|
If this was posted elsewhere please let me know...but sneak attack "some" undead? Will that be defined in the Bestiary or is it explored in the Core Rulebook? Has there been updated language from the Beta to the Final?
Did they give undead more hit points as a result? I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.
|
I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.
Presumably thieves couldn't sneak attack undead because vulnerable spots, eg organs, on a living creature don't apply to the undead.
However, I've always believed undead have their own vulnerable spots to those in the know, eg stake to the heart, decapitation, etc. So makes sense to me.
Under the final PF rules, you can sneak attack (and crit as well) corporeal Undead. Incorporeal Undead retain their immunity to sneaks and crits.
What he said.
As to hit points, Undead are now d8 hit dice, but all get Charisma bonus to each (instead of Con). And no, Skeletons won't have 1 Cha anymore.
They also get 3/4 BAB instead of 1/2 as before. Looking forward to introducing my players to some *real* Skeletons, perhaps a Bloody Skeleton... mmmm
If this was posted elsewhere please let me know...but sneak attack "some" undead? Will that be defined in the Bestiary or is it explored in the Core Rulebook? Has there been updated language from the Beta to the Final?
Did they give undead more hit points as a result? I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.
It's pretty much now that unless the creature in question is homogeneous (made of entirely the same material, ie a clay golem, a black pudding), it can both be critically hit and sneak attacked. Anything that isn't homogeneous has a weak point, and that's what rogues use and abuse to sneak attack.
Does it make sense? Most of the time. It's generally GM's call when these types of things come up in my game. For instance, if a rogue in my group attacked a medium iron golem and crit, I wouldn't allow it since it's made of entirely metal. However, a skeleton is made up of a lot of interworking pieces and parts, so I'd allow him to crit a skeleton by breaking, fracturing or dislocating a joint or something akin to that.
Did they give undead more hit points as a result? I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.
I don't recall any undead-based limits on backstabs back in the 1e/2e day. As long as the target was roughly humanoid, had a back, and was surprised, you could backstab it.
They also get 3/4 BAB instead of 1/2 as before. Looking forward to introducing my players to some *real* Skeletons, perhaps a Bloody Skeleton... mmmm
Of course, with a flat 10 Cha and a D8 hit points, the "real" Pathfinder skelingtons are down from 6 to 4 hit points. Minimum damage for a lot of fighters and barbarians.
Just saying. ;)
Anything that isn't homogeneous has a weak point, and that's what rogues use and abuse to sneak attack.
Does it make sense? Most of the time. It's generally GM's call when these types of things come up in my game. For instance, if a rogue in my group attacked a medium iron golem and crit, I wouldn't allow it since it's made of entirely metal. However, a skeleton is made up of a lot of interworking pieces and parts, so I'd allow him to crit a skeleton by breaking, fracturing or dislocating a joint or something akin to that.
Plenty of reasoning behind allowing crits on golems (and plenty of reasoning not to of course).
A sort of "Sorry, I don't see any way to sneak attack that, but maybe..." thing would be to allow the sneak attack dice to set a Fort DC (or Reflex?) or be staggered for 1 round (1d4?), or some other sort of disability. Jamming the legworks of a golem or something. Perhaps call the sneak attack dice a combat manuever check (to trip, bull rush, disarm).
At 3.5 average per 2 levels, it only really starts adding up at high levels (6 dice at level 11 average 21, enough to hit DC of a warrior with no str or dex or deflection or dodge... 10 dice at level 19 = 35, beats a warrior with 6 str/dex/def total).
Of course, with a flat 10 Cha and a D8 hit points, the "real" Pathfinder skelingtons are down from 6 to 4 hit points. Minimum damage for a lot of fighters and barbarians.
Only if they're using a blunt weapon (pretty rare for fighters and barbs).
Creative Director
|
We now let rogues sneak attack undead and all folks crit them for basically two reasons:
1) Because in a lot of undead lore (be they staking a vampire or shooting zombies in the head or chopping them up or whatever), critical hits/sneak attacks are often the ONLY way to really hurt undead.
2) Because it's very very common for adventures to get super undead heavy, and that really makes the game frustrating for rogues if they can't sneak attack them.
