Rogue sneak attack and multiple hits

[Pinotage]

And actually, dual wielding characters only get sneak attack damage once when they surprise their opponents--because you only get a standard action in the surprise round, which means one attack, even for a dual-wielder.

Or a Tempest. I think they can strike with both weapons as a standard action.

Pinotage

 

[hong]

And actually, dual wielding characters only get sneak attack damage once when they surprise their opponents--because you only get a standard action in the surprise round, which means one attack, even for a dual-wielder.

Hey Christian, you ever gonna bring back your Wally avatar, mang?

 

[Hypersmurf]

It’s a weird rule, I don’t think most people ran it this way until the sage came out of the blue and basically said that this special case exists.

No, the 'special case' is if the condition causing the opponent to be vulnerable to a sneak attack ends after the first attack.

A good example is the invisibility spell.

I'm invisible, and I've crept up beside my opponent with my longsword and short sword, after combat has started.

I make a full attack.

For my first attack, I'm invisible. My opponent is denied his Dex bonus, and I sneak attack! But attacking ends the spell. For all my other attacks (iterative attacks and off-hand attacks), I am not invisible, and my opponent gets his Dex bonus back.

This is one of the few examples (and probably the most common) where one attack is a sneak attack and the rest aren't.

-Hyp.

 

[Paraxis]

Yep, something to think about a rogue 1/ monk 1 can flurry and use two-weapon fighting and all three attacks are sneak attacks as long as the target meets the requirements, ie no dex bonus. Those attacks could even be a combination of melee and ranged(with shuriken) and on 3 different targets, all getting +1d6 sneak attack. Now the chances you have 3 different targets not having their Dex (happens only realy at begining of combat when they are flat footed) and hitting with all 3 at a -4/-4/-4 is not very likely, but can be done.

Sneak attacks are just extra damage under certain conditions, no matter how many attacks you get and how those attacks are done. For 16,500 gold a wand of Scorching Ray caster level 11 is usefull to a rogue, 3 Ranged touch attacks that deal 4d6+Sneak Attack is not to shabby but at 330 gold a round not going to use it too often.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Yup, but that rogue can buy a wand of Ray of Frost for 375gp that does d3+sneak attack. That may seem wimpy but combined with 5d6 of sneak attack it turns out to be a darned fine use of a 0-level wand.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

But I would be inclined to believe you would still have two chances to apply that sneak attack damage: so as long as one of your attacks hit, you could apply precision-based damage.

Comments?

When 3.0 first came out, I thought this was too powerful and the Rogue should only get one Sneak Attack per round. With actual play it became apparent that the only really consistent means of getting a worrisome 3+ iterative Sneak Attacks is to get a full attack from a flanking position. Not only is that flank not easily accomplished, but the downsides of being a Rogue in the thick of the brawl are sufficiently high that I decided it was not unbalanced -- if the target survives, the Rogue has a non-trivial chance of being killed outright by the counterattack.

 

[Ipissimus]

Quite so! Unless they have TW Pounce, I guess.

EDIT: And they can full-attack there enemy in the first round too, if they beat their initiative.


glass.

Which is a very good reason for a rogue to invest in ranged weapons. Sneak within 30ft. or wait in ambush for the enemy before you unleash your hail of sneak attacks. Go for the thrown dagger/shuriken approach, focus on the duel wield tree with the Quick Draw feat and make the Wizard envious of the sheer ammount of damage you can dish out per encounter. And you don't even have to worry about weapon finesse to boost your chances to hit, though Weapon Focus and Point Blank Shot are probably good ideas.

 

[Shellman]

Check out the "Telling Blow" feat from PHB2. It also allows a rogue to apply sneak attack damage on a critical.

Take a rogue using a rapier with the imroved critical and telling blow feats, your doing sneak attack on a natural roll of 15 or better.

 

[Graf]

No, the 'special case' is if the condition causing the opponent to be vulnerable to a sneak attack ends after the first attack.

A good example is the invisibility spell.
<snip>
For my first attack, I'm invisible. My opponent is denied his Dex bonus, and I sneak attack! But attacking ends the spell. For all my other attacks (iterative attacks and off-hand attacks), I am not invisible, and my opponent gets his Dex bonus back.

This was the example in Sage Advice that I was talking about; from an older dragon.
It also applies if you're just doing the hide->sneak attack (which I would humbly submit is more common than invisibilty).

I'd be thrilled if this was the case but I remember him saying the opposite... something about a dual weilding attack being "one attack" or something.

But since everyone disagrees with me I'll just accept that I'm probably wrong and move on.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It also applies if you're just doing the hide->sneak attack (which I would humbly submit is more common than invisibilty).

Well, there are two things to consider there.

First is the debate as to whether hiding denies an opponent his Dex bonus. It's not explicitly stated in the core rules. (Even less clear is whether a hiding attacker get the +2 bonus on attack rolls due to an invisible attacker.)

Secondly, remember that you generally require cover or concealment in order to hide, and if your opponent has concealment also, you can't sneak attack him. So while you can hide because it's dark or foggy, you can't make use of that to sneak attack. It cuts down to opportunities for hiding and sneak attacking.

In my own experience, sneak attacks come most commonly from:
a/ flanking,
b/ flat-footed opponents at start of combat,
c/ invisible or blinking rogues,
in that order. Hiding comes somewhere after that. That is, of course, potentially highly dependent on campaign style, DM, etc.

-Hyp.