Rogue backstabs

[Craig234]

I'm being a bit lazy, but would someone mind confirming how a rogue is set up for combat, for any special rogue attack?

I've got a rogue with a couple daggers - would I just have him hide, then attack from the monster from behind, and keep attacking?

For the moment, I've preferred to just give him a bow and keep him safer.

How much worse is that?

Any thoughts?

[Raven_Song]

I've got a rogue with a couple daggers

I'm assuming that you've also got ambidexterity and two weapon fighting feats, otherwise you'd be better using a single weapon (oh and daggers aren't the most damaging weapon you could be using )

would I just have him hide, then attack from the monster from behind, and keep attacking?

Yes but only the first attack would gain a back-stab multiplier, as after making the attack your rogue would emerge from the shadows (so you're better using hit and run tactics)

I've preferred to just give him a bow and keep him safer.

Sensible strategy - you might think of investing in some fighter levels and taking some ranged weapon type feats.

How much worse is that?

Depends entirely on the type of enemy you are facing

If your character is a pure rogue you might want to consider adding soe other classes (either search through the forums here for some tips or check out gamefaqs.com)

[Kipi]

[QUOTE=Craig234]For the moment, I've preferred to just give him a bow and keep him safer.
[/QUOTE]
Not bad strategy.
You could also combine it with Hit&Run tactic: hide, sneak behind opponent, backstabb, run behind your tanks then equip missile weapon and start shooting. Works quite well and your other characters can hammer monster with missiles and spells while those are trying to catch your rogue.

[Crucis]

I'm assuming that you've also got ambidexterity and two weapon fighting feats, otherwise you'd be better using a single weapon (oh and daggers aren't the most damaging weapon you could be using )

Agreed, you need both feats (or a level of Ranger).

And yes, daggers aren't the most damaging weapons, but if you are a relatively low STR rogue and are using Weapon Finesse, daggers aren't necessarily all that bad. Also, once you become a higher level rogue and are doing a lot of backstabbing attacks, the damage that you're causing with sneak attack damage will greatly outweigh whatever you might do with a dagger or short sword.

Yes but only the first attack would gain a back-stab multiplier, as after making the attack your rogue would emerge from the shadows (so you're better using hit and run tactics)

Given that IWD2 isn't 2e, it's not a backstab multiplier, but a number of sneak attack dice.

Regardless, You're right that only the first attack can get the sneak attack bonus. That said, in a melee situation with a lot of enemies, there's no reason that a good rogue couldn't move from one enemy to the next and the next and sneak attack them all in turn. I've done it and it's a nasty tactic. It's also a tactic that requires a degree of micromanagement. You just cannot leave your rogue behind the first enemy you sneak attack and forget about him. He'll get surrounded and overwhelmed, if you leave him on his own. You need to keep a close eye on a rogue that you've sent on a sneak attack foray in the enemy's rear areas.

(Rogue using a bow)
Sensible strategy - you might think of investing in some fighter levels and taking some ranged weapon type feats.

If you want to eventually be a nasty backstabbing rogue, you better off staying as a pure rogue. But if backstabbing isn't important to you, then taking levels from others classes is a pretty decent idea to strengthen their combat ability. Still, a rogue can be a capable archer without taking any levels from another class.

If your character is a pure rogue you might want to consider adding soe other classes (either search through the forums here for some tips or check out gamefaqs.com)

As I said above, about the best reason to stay as a pure rogue is for a lot of sneak attacking/backstabbing goodness. But if you only want the rogue skills and some decent stealth, you don't need to be a pure rogue to be sufficiently good in these areas.

There are a number of different rogue builds that work.

And if you really want to be a sneak attacker, a pure sneak attacking rogue is great too. Just be patient, My experience is that it takes a while to build up enough sneak attack dice to make the risk of sneak attacking worthwhile. Remember, you start with 1d6 sneak attack damage and get another +1d6 of SA damage on every odd level of rogue. (That is, 2d6 SA at 3 levels of rogue, 3d6 at 5 levels, 4 d6 at 7 levels, and so on.)


Towards the end of normal mode with a full party, a pure rogue might have upwards of 8d6 of sneak attack damage. This is why I wouldn't really worry about whether I was wielding a 1d4 dagger or a 2d6 greatsword while I'm sneak attacking. All that sneak attack damage will greatly outwiegh the regular damage. The only thing that really matters is hitting the target so that you can get that SA damage. And with a low STR, max DEX, weapon finessed rogue, a high enchantment dagger might just be the ticket to massive sneak attacking goodness.

