What kind of spells, if any, may be used in sneak attacks?

[jontherev]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How about Fire giants instead of Red Dragons?

I don't wanna get in a shouting match with you, Jontherev, but I will say that I loathe the bola rules in S&F. WHile the concept is cool, the weapon is (I think) horribly overpowered. It automatically makes a trip attempt with a ranged touch attack, right? That's ridiculously good, and when a player in my game asked me to look at the rules for the bola, I immediately banned it.

I might rule that a bola crits on an 18-20, and functions as a trip attack on a successful crit. That way, an expert bola user could make those attacks pretty often, but it'd be costly.

Daniel

Don't worry, I only "bite back" when someone is acting like a troll. 99% of the time, I am a polite poster. I agree that the bola is powerful, but I'm not sure if it's overly powerful. First, it's an exotic weapon. Second, it trips from range, not melee (which would be completely broken if it could do that) and that range increment sucks. Remember, you get a -4 penalty to ranged weapons when you attack someone who is prone, so any other attacks you make that round would be at -4. Also, 1d4 damage and crits only on a 20 makes it one of the weakest damaging weapons. All this for a trip and possible grapple? The grapple only lasts for one round too. All the trip does is take away part of his next action, unless he decides to do something other than stand. Remember, casting spells is not effected by being prone. Where this tactic shines is when an opponent is engaged with allies and you have Precise Shot. However, even as a touch attack, the cover bonus he'd get to ac coupled with the range penalties you'd probably have, will make the attack difficult. Really, what's worse? An archer with a mighty +4 bow of shocking pumping 3 arrows into a foe and doing tons of damage or a bola that does very little damage, but trips him? Anyway, I'm not convinced it's such an unbalancing weapon, but of course that's just my opinion. Feel free to disagree with me without fear of a retributive strike.

 

[Pielorinho]

Bola woes

I don't have my book here, so I can't refer exactly to the description. While I do agree that an archer with a +4 mighty shocking bow is nastier than a bola user, I'm not sure we're comparing apples to apples with that example.

I would think a bola would shine in the following situations:
-A nasty melee fighter is charging at you. Sure, your additional ranged attacks suffer a -4 penalty against a prone opponent -- but if he's tripped, he doesn't get to make any attacks against you at all. A few bolas can really slow him down, giving your allies a few rounds to fire spells or ranged weapons at him.
-A nasty archer is shooting at you. A shlub with a bola can prevent the nasty archer from getting a full attack option -- or, if the bola grapples, from getting any attack option at all.
-A nasty spellcaster is firing at you. If the bola grapples, that's it for the spellcaster.

The bola gives you a lot of power to control mobility on the battlefield; in my experience in D&D, the group with superior mobility has a tremendous advantage. I'm not sure the bola should make controlling mobility so easy.

Daniel

 

[jontherev]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How about Fire giants instead of Red Dragons?

I think any combat strategy that relies on Expert Tactition and a Ring of Blinking opens one up to Twink-Boy accusations .

Using a feat and one magic item is munchkin? I suppose your characters forego choosing feats and destroy all magic items then? Like I said, I acquired the ring in-game. Blame the DM for giving it to the nasty vampire that almost killed our entire party single-handedly.

And gee, a bola trips anything, automatically, huh? If you hit a Tarrasque with a bola, does it trip? And people call you a twink. How rude!

This is the rules forum dude. So far you are accusing me of using existing rules to my advantage as being a "twink". You don't know anything about my character, my dm, or our campaign. You are making (bad) assumptions and acting quite trollish imo. I don't buy the "I had a bad day, so I can go off on anyone I choose" excuse. If this ideology is something you prescribe too, you need help managing your anger. I had the worst week of my entire life last week (seriously, but details shall remain private). Go back and check my posts from last week and see if I ever resorted to such rude tactics that you are using so casually and care-free in this thread. I view insults like "munchkin" or "twink" as being as bad as using racial slurs. It's the same thing essentially, or at least on par with the level of ignorance. You are acting like a jack @ss and I'm calling you on it, plain and simple. I'm not the only person to mention your rudeness btw. An apology (which I saw from you) means nothing if it is accompanied by an attempt at justification (bad day) and THEN followed by more of the same behavior.

Finally, it says under Sneak-attack that if you can't reach vitals, you can't do sneak-attack damage. You're supposed to do the math for yourself.

Last time I checked, genitalia were pretty vital. I'm fairly certain a rogue can reach those. Especially a giant's.

Other finally: So, I gather your combat strategy is to be hasted, tumble in during your partial action, then do a full attack with two weapons -- er, but that's only three attacks. Where's the fourth one?

