What kind of spells, if any, may be used in sneak attacks?
- Thread starter The Cardinal
- Start date
IceBear said:
Hey, you brought up the dragon, not me
. How are either of our rogues getting sneak attacks? If you play by the rules, it should be extraordinarily difficult for rogues to flank dragons in such a way that they're perfectly located so that they are standing 5' away from a vital area.
And then there's that Blindsight ability Dragons have that makes invisibility pretty useless against them
.Point is that if we DO get our rogues in such a location (probably with a hasted character -- MEA to move in, then attack, attack), you still have to hit him, and break through that armor. I get to do 20d6 damage with a couple cantrips. That's assuming a 10th level character -- perhaps fighting a red dragon that doesn't have SR yet, or has minimal SR.
But hey, this tactic works against any big beasty that doesn't have SR, but has really tough armor. Massive sneak-attack damage where you pretty much don't have to roll to hit is broken IMO.
IceBear
Explorer
But you DO have to roll to hit, so nothing is guaranteed. Yes, the touch attack makes it an attractive tactic, but then instead of casting a spell the rogue could have opted for more attacks with a less likely chance of hitting (but then causing multiple attacks worth of sneak attack damage).
It's really no less plausible to drop an ogre by hitting him in the eye with a ray of frost than with a thrown dagger. Yes, it would be easier, but that's the way of magic spells in my mind. Besides, if there were two ogres, the rogue could take them both down with two thrown daggers instead of just one with the spell.
Anyway, I have no real issue with it, especially since I *do* enforce that the rogue has to be able to hit a vital area, and the fact that getting a ranged sneak attack isn't the easiest thing in the world (especially since, I just realized, you really can't flank with a ranged attack so the chances of getting a sneak attack this way is even less).
IceBear
It's really no less plausible to drop an ogre by hitting him in the eye with a ray of frost than with a thrown dagger. Yes, it would be easier, but that's the way of magic spells in my mind. Besides, if there were two ogres, the rogue could take them both down with two thrown daggers instead of just one with the spell.
Anyway, I have no real issue with it, especially since I *do* enforce that the rogue has to be able to hit a vital area, and the fact that getting a ranged sneak attack isn't the easiest thing in the world (especially since, I just realized, you really can't flank with a ranged attack so the chances of getting a sneak attack this way is even less).
IceBear
IceBear
Explorer
gamecat said:
Actually, since my first post I didn't think the atmosphere was tense at all. I just didn't like the words he used in his first post, but he kind of apologized so I'm ok (I've had bad days too).
I just remember, this is a game, I play it for fun, what's fun for me may not be fun for others, and thus I never let what other people think is "correct" bother me too much - as long as me and my players are having fun with the rules we are using I'm a happy DM.
IceBear
How about Fire giants instead of Red Dragons?
Fire giants have no SR and have the Fire subtype.
And they've got a min AC of 21 -- better if they're a leader, have magical armor, or what have you.
A Rogue9/Wiz1 will need a big fat '2' to hit with his attack.
Meaning if he can get his real-wizard buddy to make him Improved Inivisible and hasted, he can fly around and do, automatically, without fail, 20d6+4d3 pts of damage to the nasty fire giants each round. Even if these fire giants have better dex than usual, better armor than usual, have shields instead of huge greatswords, have magical armor. Doesn't matter.
That's an average of 78pts of damage each round. At least the big bruiser barbarian trying to do that much damage each round against the giants has to CLOSE with them, and risk getting hurt. At least the archers firing away from a distance have to get through the natural and real armor. And even with rapid shot and multiple attacks a round, and being hasted, they aren't going to do -- on average -- 78pts of damage!
This brings up another point -- if you do a magical ranged attack from 5' away, and you are technically flanking, do you get sneak-attack dice?
Fire giants have no SR and have the Fire subtype.
And they've got a min AC of 21 -- better if they're a leader, have magical armor, or what have you.
A Rogue9/Wiz1 will need a big fat '2' to hit with his attack.
