a party of four of the matching level; not a match for a rogue of one; partly this is a matter of crunch; doing the mathematics to see what said typical CR monster's ability to resist the feint compared to the rogue's ability to dish it out is. As I don't have a master Excel database of all the MM I monsters by challenge rating with BAB and Sense Motive/Wis, I'm doing this by hand currently. I expect that after x levels I'll need to subdivide the monsters by broad categories to give an idea which sorts of critters the rogue using this build should try and feint against and which he's just wasting his time on; I've already done this to an extent by segregating out the creatures immune to sneak attack and the creatures that are mindless and therefore can't be feinted, and by marking clearly which creatures inflict the -4 penalty for being not-humanoid shaped, and which ones inflict the -8 penalty due to Animal level intelligence (Int 1 or 2).

Now, if any of you happen to know someone who has already performed this crunch work, I'd be happy to save myself considerable time in reconstructing it myself. :biggrin:

barawn
2007-02-12, 12:28 PM
Twinking? I guess we think differently. I'd call it "being effective". In a world of wizards and clerics it's tough for the poor rogue.

Twinking is what I call using almost all of a character's resources to optimize their effectiveness. Yay, they're effective, but they've got very little freedom.

Going ITWF, Weapon Finess, plus a high-cost magic item/spell to boost Dex, plus assuming a maxxed Dex, is a lot of resources and forced fighting style - it's three feats, the cost of maxxing Dex, and a 4000/4500 gp item (for a Wand of Cat's Grace), the downside of having no hands free in combat, needing to flank to gain sneak attack damage, and no extra standard action every two rounds.

Combat Expertise, Improved Feint, and a Wand of True Strike: two feats and a 750 gp item, and a near-guaranteed hit/sneak attack every other round. If the opponent's Dex is high enough (fighting an Air Elemental?) and you don't need the True Strike, that's a free standard action every other round, too. For whatever.

Who knows? That rogue might have a slew of magic items, a Caster's Shield, and be on track to be an magic wielding Assassin, or a similar (non-evil) PrC. Or any number of other tracks.

NullAshton
2007-02-12, 12:44 PM
Noone cares about invisibility. If you flank a target, you get Sneak Attack. On every attack. Theres no if ands or buts.

Yes, But I wasn't replying to that, I was replying to the people talking about invisibility.

Helgraf
2007-02-12, 12:47 PM
Edit: As a note, though, I believe just keeping bluff maxed becomes plenty when you reach mid-to-high levels, as relatively few things have sense motive. So going with Skill Focus(Bluff) probably isn't worth your time, especially compared to weapon finesse, and especially as a rogue can eventually just take 10 on it.

Well, the problem is that Feint is a Bluff against Sense Motive with a bonus of the target's BAB; so as CR advances and you get critters with a high HD:CR ratio, (and progressively thereby, a higher BAB, based, naturally on the creature's BAB:HD ratio for its type or class levels); that's the factor I need to account for most readily; need to see if the BAB progression of monsters of higher CRs keeps up with Feint ranks of an equivalently levelled rogue, surpasses it (in which case Feint would eventually become useless against such creatures as you'd have little chance of making the check), or lags behind it (in which case Feint becomes a more desireable means of ensuring your SA damage against said critter).

At 1st level, the advantage of IF for the human rogue as built to take most advantage of the feat gives the rogue a +5 net advantage (assuming max ranks in bluff and a Cha of 16) against typical humanoids of his CR on the opposed check, so she's pretty likely to pull it off; she retains a +1 net advantage against nonhumanoids; so will still manage to get the sneak attack damage slightly more than half the time. Against animals, or other creatures of Int 1 or 2, feinting is far more difficult; she's at a net -3 disadvantage effectively, so her odds of succeeding on the feint have dropped to roughly 35%. If she can't get a flank position against an animal, IF _might_ be worth attempting to try and secure the extra 1d6 of damage; but unless she's fairly confident in avoiding the creature's attacks, she's probably better either withdrawing or attacking and 5-foot stepping back toward her party for support.

At 1st level human, IF is a very viable tactic if the party is facing a lot of humanoid type opponents; it's still useable against nonhumanoid targets; but if you're mostly facing animals, undead and vermin, then it's not effective enough.

Now I just need to see how it balances out at 3rd level. I may need to tweak the build a bit to favour strength since weapon finesse isn't part of this package (yet), an extra point or two of attack bonus would probably pay off considerable dividends in the short run for this sort of build.

barawn
2007-02-12, 01:03 PM
At 1st level human, IF is a very viable tactic if the party is facing a lot of humanoid type opponents; it's still useable against nonhumanoid targets; but if you're mostly facing animals, undead and vermin, then it's not effective enough.

