What is canon?
- Thread starter radferth
- Start date
Marius Delphus
Adventurer
Dragging a Thread Back on Track?
Personally, as a DM I consider "rules discussions" in non-core books to be the "official stance" but certainly no more binding than the core rules themselves. Probably less binding than core rules because I see them as more "rulings" on how certain rules interact than new rules.
I don't think the particular rule from T&B is explicit in the core rules. I do happen to think it's a perfectly rational extension of (1) the sneak attack rules, (2) the nature of "weapon-like" spells, and (3) the fact "weapon-like" spells model weapons in other ways (e.g., eligible for Weapon Focus feat).
But, I seem to remember the T&B ruling made it possible to combine touch attack spells (such as rays) and sneak attack damage. I pictured a rogue standing 30' from a flanked opponent with a scroll of ray of frost and managing to inflict multiple d6 damage with a 0-level spell. That just doesn't sit well with me.
I'll have to reread T&B (in my *spare* time, ha ha) to be sure I remember correctly.
radferth said:
Personally, as a DM I consider "rules discussions" in non-core books to be the "official stance" but certainly no more binding than the core rules themselves. Probably less binding than core rules because I see them as more "rulings" on how certain rules interact than new rules.
I don't think the particular rule from T&B is explicit in the core rules. I do happen to think it's a perfectly rational extension of (1) the sneak attack rules, (2) the nature of "weapon-like" spells, and (3) the fact "weapon-like" spells model weapons in other ways (e.g., eligible for Weapon Focus feat).
But, I seem to remember the T&B ruling made it possible to combine touch attack spells (such as rays) and sneak attack damage. I pictured a rogue standing 30' from a flanked opponent with a scroll of ray of frost and managing to inflict multiple d6 damage with a 0-level spell. That just doesn't sit well with me.
I'll have to reread T&B (in my *spare* time, ha ha) to be sure I remember correctly.
Re: Dragging a Thread Back on Track?
Note that flanking doesn't apply to ranged attacks, not even ranged touch attacks.
Marius Delphus said:
But, I seem to remember the T&B ruling made it possible to combine touch attack spells (such as rays) and sneak attack damage. I pictured a rogue standing 30' from a flanked opponent with a scroll of ray of frost and managing to inflict multiple d6 damage with a 0-level spell. That just doesn't sit well with me.
Note that flanking doesn't apply to ranged attacks, not even ranged touch attacks.
My group considers PHB, DMG and MM to be canon. All other books or sections of books have to be agreed upon by the DM and the players and they become canon within the campaign. Normally, sage's ruling are ageed to be canon at the beginning of the campaign to reduce arguements but rulings may be vacated if the majority agrees.
Our group is pretty democratic since there is usually 3 separate campaigns going at one time and others waiting to dm a new campaign. Campaigns of autocratic dm's die a death of disinterest and others fill their place. Surprisingly, this has resulted in cordial balance between DM's and players (no one rule 0's with impunity and no one argues at lenght about DM rulings .)
Our group is pretty democratic since there is usually 3 separate campaigns going at one time and others waiting to dm a new campaign. Campaigns of autocratic dm's die a death of disinterest and others fill their place. Surprisingly, this has resulted in cordial balance between DM's and players (no one rule 0's with impunity and no one argues at lenght about DM rulings .)
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
Re: Re: Dragging a Thread Back on Track?
Hong's right, of course. This trick would work if the target were denied her dex bonus for another reason (e.g., she were being grappled, or the rogue/wizard were invisible).
If it seems excessive for a 0th-level spell to be able to do multiple-d6 points of damage, just remember that the rogue could do similar damage with a nonmagical dart. Or, if the touch-attack is important, the rogue could do similar damage with a flask of alchemist's fire.
Daniel
hong said:
Hong's right, of course. This trick would work if the target were denied her dex bonus for another reason (e.g., she were being grappled, or the rogue/wizard were invisible).
If it seems excessive for a 0th-level spell to be able to do multiple-d6 points of damage, just remember that the rogue could do similar damage with a nonmagical dart. Or, if the touch-attack is important, the rogue could do similar damage with a flask of alchemist's fire.
Daniel
Pielorinho
Iron Fist of Pelor
Re: Re: Re: Re: Dragging a Thread Back on Track?
This is why I said,
Note that alchemist's fire costs twice as much as a 0th-level scroll; does more basic damage; does splash damage; can be used by anyone; is not subject to spell resistance; and (combined with the quickdraw feat and either iterative attacks or the rapid shot feat) can be used for multiple attacks in a round.
[Edit: Note that acid flasks can be used to this same purpose and have pretty much the same advantages as alchemist's fire over rays of frost.]
Awhile ago I posted a technique by which four 10th-level rogues with a wizard companion could kill the tarrasque using about 10,000 gp worth of materials total. They used the acid flask sneak attack technique.
I don't see anything unbalancing about the ray of frost sneak attack technique; if anything, the alchemist fire/acid flask SA technique is much worse.
Daniel
thalmin said:
This is why I said,
Note that alchemist's fire costs twice as much as a 0th-level scroll; does more basic damage; does splash damage; can be used by anyone; is not subject to spell resistance; and (combined with the quickdraw feat and either iterative attacks or the rapid shot feat) can be used for multiple attacks in a round.
[Edit: Note that acid flasks can be used to this same purpose and have pretty much the same advantages as alchemist's fire over rays of frost.]
Awhile ago I posted a technique by which four 10th-level rogues with a wizard companion could kill the tarrasque using about 10,000 gp worth of materials total. They used the acid flask sneak attack technique.
I don't see anything unbalancing about the ray of frost sneak attack technique; if anything, the alchemist fire/acid flask SA technique is much worse.
Daniel
Last edited:
