D&D 5E What's the problem with certain types of creatures being immune to Sneak Attack?

[billd91]

Its always been weird to me the idea that monsters would have one classes feature be explicitly mentioned in their stats.

It'd be like saying Dragons are all immune to the spells of wizards but effected by all other spells.

That's not really what was going on. They were described as being immune to critical hits. It was the sneak attack power that stated that anything immune to critical hits was also unaffected by sneak attack. So it's not like the immunity specifically targeted rogues in the way it was described or written, rather it specifically highlighted damage above and beyond normal weapon damage that might be construed as hitting a vital spot. And as such, it could significantly blunt the damage done by crit-focused fighters as well.

 

[The Human Target]

What part on a skull is a "vital spot"?

Whats the difference between you sneaking up and delivering the attack to the back of the skull and my barbarian giving it a good old golf club swing with his big hammer in the same spot? How would you hit a skull in a precise location?

Magic gems, runes, some parts of real skulls are weaker than others.

You attack the skull when he doesn't know you're there, he can't dodge or bring his magic defenses to bear since he isn't omnipotent, you crack his skull that much harder.

I think part of the problem is viewing sneak attacks and HP too literally. If you sneak attack an orc but don't do enough damage to kill him do you severe his windpipe? Pierce his kidney? Cut his femoral artery?

Futhermore, how do you damage a magic skull with a fireball?

 

[The Human Target]

Boo hoo, you get gimped versus some monsters. If your DM is going out of his way to throw things at you thar alwys play on your weakness then that is his fault, not the fault of the game.

If you don't carry a bow am I supposed to not throw in any flying creatures?

Boo hoo is always a good way to get your point across.

Yes, a primary class feature and a bow and arrow anyone can buy or find as treasure are totally the same thing. Good point.

 

[The Human Target]

That's not really what was going on. They were described as being immune to critical hits. It was the sneak attack power that stated that anything immune to critical hits was also unaffected by sneak attack. So it's not like the immunity specifically targeted rogues in the way it was described or written, rather it specifically highlighted damage above and beyond normal weapon damage that might be construed as hitting a vital spot. And as such, it could significantly blunt the damage done by crit-focused fighters as well.

You are literally correct, and that's a good point.

Though I would say even a crit focused fighter is way better off in that situation. And it does come up for rogues more, as they have no choice in the matter.

 

[Farscape]

If you needed SA bad enough you just bought a wand or a few scrolls of that spell that allowed you to use SA on undead.

 

[The Human Target]

I'm not sure spaming magic items is a solution.

 

[jeckyllgeek]

If you needed SA bad enough you just bought a wand or a few scrolls of that spell that allowed you to use SA on undead.

Isn't wand and scroll use usually not a rogue ability? They sound like wizard stuff to me.

 

[The Human Target]

Isn't wand and scroll use usually not a rogue ability? They sound like wizard stuff to me.

Some editions allowed the rogue to sort of trick magic items of other classes into working.

 

[billd91]

Some editions allowed the rogue to sort of trick magic items of other classes into working.

1e, 2e, and 3e (and PF) all do, though 3e and PF enable it the most with the Use Magic Device skill.

 

[The Human Target]

1e, 2e, and 3e (and PF) all do, though 3e and PF enable it the most with the Use Magic Device skill.

I always think of 3e and UMD.

Scrolls and wands weren't as very common a thing in the older editions from what I understand.