Little Known Rules of D&D

[Meeki]

Hah, I'm not quite sure Bigby's hands can be sneak attacked. Afterall what is a normal creature? That and it is made of force and has no discernable anatomy (a force effect shaped like a hand does not mean it has the components that make up, say, a human hand).

I was reading the magic section and noticed that if you roll a 1 to save against a spell that can effect objects, even if it normally doesn't, an object on your person will be effected.

 

[Slaved]

I am not sure if it was mentioned but while using Weapon Finesse carrying a shield you apply its armor check penalty on your attack rolls.

 

[Goblyn]

Hah, I'm not quite sure Bigby's hands can be sneak attacked. Afterall what is a normal creature? That and it is made of force and has no discernable anatomy (a force effect shaped like a hand does not mean it has the components that make up, say, a human hand).

Sounds odd, yes, but that is what the description states. The exact wording under interposing hand: "It takes damage as a normal creature, but most magical effects that don't cause damage do not effect it." I don't see 'force effect' anywhere; it is always described as a hand, not an effect shaped like one. I think the 2e B's Hand is as you describe; though I don't have a 2e PHB to check.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Well, the Bigby's line of spells are all Evocation [Force] spells, so take from that what you wish.

 

[Legildur]

I don't see 'force effect' anywhere;

That'd be the 'Evocation [force]' sub-school attached to each of the Hand spells......

 

[Goblyn]

That'd be the 'Evocation [force]' sub-school attached to each of the Hand spells......

Looks like I was too hasty in my looking. Oops.

This is just an aside, though. The hand still takes damage as a normal creature.

 

[Hypersmurf]

This is just an aside, though. The hand still takes damage as a normal creature.

It takes damage as a normal creature, but it is not living:
A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies...

-Hyp.

 

[Goblyn]

It takes damage as a normal creature, but it is not living:
A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies...

-Hyp.

I'd seen that and thought to myself: 'It is described as a hand; is that not discernable anatomy?' But the hand would be considered just an appendage, and so not sneak-attackable. So nevermind that.

Jeez, I'm an idiot today ... it's probably a good thing tonight's game was cancelled.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd seen that and thought to myself: 'It is described as a hand; is that not discernable anatomy?' But the hand would be considered just an appendage, and so not sneak-attackable. So nevermind that.

Well, I think it might be able to be described as having a discernable anatomy (though I suspect that, not having vital organs, you couldn't say those organs were within reach!); my point was that while it might be treated as a creature for damage purposes, it's not a living creature. Creatureness isn't, by itself, sufficient for sneak attack; the creature must be living.

-Hyp.

 

[javcs]

I am not sure if it was mentioned but while using Weapon Finesse carrying a shield you apply its armor check penalty on your attack rolls.

Source?