Flanking with a ranged weapon?

[Legildur]

...but I can't understand why sneak attack is so restricted. Would it be overpowered if a rogue would get to add sneak attack damage in the example I mentioned above?

For reasons of balance.

If you do a search on these forums, you could find many threads discussing how DMs often house-rule that Sneak Attack only applies for one attack each round, as otherwise it is too powerful.

Granted it can appear that way with rapid shooting and/or two-weapon fighting rogue up against a low AC creature subject to critical hits. But the restrictions are there to provide balance with other character classes.

 

[Milagroso]

So I guess then that Rogues are only going to get sneak attack die on their bow if they get to shoot first in the encounter. Any other time an opponent would lose Dex does not happen frequently enough for one to be prepared for it.

 

[Neverwill]

So I guess then that Rogues are only going to get sneak attack die on their bow if they get to shoot first in the encounter. Any other time an opponent would lose Dex does not happen frequently enough for one to be prepared for it.

Here is a list of activities a rogue with a bow can take advantage of; as these all deny a Dex bonus:

The opponent is balancing, climbing, running, blinded, cowering, flat-footed, grappling, stunned, squeezing through a space less than half its size, or lifting double its maximum load.

The rogue can also just be invisible.

 

[Milagroso]

Here is a list of activities a rogue with a bow can take advantage of; as these all deny a Dex bonus:

The opponent is balancing, climbing, running, blinded, cowering, flat-footed, grappling, stunned, squeezing through a space less than half its size, or lifting double its maximum load.

The rogue can also just be invisible.

Potions of Invis all around!

Not sure how a character loses Dex bonus when they are running, I figure a person would be using their Dex then. But if it is RAW then I'll deal with it.

 

[jontherev]

Well, not really. That's what non-lethal damage is all about, after all. But I'm more interested in the original question.

Yes, you are. You're still trying to knock your opponent out as fast as possible, but the damage is non-lethal...you're just not trying to KILL your opponent.

Hmm. I found this:


The emphasized parts imply that it must be an opponent, and it must be her target. So an attack based on some random factor would not qualify. Hence, no SA damage to an ally in a grapple. (Interesting.)

I have a barbarian in the party who will grapple a bad guy and let the rogue slice'im and dice'im with sneak attack damage. Or at least, that's what they want to do.


They are playing in a low magic campaign; no ring of freedom of movement is available.

That's certainly your call to make, especially if you are DM, but I disagree. And you are fine as long as you are attacking in melee in any case. I think the word opponent can easily be used to consture any creature that you are striking. If you stabbed me in the middle of a combat, I sure as heck might consider you my opponent (how do I know you aren't charmed or something?). Again, this is not spelled out in the rules, and that's what a DM is for. Besides, I think it's way too convenient to say that you meant to use sneak attack on the bad guy, just because you lucked out on the random roll, and not when the roll goes against you and you strike your buddy instead. In this case, as a DM, I might house rule that if you want to use non-lethal damage (and take the -4 penalty to hit), then you can opt to not use your sneak attack damage, even though your opponent and ally would normally be dealt it automatically. To me, that represents that despite the loss of dex bonus on the grappling creatures, you are being very careful to avoid striking vital areas.

Does anyone know whether or sneak attack can actually be "turned on or off"? Although in the sneak attack description, it has this: "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."

The following passage seems to have more strong language that tells me it is the creature struck that determines whether or not sneak attack damage applies:

"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."

I know this is going a bit off topic, so sorry about that.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

They lose their Dex bonus when running because they've stopped dodging around in exchange for moving very, very quickly in a straight line.

 

[Dross]

That's certainly your call to make, especially if you are DM, but I disagree. And you are fine as long as you are attacking in melee in any case. I think the word opponent can easily be used to consture any creature that you are striking. If you stabbed me in the middle of a combat, I sure as heck might consider you my opponent (how do I know you aren't charmed or something?). Again, this is not spelled out in the rules, and that's what a DM is for. Besides, I think it's way too convenient to say that you meant to use sneak attack on the bad guy, just because you lucked out on the random roll, and not when the roll goes against you and you strike your buddy instead. In this case, as a DM, I might house rule that if you want to use non-lethal damage (and take the -4 penalty to hit), then you can opt to not use your sneak attack damage, even though your opponent and ally would normally be dealt it automatically. To me, that represents that despite the loss of dex bonus on the grappling creatures, you are being very careful to avoid striking vital areas.

By the rules you cannot use SA with non-leathal damage (as in the -4 penalty for a shortsword) unless the weapon deals non-leathal damage, such as a sap. It is somewhere in the SA description under rogue from memory refering to not using a weapon optimally.

Does anyone know whether or sneak attack can actually be "turned on or off"? Although in the sneak attack description, it has this: "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."

I'd allow a rogue to not SA, but they would need to make that call before rolling dice. I don't see SA as an "always on" ability that gets triggered automatically regardless of an attacker's wishes, but that choice is implied rather than stated.