Sneak Attack vs. Uncanny Dodge

[Synthetik Fish]

So an invisible rogue can't sneak attack a flat-footed barbarian? Hmmm, I think that if he's got a double "denies dex bonus" going for him, that a rogue Should be able to. IMHO.

Possibly good opinion, but not RAW.

Would you allow an invisible fighter to attack a barbarian at his flat-footed, denied-dex AC?

Hm, not sure. The answer would either be: A) yes. or B) I think I'd make it an exception for rogues, because of their sneak attacking abilities. The double "would-be denied dex" situations just calls for too many variables that I couldn't see a 2nd level Barbarian accounting for, but a rogue deffinately being able to take advantage of.

Maybe: "yes, but only if the rogue is 4 levels higher." ? That sounds like a rule that Wizards' would make on the situation.

 

[Nail]

I think I'd make it an exception for rogues, because of their sneak attacking abilities. The double "would-be denied dex" situations just calls for too many variables ...

You are suggesting that you may be denied your Dex bonus twice.

That's simply not possible. You are either "Denied your Dex bonus", or you are not. There's neither RAW support nor any need to make this more complicated.

Put another way: Does a invisible rogue get twice his sneak attack damage when attacking a flat-footed opponent? He's "doubled up", isn't he?

 

[ARandomGod]

Maybe: "yes, but only if the rogue is 4 levels higher." ? That sounds like a rule that Wizards' would make on the situation.

That's what I was thinking too... but apparently that's only for flanking. For pure suprise sneak attack (flat-footed) apparently the answer is "No, you can't sneak attack." The Wizards rules-interpreters tend to think along the same lines as the Magic:TheGathering rules interpreters (same company, similiar game), and I'm positive they would rule in a sanctioned game that a barbarian of level two can never recieve a sneak attack due to being "flat-footed", in that such a barbarian will never BE flat-footed.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

That's what I was thinking too... but apparently that's only for flanking. For pure suprise sneak attack (flat-footed) apparently the answer is "No, you can't sneak attack." The Wizards rules-interpreters tend to think along the same lines as the Magic:TheGathering rules interpreters (same company, similiar game), and I'm positive they would rule in a sanctioned game that a barbarian of level two can never recieve a sneak attack due to being "flat-footed", in that such a barbarian will never BE flat-footed.

That's probably how the rules read, by their strictest definition. I PERSONALLY would say that it would MAKE SENSE TO ME that the Barbarian COULE be sneak attacked, BUT would gain his dex bonus. Remember, the Uncanny Dodge ability isn't aimed at just sneak attacks. There are many situations where a character could be caught being flat-footed... and while the Barbarian retains his dex in these situations, the fact is that he is STILL FLAT FOOTED. This means that he could essentially do Nothing that round (assuming it's suprise round)... and THAT is the type of situation that a rogue can take advantage of and sneak attack people. I know that, reading strictly by the rules, being flat-footed doesn't mean much in the way of sneak attack... but just rationalizing.

Besides... I see the rules as "more actual Guidelines" anyways

 

[ARandomGod]

Besides... I see the rules as "more actual Guidelines" anyways

Me too, me too. Of course, as I hinted earlier, I've had a number of characters get Uncanny Dodge... and they've always considered the "I can't be surprise sneak attacked" a part of the "I can't be surprised denied my dex". Generally speaking it's high dex people who I have get uncanny dodge, and mainly I admit it's to avoid losing Dex against invisible and unexpected (IE flat-footed) attacks.

But by extention ... the *feel* of the ability to me is simply an uncanny awareness, one that allows you to overcome sudden, surprise attacks. Therefore ones from invisible attackers and from things that would otherwise catch you unaware.

And that's the definition of why rogues get a sneak attack against someone who's flat footed. And therefore, while I do see your logic, I wouldn't like the feel of having my preternatural awareness become "except for rogues, since they get such a big bonus if you're unaware of them".

Although a "four levels higher" ruling could be palatable, I still wouldn't *like* it. I mean, they can still flank (and therefore get sneak attacks), they just can no longer surprise the character. Which is where I think that balance should be, what that ability is meant to do.

