Remove ranged sneak attack limitations

[ArkoHighStar]

With the change to mechanic, and the seeming desire by Turbine to make crossbows the ranged weapon of choice for rogues, why don't you go one step further and actually make them useful by eliminating or vastly increasing the 30' requirement when rogue is using a crossbow.

The limitation just seems so arbitrary and so small a distance, making ranged sneak attack combat almost a pointless affair, because at that point you might as well do melee damage and get the advantages of subtle backstabbing.

On the point of subtle backstabbing having 2 branches, one ranged and one melee would also help a great deal in making ranged sneak attack combat more viable.

[Jubbers]

30ft isn't arbitrary it's straight from the 3.5 rules.

I agree that the range should be adjusted, but prefer that it's an enhancement line. While damage from a high dex should be based off a feat (as it is in the rules). There are a ton of things that they can do as the game isn't a mirror of 3.5 and has a lot of flavor in the way an MMO functions.

It's surprising how ranged DPS, bow or crossbow, is so far below that of melee in this game. In pnp ranged is on par if not even higher dps then melee. Multi-shot functions differently but the game is balanced for the 2 styles (melee or ranged), the same can’t be said for ddo.

I don't think that ranged should be the dominate style, but it does need to be a flavor that isn't looked as very sub par.

[Sabvre]

What about letting you get sneak damage on your first volley if you are sneaking at any range (aka until you draw aggro)

Kinda a snipe like ability.

[DToNE]

The problem here would be precision. As you well know, the realistic accuracy of any given ranged weapon is questionable, not to mention the speed it takes a projectile weapon to reach the target. Even if you aim at a vulnerable spot, there's no guarantee that the same vulnerable spot would be there half a second later as it would make sense that things are constantly on the move. The distance of 30 ft is actually forgiving, considering that scientifically no pre-gunpowder weapon ever exceeded the 80 ft a second mark. The average human conscious reflex time also averages around 0.2 seconds, so even at 30 ft, a person wary of the attack still has 0.1 second to jerk out of a fatal strike.

Therefore, no change is necessary. 30' is already forgiving.

[Sabvre]

The problem here would be precision. As you well know, the realistic accuracy of any given ranged weapon is questionable, not to mention the speed it takes a projectile weapon to reach the target. Even if you aim at a vulnerable spot, there's no guarantee that the same vulnerable spot would be there half a second later as it would make sense that things are constantly on the move. The distance of 30 ft is actually forgiving, considering that scientifically no pre-gunpowder weapon ever exceeded the 80 ft a second mark. The average human conscious reflex time also averages around 0.2 seconds, so even at 30 ft, a person wary of the attack still has 0.1 second to jerk out of a fatal strike.

Therefore, no change is necessary. 30' is already forgiving.

First, How many people do you know that can can move in less than a tenth of a second?

Second, i don't think you understand the reality of the word "SNEAK ATTACK". If they knew it was incoming it wouldn't be a sneak attack would it?

[DToNE]

First, How many people do you know that can can move in less than a tenth of a second?

Second, i don't think you understand the reality of the word "SNEAK ATTACK". If they knew it was incoming it wouldn't be a sneak attack would it?

First off, bolts and arrows are really loud. They're not exactly quiet weapons, you can easily hear the whir of the arrow. It doesn't take an expert to try to guard when you hear a "whoosh" coming in your direction.

Vital spots are very small and pinpoint, even a centimeter off can determine the difference between a fatal wound and a critical one. A person can definitely move MORE than an inch in 1/10th of a second which would completely throw off the precision. People can hit moving targets, yes, but that's only if they move in a single direction constantly, but living targets are different as vital organs are on the move spontaneously.

Take for example, someone's liver. If they're in combat, what are the chances that the person would stand perfectly still. The only real time they'd be perfectly motionless is when they're asleep. When they're not doing anything, if they hear something suspicious, what are the chances they'd just stand still but instead look in the direction of the sound? If the projectile sneak attack came from the front, what are the chances they wouldn't react to it and stand perfectly still?

As I've mentioned, 30' is actually very forgiving.

[Kromize]

30ft isn't arbitrary it's straight from the 3.5 rules.

I think you don't fully grasp the meaning of arbitrary.

[Chai]

I think you don't fully grasp the meaning of arbitrary.

That depends on what the meaning of is, is.

At some point the makers of the rules had to assign ranged sneak attack a game mechanic to outline its function in the game in relation to combat. At that point it was arbitrary. It has been a rule for a long time in the core setting.

DDO basically copy pasted that rule, due to precident, plain and simple.

If they do put this into DDO and make the radius larger, they need to make it an enhancement.

[Kromize]

That depends on what the meaning of is, is.

At some point the makers of the rules had to assign ranged sneak attack a game mechanic to outline its function in the game in relation to combat. At that point it was arbitrary. It has been a rule for a long time in the core setting.

DDO basically copy pasted that rule, due to precident, plain and simple.

If they do put this into DDO and make the radius larger, they need to make it an enhancement.

I'm thinking it would be wise to increase the range in relation with character level.

[Arkat]

I think you don't fully grasp the meaning of arbitrary.

Are you so sure?

Perhaps the creators of the D&D 3.5 rules had a very logical reason for using 30 feet.

[Kromize]

Are you so sure?

Perhaps the creators of the D&D 3.5 rules had a very logical reason for using 30 feet.

Perhaps. If so, I would love to see the reasoning, could be very interesting. But, I doubt it.

[Devonian]

At this stage I'd be happy with some manner of range marker, instead of guesswork. That and from my early and swiftly curtailed attempts, its no way 30ft, 10 at best.

[Scraap]

Are you so sure?

Perhaps the creators of the D&D 3.5 rules had a very logical reason for using 30 feet.

http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/SRD:Round

http://dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/SRD:M...,_and_Distance

Seems the logical intent is allowing sneak attacks to occur within the 6 seconds it would take for you and your opponent to move (or 1 full attack chain). That being said, 6 seconds in DDO is drastically different than 1 round PnP. Just how far of a distance can you cover in 6 seconds/1 full attack chain here? Still, I can't say completely removing the limitation would be a good notion, though making folks spend aps for a trade-off (gradually, as per the arcane archer line for maximum customization being the personal preference. believe the last suggestion along those lines as 6ft per d6 max, maybe lower to 3ft per d6) does have it's appeal.

One concern is of course just how broken it would be to have ranged assassinate and manyshot, so ensuring either an active range-boost clicky that locks that out, flatly prohibiting the assassinate ability when ranging, or specifying sneak attack range boosts to the mechanic line would be the suggestions there. Personally I could get behind option 2, as a better mix with Deepwood Sniper.

[ArkoHighStar]

The main problem is giving mechanics and rogues the crossbow enhancements becomes a useless gesture without some changes to the ranged sneak attack requirements.

Th 30 feet requirement just doesn't work in a 3d game like it does in a 6 second round scenario.Especially since that 30 feet is not really 30 feet based on actual play. In this instance 60 to 80 feet would be appropriate and would give the player the option to stay just outside of combat.

The whole notion of arrows being loud is just a bit silly in a combat system that allows a melee rogue to keep stabbing a mob for massive damage with 80% reduction in aggro due to subtle backstabbing etc.

That is why I advocate splitting the subtle backtabbing line into 2 lines one for melee one for ranged, this allows a rogue to be really good at one or not so shabby at 2.

[Bacab]

Sneak Attack with ranged attack.

I always felt you should have to have Precise Shot Feat to get sneak attack with a bow.

Sneak Attacks are based off hitting a small (like a kidney) unarmored target.

There are not many "instantly fatal" stab/piercing wounds on the human body. You will usually have a while before you bleed out.

Aorta and Heart are obviously very critical and fast deaths. Being stabbed in one of the Kidneys is extremely painful...and would indeed take you out of a fight...yet not instantly fatal. Interestingly, getting a Renal Artery clipped (main artery that feeds the kidneys...one for each kidney so you have 2) could indeed have you dead within 30 secs when adrenaline is factored in. Adrenaline would make your blood pressure rise and heart rate rise...basically bleed to death quicker.

Anywhere on the anterior (front) side of the neck could drop you quickly. Getting a carotid artery cut would shut down half your body in about 10 seconds and you would most likely bleed to death within a minute. Getting a jugular vein slashed or pierced is NOT usually fatal. Well not if you can apply pressure and see expert medical expertise quickly. Venous systems can re-route to avoid blood loss.

A stab to the liver or spleen would hurt really bad...but would take days to die from. Both are very "spongy" organs. A cut hepatic (the liver's main artery) artery though would be fatal fairly quickly if the it didn't tamponade (basically pressure itself into not bleeding due to the finite amount of space) quickly.

Lungs would hurt but not necessarily kill you...at all. Pulmonary Artery would be fatal within seconds.

Do you see a correlation here? Organs (big fruit-sized targets) are usually not "combat fatal" wounds. While its the arteries which are about as thick as your thumb (the aorta is) or pencils. "Sneak Attacks" in reality would be extremely difficult to pull off period. Next to impossible from range.

Oh don't get me wrong, ranged combat is lethal. But it really does not fit the thematic of a "Sneak attack". I mean shooting someone with a gun or cross-bow or bow and arrow...very fatal. But it is usually not a "precise" action. No more precise than getting hit by a car. Huge trauma kills you. Being shot multiple times is an example of "huge trauma".

My credentials...I am a CT Tech currently. I have a degree in A&P and 10 years experience in trauma medicine. I am also an Ex Army guy (Medical back then too) and have a Tour in Iraq from Feb 03-November 03.

And yes, its not lost on my the "bringing facts to a fantasy world". I just like/enjoy how DnD has magic, but also has a realism flavor to it.

So my feelings a Ranged Professional like a Ranger or a ranged Fighter or a Ranged ROG would indeed be lethal, but not from sneak attack damage. BUT Critical damage would be exhibited by that x3 multiplier of an arrow. AKA when you crit with an arrow...its because it did hit a big artery. But it is pretty much luck based. I personally would not allow sneak attack damage from ranged...

These are just my opinions...I would not want this put into the game.

[Uska]

umm how about no

[Arkat]

I'd be ok doing with either a feat that doubles the range to 60' or an enhancement line that gradually increases the sneak attack range to 60'.

In either case, I'd like to see it limited to Crossbows (repeating or otherwise).