Power Attack And Sneak Attack Combo

[Bartmanhomer]

I just thought of a good combo for a fighter/rogue class. Power Attack and Sneak Attack Combo will dish depending on the level. So what do you think about this combo?

[AnimeTheCat]

You'll want two weapon fighting for sneak attack and two handed weapons for power attack. I think the best combination would be ranger/rogue, use a two handed weapon and armor spikes or unarmed strikes, and possibly dip in to swordsage or warblade for some maneuvers. I did a similar concept blending the sneak attack fighter with a greatsword power attack for a glass cannon thug in a game once.

[heavyfuel]

It's... Pretty bad.

Power attack likes 2 handed weapons because the ratio goes from 1:1 to 2:1.

Sneak Attack ooth likes TWF because you care more about the number of attacks, this also means that penalties to attack (such as those from Power Attack) are extra bad for sneak attack

[Bartmanhomer]

You'll want two weapon fighting for sneak attack and two handed weapons for power attack. I think the best combination would be ranger/rogue, use a two handed weapon and armor spikes or unarmed strikes, and possibly dip in to swordsage or warblade for some maneuvers. I did a similar concept blending the sneak attack fighter with a greatsword power attack for a glass cannon thug in a game once.That's even better than the fighter/rogue multiclass. :biggrin:

[Kelb_Panthera]

It can be -made- to work but it's gonna cost you one more feat; oversized two-weapon fighting. Having a one-handed weapon in either hand means you can still get two extra points of damage for every point of attack penalty you take from PA. If you're not dumping your penalty onto AC with shocktrooper then the -2 from TWF is -probably- eating into your PA damage potential though.

There's also the option of using unarmed strikes, though there's some contention surrounding the idea of using an unarmed strike for both the primary and off-hand attacks if you've got the monk feature. That clears up if you just use it as your off-hand and wield a regular weapon for the primary. Requires a dip in monk or shou disciple (unapproachable east) and the latter takes a couple feats.

Then there's a race-locked option of being a revenant blade. The level 5 capstone of that class allows you to treat both ends of a valenar double-scimitar as two-handed weapons. Costs you 5 levels and your race choice (elf) though.

By default on just any character that has SA though, it's not a great option really.

[AnimeTheCat]

That's even better than the fighter/rogue multiclass. :biggrin:

If your goal is simply to augment power attack with additional sneak attack damage while flanking or against flat-footed/Dex denied targets, I highly recommend the Fighter ACF that switches the feats for sneak attack, better still to use the Thug variant and get some more skills. If this is just for some kind of NPC, just use SA fighter and a 2-handed weapon. You really only need power attack to be threatening on the damage end. On a charge in to a flanked or flat-footed foe you'll take a -2 attack bonus (PA Penalty), +2 attack bonus (charge bonus) which nets you the same normal attack bonus and +4 damage. That means you're dealing, with a medium greatsword, 2d6+4+(1.5xstrength)+(SA dice by level). With an orc fighter using the elite array as an enemy (which is how I used it) I put the 15 from the array in strength with the +4 from orc to give me 19, it was a level 3 orc so I got 2d6 sneak attack, I was dealing 2d6+10+2d6 on the flank which is very substantial against level 5 PCs. I played them like ambushers so they couldn't all be caught in a single AOE control spell, multiple uses would have to be expended. That was not including the archers from trees that prepared actions to try and disrupt spellcasting (which they didn't ever succeed because the DCs are crap...). Regardless, a little extra damage on an enemy to make them more punchy/threatening is never really a bad thing (and is never really a bad thing for a PC eaither). However...

If this is for an PC concept, you'll probably want to try and squeeze out more optimization than what I did for the orc ambusher fighter. You'll be at a loss for the sneak attack unless you can stack it up somehow, and I almost recommend going scout/ranger with swift hunter instead of rogue. I keep going back to ranger since they can effectively dump Dex... well they can have less than 15 dex and still pick up two weapon fighting so I guess not "dump" it, or do... Either way, then you get the feats for free. I say scout as opposed to ranger because then if you decide to throw a splash of barbarian for pounce, you'll get your skirmish stuff every time you charge. It will output less damage than Sneak Attack, but I think it's more reliable to get off. I don't recommend using unarmed strikes, but rather a spiked gauntlet or armor spikes. Unarmed strikes needs another feat and you're probably going to be so insanely feat starved to make this optimal, you don't need to be adding another one in there.

[Troacctid]

Combine it with Precise Strike. Convert your sneak attack dice into flat +4 damage bonuses (slightly better than the +3.5 average for a day) that ignore fortification and are multiplied on a crit.

The last bit lends itself nicely to a crit-focused build with a keen falchion and Telling Blow.

[Anthrowhale]

Using Exotic Weapon Proficiency[Dragonsplits]+Exotic Weapon Master[Uncanny Blow] plausibly allows you advantageous power attack with two-weapon fighting.

