Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

3E Sneak Attack only working once per target

Why does the 3E SA only work once per target? That's not how it works in NWN.

«1

Comments

  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    What balance?

    But nevertheless, that's not how *3E Sneak Attack* works.

    jackjack
  • amk320amk320 Member Posts: 15
    Yes, that took me by surprise too, coming from NWN.

    Be advised it also only works with melee weapons. Also unlike NWN. Also took me by surprise.

    What I'd still like to know (not that I think I have the patience for two thieves in a party) is if a single critter can be sneak attacked multiple times by separate sneak attackers.

    FinneousPJ
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    I'm not so sure it's about balance. I think it was bad implementation.

    I imagine that they tweaked Backstab a little to work like a Sneak Attack but left the other parts of the code alone for a quick and dirty solution.

    Remember, the game is still ADnD.

    FinneousPJjackjack
  • amk320amk320 Member Posts: 15
    edited December 2014
    So why is it not available once per round to crossbow and sling users?

    Not sure where they got the idea that ranged weapons were okay for NWN 3E sneak attack, but not for IWD 3E sneak attack.

    I don't see how that would've been game-breaking. As it stands, I have a difficult enough time fitting 2-3 characters into the melee, let alone trying to jam a thief in there.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    is it not once per round?

  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited December 2014
    @elminster‌

    I'm not sure if your quote is correct. This is what the 3.5E PHB says about Sneak Attacks:

    "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.
    "

    @amk320‌

    Also, in PnP 3.5E, you can Sneak Attack with ranged weapons only once, unless you hide again.
    You cannot keep sneak attacking them at range like in melee, basically, because they are not flanked.

    In short, NwN1 is wrong about ranged sneak attacks. It's based on those rules, it's not perfect and many other rules are missing or are changed to fit the game.

    Secondly, you get 1d6 Sneak Attack every 2 levels after 1st. (1st 1d6, 3rd 2d6, 5th 3d6, 7th 4d6 etc etc).

    Third, they thought it was okay to sneak attack at ranged because you control only one character and can have AI companions.
    They did that in order to not make Rogues useless. In PnP you have a full party to assist you.
    That's why it's much easier and forgiving than the Infinity Engine games.

    Also, I will repeat what I said. This is still an ADnD game. They're not going to implement everything from 3E (when it JUST came out).
    Sneak Attack shouldn't even be in the game. It was an alternate bonus.

  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,301
    edited December 2014
    edited out

    Post edited by elminster on
  • amk320amk320 Member Posts: 15
    NWN2 plays a lot like these old IE games. I don't understand why ranged sneak attacks were okay in that medium, but not okay in this one.

    Limiting the sneak attack to once per enemy makes sense, but I'm baffled as to why it was also restricted to melee weapons.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited December 2014
    Not only is it restricted to melee weapons, it is restricted to thief weapons so no sneak attacking with axes or two handed swords or whatever for fighter thieves. *kicks dirt dejectedly*

    But I thought I've seen it work once per round not only once per target? Maybe because most things die after a sneak and full round of attacks from everyone.

    jackjack
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited December 2014
    @elminster‌

    I'm reading the 3.0E PHB also (the 3.0E skills like Pick Pocket vs Sleight of Hand, Animal Empathy and different Animal Companions are there so I know it's 3.0E and not 3.5E) and the description for the Sneak Attack is different.

    Can you post a picture of it? Maybe some of us is doing a mistake and is using a wrong or outdated book.

    @amk320‌
    Probably because they took NwN1's code and put it into NwN2 without changing too much.

    For example, the Pale Master in 3E is 5/10 casting. In 3.5E it's 9/10 casting. In NwN2 it's 5/10 casting.

    Many stuff in NwN2 are relics from NwN1.

    Also about the restriction to melee weapons in 3.5E (not NwN2):
    That's how flanking and threatened squares work. They don't allow ranged sneak attacks to work exactly like melee sneak attacks.

    And the reason for that is balance. In PnP, doing multiple ranged sneak attacks per round means that the enemy cannot turn and hit you, which would make sneak attacks way too good.

    Or imagine a scenario with multiple rogues that shoot and move at an enemy while he cannot do anything about them.

    It's risk vs reward. In melee you can do a ton of sneak attacks but you're not safe. At range you can sneak attack and you're safe.

  • amk320amk320 Member Posts: 15
    edited December 2014
    I'm asking about the restriction to melee weapons for sneak attacks in IWD.

    Nothing to do with PnP. NWN engine vs. IWD engine.

    If a thief can make unlimited sneak attacks at range in a game like NWN2 without the game being broken, I don't understand why a thief in IWD can't make a single sneak attack at range. Especially in light of the "once per enemy" IWD restriction.

