Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Sean Reynolds' new company press release
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wilrich" data-source="post: 1808806" data-attributes="member: 18624"><p>I've only been sporadically following this thread, and if someone may have made this point explicitly already, but anyway . . .</p><p></p><p>Regarding sneak attacking undead and constructs:</p><p></p><p>If sneak attack represents the ability to hit a "vital spot," then constructs and undead should -- except in very rare cases -- be subject to sneak attack, because D&D lacks a system to account for specific injuries and uses on hit points for a broad abstraction of them. I'll explain . . . </p><p></p><p>Presumably most constructs and undead move and act using the same general biomechanical principles as a humanoid (zombies and golems walk, meaning their "legs" bend at the "knee" and they lift their legs through movement at the "hip" and "knee" joints, etc. etc. -- zombies or golems do not "wheel" or "float" along the ground ramrod straight -- they walk.) If someone cuts off the left leg of a zombie or golem below its "knee," that zombie or golem's ability to move will be hampered, despite the fact that it is undead or a construct -- it needs the lower portion of its leg to properly move itself. Given the hinderance a legless zombie or golem would suffer, that zombie or golem is going to be a less effective combatant that a zombie or golem with both legs intact. Although it is true that, given the lack of bleeding, etc. a zombie or golem is going to be better off than a human who has just had one of their lower legs cut off, but, a zombie or golem will still be hampered by the biomechanical difficulties caused by missing a portion of a limb. The same argument could be advanced for cutting off a constucts arm at the shoulder or a zombie's arm below the elbow, etc. etc.</p><p></p><p></p><p>So, undead and constructs do, in fact, have vital spots. Given that there is no system in D&D to account for the specific injuries and effects discussed above, and that hit points represent an abstraction of all of those types of specific injuries, there is a reasonable "flavor" basis to make them susecptible to sneak attacks (the rogue cuts the zombie's arm off, or messes up the "workings" of a golems knee -- imagine the difference between shooting a bullet into the door of a car versus shooting out one its tires.) Granted, given the lack of shock, bleeding, etc. that undead and constructs will not suffer, their vital areas are perhaps less vital than a humans, but I don't think it is completely uncomprehensible from a realism standpoint to, for example, create a feat which allows a rogue to sneak attackd constructs or undead, or to (without a feat) let a rogue use half of his regular sneak attack damage when attacking such creatures.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wilrich, post: 1808806, member: 18624"] I've only been sporadically following this thread, and if someone may have made this point explicitly already, but anyway . . . Regarding sneak attacking undead and constructs: If sneak attack represents the ability to hit a "vital spot," then constructs and undead should -- except in very rare cases -- be subject to sneak attack, because D&D lacks a system to account for specific injuries and uses on hit points for a broad abstraction of them. I'll explain . . . Presumably most constructs and undead move and act using the same general biomechanical principles as a humanoid (zombies and golems walk, meaning their "legs" bend at the "knee" and they lift their legs through movement at the "hip" and "knee" joints, etc. etc. -- zombies or golems do not "wheel" or "float" along the ground ramrod straight -- they walk.) If someone cuts off the left leg of a zombie or golem below its "knee," that zombie or golem's ability to move will be hampered, despite the fact that it is undead or a construct -- it needs the lower portion of its leg to properly move itself. Given the hinderance a legless zombie or golem would suffer, that zombie or golem is going to be a less effective combatant that a zombie or golem with both legs intact. Although it is true that, given the lack of bleeding, etc. a zombie or golem is going to be better off than a human who has just had one of their lower legs cut off, but, a zombie or golem will still be hampered by the biomechanical difficulties caused by missing a portion of a limb. The same argument could be advanced for cutting off a constucts arm at the shoulder or a zombie's arm below the elbow, etc. etc. So, undead and constructs do, in fact, have vital spots. Given that there is no system in D&D to account for the specific injuries and effects discussed above, and that hit points represent an abstraction of all of those types of specific injuries, there is a reasonable "flavor" basis to make them susecptible to sneak attacks (the rogue cuts the zombie's arm off, or messes up the "workings" of a golems knee -- imagine the difference between shooting a bullet into the door of a car versus shooting out one its tires.) Granted, given the lack of shock, bleeding, etc. that undead and constructs will not suffer, their vital areas are perhaps less vital than a humans, but I don't think it is completely uncomprehensible from a realism standpoint to, for example, create a feat which allows a rogue to sneak attackd constructs or undead, or to (without a feat) let a rogue use half of his regular sneak attack damage when attacking such creatures. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Sean Reynolds' new company press release
Top