All About Sneak Attacks (Part Two)

[Camarath]

All About Sneak Attacks (Part Two) is up and in it Skip says that "When facing a totally concealed foe, a creature is denied Dexterity bonus (if any) to Armor Class and the attacker gets a +2 attack bonus as well.". Is he saying that a totally concealed foe counts as being Invisible and thus gains a +2 attack bonus or is it stated somewhere that total concealment grants a +2 to attack bonus?

 

[James McMurray]

Oh dear lord, here we go again.

 

[the Jester]

Invisibility is 100% concealment.

 

[Camarath]

Oh dear lord, here we go again.

Sorry
I was just wondering because I could not find a rule that said that creatures with total concealment counted as Invisible or that total concealment granted a +2 to attack bonus.

 

[Camarath]

Invisibility is 100% concealment.

Yes but is total concealment Invisibility?

 

[Camarath]

For example all opponents are considered to have total concealment for a blinded character but they explicitly do not gain a +2 to attack bonus due to an Invisible attacker. Why would that be so if attackers with total concealment were considered Invisible?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Ouch. Don't like this one so much.

On the plus side:

Perhaps the most common form of total concealment is the invisibility spell. A regular invisibility effect is broken when you attack. If you begin your turn under such an effect and you're making multiple attacks, you'll be invisible only for the first attack and your opponent will be denied Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) against that first attack.

This is good. A lot of people used to quote a Sage reply (not an FAQ entry - must have been an email, chat, or Dragon column) that said that every attack in a Full Attack action was a sneak attack if you began the round invisible. It's nice to see he's fixed that one.

But then there's the minus side.

A creature with blindsight thus retains its Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) against an unseen foe and blindsight also negates most kinds of concealment. This means that you can't sneak attack a creature with blindsight unless you have it flanked or catch it flat-footed.

... or you Feint... or it's grappled... or it's stunned... or it's climbing... or...

Immobility is one time when the uncanny dodge ability doesn't foil a sneak attack (see the section on uncanny dodge).

Wait, what? Hasn't the Sage always been in the "Feint trumps Uncanny Dodge" camp? His Uncanny Dodge column is the next one... but this line bodes ill. The implication is that he's going to say that Uncanny Dodge allows you to retain Dex bonus while Running, or against a successful feint...

It was going so well!

-Hyp.

 

[xeno_eleusis]

If you have ranks in Use Magic Device, then I would suggest you buy a few
scrolls of blink for a large 375 gp each.

pg 206 PHB3.5
You strike as an invisible creature, denying your target any Dex bonus to AC... [but] your own attacks have a 20% miss chance...

As a rouge, I suggest saving up the 27,000 gp to buy a ring of blinking so
that you can always do Sneak Attack Damage.

 

[Darklone]

Guess the Sage changed his mind on some subjects in the meantime... he prolly read our discussions

 

[Li Shenron]

This is good. A lot of people used to quote a Sage reply (not an FAQ entry - must have been an email, chat, or Dragon column) that said that every attack in a Full Attack action was a sneak attack if you began the round invisible. It's nice to see he's fixed that one.

I also appreciated this clarification.

... or you Feint... or it's grappled... or it's stunned... or it's climbing... or...

IMO he simply wanted to write "flanked or losing Dex bonus" and instead wrote "flanked or flat-footed". I am sure he just overlooked this, but he should be very careful when using words which has a specific meaning in this game! Otherwise the meaning of the sentence can change completely.