No, not hasted. Two-weapon fighting. Tumble is part of your move action. I can move/tumble in without being hasted and make two attacks due to the ring of blinking and expert tactician. Next round, I get 4 attacks.

And you didn't work your 20% miss chance into your average damage.

Yes I did. I said, IF I hit with all attacks. It's not the exact amount of average that is important. You missed my point again. I can average CLOSE to the same damage you were complaining about, but this is against ANY foe who can be sneak attacked...not just those vulnerable to a certain element. If I were a true rogue, the damage would be much higher because I would have 2d6 more sneak attack dice each attack.

And if you EVER end the round standing next to the giant, having just done 50hp of damage (or whatever), he's going to turn around and swing the Big-Ass Doom Sword at you. I know, he's probably got a 50% miss chance, but he gets three attacks at great bonuses. If two hit . . . owie!

I took a level of ranger because giants killed my father, so I like to melee with them whether they smack me or not. But, my high ac (in the 30's w/Shield spell), high hit points (high con, good rolls), and ring of blinking help me stay in melee much longer than a pure rogue could. I haven't had a problem w/Giants yet.

No offense, but as a DM I take the charge of protecting my monsters seriously. And it sounds like your DM lets you get away with murder.

No offense? My DM lets me use RULES. How is that 'getting away with murder'? We use very little house rules, if any. Only if something is WAY out of wack, like the armor of speed from DotF. I am not someone who cheats or tries to bend rules like you seem hellbent on proving me as. Have a nice day.

 

[Forrester]

In other "twink" news . . .

So far you are accusing me of using existing rules to my advantage as being a "twink" . . . I view insults like "munchkin" or "twink" as being as bad as using racial slurs.

This is something you need to share with your therapist, not me.

If you consider everything that has been printed anywhere in any sourcebook as "existing rules", then more power to you, I guess.

And lord, I don't care if your DM gave it to you in-game. Since the beginning some DMs have handed out artifacts and relics as if they were party favors "in-game". What's your point?

I said, IF I hit with all attacks. It's not the exact amount of average that is important.

No offense, but it IS the amount of damage that's important. When you make assumptions about hitting all the time, ignoring miss chances, etc., you mess up the true average.

The majority of what makes sneak-touch-attacks so broken is that they almost always hit on a '2' or better, even against the most heavily armored opponents. When you start making assumptions about hitting with all attacks, that part of the equation gets ignored. And it's the MOST IMPORTANT PART.

Figure out what your TRUE average is, and then we'll talk.

And perhaps you have an AC of 30+ with a Shield spell -- I'll buy that. But that spell can often be avoided by the giant if he takes a lousy 5' step.

Finally, as far as "vitals" are concerned . . . it all depends on how tall your rogue is. If he's a halfling, he'll need to jump to reach Mr. Giant's loincloth. Odd image, that.

PS I'm sorry you are having such a lousy week. It is undoubtedly affecting your flame-resistance . I hope it gets better.

 

[IceBear]

Duplicate post

 

[IceBear]

Damn. I can't believe you guys think I'm harsh.

Hehehe - relatively speaking I don't think you are harsh anymore

You at least try to discuss OFFICAL RULES on the RULES FORUM without demeaning anyone who uses them.

IceBear

 

[kreynolds]

Hehehe - relatively speaking I don't think you are harsh anymore

IceBear

Don't be so quick to defend. I'm taking a little heat on the When does invisibility drop while attacking thread. It's partially deserved.

 

[IceBear]

Oh, I'm not defending you

I'm just commenting that RELATIVELY you aren't as bad as I thought you were

hehehe - kidding

IceBear

 

[jontherev]

Oh, I'm not defending you

I'm just commenting that RELATIVELY you aren't as bad as I thought you were

hehehe - kidding

IceBear

I HOPE you guys aren't talking about me!

Btw, no one replied to my earlier post regarding the rule on doubling sneak attack damage. Normally, if you crit, you don't double (or triple) the sneak attack dice. So, it should follow that in circumstances like a ray of frost against a fire creature, that it also would not change. Can anyone show me a rule regarding this? I don't think sneak attack damage should EVER be doubled, by the rules. It doesn't matter that it is the same damage type. It's also the same damage type on a crit, but it doesn't get doubled there does it? Unless you provide a rule on this, I would assume that sneak attack damage is NEVER mulitplied. Comments?

 

[IceBear]

The reason I didn't comment was because I don't know

I haven't looked at the rules myself, but Caliban seemed to suggest that it would double. Now, I'm not taking his word as gospel (I have to say this because some people have accused me of being his lapdog and not being able to think for myself and depending on other's opinions too much, etc) but I'm assuming that he has looked into it more than I have so his opinion is currently better informed than mine.

IceBear