Sneak attacking - I'm a tad confused

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

In my game, I've always ruled that sneak attack damage applies to every attack that the opponent is clearly denied a dex bonus to armor class.

I've further specifically ruled on the invisibility + SA damage in the affirmative.


In playing in a friends game, it was abruptly brought home that both of these were house rules specific only to me... along with the fact that flanking rogues did NOT get SA damage as their target was not denied dexterity bonuses.

In reading a previous thread, I read someone pointing out SA damage on flanking, for each attack, as though it were a general rule.

Is this backed up anywhere in the rules? I could not find it.

That's the first question...


Secondly, in close reading of the rules (and this is stretching a bit, I quite agree), wearing of heavy armor incurs a max dex bonus limitation...

If that max is 0, an arguement could be made that that character is currently denied a dex bonus while wearing that armor... Valid arguement I don't know, but an arguement all the same. Any rules mongrels out there want to take a bite out of the arguement?

 

[Liquidsabre]

You are using SA correctly. The heavy armor with reducing dex mod to ac doesn't make them SA'able. The group you played with need to look stuff up
As for pages and such to back you up I'll start looking.

 

[Liquidsabre]

In my game, I've always ruled that sneak attack damage applies to every attack that the opponent is clearly denied a dex bonus to armor class.

That is correct. It clearly states this in SA ability for the rogue.

I've further specifically ruled on the invisibility + SA damage in the affirmative.

This is also correct as the target loses their dex bonus versus invisible foes. If just Invisibility the SA is for the first attack only, then the rogue becoems visible of course.

flanking rogues did NOT get SA damage as their target was not denied dexterity bonuses.

Right, these guys are smoking evercrack as it says specifically in the SA description for the Rogue that a Rogue uses their SA when "flanking" an opponent. No need for the loss of dex there.

Send the group here man and we'll straighten them out. Nerfin' the rogue! The nerve...

 

[MichaelH]

In my game, I've always ruled that sneak attack damage applies to every attack that the opponent is clearly denied a dex bonus to armor class.

I've further specifically ruled on the invisibility + SA damage in the affirmative.


In playing in a friends game, it was abruptly brought home that both of these were house rules specific only to me... along with the fact that flanking rogues did NOT get SA damage as their target was not denied dexterity bonuses.

In reading a previous thread, I read someone pointing out SA damage on flanking, for each attack, as though it were a general rule.

Is this backed up anywhere in the rules? I could not find it.

That's the first question...

You are correct in both cases. Did you/they read the sneak attack section on page 50 of the PH? It says you are doing it by the book and they are the ones using house rules. Let me quote:

"Basically, 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."

Secondly, in close reading of the rules (and this is stretching a bit, I quite agree), wearing of heavy armor incurs a max dex bonus limitation...

If that max is 0, an arguement could be made that that character is currently denied a dex bonus while wearing that armor... Valid arguement I don't know, but an arguement all the same. Any rules mongrels out there want to take a bite out of the arguement?

Sure. There are specific reasons and situations that deny one his Dexterity bonus to AC. Wearing heavy armor (I think half-plate is the only one that is 0) is not one of them. Wearing the armor renders you the same as a person with a Dex of 10 or 11 as far as AC goes. But just like that person, you are not denied your Dexterity bonus to AC, you just don't have any bonus to AC. Now, if that person with the Dexterity of 10 or 11 is flanked or attacked by an invisible rogue, he is denied his Dexterity bonus to AC (even thought he does not have one) and can be sneak attacked.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

It seems that the reason you're confused is that your friends are wrong.

 

[Eltern]

As a small thread hijack, how many of you considered an enemy who is flanked to be eligible for SA, EVEN IF the rogue is not the one doing the flanking

F
ER
F

Friend, Evil guy, rogue

I think that has been discussed before, "Is he considered flanked if you're not flanking him" but I want to ask it again. Personally, I say it's fine, realistically/tactically speaking.

Eltern

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I say the Rogue has to be one of the characters flanking in order to qualify for Sneak Attack damage.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

Thanks guys - the comment about the rogue ability helps the most - we were all referencing it from the combat section on flanking

FYI - My house rule is that the invisible rogue gets SA on all his attacks. I could go into all the reasons for it - but I'll simply say that at first I thought the rules agreed, the local hivemind disproved it, and I ended up severely disagreeing with the house rules.

Haven't had a balance problem with it yet

On the armor question - it's just one that just occurred to me. Seems like a weak arguement but there is something to be said about armor denying one's dex bonus being a penalty when trying to actively dodge or ward off lightweight attacks... Who would you rather fight (in RL) with a rapier? The plate mail, long sword wielding knight, or the leather clad ranger? Isn't that combo what finally moved the knights from the 'practical' combatant and introduced the dueling dandies?

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

I say the Rogue has to be one of the characters flanking in order to qualify for Sneak Attack damage.

And I'd agree - you must a) be a rogue and b) be getting the flanking bonus to SA when flanking... Now, that's not to say the rogue can't get an SA - just not solely because the target is flanked by others.

 

[Unseelie]

No books in front of me, but technically, a foe is only flanked when someone attacks that qualifies for flanking... so extrapolating from that, the Rogue would have to be doing the Flanking to qualify for SA. Even if the other fellow flanks your target, you can't attack simultaneously (D&D doesn't work that way), and therefore he's not flanked when you attack.

Weird, I know, but...