[Crucis]

[QUOTE=Kipi]Not bad strategy.
You could also combine it with Hit&Run tactic: hide, sneak behind opponent, backstabb, run behind your tanks then equip missile weapon and start shooting. Works quite well and your other characters can hammer monster with missiles and spells while those are trying to catch your rogue.[/QUOTE]

Kipi, there's also a reverse version of this strategy that I've used to great effect many times. I think of it as Recon in Force.

In many of my parties, I've had a ranger along with my rogue, both of whom were excellent at stealth. I would think of this pair as my Special Ops team. What I'd do is send both out on scouting missions with the rest of my party just out of sight, but not far away. If I found a target that wasn't too tough, I'd have both of them start the attack from stealth and would have the rest of my party come a-running at the first sound of battle. Of course, the first targets of my special ops team would be any spellcasters.

OTOH, if the enemy forces appears to be too tough for the SpecOps team to stand up to for short time, I'll revert to the Hit & Run tactics you describe, except that my prefered H&R involves hitting the enemy with my scouts using ranged combat, so that they are already a good distance from the enemy at the start of combat. If I'm gonna start a battle from stealth in melee, I'm not going to run away. I prefer to have the range already fairly open, for H&R tactics. It also allows me to have my mage dump a web or grease in front of the charging enemy to slow their advance and give my archers an extra round of 2 of fire. And maybe a chance to summon monsters or cast a fireball in their midst.

[Raven_Song]

Given that IWD2 isn't 2e, it's not a backstab multiplier, but a number of sneak attack dice.

I only play CRPG's so I frequently mix back stabbing/sneak attack ...

As to your other points I bow to your superior knowledge.


To be perfectly honest I loathe rogues in IWD2 and I usually only throw a few levels in as a mix in to some other class (usually a wizard). I'm much more comfortable with hybrid classes like druids and bards...

[Crucis]

[QUOTE=Raven_Song]I only play CRPG's so I frequently mix back stabbing/sneak attack ...

As to your other points I bow to your superior knowledge.


To be perfectly honest I loathe rogues in IWD2 and I usually only throw a few levels in as a mix in to some other class (usually a wizard). I'm much more comfortable with hybrid classes like druids and bards...[/QUOTE]

Bah, no problemo, RS.

I happen to love rogues in IWD2. I don't care that they aren't quite as necessary, due to the weakness of traps in the game. (I am soooo tempted to try to write a mod to try to fix that situation.)

It's strange that you mention druids and bards. Those are two classes that I rarely play. I liked druids in IWD1/HOW/TOTL, but can never seem to fit one into my IWD2 parties. I usually end up with a ranger instead.

Bards, I know that some people love'em and that's cool. But they seem to be best played by letting'em sing. And that's pretty much too hands off for me. I may be a rare bird, but I actually like micromanaging my characters in battle. And a bard that I just leave out of the fray singing seems soooo boring.

I like looking at every member of my party during a battle and thinking what should he or she do right now. Looking at a bard and constantly thinking "just keep singing" just doesn't excite me. I've tried putting bards in my parties, but they just never seem to get by gaming juices flowing.

Now, give me a good, sneaky ranger, team him up with a good sneaky rogue, within my full sized party and I'm in sneaky heaven, as you can read above.

Regarding druids, I'm not sure why I've never taken a druid. One thing, I can never see replacing a cleric with a druid. That said, there should be nothing wrong with a druid in my 6th "utility" position. Another things I like about having a ranger is the Wilderness Lore skill for getting thru the Fell Wood. Obviously, a druid would manage this role every bit as well.



Back to rogues. One of the very best sneak attack weapons in the game (IMHO) was the HOF 12 paces spear, due to its long reach. If you've got a rogue with enough STR to not suffer by not using a small weapon and weapon finesse, the 12 paces spear was soooo fun for sneak attacking. You could stand a good distance away from the target and poke, poke, poke away. Even in HOF, a pure rogue with a LOT of sneak attack dice and the 12 Paces spear could be a truly terrifying force.

[silverdragon72]

.

btw. if you flank your opponent (therefore the enemy needs to lock on another PC and the rogue must attack this one from the rear) you get one sneak attack per round!

.