That sounds right to me. The few builds I've had where I used Improved Feint frequently, it was frequently in a city-type environment where it was almost all humanoids. The high Bluff also allows distractions to hide, as well.

I've never been fond of the "can't feint a nonintelligent character" bit, though. It's just silly. You're not trying to fool their intelligence. You're trying to fool their instincts, IMHO.

Quietus
2007-02-12, 01:06 PM
I'd just like to point out, for all the people who are saying "A human with CE/IF at level one has to wait till level 3 to pick up Weapon Finesse" - they'd have to anyway! Weapon Finesse requires BAB +1, which a Rogue won't qualify for until level 2, so they have to wait to take their level 3 feat for that.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-12, 01:08 PM
The BAB +1 prereq for Weapon Finesse was a poor, poor design decision.

Arceliar
2007-02-12, 01:21 PM
Feinting can be good at low levels when you only get 1 attack and haven't started TWF yet.

If I recall correctly, Invisible Blades can feint as a free action with daggers. As ultimately almost all of a rogue's damage is coming from sneak attacks, changing to dagger instead of rapier isn't going to hurt them that much.

I myself prefer the Scout + Greater Manyshot combo.

barawn
2007-02-12, 02:25 PM
Now I just need to see how it balances out at 3rd level. I may need to tweak the build a bit to favour strength since weapon finesse isn't part of this package (yet), an extra point or two of attack bonus would probably pay off considerable dividends in the short run for this sort of build.

Also don't forget that you can Feint as a move action first, and if it fails, you can Feint as a standard action again. So in some sense you can "try again" if you're willing to give up an attack, and still hit it next time. Feinting again the next round after means that you can get a "do-over" (i.e. if you 1: Feint (fail), Feint (succeed) 2: Attack, Feint (fail), 3: Feint (succeed), Attack), which means even if Feint's a 50/50 shot, you can still get 2 sneak attacks every 3 rounds on average.

I mentioned elsewhere that Feint, by RAW, doesn't require you to be in combat, either. Just requires you to be able to interact, which you can certainly do from a distance away, and then make a melee attack, which you could do via Charge the next round, or by moving and attacking, or if your opponent comes at you. Not a bad tactic at the start of a battle, if your DM allows it (I think it's silly).

Heck, you can always have a repeating crossbow (or Rapid Reload, but repeating crossbows don't take a feat)), and plunk an enemy from afar, Feinting afterwards, and if he comes after you, if your Feint succeeded on the previous round, drop the crossbow, draw a sword, and chop at him.

Josh Inno
2007-02-12, 02:44 PM
Feinting can be good at low levels when you only get 1 attack and haven't started TWF yet.

If I recall correctly, Invisible Blades can feint as a free action with daggers. As ultimately almost all of a rogue's damage is coming from sneak attacks, changing to dagger instead of rapier isn't going to hurt them that much.

I myself prefer the Scout + Greater Manyshot combo.

I was not aware of the Invisible blade's ability to do that. o.O That is very far into the "Awesome" category.

Piccamo
2007-02-12, 02:46 PM
I thought the errata changed that.

Rigeld2
2007-02-12, 04:21 PM
It did. Changed it from a Free action to an Immediate action.

Arceliar
2007-02-12, 04:31 PM
It did. Changed it from a Free action to an Immediate action.

Ah, yeah, a swift/immediate action does make a lot more sense than free...what with limiting the frequency of use...

Either way, it means there's virtually no reason NOT to try and feint the opponent.

Helgraf
2007-02-13, 02:48 AM
Data Crunch, Part II : Numbers at Level 3 of the build vs CR 3 critters.

First, the CR 3 monsters...

