Sneak Attack vs. DR

[Grog]

Is there a section of the rules that handles how sneak attack damage works versus damage reduction? There are a couple of different circumstances I'm curious about.

Say I'm a 3rd level rogue fighting a werewolf (DR 10/silver). I hit it with my shortsword for 4 damage plus 7 damage from sneak attack. Does it take no damage (since my regular attack didn't damage it and thus the SA doesn't apply), 1 damage (the damage is added up and then the DR is subtracted from it), or 7 damage (the SA ignores the DR)?

Now say I'm a 2nd level wizard/1st level rogue fighting a werewolf. I shoot it with a ray of frost for 2 damage plus 4 damage from sneak attack. Obviously it will take the 2 damage from the ray of frost, but will it also take the 4 damage from sneak attack, or is that negated by the DR?

 

[Vurt]

I don't recall exactly where in the rules it's written, but sneak attack damage is considered to be of the same type as the weapon (or spell) used to administer it.

So in the first case, the werewolf takes 1 hp of damage, and in the second, the werewolf takes the whole 6 hp because it's all considered to be spell energy (cold) damage.

Cheers,
Vurt

 

[Nail]

The type of sneak attack damage is the same as the attack that delivered the sneak attack.

Rog 3 example: werewolf takes 1 hp of damage.

Wiz 2/Rog 1 example: 6 hp of cold damage. DR does not apply to energy damage.

 

[Nail]

Oooooooo. Beaten by a hair.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Oooooooo. Beaten by a hair.

Which one?

 

[Vurt]

Oooooooo. Beaten by a hair.

Seriously! I hit post and when the page refreshed I was quite surprised to see yours following. I'm glad, at least, we reached the same conclusions, or it could have been even more entertaining.

Cheers,
Vurt

 

[saucercrab]

I think it gets muddy when dealing with multiple types of damage. For a +1 flaming short sword, I think it would only be considered piercing damage though, right? None of the sneak attack would be considered fire damage.

 

[Grog]

I don't recall exactly where in the rules it's written, but sneak attack damage is considered to be of the same type as the weapon (or spell) used to administer it.

Thanks. That makes it easy.

If anybody could remember where in the rules this is stated, I'd be most grateful.

 

[Vurt]

If you have Complete Arcane, it talks about this under the section "Weaponlike Spells" on p.86. Here's the relevant bit:

"A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell deals extra damage of the same type the spell normally deals."

Similarly, the blurb on sneak attack under the Rogue section of the PHB mentions using the sap for non-lethal damage. You can extrapolate from there, and I'd be surprised if this hasn't made it into the FAQ somewhere.

Edit: Colour me surprised...

Cheers,
Vurt

 

[Vurt]

I think it gets muddy when dealing with multiple types of damage. For a +1 flaming short sword, I think it would only be considered piercing damage though, right? None of the sneak attack would be considered fire damage.

I would agree, since the flaming damage is applied on top of the weapon damage. i.e. All the damage isn't considered flaming, so the sneak attack is of the type of the original weapon damage, in this case piercing.

Cheers,
Vurt