Can't sneak attack in dungeons?

[Forrester]

Re: Re: Can't sneak attack in dungeons?

Yup, dwarves and half-orcs make better solo muggers in pitch darkness. Gnomes and elves tend to mug by moonlight. Humans and halflings gang up and flank, or just plain getcha in the daylight.

Greg

You forgot to mention goblins. Reason #124 why if you're going to be a rogue, you should be a goblin rogue . Darkvision, +4 to Move Silently, +2 to Dex, 30' move . . . yeah baby!! Unlike those dumb-ass little halflings, you can run like hell when you need to. And see just fine in the dark.

 

[EOL]

My point is that a rogue who goes after a target in an alley dark enough that limits his vision is a moron anyway. They can't take the target down very quickly. It stands to reason that if your target can't see you because of darkness, you can'y see them either. Kinda makes this whole discussion academic.

No actually this sounds like the classic rogue scenerio a dark alley where the victim can't see him well enough to identify him. A knife in the back, and the body left in a place where it won't be noticed for a long time.

So how is this a moronic move for the rogue again? (without the inclusion of game mecahnics)

 

[kreynolds]

So how is this a moronic move for the rogue again? (without the inclusion of game mecahnics)

LOL Well, since we are talking about game mechanics, I don't think I'll bother answering that question.

 

[jontherev]

Say what!?! No, True Strike does not allow you to sneak attack a target with concealment. The only thing the spell does for you is grant you a +20 to your next single attack. That's it.

Dude, you're rather trigger-happy. Go read the spell again.

EDIT:I was a bit late, seems others corrected you first. Had I noticed, I wouldn't have bothered adding this comment.

 

[Anubis]

These are specific circumstances. These ARE rules here. Check the concealment chart in the PHB or SRD. Early in the morning there is often times a light fog. By the rules, this would prevent sneak attacks. Light foilage does the same thing. Any amount of darkness (moderate and above, open to interpretation by the DM) does the same thing. Those with lowlight (and a light source) or darkvision don't have to worry about this problem. However, the fog and foilage IS a problem. How can the DM be wrong for using these rules?

Granted, any DM who uses these all the time just to screw the rogue is not being fair. This is why being a halfling rogue kinda sucks until you save up for the goggles of night or belt of dwarvenkind. Depending on the DM, you may want to take a level of wizard or sorceror to get True Strike to bypass this. With this spell, you can still sneak attack someone with concealment since it ignores any concealment.

Well, under those circumstances, this is more of a problem with lousy rules than interpretation. (Not much to interpret when the PHB spells it out for you.)

I would just ignore such silly rules. Anything less and you make the rogue pretty useless. Actually, a better rule would be to simply allow sneak attacks for anything less than half cover andconcealment, but not allow it for 1/2 cover or greater or 50% concealment or greater. That balances MUCH better.

 

[kreynolds]

Dude, you're rather trigger-happy. Go read the spell again.

You're a little slow off the mark there, ya' know that? You're real name isn't Corky by chance, is it?

Edit: Forgot to add emoticon.

 

[jontherev]

You're a little slow off the mark there, ya' know that? You're real name isn't Corky by chance, is it?

Edit: Forgot to add emoticon.

Yep, I realized that after I posted. Go back and read my edit. I don't know a Corky, so your joke/whatever is lost on me.

 

[AGGEMAM]

Also when we apply logic to the rules, 'light fog' and 'light foilage' should actually give you increasing amounts of concealment the farther you are from eachother.

I'm pretty sure I couldn't see someone half a mile away even if it is only light fog.

 

[Caliban]

No actually this sounds like the classic rogue scenerio a dark alley where the victim can't see him well enough to identify him. A knife in the back, and the body left in a place where it won't be noticed for a long time.

So how is this a moronic move for the rogue again? (without the inclusion of game mecahnics)

If the rogue is attacking pitch darkness without the ability to see, yes it is a moronic move.

The "classic" scenario you outline isn't that classic. What usually happens is that the rogue is hiding in a dark, shadowed part of the allow and jumps somone as they pass through a better lit portion of the area. If it's a moonless night, the rogue is SOL unless he's a dwarf or 1/2 orc.

 

[Jack Haggerty]

The "classic" scenario you outline isn't that classic. What usually happens is that the rogue is hiding in a dark, shadowed part of the allow and jumps somone as they pass through a better lit portion of the area. If it's a moonless night, the rogue is SOL unless he's a dwarf or 1/2 orc.

Or, likewise, the rogue is deep within the shadows of the alley, and the target is in the dimly lit alley, but between the rogue and the well-lit street... Providing the rogue with an easily targetted silhouette.

It was my impression (though I don't know if it is supported by the rules) that the mist/dim-light/concealment negation of sneak attacks applied primarily to ranged sneak attacks.

Should you really get a concealment bonus from mist/fog or dim/dusky light (not complete darkness, mind you) when someone is standing five feet away?