Ankheg ((+3, +1, +4 [8])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Arrowhawk, Juvenile ((+3, +7, +10 [14])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Centaur NH ((+4, +1, +5 [9])) Nonhumanoid? [Monstrous Humanoid]
Cockatrice NH ((+5, +1, +6 [10])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Derro ((+3, -3, +0)) [Monstrous Humanoid]
Dinosaur, Deinonychus A ((+3, +1, +4 [12])) Animal Int [Animal]
Dire Ape ((+3, +1, +4 [12])) Animal Int [Animal]
Dire Wolf ((+4, +1, +5 [13])) Animal Int [Animal]
Doppelganger ((+4, +6, +10)) [Monstrous Humanoid (Shapechanger)]
Dryad ((+2, +2, +4)) [Fey]
Eagle, giant ((+4, +4, +8 [12])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Etheral Filcher ((+3, +1, +4 [8])) Nonhumanoid [Aberration]
Etheral Marauder ((+2, +1, +3 [7])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Ettercap ((+3, +2, +5 [9])) Nonhumanoid [Aberration]
Formian, Warrior ((+4, +1, +5 [9])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Grick, ((+1, +2, +3 [7])) Nonhumanoid [Aberration]
Hell Hound ((+4, +0, +4 [8])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Howler ((+6, +2, +8 [12])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Lion ((+3, +1, +4 [12])) Animal Int [Animal]
Lycanthrope, Werewolf War1 ((+2, +0, +2 [6])) [Humanoid (Shapechanger)]
Magmin ((+1, +0, +1)) [Elemental]
Mephit (any) ((+3, +2, +5)) [Outsider]
Ogre ((+3, +0, +3)) [Giant]
Ogre, Merrow ((+3, +0, +3)) [Giant]
Owl, giant ((+4, +2, +6 [10])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Pegasus ((+4, +9, +13 [17])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Rust Monster ((+3, +1, +4 [12])) Animal Int [Aberration]
Salamander, Flamebrother ((+4, +2, +6 [10])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Snake, Huge Viper ((+4, +1, +5 [13])) Animal Int [Animal]
Tojanida, juvenile ((+3, +7, +10 [14])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Unicorn ((+4, +5, +9 [13])) Nonhumanoid [Magical Beast]
Xorn, minor ((+3, +0, +3 [7])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Yeth Hound ((+3, +2, +5 [9])) Nonhumanoid [Outsider]
Yuan-ti Pureblood ((+4,+0, +4)) [Monsterous Humanoid]

And for completeness:
CR 3 creatures immune to sneak attack, feint or both
Allip ((+2, +0, +2 [6])) NH - ISA
Animated Object, Large ((+3, -5, -2)) IB [Construct]
Assassin Vine ((+3, +1, +4)) IB [Plant]
Elemental, Medium (any) ((+3, +0, +4 [8])) NH - ISA [Elemental]
Fungus, Violet ((+3, +0, +3)) IB [Plant]
Ghast ((+2, +2, +4)) ISA [Undead]
Giant Praying Mantis ((+3, +2, +5)) IFe [Vermin]
Giant Wasp ((+3, +1, +4)) IFe [Vermin]
Monsterous Scorpion, Large ((+3, +0, +3)) IFe [Vermin]
Ooze, Gelatinous Cube ((+3, -5, -2)) IB [Ooze]
Phantom Fungus ((+1, +0, +1 [9])) AI - ISA [Plant]
Shadow ((+1, +1, +2 [6])) NH - ISA [Undead]
Skeleton, Troll ((+3, +0, +3)) IB [Undead]
Swarm, Locust ((+4, +0, +4)) IB [Swarm]
Wight ((+2, +1, +3)) ISA [Undead]
Zombie, Ogre ((+4, +0, +4)) IB [Undead]


Universal CR 3 Feint Average (excluding no-feints and no-sneaks): +5
By Type:
Aberration: Total of +16 over 4 critters - Feint Average +4 exact
Animal: Total of +22 over 5 critters: Feint Average: +4 (from 4.4)
Elemental: Total of +1 over 1 critter: Feint Average +1 exact *
Fey: Total of +4 over 1 critter - Feint Average +4 exact
Giant: Total of +6 over 2 critters - Feint Average +3 exact
Humanoid: Total of +2 over 1 critter - Feint Average +2 exact
Magical Beast: Total of +49 over 7 critters : Feint Average: +7 exact
Monstrous Humanoid: Total of +19 over 4 critters: Feint Average: +5 (from 4.75)
Outsider: Total of +56 over 9 critters : Feint Average: +6 (from ~6.22)

* Yes, Magmin are Elemental type without elemental traits. Boggling.

So a typical CR 3 critter rolls a d20 + 5 to oppose feints, before factoring in any advantage gained for being nonhumanoid in form or for having animal level intelligence (INT 1 or 2).