    How is a single arrow/bolt/stone + sneak attack damage any different from a single katana swipe + sneak attack damage? (Other than that the ranged weapon would allow the thief to sneak attack more often, against more opponents, at range. I don't see this as being too game-breaking. Single class thieves are already a bit lackluster.)

    It would also allow many people who can't fit thieves in the front line to take advantage of sneak attack. As I said, I've already got enough characters tripping over one another in the melee without trying to jam the thief in there too.


  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,301
    Archaos said:

    @elminster‌

    I'm reading the 3.0E PHB also (the 3.0E skills like Pick Pocket vs Sleight of Hand, Animal Empathy and different Animal Companions are there so I know it's 3.0E and not 3.5E) and the description for the Sneak Attack is different.

    Can you post a picture of it? Maybe some of us is doing a mistake and is using a wrong or outdated book.

    Nah it looks like you are right. :)

    Archaos
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited December 2014
    @amk320‌
    amk320 said:

    I'm asking about the restriction to melee weapons for sneak attacks in IWD.

    Because in IWD, Sneak Attack uses the code of a Backstab, more or less. It's that simple.
    And that code doesn't allow backstabbing with ranged weapons and other stuff.

    Also, Backstab is still viable. If you could Sneak Attack a ton of times from range, why would anyone use Backstabbing?

    elminsterjackjackGamingFreak
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    I'm just kind of bummed after finding this out. I was expecting it to work like 3E given the name of the option. According to the quote by @Archaos each strike catching the opponent off guard should deal extra damage, which is how I remembered it from NWN.

    elminster
  • amk320amk320 Member Posts: 15
    It makes sense now that I know it's using the same code as backstab (which requires thief only melee weapons)...

    But I also wish it was possible with a ranged weapon. As I said, that doesn't seem too game-breaking given the restriction in place that each enemy can only be sneak attacked once. It also has a legitimate PnP basis and would be a helpful boost to single-classed thieves.

  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    pretty sure it's once a round, backstab is once a round right (unless assassination)?

  • amk320amk320 Member Posts: 15
    Backstab, at least in Baldur's Gate, could be done as often as you could attack from stealth or invisibility.

  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    I tried sneak attacking, leaving the room to hide again and sneak attacking a second time and it doesn't work.

    elminsterjackjack
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited December 2014
    Don't take my word about the code being similar, but knowing how some things work, it really seems like changing some variables in it's code, based on it's behavior.

    Like I said, if Sneak Attack was made superior in everything, backstab would be useless.
    Right now, backstab multiplies all of the damage, while sneak attack only adds some dice but makes it easier to land it.
    So that's where the balance factor comes in.

    Maybe it was intentional exactly for this balance reason.

    CrevsDaak
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,156
    They're probably completely different parts of code using an if (!variable) or while (!variable) to differentiate one from the other (after reading the .ini file of course).

    elminsterjackjack
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    @Archaos Backstab and sneak attack are two completely different things. Whether one is superior to the other is irrelevant. If you're going to give the option of 3E SA, make it right. Those who don't like it for balance reasons or whatever can still opt for backstab. Besides, you'll never make them perfectly balanced.

    CrevsDaak
  • GamingFreakGamingFreak Member Posts: 639
    Part of it saddens me, part of it makes me respect it. Anyone who played NWN2 knew damn well one of the silliest strategies was controlling Neeshka and running around all enemies and stabbing them in the back while the party kept aggro and keep on doing this until everything died. It's the same damn reason they decided to make late-game enemies immune to crits (and thus sneaking attacks), which effectively crippled rogues and killed the desire to play a pure rogue or backstab build in the campaign without multi-classing.

    Archaos
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    edited December 2014
    Archaos said:

    @FinneousPJ‌
    That's another case of "I want to eat my cake and have it too."

    No it's not irrelevant. If one option is vastly superior to another and it makes the other useless, then that's bad design. Period.

    That's not how things work period and no it's not irrelevant. A mage can kill everything with a fireball does that make warriors irrelevant? It's clearly superior as you would say. And say if you are a fighter, you could use Wisdom as a dump stat does that make it bad design for the game to have wisdom?

    It's there you can use it or put points into it if you want to or not. It's the same type thing with backstab and sneak. Maybe some people like backstab, maybe some like sneak attack. You can choose backstab or you can choose sneak. Remember that you don't HAVE TO POWERGAME.
    Archaos said:


    They are under no obligation to make everything exactly like 3E when it's not even a 3E game.

    This bit holds true. But they should at least implement something in a way that makes sense. It makes no sense that you can only sneak a target once when you can re-hide and backstab continuously.


    FinneousPJjackjack
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    @Troodon80‌
    Can you make a version where it works once per round instead of once per 7 turns? Instead of turning off the protection completely.

    FinneousPJjackjack
Sign In or Register to comment.