PDA

View Full Version : Skirmish and sudden strike



Shas aia Toriia
2007-05-16, 04:25 PM
Alright, in my opinion a good sneak attack can effect the battle quite easily, and is easy to do, because it works when you are flanking as well as when you catch them flat-fooded (rare in the middle of a battle).

Now, why would any one take sudden strike? It is exactly the same thing, but can only be used if they are flat footed, which is rare unless you either strike first, or are scouting. With skirmish, although it grants a bonus to AC and bonus damage, you provoke attacks of oppurtunity, so you should probably spend a feat on Combat Expertise, which could be used for better feats.

Now, does anyone here actually prefer to use skirmish or sudden strike over sneak attacks, and if so, why? Right now, I think they're useless. What do you guys think?

Dhavaer
2007-05-16, 04:27 PM
Skirmish is more reliable. Sudden Strike is less reliable, but classes with it generally get more abilities than ones with sneak attack. Or at least they should.

Shas aia Toriia
2007-05-16, 04:28 PM
Alright, and is there any one who would take that over the (in my opinion) better sneak attack?

Dhavaer
2007-05-16, 04:31 PM
I'd definately take Scout over Rogue. More hp, perma-Freedom of Movement, HiPS and Blindsight. Ninja doesn't really interest me, though.

Shas aia Toriia
2007-05-16, 04:33 PM
Not just scout, but would you take skirmish over sneak attack?
By the way, thanks so far.

Ikkitosen
2007-05-16, 04:34 PM
Skirmish over Sneak Attack? No, not from a raw power perspective.

Dhavaer
2007-05-16, 04:35 PM
How do you mean? Scout is the only class that gets Skirmish, except a few PrCs. How are you choosing between it and Sneak Attack?

Shas aia Toriia
2007-05-16, 04:36 PM
Never mind, just some rantings, and a little homebrew thrown in there. Thanks anyways!

SpikeFightwicky
2007-05-16, 04:37 PM
Alright, and is there any one who would take that over the (in my opinion) better sneak attack?

I'd probably go for the scout and take skirmish. It's WAY easier to pull off and if you have a bow, then you're set. Plus you get a nifty dodge bonus. If a rogue is sneak attacking, he's likely in melee, and if he's in melee, he's likely about to get pummeled.

The ninja takes a little more finesse to use. He can turn invisible as a class feature (many times per day with the right feat) and thus has an easier time hitting the enemy (you get a +2 bonus to attack and the enemy's denied their Dex). However, when they run out of options, they're much less combat ready than the other 2 classes.

Shas aia Toriia
2007-05-16, 04:39 PM
Thanks, I forgot about the ninjas' ki abilities. . .

Maybe I'll make a ninja character sometime.:smallwink:

Teilos
2007-05-16, 04:39 PM
I heard there is a stance in ToB, which allows to move two 5-foot steps. With that you can always skirmish.

Tumble should resolve any AoO issues.

Skirmish works also better with ranged attacks. You can take Greater Manyshot from EPH (and the prerequesites ofc). Then you can use your move action to move and fire all your arrows with skirmish damage using a standard action. This is an attractive way to keep your skill monkey out of combat.

Aximili
2007-05-16, 04:47 PM
OK, first of all. Sneak is better than sudden, it`s suppose to be.

Now, why would any one take sudden strike? It is exactly the same thing, but can only be used if they are flat footed, which is rare unless you either strike first, or are scouting.
Ok, last time I checked, you don`t take sudden strike, nobody does. You take levels in ninja or levels in rogue, and that comes with a lot more stuff than just sneak attack (SA) or sudden strike (SS). And that`s why people take SS, because it comes with the class they chose. Would they prefer SA? of course, but there were other stuff in the ninja class that made them choose it.


With skirmish, although it grants a bonus to AC and bonus damage, you provoke attacks of oppurtunity, so you should probably spend a feat on Combat Expertise, which could be used for better feats.
Well, you only provoque AoO if you`re in melee, and that`s not what skirmish was designed for (though it`s possible to make it happen). Comparing skirmish and SA is relative. From an optimizer`s point of view, SA is better, since it has much more damage potential.
But skirmish is highly more reliable, you`ll be able to apply it to full attacks (with the right feats) with no need of flanking or denying DEX bonus. And it`s easier to apply to ranged full-attacks, while ranged full-SA usually relly on a ring of blinking but have much more devastating effects.

And by the way, Combat Expertise is not a bad feat.


Now, does anyone here actually prefer to use skirmish or sudden strike over sneak attacks, and if so, why? Right now, I think they're useless. What do you guys think?

Yes, I prefer to use skirmish. Not only because I prefer the scout, but also because I prefer independent and reliable characters. While skirmish rellies only on mobility, SA requires either help or some other card up your sleeve.

Shas aia Toriia
2007-05-16, 04:50 PM
And by the way, Combat Expertise is not a bad feat.

No, it is not a bad feat, but it takes up a feat slot that could be used for something better.

Indon
2007-05-16, 05:16 PM
I would take both, by going Scout 3/Rogue X and taking the feat from Complete Scoundrel that lets your Rogue levels add to your effective Scout level for Skirmish. :smallbiggrin:

But seriously, Skirmish has its' uses. I envision the Scout's ideal combat as one basically leading an enemy along towards a trap (comprised of your party members), and the ability to deal good damage and gain AC at the same time are both condusive to that style.

Person_Man
2007-05-16, 05:53 PM
1) Skirmish is the easiest to qualify for, but has the poorest progression. However a Scout 3/Rogue 17 with Swift Ambusher and Improved Skirmish will have 9d6 Sneak Attack and 7d6 Skirmish damage (average +56 damage per attack), which as far as I know is the most Precision Damage you can get without some crazy combination.

2) Sneak Attack is the gold standard of Precision Damage. But keep in mind that it's progression is only an average of 1.75 per level, well behind the Power Attack family of feats, which most Skill Monkeys can't use very well due to mediocre BAB and lack of bonus feats. At best, it helps a Skill Monkey from being entirely useless in combat. At worst, it screws over people who think the best way to make a powerful melee build is to maximize Sneak Attack somehow. So really we're arguing over which form of Precision damage is the least mediocre.

3) Sudden Strike is Sneak Attack's slightly retarded cousin. Sneak Attack, except not when you're flanking. This might seem like a huge drawback, but really, its not. Skill Monkeys are inherently fragile - mediocre AC, poor hit points, and often weak Fort and Will Saves. They shouldn't be anywhere near the front line, unless they have a death wish. Once you can afford a Ring of Blinking or reach 7th level (when the Wizard will cast the obligatory Greater Invisibility on you regularly) there's effectively no difference between Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack.

4) Greater Manyshot is a Precision Damage user's best friend. Stay out of the way, provide ranged support, and solve the Skill encounters. That is your job. Enjoy being good at it, or choose a different class. Don't get yourself killed trying to do something else. Unless your whole party is suboptimized, in which case your DM will throw weak encounters at you. In that case, enjoy whatever Precision Damage build you want.