Now, the Improved Feint rogue build, and how to update to Rog 3:

Race: Human Class/Level: Rogue 3
A) 25 point buy : Str 10 Dex 12 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 16 (2 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 10 = 25)
B) 28 point buy : Str 10 Dex 12 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 17 (2 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 13 = 28)
C) 30 point buy : Str 10 Dex 14 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 17 (2 + 6 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 13 = 30)
D) 32 point buy : Str 10 Dex 13 Con 10 Int 13 Wis 10 Cha 18 (2 + 5 + 2 + 5 + 2 + 16 = 30)

6 each ranks in : Bluff, Tumble, Jump, Hide, Move Silently, Search, Spot, Listen, Open Lock, Disable Device. Depending on your personal choices, you may want to substitute Sleight of Hand or Use Magic Device for one or two of the above skills.

Feats : Combat Expertise (Human), Improved Feint (CH1)

Now, here lies the first point of digression in the continuing of this build. There are a number of different feats appropriate to continuing this build; you could go with Persuasive or Skill Focus (Bluff) if you want to maximize the Bluff edge; or go for Weapon Finesse to increase your to hit bonus from +0 Str to either +1 or +2 from Dex, depending on which build you used.

Alternately, one could go for Improved Trip, using that to drop enemy prone, then Improved Feint for the SA in the following round on either condition of A) him getting up, provoking the AOO from you, or B) your turn coming up and him still being on the ground. In either case, you get the SA with the +4 bonus for striking a prone opponent.

Another option would be Exotic Weapon Proficiency ... Spiked Chain comes to mind, though if you go that route, you'll probably want to pick up Combat Reflexes and/or Improved Trip at level 6.

But for purposes of this analysis, we'll narrow it down to three choices - those being the ones that will affect your Bluff skill total.

A) A feat that _isn't_ Persuasive or Skill Focus (Bluff)
B) Persuasive
C) Skill Focus (Bluff)

In Case A, your Bluff total is now either d20 +9 (Builds A-C) or d20+10 (Build D).

In Case B, your Bluff total is now either d20 +11 (A-C) or d20 +12 (D)

In Case C, your Bluff total is now either d20 +12 (A-C) or d20 +13 (D)

There isn't quite enough gold to buy a permanent Cha item, though if you went the Use Magic Device route or have a buffing friend, you may want to go the Wand of Eagle's Splendor route - the +4 Cha bonus will increase your Bluff checks by another +2 on top of the above numbers while it lasts, increasing your Bluff total to between +11 and +15 depending on build and feat selection.


Now, knowing that:
Universal CR 3 Feint Average (Human-shaped): +5
Universal CR 3 Feint Average (Nonhumanoid): +9 effectively
Universal CR 3 Feint Average (Animal Int): +14 effectively

We can see that the build rogue who doesn't take Persuasive or Skill Focus Bluff at level 3 has a 4 or 5 point advantage bluffing humanoid-shaped opponents (6 or 7 with Eagle's Splendor); a 0 to +1 point advantage against nonhumanoid opponents (2-3 with ES), and is at a 4-5 point disadvantage trying to Feint opponents with Animal Intellect (2-3 point disadvantage with ES). So far, this rogue is maintaining equal footing with the average monster advancement; the unenhanced lead is the same as it was at level 1, and Eagle's Splendor gives the Rogue an additional two point advantage. He has lost a tiny amount of ground against animals; being on the whole 5% less likely to successfully feint an animal of his CR. With 2d6 of sneak attack, the Rogue is almost certainly doing more SA damage than base damage, a disparity by design that will only continue to grow.

The rogue that takes Persuasive has all the advantages of the no-Bluff feat Rogue with Eagle's Splendor all the time; and when she benefits from Eagle's Splendor she now has a +8 or +9 point advantage trying to Bluff humanoid-shaped opponents; against nonhumanoids, she retains a still impressive +4 to +5 advantage; and against Animals she has pulled up even (or to a +1 advantage with Build D) when under the effects of ES.


The rogue that takes Skill Focus (Bluff) increases all the numbers of the Persuasive Rogue by an additional +1; while under Eagle's Splendor he is at +9/+10 vs. humanoids on the Bluff, +5/+6 vs. nonhumanoids, +1/+2 vs animals for his feint attempts; this single feat has made bluffing even animals of his CR a reasonable action.

In short - _so far_ the rogue maintains his edge on skill ranks alone; Eagle's Splendor widens the gap in his favour now that it is economically available; either feat does the same, and doing a feat and the spell gives the rogue a significant advantage in his feinting attempts. A quick summary chart.