The precise strike approach also sounds pretty good on a sneak attack fighter. You might consider dual wielding Kusarigama taking EWP[Kusarigama]+WF[Kusarigama]+Precise Strike+Power Attack+Combat Reflexes+Vexing Flanker+Adaptable Flanker+Two Weapon Fighting+Sneak Attack Thug Fighter+Exotic Weapon Master[Uncanny Blow]. Adaptable Flanker with a reach weapon allows you to flank for yourself. Precise Strike+Power Attack allows you to convert SA into a bonus to hit. EWP[Kusarigama]+WF[Kusarigama] qualifies for Exotic Weapon Master[Uncanny Blow] which doubles Power Attack Damage on an exotic weapon. That's quite a few feats, so this sort of approach works best if you have some way to acquire extra feats (Flaws, Heroics, Heartfire Fanner, etc...).

[Afghanistan]

It's... Pretty bad.

Power attack likes 2 handed weapons because the ratio goes from 1:1 to 2:1.

Sneak Attack ooth likes TWF because you care more about the number of attacks, this also means that penalties to attack (such as those from Power Attack) are extra bad for sneak attack

Get the best of both worlds by being a Diopsid and wield two Executioner's Mace. As for the penalty? Eh, I got nothing.

[Allanimal]

Adaptable Flanker with a reach weapon allows you to flank for yourself.

Wow, that's a neat trick. Might have to use that one...

[Anthrowhale]

Wow, that's a neat trick. Might have to use that one...
The substantial drawback here is the feat tax. 3 feats on top of all the other feats you might want to max out sneak attack is pretty substantial. If you have a plan to overcome that (they are fighter bonus feats at least...) it seems quite useful.

[heavyfuel]

Adaptable Flanker with a reach weapon allows you to flank for yourself.

No, it doesn't.



When in doubt about whether two friendly characters flank an opponent in the middle, trace an imaginary line between the two friendly characters’ centers. If the line passes through opposite borders of the opponent’s space (including corners of those borders), then the opponent is flanked.


You very clearly need two characters to flank.

[Kelb_Panthera]

The substantial drawback here is the feat tax. 3 feats on top of all the other feats you might want to max out sneak attack is pretty substantial. If you have a plan to overcome that (they are fighter bonus feats at least...) it seems quite useful.

There's also the minor issue of needing the opponent to be the same size as you or smaller. I suppose you could pick up island of blades somewhere to solve that.

[RNightstalker]

Adaptable Flanker with a reach weapon allows you to flank for yourself.

Umm...wha?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Umm...wha?

The feat says you can pick a square you threaten and treat it as though you were occupying that square for determining flanking. It says further that you also still occupy your actual square for determining flanking. If you have a reach weapon and you're adjacent ot a creature of your size or smaller, you can designate the square opposite yourself on the other side of the enemy. Since you occupy both of the positions necessary for flanking, thanks to the feat, you -may- be considered to be flanking by yourself, provided that the same weapon allows you to threaten adjacent squares or that you have another that does so.

This was almost certainly not an intended function of the feat and it can be argued that you still need another creature in a flanking position as heavyfuel has done.

[RNightstalker]

The feat says you can pick a square you threaten and treat it as though you were occupying that square for determining flanking. It says further that you also still occupy your actual square for determining flanking. If you have a reach weapon and you're adjacent ot a creature of your size or smaller, you can designate the square opposite yourself on the other side of the enemy. Since you occupy both of the positions necessary for flanking, thanks to the feat, you -may- be considered to be flanking by yourself, provided that the same weapon allows you to threaten adjacent squares or that you have another that does so.

This was almost certainly not an intended function of the feat and it can be argued that you still need another creature in a flanking position as heavyfuel has done.

I'm not going to sidetrack this thread going down that path. It's a nice idea.

Back to the OP, one of the best ways to gain SA is to attack from concealment, which is what the Blink spell does for you. A Ring of Blinking should be manageable by mid-levels.

[Mordaedil]

Note that most reach weapons can't attack someone in an adjacent square to you, so you'd need to use the almighty spiked chain or whip (unless I am forgetting another reach weapon here) and it is worth noting that if you grab a feat like short haft, the feat specifies that you spend a swift action to lose reach, so you'd be unable to call on the benefit of the other feat, as you'd no longer be able to threaten from that square.

That is, unless you work with a DM who thinks it is a neat idea and will allow you to anyway.

[Anthrowhale]

You very clearly need two characters to flank.
It's very common for feats to change the rules.

There's also the minor issue of needing the opponent to be the same size as you or smaller.
This is true at medium size, but not at larger sizes. If you are large and use a reach weapon, then you can threaten 20' away. If a huge creature (15'x15') is next to you, then you can achieve flanking via threatening from across it (not diagonally across it). This situation is "good" since you can threaten from 4 squares away and attack with the same weapon 3 squares away.

The constraint that you be directly next to an opponent is annoying. I guess the good news is that it's probably common to have tumble on builds with sneak attack.

This was almost certainly not an intended function of the feat and it can be argued that you still need another creature in a flanking position as heavyfuel has done.
It looks intended to me, as the wording is quite explicit.

...you can choose to count as occupying any other square you threaten for purposes of determining flanking bonuses for you... Short of an actual example, I don't know how it could be more explicit. This also seems reasonable power-wise given the 3 feats required (on feat starved builds) and some opponents being immune to flanking. For example, my expectation is that many people would prefer Craven, Darkstalker, and Two-Weapon Fighting instead.