Does Ray of Frost + Piercing Cold + Sneak Attack = A decent option?

[Gez]

The rules about sneak attack in T&B and CoAr are just precisions, not changes.

Here's the SRD entry for Sneak Attack in the Rogue class:

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. [Notice the important part where it says the rogue must use a weapon. Oh, wait, there are no such parts. It just speaks about attacks.]

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. [Notice the important part where it says that ranged touch attacks are not considered to be ranged attacks. Oh, wait, there are no such parts. Again.]

With a sap (blackjack) or an unarmed strike, a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual -4 penalty. [Yay! At least one part where one can see a restriction to weapons!!! But it's only about making nonlethal sneak damage. In effect, this rule just illustrate the "sneak attack damage are of the same kind as the attack's primary normal damage"...]

A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks. The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach. [Nothing here prevents the use of spells as weapons.]​

The core of Sneak Attack is in this sentence: 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.

It says everything there. First bolded part means "must make an attack" (i.e., an attack roll), second bolded part means "must be able to hit vital spots" (that is, in short, the last paragraph of the full SA rules), and third bolded part means "increased damage" -- and that's all you need to know.

 

[glass]

Can you find anything in the description of Sneak Attack that says it requires a weapon?

In fact, as I alluded to upthread, it specifically says you can sneak attack with at least one thing that is not a weapon (ie an unarmed strike).

Given the lask of a restriction, plus a non-weapon example, I think it is pretty clear but obviously (from this thread) some people do not.


glass.

 

[rln]

You can, as someone cleverly stated elsewhere, sneak attack with a ham sandwich if you wanted to.

Dwarven Warbread anyone?

I would definitely say that the feat applies to sneak damage, as it is of the same type. Besides, the feat seems quite underpowered to me.

It requires the spells to be used in a higher level spell slot. It's effective using one single elemental form against creatures that are either immune to cold, has damage resistance vs cold, or is of the fire subtype. The caster also has to actually actually sneak up within 30ft of his foe (granted, Invisibility helps) and make the attack roll.

That's quite a lot of restrictions for something that costs a feat!

 

[likuidice]

just a slight tangent. If a sneak attack deals the kind of damage that the weapon or attack would deal, how does this affect ability damage? For example, a druid/rogue uses a poison spell to deal Con damage, would the sneak attack be applied to the con damage (resulting in 1d10 + xd6 con loss), or would it simply be HP damage? (1d10 con +xd6 normal damage)

 

[Gez]

Sneak attack always deal hp damage, regardless of the type (slashing, fire, nonlethal, negative energy, etc.) of hp damage.

Therefore, a touch attack or ranged touch attack poison spell would, with sneak attack, inflict a few d6 of poison damage to hp, in addition to the normal effect.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

just a slight tangent. If a sneak attack deals the kind of damage that the weapon or attack would deal, how does this affect ability damage? For example, a druid/rogue uses a poison spell to deal Con damage, would the sneak attack be applied to the con damage (resulting in 1d10 + xd6 con loss), or would it simply be HP damage? (1d10 con +xd6 normal damage)

Two things.

1. A poison spell does not actually "deal damage." It causes your opponent to be poisoned, and uses the rules for poisons.

2. If, instead, you were using a spell which actually did ability damage, the damage from Sneak Attack is negative energy damage, IIRC.

EDIT:

And, as Gez said, it's always hit point damage.

 

[ARandomGod]

Could you sneak attack a Vamp touch to get more hps?

Umm...
I have a character who does it all the time. It's actual inclusion is debatable. There's no doubt that if you sneak attack a vamp touch the target will get extra damage done to it. And the spell does say specifically that you gain temp HP's equal to the damage that you deal. So by a strict reading of the words you certainly can. On the other hand I don't think that it's a big stretch to say that isn't the intent...

But on the gripping hand, this is just really cool. And vamp touch without it is a pretty weak spell in my opinion.

 

[Ferret]

Furthermore, have you ever read the Exotic Weapon Master PrC?

He gets a really cool special ability that lets him treat a one-handed exotic weapon, when wielded in two-hands, as a two-handed weapon for purposes of Power Attack.

Bye-bye brain cells. Bye-ee.


What happens when you use spells with feats like wounding strike, the damage is the smae type? I dunno if it's still not worth it, but what about things like level drain? Surely you could abuse it somehow

 

[Gez]

One funny thing to do.

Play a multiclass Fighter 4 (or 6)/Spellcaster X.

Choose Weapon Focus: Ranged Spell, and/or Weapon Focus: Touch Spell. (Can get those at fighter levels 1 and 2.)

At fighter level 4, get Weapon Specialization: Ranged Spell or Touch Spell. At level 6, optionally, the other.

With regular feats, take Spell Specialization: Ranged Spells or Touch Spells.

You know have a +4 bonus to damage on your attack-roll spells.

If you push fighter levels up to 14, you can increase that up to +6 for both.

A combo to remember for a gestalt warmage! With Extra Edge and Point Blank Shot, you can get awesome ranged touch attack damage, even (especially) for something like ray of frost.