Handy Chart - VS Average CR 3 monster
+----------+----------+----------+----------+
|Feint Edge| Humanoid | Nonhuman | .Animal. |
+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| .[U]Cha 16. | Adv. +ES | Adv. +ES | Adv. +ES |
|Base Rog3 | .+4. .+6.| .+0. .+2.| .-4. .-2.|
|Pers Rog3 | .+6. .+8.| .+2. .+4.| .-2. .+0.|
|SklF Rog3 | .+7. .+9.| .+3. .+5.| .-1. .+1.|
+----------+--------------------------------+
| .Cha 18. | Adv. +ES | Adv. +ES | Adv. +ES |
|Base Rog3 | .+5. .+7.| .+1. .+3.| .-3. .-1.|
|Pers Rog3 | .+7. .+9.| .+3. .+5.| .-1. .+1.|
|SklF Rog3 | .+8. .+10| .+4. .+6.| .+0. .+2.|
+----------+--------------------------------+

Next installment : Level 6 ... and hopefully insights/answers to the following: Does the pattern continue to hold, or does increasing monster power close the gap? Is taking both Bluff enhancing feats really neccesary to maintain Bluff dominance?

Cowboy_ninja
2007-02-13, 01:20 PM
on the rouge and sneak attack subject:

my wispering gnome rouge was around a corner (full cover) and hideing. when i took a peek to attack (snipe) the opponent got a spot check VS my hide at -20. if i still won i got to sneak attack him if not then i just did weapon dmg. after i shot i just moved back to total cover so i could hide again.



did me and my DM do this right? i guess what im asking is when i first blow my cover to make the first attack is the opponent flat footed? is he even suppose to get that spot check? if he does should it come after of before i attack him?

Quietus
2007-02-13, 07:13 PM
The BAB +1 prereq for Weapon Finesse was a poor, poor design decision.

Strongly agreed. I generally houserule that it doesn't have that requirement.


Cowboy_Ninja - For the first shot, I would consider him flat-footed. He'd get a spot check to see where you are after you hit him, at your Hide-20. Also note that unless you have Spring Attack, you're attacking him from behind cover, and that should be considered.

Even so, as a DM, I would immediately have the guard-person in that situation examine things at that end of the corridor. It would be senseless to say "Oh, I've been shot! I'll stay here and hope I don't get shot again!".

barawn
2007-02-13, 11:30 PM
Even so, as a DM, I would immediately have the guard-person in that situation examine things at that end of the corridor. It would be senseless to say "Oh, I've been shot! I'll stay here and hope I don't get shot again!".

I don't think he'd be able to figure out where the shot came from, though. That's kindof what the re-hide check (at -20) is attempting to emulate.

I think he'd definitely move, but it'd be pretty much a random movement, rather than coming towards the hidden character.

Quietus
2007-02-14, 05:11 AM
If you get shot in the chest, and the hall goes in two directions, you aren't going to turn around and go in that direction. Unless the guards are idiots, there's an extremely good chance they can narrow down the direction to a 45 degree arc.

That being said, your re-hide check isn't so the guard doesn't know which direction the shot came from. The re-hide check is so that you aren't seen when you get out of the way. Find another corner, a cranny, something to hide behind, and get back there, if he's coming in your direction. If you're big on sniping, you can even set it up so that you have a position to attack him from, so when he pops his head around the corner to look for you, you take a shot then disappear.

Rigeld2
2007-02-14, 07:33 AM
That, and if youre guarding something... I guarantee theres an S.O.P. regarding what to do if someone breaks in. Its not run around like a chicken that just got its head cut off.

barawn
2007-02-14, 10:40 AM
Unless the guards are idiots, there's an extremely good chance they can narrow down the direction to a 45 degree arc.

Er? Why? If you're shot in the back (that's what sneak attacks used to be, wasn't it?), I can't imagine you'd be able to narrow the direction down closer than "it came from behind me".

Now, if it's a hallway, that I agree with.


That being said, your re-hide check isn't so the guard doesn't know which direction the shot came from. The re-hide check is so that you aren't seen when you get out of the way.

That's actually my point. Without seeing any motion whatsoever (the Hide check) - the guard's just going to be twisting around, looking for anything. He's not really going to have a good guess as to where it came from, unless the architecture restricts things (i.e. a hallway).

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-02-14, 11:18 AM
A) Yes, flank is a wonderful way of getting sneak attack; it's great when your team actively works to help you get flanking. This isn't always the case, or possible, however.
Indeed.

I played a rogue in a Living Greyhawk game once where one person would stand on one side of an enemy, but the fighter, who's turn came before my own, would always go in to complete the flank and deny me the opportunity. The player seemed to believe that his +1 BAB and +2 Str to hit (yes, this was a low-level game) over mine meant that I wouldn't hit at all and he needed the additional +2 more than I did. Needless to say, I was peeved.

But even with a cooperative party, flanking isn't necessarily a forgone conclusion. The bad guys don't like being flanked, even if a rogue isn't involved. They will take appropriate measures to avoid being flanked whenever possible.

And then sometimes you're just fighting a fella with Improved Uncanny Dodge.


my wispering gnome rouge was around a corner (full cover) and hideing. when i took a peek to attack (snipe) the opponent got a spot check VS my hide at -20. if i still won i got to sneak attack him if not then i just did weapon dmg. after i shot i just moved back to total cover so i could hide again.
Uh, the -20 penalty applies to the hide check you make after taking your shot. When sniping, you're supposed to make a normal hide check, shoot, then make another hide check at -20 immediately afterwards. Sniping is to help you remain hidden, not to avoid being seen in the first place.


Sniping: If you’ve already successfully hidden at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack, then immediately hide again. You take a –20 penalty on your Hide check to conceal yourself after the shot.

Ardantis
2007-02-14, 12:13 PM
In a discussion revolving around the combat utility of Sneak Attack, I'm surprised that nobody has brought up one of my favorite feats from Complete Warrior, Flick of the Wrist.

Flick of the Wrist
Requires: Dex 17, Sleight of Hand 5 ranks, Quick Draw
System: If you draw a light weapon and make a melee attack with it in the same round, you catch your opponent flat-footed (for that attack only.) You may use this feat only once per round and once per opponent during any single combat encounter.

Now, while it is generally more desireable to flank if possible, and not all rogues go the high-dex route (although many do,) Flick of the Wrist can be an attractive option in rogue or other stealth specialty games where the goal is usually either larceny or assassination.

In addition, it encourages combat flexibility- going into combat with two weapons and without Quick Draw can be cumbersome, and in an urban area it's not always considered polite to walk around like that. Hell, many civilized areas may even restrict the amount of personal weaponry allowed (depends on the local government...)

However, a Flick of the Wrist rogue can have daggers secured or, better yet, hidden on his person, and then whip them out for a sneak attack at a moment's notice. This is of particular use in assassination games, where the rogue is waiting to slip up next to his target in a crowd, or has infiltrated the target's household via stealth or disguise and is waiting for a moment alone with him.

In combat, Improved Feint for high Cha rogues (especially in urban environs, where both Cha and feinting are more useful) and Two-Weapon Fighting for rogues working with fighters and other allies ultimately can put up more damage over time. But for unexpectedness, and for bringing back the prevalence of the dagger as the best weapon for backstabbing, Flick of the Wrist earns my vote for my favorite way to inflict sneak attack damage.

However, this is all incredibly biased by my personal preference for urban games with less combat (where FotW and IF are the best sneak attack options because they are the most situationally flexible.)

As a side note, I usually house-rule allow my PCs to use Flick of the Wrist to throw daggers as well- it helps characters built along these lines to be more effective against multiple opponents, and to be more awesome in general.

Tell me what you think.

silvermesh
2007-02-14, 12:46 PM
The attacks happen within a 3 second timeframe. For a level 20 rogue with three attacks, thats an attack every 2 seconds. I'd sure NOTICE in that two seconds that someone just stabbed me with a dagger, and I'd be able to react.


Flat-Footed

At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed. You can’t use your Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) while flat-footed. Barbarians and rogues have the uncanny dodge extraordinary ability, which allows them to avoid losing their Dexterity bonus to AC due to being flat-footed.

A flat-footed character can’t make attacks of opportunity.

you are flat-footed until you act. you cannot act until it is your turn. sneak attack is based on the idea that the target did not know that you were going to do what you did, regardless of his awareness of you or his surroundings. if a rogue sneaks up and effectively "backstabs" you, he gets a surprise round in which all of his attacks are sneak attacks, and if he rolls higher initative than you, he gets ANOTHER ROUND of sneak attacks while you are still flat-footed. There is no splitting hairs here, the RAW ruling here is simple and OBVIOUS.

making up numbers for "how long attacks take" based on the approximate length of a round simply doesn't compute. a round is more than just attacks, it's defense, it's thought process, it's recovering from attacks. it's mutable and nondescript. a rogues attacks aren't one every two seconds, theyre just fast... faster than your reaction time if you didn't beat his initiative.
If you want to house-rule it that's fine, but the RAW is explicit, and it's not like rogues need any nerfing.