Coup de Grace question...

[SoulsFury]

Say you have this scenerio, "A" is fighting "B" and "A" and "C" are on the same side, so "A" thinks and "C" sneak attacks "A" from behind while he is fighting "B" face to face. Is this a coup de grace?

Nik

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Say you have this scenerio, "A" is fighting "B" and "A" and "C" are on the same side, so "A" thinks and "C" sneak attacks "A" from behind while he is fighting "B" face to face. Is this a coup de grace?

Nik

Nope. The recipient of the coup de grace has to be helpless. Check the glossary in the PHB for the definition of helpless.

 

[isoChron]

There is no facing. So no back or front. Just flanking. See http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_helpless&alpha=H

 

[blargney the second]

I'd say A was probably surprised, and therefore denied Dex bonus to AC, so susceptible to sneak attack from C.

-blarg

 

[Mortis]

A doesn't need to be surprised to suffer the Sneak Attack because from the description B & C are flanking him anyway which enough for a Sneak Attack.

C +2 for flanking, may Sneak Attack
A
B +2 for flanking

Regards,
Mortis

 

[glass]

I'd say A was probably surprised, and therefore denied Dex bonus to AC, so susceptible to sneak attack from C.

We have no information about whether B was surprised: it could be the surprise round, or the first normal round or the 20th normal round for all we know.

We do know the realtive positions or the combats (assuming I am interpretting the OP correctly). It is this:

ABC

Where A and C are allies, who are flanking B. If either A or C have the sneak attack ability they can use it on B. They also gain +2 to hit him with melee attacks, but they cannot sneak CdG him unless B is helpless.


glass.

 

[SoulsFury]

We have no information about whether B was surprised: it could be the surprise round, or the first normal round or the 20th normal round for all we know.

We do know the realtive positions or the combats (assuming I am interpretting the OP correctly). It is this:

ABC

Where A and C are allies, who are flanking B. If either A or C have the sneak attack ability they can use it on B. They also gain +2 to hit him with melee attacks, but they cannot sneak CdG him unless B is helpless.


glass.

A and C are allies. However, A is face to face with B and C is coming up behind A. A is concentracting on B thinking C is his ally.

Thanks for the info guys, no coup de grace but a dangerous sneak attack.

Nik

 

[IcyCool]

A and C are allies. However, A is face to face with B and C is coming up behind A. A is concentracting on B thinking C is his ally.

Thanks for the info guys, no coup de grace but a dangerous sneak attack.

Nik

You've gotten the correct result, but it sounds like you might be confused on how you got there. You don't get a sneak attack on someone by "being behind them", because there is no facing. You get a sneak attack if your opponent is flat-footed, denied their dexterity modifier, or is flanked.

In this case, A is flanked by both B and C.

And as was mentioned before, a Coup de Grace can only be performed on someone who is helpless. Someone who is being grappled or pinned is not helpless, but someone who is unconcious or under the effects of a hold person spell is.

 

[billd91]

For what it's worth, I think a lot of DMs would also grant the sneak attack even if C didn't actually flank with B because it feels right to catch A, who thought C was an ally, by surprise (and thus treating him similarly to being flatfooted or attacked by an invisible attacker for that specific instance, even though neither condition technically applies).

Of course, once that surprise strike is taken care of, the same DMs would probably require the more technical requirements of the sneak attack to be met before granting rogue C the sneak attack again.

But under no case would I imagine anyone treating C's perfidious attack on A as a coup de grace.

 

[Antoine]

For what it's worth, I think a lot of DMs would also grant the sneak attack even if C didn't actually flank with B because it feels right to catch A, who thought C was an ally, by surprise (and thus treating him similarly to being flatfooted or attacked by an invisible attacker for that specific instance, even though neither condition technically applies).

Actually, you might use Bluff vs. Sense Motive as for a feint if C is tricking A into believing they're on the same side.