As for an invisible AND surprise attack (where one without Uncanny Dodge would be flatfooted)... I don't think I'd find a ruling that these double trump as a palatable ruling. All invisible attacks come as if you don't know they're coming. All surprise attacks come as if you don't know they're coming. You really aren't more penalized in any (other) way for an opponent being invisible AND surprising you, so this shouldn't get a synergy bonus from that either.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Me too, me too. Of course, as I hinted earlier, I've had a number of characters get Uncanny Dodge... and they've always considered the "I can't be surprise sneak attacked" a part of the "I can't be surprised denied my dex". Generally speaking it's high dex people who I have get uncanny dodge, and mainly I admit it's to avoid losing Dex against invisible and unexpected (IE flat-footed) attacks.

But by extention ... the *feel* of the ability to me is simply an uncanny awareness, one that allows you to overcome sudden, surprise attacks. Therefore ones from invisible attackers and from things that would otherwise catch you unaware.

And that's the definition of why rogues get a sneak attack against someone who's flat footed. And therefore, while I do see your logic, I wouldn't like the feel of having my preternatural awareness become "except for rogues, since they get such a big bonus if you're unaware of them".

Although a "four levels higher" ruling could be palatable, I still wouldn't *like* it. I mean, they can still flank (and therefore get sneak attacks), they just can no longer surprise the character. Which is where I think that balance should be, what that ability is meant to do.

As for an invisible AND surprise attack (where one without Uncanny Dodge would be flatfooted)... I don't think I'd find a ruling that these double trump as a palatable ruling. All invisible attacks come as if you don't know they're coming. All surprise attacks come as if you don't know they're coming. You really aren't more penalized in any (other) way for an opponent being invisible AND surprising you, so this shouldn't get a synergy bonus from that either.

Mind you, flat-footed would only be for One round, as opposed to flanking which could presumibly be every round. Come to think of it, from that perspective losing Sneak Attack on suprise round to a *select few* wouldn't be that bad. (Mind you, I'm a player, not a DM, so all of my input is from a player's side, but trying t to be as fair and realistic as possible.)

I only said the invisible AND flat-footed thing because it's a double variable. Going off your interpretation, Uncanny Dodge is almost like "spidey-sense," you can feel the attack coming and thus are properly prepared, enoughso that you retain your Dex. Well, just because you can see an invisible attack coming (mind you, it can't be easy to do) and you can see a flat-footed attack coming (again, foretelling this can't be easy) then I think that combining the two would be a lot harder. Unless, of course, you have Blind Fight...

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Just thought of something-

If you're invisible, you get sneak attack anyway. I don't think Uncanny Dodge has anything to do with invisibility? May be wrong, haven't read it in a while... but it wouldn't make sense if it did (to me), because that's what Blind Fight is for...

 

[Pasus Nauran]

If you're invisible, you get sneak attack anyway. I don't think Uncanny Dodge has anything to do with invisibility? May be wrong, haven't read it in a while... but it wouldn't make sense if it did (to me), because that's what Blind Fight is for...

Actually, read the description for Uncanny Dodge, and you'll see that it specifically states you are not denied your Dex bonus to AC, even if struck by an invisible attacker.

Blind Fight is a feat (and thus available to all characters who meet the prerequisites), whereas Uncanny Dodge is a class ability.

 

[Synthetik Fish]

Actually, read the description for Uncanny Dodge, and you'll see that it specifically states you are not denied your Dex bonus to AC, even if struck by an invisible attacker.

Blind Fight is a feat (and thus available to all characters who meet the prerequisites), whereas Uncanny Dodge is a class ability.

... making life harder for rogues, Everywhere!

 

[werk]

in that such a barbarian will never BE flat-footed.

The barbarian IS flat-footed, just because of initiative, but he keeps his dex bonus to AC. Uncanny dodge doesn't relieve the condition flat footed, but overrides one of the penalties, loss of dex bonus to AC.

So throw that out. Flat footed. It isn't really needed for the argument.

The rogue can sneak attack anytime the target WOULD be denied a dex bonus to AC.

By the reasoning that lets the rogue SA anytime the target COULD be denied it's dex bonus to AC, says a rogue can SA a target any time that target makes a save or skill check to keep dex bonus to AC, successful or not.

That's just silly. (no offense)

Now, the problem is really the word: would. Would is the past tense of the word: will, and is used in several different ways. When used in the main clause of a conditional statement to express a possibility or likelihood, 'would' can generally be replaced with the word 'if'.

So we can reconstruct the sentence a couple of different ways to maybe yield the true meaning of the sentence.

The rogue can sneak attack anytime the target WILL be denied a dex bonus to AC. (no SA)
or
The rogue can sneak attack anytime if the target is denied a dex bonus to AC. (no SA)

That's about as far down as I can go...