Meaning if he can get his real-wizard buddy to make him Improved Inivisible and hasted, he can fly around and do, automatically, without fail, 20d6+4d3 pts of damage to the nasty fire giants each round. Even if these fire giants have better dex than usual, better armor than usual, have shields instead of huge greatswords, have magical armor. Doesn't matter.
That's an average of 78pts of damage each round. At least the big bruiser barbarian trying to do that much damage each round against the giants has to CLOSE with them, and risk getting hurt. At least the archers firing away from a distance have to get through the natural and real armor. And even with rapid shot and multiple attacks a round, and being hasted, they aren't going to do -- on average -- 78pts of damage!
This brings up another point -- if you do a magical ranged attack from 5' away, and you are technically flanking, do you get sneak-attack dice?
Forrester said:
Hey, you brought up the dragon, not me
If you play by the rules, it should be extraordinarily difficult for rogues to flank dragons in such a way that they're perfectly located so that they are standing 5' away from a vital area.
And then there's that Blindsight ability Dragons have that makes invisibility pretty useless against them
Point is that if we DO get our rogues in such a location (probably with a hasted character -- MEA to move in, then attack, attack), you still have to hit him, and break through that armor. I get to do 20d6 damage with a couple cantrips. That's assuming a 10th level character -- perhaps fighting a red dragon that doesn't have SR yet, or has minimal SR.
But hey, this tactic works against any big beasty that doesn't have SR, but has really tough armor. Massive sneak-attack damage where you pretty much don't have to roll to hit is broken IMO.
Yes, but you're the one claiming the dragon example proves it's broken. The only time that Ray of Frost will do anymore than 2d3 damage to a Red dragon is if you somehow (yeah, right) catch him flat-footed and/or surprised. So, AT MOST, you could pull off 4 of these spells (if hasted, 2 during surprise, 2 during round 1). But this is such a BIG IF that you might as well ditch this idea altogether. Otherwise, flanking is the most probable method of obtaining sneak attack damage, which is what Icebear was using. And rogue/wizards flanking a dragon simply don't last very long. Do you still think Ray of Frost unbalanced? My rogue rarely uses Ray of Frost. He does much more damage by going into melee. Also, if I'm not mistaken, sneak attack damage is NEVER multiplied. Even in this case where it is doing cold damage vs. a fire creature. Anyone know a rule on this?
Mal Malenkirk
First Post
Forrester said:
I don't want to be nitpicking but... oh, heck, I want to nitpick!
20D6 of sneak attack with a ray of frost against a fire creatire assume a 20th level character, not a 10th. You only get 10D6 of sneak attack at level 19!
IceBear
Explorer
You would only be flanking with a touch attack I think, not a ranged touch attack (but I don't know for sure) - and casting your spell from 5ft away of a fire giant would be an AoO and since you have only 1 level of wizard I don't think you would make the concentration check.
Yes, once you start throwing haste and improved invisibilty around lots of things are broken. Why not have the rogue attempt multiple attacks. Sure...he needs to hit an AC of 21 but I bet he has a nice magic bow, 18+ Dex, etc so is that really going to be that hard for a hasted, improved invisible rogue?
And, as an FYI, only needing to roll a 2 isn't automatic...he could still roll a 1.
Bottom line - you aren't going to convince me that allowing this is broken beyond repair when someone like jontherev (whose opinion is usually quite accurate) who has been playing a rogue finds that he doesn't use this tactic that often.
IceBear
Yes, once you start throwing haste and improved invisibilty around lots of things are broken. Why not have the rogue attempt multiple attacks. Sure...he needs to hit an AC of 21 but I bet he has a nice magic bow, 18+ Dex, etc so is that really going to be that hard for a hasted, improved invisible rogue?
And, as an FYI, only needing to roll a 2 isn't automatic...he could still roll a 1.
Bottom line - you aren't going to convince me that allowing this is broken beyond repair when someone like jontherev (whose opinion is usually quite accurate) who has been playing a rogue finds that he doesn't use this tactic that often.
IceBear
Last edited:
