
Pentar |
Hello,
I was wondering if there was any rule regarding the damage type of a sneak-attack? I believe the most common-sense approach is that a sneak attack takes on the damage "type" of the attack used to generate the sneak attack.
Example 1:
A Cold Iron Longsword +1 that is used to deliver a sneak attack will cause that damage to by pass any damage reduction Cold Iron and/or Magic. The reverse also being true, that sneak attack damage using a weapon that cannot bypass the damage reduction of the creature it is hitting has damage reduction applied.
In the case of the above, do I calculate all damage from the one attack and then deduct DR? Or do I treat Sneak Attack as a separate damage pool that DR works against separately?
Example 2
A Scorching Ray used to generate a sneak attack will have that added damage be considered [Fire], thus fire resistance/immunity or vulnerability applies normally.
I've heard some arguments that Sneak attack damage is "untyped".. it's just precision damage and no form of defensive or vulnerability applies. I disagree with this.
Thoughts?

The Admiral Jose Monkamuck |

Hello,
I was wondering if there was any rule regarding the damage type of a sneak-attack? I believe the most common-sense approach is that a sneak attack takes on the damage "type" of the attack used to generate the sneak attack.
Example 1:
A Cold Iron Longsword +1 that is used to deliver a sneak attack will cause that damage to by pass any damage reduction Cold Iron and/or Magic. The reverse also being true, that sneak attack damage using a weapon that cannot bypass the damage reduction of the creature it is hitting has damage reduction applied.In the case of the above, do I calculate all damage from the one attack and then deduct DR? Or do I treat Sneak Attack as a separate damage pool that DR works against separately?
Example 2
A Scorching Ray used to generate a sneak attack will have that added damage be considered [Fire], thus fire resistance/immunity or vulnerability applies normally.I've heard some arguments that Sneak attack damage is "untyped".. it's just precision damage and no form of defensive or vulnerability applies. I disagree with this.
Thoughts?
Example 1: Sneak attack adds to the damage of the attack, it is all one attack and the DR is only applied one time. It's just like the fighter getting +2 damage from Weapon Specialization, only more of it.
Example 2: Unless Paizo has changed things massively then the damage type of the sneak attack is the damage type of the attack. So with scorching ray it would be fire damage.

Dabbler |

Sneak Attack damage is Precision Damage by nature, not type, and is conditional damage: it either applies or not by circumstance of the attack and/or the nature of the target. It's damage type is determined by the weapon that it is used with, the same as a fighter's bonus damage from weapon training/Weapon Specialisation is.
The other example of precision damage is the duelist's precise strike class feature, which likewise does not apply against creatures with no discernible anatomy.

OneSoulLegion |

Agreed with the above.
Another way to look at it is that the sneak attack damage isn't an additional damage source on the target as such, but rather a conditional bonus added to the attack, much in the same way as an enhancement bonus on a magical armour.
That +3 enhancement bonus on your armour ends up as becoming a larger "armor" bonus to AC in the game mechanics (and as such if something disregards your armour bonus (like a touch attack), it disregards that part as well). Likewise, that sneak attack adds a +2d6 precision bonus to your short sword's 1d6 piercing damage (assuming the situation allows precision damage), making it end up as a 3d6 piercing damage, just as if the weapon had been doing 3d6 damage from the get go.
Though of course this analogy isn't perfect as it still requires a check for whether precision damage is allowed before it's applied, but it works out completely well for things like damage type and damage reduction.