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

[Minigiant]

Well considering you don't actually stab somone in a vital region unless you actually kill/drop them, sneak attack immunity is wis weird already. You didn't stab a 30 HP ogre in the heart with a 15 damage SA. But that's the "what is HP" issue thing and I don't wanna get into that.

Overall it is the ranger favored enemy problem. Having 15-25% of the MM immune to a class defining feature or having a feature work on 5% of the MM or making the class's effeciency based on item drops puts the class's power a lot more dependent on the DM than the other classes. Then how the class is played is squarely up to the DM or the game system and not the player.

 

[Derren]

And since when do undead have no vital spots?

Since the time D&D uses mythological and magical undead as basis for their monsters instead of modern pulp ones.
It doesn't matter to an animated lump of flesh where you hit it and the skeleton is also unimpressed if you crack some bones or even its skull. You can even split it in half and it might continue to fight.

Those are the kind of undead in D&D and not the Resident Evil or The Walking Dead zombies which drop as soon as slight pressure is applied to its head region.

 

[Bluenose]

Since the time D&D uses mythological undead as basis for their monsters instead of modern pulp zombies.
It doesn't matter to an animated lump of flesh where you hit it and the skeleton is also unimpressed if you crack some bones or even its skull. You can even split it in half and it might continue to fight.

This being D&D, the only thing you can do it it is hack randomly away until it runs out of hit points. It's not as if you can chop it's arms off and prevent it using weapons.

 

[Minigiant]

In D&D, you beat the energy out of a zombie. Every point of HP damage is 100 necro-watts of energy you beat out of it.

Or is it shadow-joules?

Anyway once you smack the necrotic energy out the zombie, it cannot sustain its own animation.

 

[Mr. Patient]

There is an article by Skip Williams that says a spell completion item that uses any other casting time besides standard uses that casting time.

Its on the Wizards website.

Quote, please? I've been giving you SRD quotes. All I'm getting back are your recollections, which so far have turned out to be wrong. I'm happy to concede if I'm wrong, but so far you've shown nothing to support your view.

 

[Farscape]

Quote, please? I've been giving you SRD quotes. All I'm getting back are your recollections, which so far have turned out to be wrong. I'm happy to concede if I'm wrong, but so far you've shown nothing to support your view.

Just Google Using Magic Items Part 2 by Skip Williams.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Just Google Using Magic Items Part 2 by Skip Williams.

In the interests of good debate and no hard feelings, going forward, why don't we all provide links/quoes instead of telling others to Google something. After all, the onus of supporting a position is on the person making the assertion.

 

[Mr. Patient]

Just Google Using Magic Items Part 2 by Skip Williams.

OK, fair enough, I see that. He's contradicting the rules as written here; I'm not aware of anything in the actual rulebooks that supports his statement (perhaps there's something in the Rules Compendium, which I don't own). But if you want to use this as a canonical source, sure, then it works.

 

[Farscape]

In the interests of good debate and no hard feelings, going forward, why don't we all provide links/quoes instead of telling others to Google something. After all, the onus of supporting a position is on the person making the assertion.

It's not simple to post links while using your mobile phone. This site doesn't like mobile phones very well, and I won't even start on the Enworld app.

 

[Stormonu]

This sounds like its going to be one of those that just goes in circles due to playstyles.

For my money, I'd like to see crit immunity or resistance be restricted to just a couple of creatures, called out just like something with spell immunity or damage reduction/special weapon to hit. I can see zombies being vulnerable to "headshots", vampires taking a blow to the heart, golems having the motivating runes defaced and the like. I have a hard time seeing a black pudding being critted and how non-sentient plants seem like they ought to have a reduction, if not immunity. And something like ghosts - I mean, I don't even understand how a fighter's weapon could even harm that unless it was something like ghostbane.

I'm also for the rogue having other schticks beside sneak attack to bring to the adventure. Whether its skill tricks or UMD, giving them something other than "whack really hard with the sneaky stick" seems like a good idea.

Finally, as for potions, scroll and wands, they don't need to be sneak attack buffs to be useful. A wand of fireballs in a rogue's hand can be a deadly aid - now you're not only hitting one foe for 6d6, you're hitting the whole room. A potion of invisibility lets the rogue bypass an enemy he can't sneak attack (hopefully). A scroll of knock opens some unusual options in the rogues hands. And if the rogue can't use these items against foes or obstacles, the wizard's probably screwed as well.