In any event, while undead have had their hit dice reduced to d8, they do indeed now gain their Charisma modifier to their hit points (and to their Fort saves). The zombie and skeleton are a poor example to look at to see how hit points generally increase (or at least stay about the same) for undead as a result. But then, zombies and skeletons are sort of supposed to be the "starter undead." And their damage reduction is pretty tough for 1st level characters anyway unless they're armed right.
But the vast majority of undead will have a combination of more hit points and/or damage reduction to help them stand up to sneak attacks.
I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.
That's not true. In earlier editions, there wasn't even sneak attack.
Plus, the concept of classes being useless in a lot of combats because of a rule that is far from the only logical conclusion should not be kept in just because it has always been there.
But the vast majority of undead will have a combination of more hit points and/or damage reduction to help them stand up to sneak attacks.
Sneak attacks aren't really the corpsies' problem. It's Clerics and Paladins with smites and channeling smites and all the nice gimmicks, or just plain old fighters with superspecialisation in their favourite weapon
|
I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.
Just because you've always done it that way... ;)
I am fully behind this change.
|
It was high time for that change. Rogues are not that simple to play, they need clever tactics, mobility, and competence at what they do... and sneak attack is a just reward for that. The fact that this reward would be denied about half the time, reducing one's dexterous attack damage to the low single digits (which would be absorbed by DR more often than not), was one of the reasons I've never played a rogue so far. The talents are just icing on the cake. The d8 hitpoints are golden, though.
In any event, while undead have had their hit dice reduced to d8, they do indeed now gain their Charisma modifier to their hit points (and to their Fort saves)...
But the vast majority of undead will have a combination of more hit points and/or damage reduction to help them stand up to sneak attacks.
*Imagines a lovely coven of Vampires for the party to encounter*
*Imagines a lovely coven of Vampires for the party to encounter*
Covens are for hags. Vampires gather in coteries.
Always important to remember what you call groups of creatures Look! A richness of martens!
Semantics... :oP
Besides... Hags and vampires aren't listed in your link.. so there *stick out his tongue*
:oP
Always important to remember what you call groups of creatures Look! A richness of martens!
My favorite sofar: an embarrassment of dragons
|
|
You guys rock! I have to say, PAIZO messageboards are an incredible source for idea sharing and rule clarifying.
When you consider the fact that for 10,000 gp, everybody bought the greater crystal of true death...
It just bothers me that rogues can sneak attack undead. and yes, tha'ts the way it's always been. that's what made it so fearsome to face an undead. Something has to be said about the dread of it all. it's sort of why I don't like Death Spells being gimped either, despiteunderstanding it. It's like we jazzed up everything for characters when there was real fear of death. And why is the rule of massive damage still in? that rule is absurd!
|
|
And why is the rule of massive damage still in? that rule is absurd!
It's only an optional rule this time. And for every gamer who thinks it's stupid, there are those of us who actually like having it around, just to keep some fear of death around for combat at Epic levels... even with a higher damage cap (I find myself using 50 + 5/point of Con bonus)
|
|
Wait....where did the rule become corporeal undead can be crit and/or sneak attacked?!?!?
Sorry to sound confused, but I've flipped through the book and couldn't find anything in particular on this, so this kind of blows my mind because we've all be under the impression it reverted back to 3.5 style rulings...
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
3.5 Sneak Attack (under Rogue class abilities): A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks. The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach.
PF Sneak Attack (under Rogue class abilities): The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
The whole chunk about undead and oozes is gone. Under PF creature type Ooze is "Does not take additional damage from precision-based attacks, such as sneak attack."
The 3.5 Ooze says "Not subject to critical hits or flanking." and the sneak bit comes from the ability description "immune to crits = immune to sneak".
|
|
3.5 Sneak Attack (under Rogue class abilities): A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks. The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach.
PF Sneak Attack (under Rogue class abilities): The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
The whole chunk about undead and oozes is gone. Under PF creature type Ooze is "Does not take additional damage from precision-based attacks, such as sneak attack."
The 3.5 Ooze says "Not subject to critical hits or flanking." and the sneak bit comes from the ability description "immune to crits = immune to sneak".
