iterative Attacks and Sneak Attacks

Albert_Fish · Nov 3, 2002

Does each iterative attack against the same creature...so long as he or she is flanked/flatfooted gain the bonus d6s for damage?
i.e. say Thiefy wants to attack master Goblin #3 with his 3 iterative attacks and wins initiative do all three do normal Damage plus sneak attack damage? if so then masters of the Bow are frkking powerful.

Mr Fidgit · Nov 3, 2002

"...any time the rogue's target would be denied his Dexerity bonus to AC"

so, yep, that's wicked powerful

MeepoTheMighty · Nov 3, 2002

Yes, sneak attack damage applies to every attack in an iterative attack sequence.

Pax · Nov 3, 2002

Yes, by the book, Rogues get their sneak attack bonus to EVERY attack during an action where they qualify (i.e. when their foe is flatfooted) ... making high-level rogues wielding two weapons VERY powerful in combat, often moreso than the FIGHTERS.

One of the first houserules I decided on, was to make sneak attack per attack action instead (allocated after the hit/miss check, to prevent "wasting" dice ... if the rogue swigns four times, and only hits once, s/he still gets their full sneak attack damage ... presuming the rogue -qualifies- for sneak damage, of course).

kreynolds · Nov 3, 2002

Albert_Fish said:
Does each iterative attack against the same creature...so long as he or she is flanked/flatfooted gain the bonus d6s for damage?

Yes.

hammymchamham · Nov 3, 2002

I'm going to say "no" only to go against the trend, even though its the wrong answer

IceBear · Nov 4, 2002

Yes, all attacks. Many people, like Pax, feel that this makes the rogues too powerful in combat, but I've yet to see that happen in practice, rather than theory in my campaign, so I've left it alone.

So far, in my opinion, there are a lot of things in the rules that look worse in theory than what normally happens in reality.

IceBear

Pax · Nov 5, 2002

hammymchamham said:
I'm going to say "no" only to go against the trend, even though its the wrong answer

I'd just like to point out, in my case at least, it's based on direct observation of the rule's effects in-play. Even the rogue's own player agreed, teh amount of damage he could pump out seemed abusive; left our poor fighter -completely- in the dust ...

... on a regular, reliable basis.

Now, IMO, in melee combat, when swinging weapons, the fighters should be "the best", aside form magic and tactics. It's what fighters *do*, after all. I'm fairly certain Clerics woudl be upset of Bards could out-heal them, or Paladins outdo them in turning undead. I'm sure the Wizard would be upset if the Sorceror had the same "change your spell repertoire with a day's notice" ability of the wizrd, and conversely, the Sorceror wouldbe unhappy if hte Wizard ended up casting more spells per day, with more on-the-fly flexibility, than the Sorceror could.

So when the Rogue can regularly (with flanking) deal out more damage per round than the fighter ... IMO there's something in need of fixing.

But, as I said above ... by the book, every single attack the Rogue makes, that "qualifies for" sneak bonus dice, gets them. All of them.

shilsen · Nov 5, 2002

Pax said:
I'd just like to point out, in my case at least, it's based on direct observation of the rule's effects in-play. Even the rogue's own player agreed, teh amount of damage he could pump out seemed abusive; left our poor fighter -completely- in the dust ...

... on a regular, reliable basis.

Now, IMO, in melee combat, when swinging weapons, the fighters should be "the best", aside form magic and tactics. It's what fighters *do*, after all. I'm fairly certain Clerics woudl be upset of Bards could out-heal them, or Paladins outdo them in turning undead. I'm sure the Wizard would be upset if the Sorceror had the same "change your spell repertoire with a day's notice" ability of the wizrd, and conversely, the Sorceror wouldbe unhappy if hte Wizard ended up casting more spells per day, with more on-the-fly flexibility, than the Sorceror could.

So when the Rogue can regularly (with flanking) deal out more damage per round than the fighter ... IMO there's something in need of fixing.

But, as I said above ... by the book, every single attack the Rogue makes, that "qualifies for" sneak bonus dice, gets them. All of them.

IMO, it's perfectly all right for the rogue to deal out more damage per round than the fighter in certain cases. One thing that balances the fighter out against the rogue is that the latter needs flanking or other special circumstances to operate at full effectiveness, whereas a fighter can keep cranking out damage consistently. Also, being the "the best" in combat doesn't mean just doing most damage. Or hitting most often. Or being able to soak up damage. Or being the best at various combat maneuvers. It's a combination of the above, and where that's concerned, the fighter is streets ahead of any other class (as it should be). With the potential for heavy armor, high hit points, extra iterative attacks, & oodles of bonus feats, the fighter is far ahead of an equivalent-lvl rogue in combat. And this is based on direct observation of game play.

ConcreteBuddha · Nov 5, 2002

Pax said:
... on a regular, reliable basis.

So when the Rogue can regularly (with flanking) deal out more damage per round than the fighter ... IMO there's something in need of fixing.

Whoa.

All enemies in your campaigns can be flanked, have no applicable miss chances, aren't invisible, blinking, or immune to critical hits.

So no arcane casters, no displacement, no blur, no rogues, no barbarians, no undead, no oozes, no constructs, no fortification armor, no plants, no ranged attackers, no creatures with a high AC, no grappling, no swallow whole, no incorporeality, no attacks of opportunity, no improved grab, no counter tumble...
.
.
.
Jeez. I'm of the exact opposite opinion. I think high level SA is mediocre. What caster is not going to buff with a Displacement after seeing the first SA? Or even before? Displacement or some other miss chance is a must for high-level play. (Entropic shield vs. Rogue archers.)
.
.
.
Sure, in a low-magic world, SA is overpowered. Since all of your enemies are humanoid non-casters with few magic items, then SA works against everything. With the money limits in the DMG, however and a typical amount of casters, the DM is free to pull out the stops for NPCs and creatures. Potions are an NPC's best friend. Casters buff. Creatures Sunder. SA just requires that the DM not fall back on base MM creatures.

Sure, a Rogue will rock a Tarrasque...

...but a L4 Sorcerer Tarrasque would rock any level Rogue.

iterative Attacks and Sneak Attacks

Albert_Fish

First Post

Mr Fidgit

First Post

MeepoTheMighty

First Post

Pax

Banned

kreynolds

First Post

hammymchamham

First Post

IceBear

Explorer

Pax

Banned

shilsen

Adventurer

ConcreteBuddha

First Post

Similar Threads