Thank you very much! I think what happened with our group was the bit left over about "The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot." was thought to reference the much larger section from 3.5. Thanks Carborundum, because one of the things I was kind of disappointed with from the stated beta goals and final release was that we thought the rogue change had never made it. :D
|
|
It just bothers me that rogues can sneak attack undead. and yes, tha'ts the way it's always been. that's what made it so fearsome to face an undead.
Whatever the 'dread factor' brings to the table, not being able to sneak attack undead beings isn't entirely logically consistent. I've always viewed sneak attacks not only to include organs like the liver, heart or lungs but structural weak points or vital ligatures of a creature's anatomy such as hamstrings, trapeziuses, the insides of the arms near the armpit, eyes, etc. This is somewhat born out by the various rogue talents that can be used to modify sneak attack damage to achieve conditions or alternate effects such as slowing. Most undead no longer make use of their respiratory or circulatory systems, but that doesn't mean they have no weak points - stab a zombie in the eyes and he can't see; slice his hamstrings and he can't stand up.
Personally, I'd count level draining, ability damage, incorporeality, DR, exotic diseases, the ability to turn your fallen party members into new undead foes, and the general gross-out factor of seeing something like a mohrg coming after you as much more salient factors towards making undead 'fearsome'.|
|
They also get 3/4 BAB instead of 1/2 as before. Looking forward to introducing my players to some *real* Skeletons, perhaps a Bloody Skeleton... mmmmOf course, with a flat 10 Cha and a D8 hit points, the "real" Pathfinder skelingtons are down from 6 to 4 hit points. Minimum damage for a lot of fighters and barbarians.
Just saying. ;)
As Xanos the Un-dying once said "If a dozen skeletons won't get the job done, perhaps five dozen will."
He also later added "Oh ya, and when they fall in combat, have them explode for negative energy damage." But Libris Mortis was awesome like that.==
AKA 8one6
Always important to remember what you call groups of creatures Look! A richness of martens!My favorite sofar: an embarrassment of dragons
Don't forget, it's also a club of ogres and an overkill of fiends ...
Don't forget, it's also a club of ogres and an overkill of fiends ...
Always important to remember what you call groups of creatures Look! A richness of martens!My favorite sofar: an embarrassment of dragons
lol awesome :)
..a bucket of slimes?
I am not happy about this since the ability to not be able to sneak attack undead has been a mainstay in core D&D since the beginning.That's not true. In earlier editions, there wasn't even sneak attack.
Plus, the concept of classes being useless in a lot of combats because of a rule that is far from the only logical conclusion should not be kept in just because it has always been there.
Earlier editions just called it back stab multiplier instead of sneak attack. Instead of D6s for damage it x2-x5 depending on your level. As well there wasn't flanking so it was much harder to use but it did exist.
Not being able to sneak attack undead didn't give them "dread." It only effected one class to begin with, why would the rest of the party get scared?
|
Because undead used to be challenging and unique. It also used to be that when an evil necro started raising a horde from your towns graveyard, you went to the church and holy knights, not the thieves guild. I still think that sneak attack to constructs and undead are very bad ideas after all this time. Crits (correctly) represent head shots, stakes through the heart, and smashing gears, so makes sense in my opinion. Just drop the sneak attack.
|
Because undead used to be challenging and unique. It also used to be that when an evil necro started raising a horde from your towns graveyard, you went to the church and holy knights, not the thieves guild. I still think that sneak attack to constructs and undead are very bad ideas after all this time. Crits (correctly) represent head shots, stakes through the heart, and smashing gears, so makes sense in my opinion. Just drop the sneak attack.
I'm not sure if having one party member sit out the fight due to his primiary offensive ability not functioning fills my definition of "challenging and unique", but YMMV.
I don't agree that Rogues are the only snipers. The question you should be asking then is why does no one else get extra damage when they carefully snipe a vampire (with a wooden crossbow bolt or stake I presume)?
Two answers to that:
1) They don't get the bonus damage in other circumstances either;
2) a lot of them have their own versions of bonus damage:
Weapon training
Favoured Enemy
Smite Evil
Precise Strike
And if you want to be pedantic, Focussed Shot is also applicable, as is Power Attack, Vital Strike, etc.
There are lots of ways of getting extra damage, and they all work on undead by targeting them at their weakest in one way or another. So perhaps the question should be, "why should sneak attack be any different?"
Because undead used to be challenging and unique. It also used to be that when an evil necro started raising a horde from your towns graveyard, you went to the church and holy knights, not the thieves guild. I still think that sneak attack to constructs and undead are very bad ideas after all this time. Crits (correctly) represent head shots, stakes through the heart, and smashing gears, so makes sense in my opinion. Just drop the sneak attack.I'm not sure if having one party member sit out the fight due to his primiary offensive ability not functioning fills my definition of "challenging and unique", but YMMV.
Yeah I played a 3.5 Rogue once - "Oh look it's another undead/construct with damage resistance... I'll go and read a book shall I?"
SA working on corporeal undead is something that just makes sense. As Jason wrote above *most* undead have clear "vital" targets on them - if you can do a *slight* bit of lateral thinking - you can let the Rogues get to hit *those* vitals on the undead (whatever they happen to be - although they are things that *generally* work on most living targets).
I think that including Golems is nonsense, though - there really *is* no magical off switch for those things, nor are they made of "vital" bits and pieces. They're magical statues and the like - there IS nothing "vital" to strike even remotely.
In a similar manner, I think Skeletons and anything bone-based should also be immune to crits ... for similar reasons. *what* is vital once you're all bone? The bone itself is the structure, and the DR system for the skeletons I've always sort of liked. It made them more "hard core" in a way that other types just seemed to pale against slightly. I mean, I can totally see ghouls or zombies getting SA'd like crazy. I can't see the similar type of thing happening to a skeleton (that's *already* magically animated to move more like a golem in the first place as it *has* no tendons, ligaments, or brains even remotely in play).
Moving back to golems, *what* is exactly vital on an animated lump of materials roughly formed into *any* shape you'd like it to have (ie: giant scorpion golem anyone?)? None of it's parts are more required than any of the others ... lob off a foot and, minus slight adjustment in movement, there *is* no real effect. HOW would a rogue even attempt to SA something like that? There *is* no "weak spot" anywhere at all.
Similar case to be made for elemental and incorporeal undead as well.
In my games I'm leaning heavily towards making golems, skeletons(and skeletal undead) into SA immune critters again. Only them, though - any other "fleshy" undead is totally fair game (hell ... a case can be made even for a flesh golem - not really for any of the other golem types, though).
|
|
Yeah I played a 3.5 Rogue once - "Oh look it's another undead/construct with damage resistance... I'll go and read a book shall I?"Because undead used to be challenging and unique. It also used to be that when an evil necro started raising a horde from your towns graveyard, you went to the church and holy knights, not the thieves guild. I still think that sneak attack to constructs and undead are very bad ideas after all this time. Crits (correctly) represent head shots, stakes through the heart, and smashing gears, so makes sense in my opinion. Just drop the sneak attack.I'm not sure if having one party member sit out the fight due to his primiary offensive ability not functioning fills my definition of "challenging and unique", but YMMV.
Thats a redundent arguement because
1.) there are more than a few ways for a Rogue that specializes to put the hurt on Undead <key word = specializes>
2.) there are many other things that a Rogue can do in a fight besides always being the uber damage dealer
3.) this arguement doesn't hold water when applied to other classes with the exact same circumstances, like a spellcaster vs a Golem/boss Outsider/Dragon with high SR.
I'm not saying that your opinion is wrong, just that I don't agree with it even this far after the Core book was released. I think in particualr, Undead have become pretty weak as a creature type and bascally similar to living creatures from a PC's point of view.
I also think that just allowing Crits on Undead (Constucts, etc. . ) would have solved the problem, as Rogues tend to have the best Crit chances anyway.
Moving back to golems, *what* is exactly vital on an animated lump of materials roughly formed into *any* shape you'd like it to have (ie: giant scorpion golem anyone?)? None of it's parts are more required than any of the others ... lob off a foot and, minus slight adjustment in movement, there *is* no real effect. HOW would a rogue even attempt to SA something like that? There *is* no "weak spot" anywhere at all.
Joints. Cracks in stone, knots in wood. A construct is just that, a construct. An earth elemental is literally a solid chunk of rock moving through magical means. A stone golem is a chunk of rock, specially carved and animated through magic to be able to move. That's where you Sneak Attack them. Lob off a foot and suddenly it can't move as well. Crack the elbow joint and it can't use that arm as well.
And skeletons? Same as before, joints. If you break it's knee, it cannot walk, it must hop instead.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Moving back to golems, *what* is exactly vital on an animated lump of materials roughly formed into *any* shape you'd like it to have (ie: giant scorpion golem anyone?)? None of it's parts are more required than any of the others ... lob off a foot and, minus slight adjustment in movement, there *is* no real effect. HOW would a rogue even attempt to SA something like that? There *is* no "weak spot" anywhere at all.
In some real-world golem stories, the golem is brought to life by carving words upon its forehead, or placing holy/magical texts into it's mouth. These would be excellent weak points for a rogue to strike.
|
|
Moving back to golems, *what* is exactly vital on an animated lump of materials roughly formed into *any* shape you'd like it to have (ie: giant scorpion golem anyone?)? None of it's parts are more required than any of the others ... lob off a foot and, minus slight adjustment in movement, there *is* no real effect. HOW would a rogue even attempt to SA something like that? There *is* no "weak spot" anywhere at all.In some real-world golem stories, the golem is brought to life by carving words upon its forehead, or placing holy/magical texts into it's mouth. These would be excellent weak points for a rogue to strike.
But that begs the quesion, why cant anyone else then do that? WHen did Sneak Attack become a called shot, more or less? I can easily see Crits doing that, because it is a lucky good shot that nets you a larger return than normal. But a Rogue that just happens to have a Fighter on the golums back automatically starts hitting magical writing that no one else can see or pin point, nah.
But that begs the quesion, why cant anyone else then do that? WHen did Sneak Attack become a called shot, more or less? I can easily see Crits doing that, because it is a lucky good shot that nets you a larger return than normal. But a Rogue that just happens to have a Fighter on the golums back automatically starts hitting magical writing that no one else can see or pin point, nah.
Moving back to golems, *what* is exactly vital on an animated lump of materials roughly formed into *any* shape you'd like it to have (ie: giant scorpion golem anyone?)? None of it's parts are more required than any of the others ... lob off a foot and, minus slight adjustment in movement, there *is* no real effect. HOW would a rogue even attempt to SA something like that? There *is* no "weak spot" anywhere at all.In some real-world golem stories, the golem is brought to life by carving words upon its forehead, or placing holy/magical texts into it's mouth. These would be excellent weak points for a rogue to strike.
May as well ask: "Why is it the wizard gets to cast spells by mouthing magic words when any class can talk?"
But then, they can deal extra damage with the right feats. What do you think Vital Strike is? Or the damage bonus against a favoured enemy? In fact, the rogue in that respect is unique not because he has a way of dealing extra damage but because his way is restricted to the foe being distracted enough to let him land the blow.
But that begs the quesion, why cant anyone else then do that? WHen did Sneak Attack become a called shot, more or less? I can easily see Crits doing that, because it is a lucky good shot that nets you a larger return than normal. But a Rogue that just happens to have a Fighter on the golums back automatically starts hitting magical writing that no one else can see or pin point, nah.'Cause of all the classes the rogue is the archetipical guy used to hit vulnerable parts during combat (SA is PRECISION damage...not simply "bonus damage" like weapon specialization) so it's only logical that of all classes he's the one to hit specific places. A crit is a lucky strike, it's totally different.
Not really, a critical hit is when you hit a part that's particularly vulnerable by luck or design (the higher the threat range, the more design comes into it). Vital Strike is about aiming at these areas while the owner of them is actively trying to defend himself, Sneak Attack is the ability and training to hit them if he isn't. I'd happily allow a feat that gave the owner 1d6 sneak attack, for having that training in some form or another.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
But that begs the quesion, why cant anyone else then do that? WHen did Sneak Attack become a called shot, more or less? I can easily see Crits doing that, because it is a lucky good shot that nets you a larger return than normal. But a Rogue that just happens to have a Fighter on the golums back automatically starts hitting magical writing that no one else can see or pin point, nah.
Additionally...
A rogue that just happens to have a fighter on the human's back automatically starts hitting vital organs and such that no one else can see or pin point? Nah.
Additionally...
A rogue that just happens to have a fighter on the human's back automatically starts hitting vital organs and such that no one else can see or pin point? Nah.
Like they can with Vital Strike?