| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is something I've always been struggling with how to frame when translating crunch into fluff. Some creatures are only immune to critical hits, but not to precision damage. Take, for instance, a swarm. You cannot crit against a swarm, but you can totally sneak attack it (although only when it's flat-footed, because it's immune to flanking for obvious reasons). How would one conceptualize that, from a storytelling perspective?
Well, the swarm traits state:
"A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernible anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking."
There's no mention of sneak attacks or precision damage. The info box on the rogue page on d20pfsrd.com also doesn't list swarms as among the creature types/subtypes which are immune to precision damage. Unless I've missed something, swarms appear immune only to critical hits and flanking. Aeons similarly are immune to critical hits, but still susceptible to precision damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
ha, thats kinda funny. I can see it though, you cant get a lucky shot on an artery or something (crit) but you can aim a little better to hit more creatures in the swarm (sneak attack).
think mr. miyagi's chopsticks vs a baseball bat
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've never seen anyone claim that a swarm can be sneak attacked before. Swarm Traits specifically say a swarm has no discernible anatomy, which is required for sneak attack.
I'm pretty sure that having a discernible anatomy is not required for sneak attack in Pathfinder like it was in 3.5.
They've explicitly removed the "discernible anatomy" requirement so it becomes odd in some cases.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Ridiculon: That's a pretty good way to visualize it, thanks!
Swarm subtype didn't get updated to match the edited sneak attack entry. I'd still rule them immune to sneak attack, when they aren't outright immune to weapon damage.
RAI vs RAW readings
By RAW you get sneak attack damage on swarms (that aren't immune to your weapon anyway) until it gets patched.
RAI-wise they should probably be immune to both.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I'm honest, I think the immunity to weapon damage of swarms composed of creatures below Tiny size is overdone, and I hope it doesn't get exacerbated. I can see a sneak attack meaning managing to cleverly hit a few additional component creatures, thus inflicting more damage. I also don't think swarms of any component creature size should be completely immune to bludgeoning damage. I mean, an earthbreaker might not be totally effective against a swarm of cockroaches, but it will squash more than a few of them, for sure. But that's more of a house rule/homebrew issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From the rogue text, "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."
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Swarm Traits: A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernable anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking. A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
You can't flank a swarm, so getting SA is a bit harder than normal. Feinting isn't going to work either. There are a few alternatives remaining though.
As an aside: does the "half damage" clause mean that bludgeoning weapons are still fully effective against Tiny critter swarms?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yeah it does
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
swarm. You cannot crit against a swarm, but you can totally sneak attack it (although only when it's flat-footed
Precision damage is damaged not multiplied on a critical. That is it.
Swarm has the same language "Immune to Critical hits and flanking" without the extra bit calling out precision also. Probably space reasons.
Depending on RAW interpretation, you will find a number of tables accepting that swarm are immune to precision strikes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monkey swarms! They're also not mindless, so you can feint against them. Or I guess maybe you need some feat or class feature or something to feint against animals? I know it's possible somehow.
Or is it the case that feinting counts as "a single-target effect"? I mean, I could see how it might, but by that logic you could almost claim that a weapon attack is also a single-target effect, and they ain't definitionally immune to those. Like, can you demoralize a non-mindless swarm with Intimidate? If a monkey swarm steals your wand, can you disarm it back from them? If you gave a monkey swarm 300 Tiny suits of chainmail, would it gain an armor bonus to AC?
I have so many questions! :O
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Feint is single target, or is by my RAW.
Bold mine.
That... that bold part doesn't make any sense, though, does it? Wouldn't that be "by my reading" or "by my interpretation" or something more along those lines?
Ask your GM.
This is very good advice, however.
Feint (which can be used against non-humanoids without sentience at a -8 penalty) is noted as a sub-facet of bluff.
The swarm subtype notes,
A swarm is a collection of Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creatures that acts as a single creature. A swarm has the characteristics of its type, except as noted here. A swarm has a single pool of Hit Dice and hit points, a single initiative modifier, a single speed, and a single Armor Class. A swarm makes saving throws as a single creature.
... and,
A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, morale effects, patterns, and phantasms) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind. A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.
... which seem to be the two sources of contention.
Bluff is clearly social, but it's not necessarily mental or mind-affecting. Further, while feint only lets you target a single opponent, a swarm is noted as acting like a single creature.
Feint is a specific bluff check you make with a listed DC - based on the attack bonus and wisdom modifier of the creature you're opposing, or their ranks in sense motive (whichever is higher), but explicitly needs an intelligence score. That rules out many swarms right there. But what about those it does not?
Looking at a monkey swarm.
These creatures have animal intelligence; they are legitimate targets of feint based on that. They lack ranks in sense motive, but retain a wisdom score - hence, there is something to generate a target DC off of. They even have a base attack, although not used by the swarm for a swarm's attack (+2), so you've got a valid DC for feint. Added to that, you've got a +3 Dex bonus to AC, so denying that would be pretty legit.
There are plenty of places in fiction where distractions of large groups of creatures have happened at the same time - Up comes to mind when Carl tosses the ball to distract the dogs - which places it firmly in the realm of "that's happened before" in fiction (though that might be more of a general bluff/suggested course of action, rather than a specific feint).
But for all of that, it could easily be construed as a single-target effect - it does specify "opponent" (though that is, functionally, what a swarm is), so it does come down to asking the GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James has his own definition of RAW, which is different than everyone else's. When he uses the term RAW, you should probably just ignore him.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James has his own definition of RAW, which is different than everyone else's. When he uses the term RAW, you should probably just ignore him.
That couldn't possibly be more untrue.
My definition matches the majority of players, GMs, and the entire Pathfinder Design Team.
"Rules as Wanted"?
"Rules as Wished"?
"Reference as Interested"?
... I mean, interpretation is always going to come when two people are reading English, but in the game's case, that's an interpretation of RAW, not RAW itself.
My definition matches the majority of players, GMs, and the entire Pathfinder Design Team.
Proof?
My proof is basically every other person who reads this post and agrees. Of course someone will disagree now just to be that guy.
Well, the swarm traits state:
"A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernible anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking."
There's no mention of sneak attacks or precision damage. The info box on the rogue page on d20pfsrd.com also doesn't list swarms as among the creature types/subtypes which are immune to precision damage. Unless I've missed something, swarms appear immune only to critical hits and flanking. Aeons similarly are immune to critical hits, but still susceptible to precision damage.
A swam is immune to single creature damage in most cases. So adding extra lines that it'd be immune to sneak attack damage would be rather redundant.
However a swarmbane effect can enable someone to damage it with a weapon, in which case it's immunities to critical hits and flanking DO become an issue. The immunity to flanking does remove one avenue for setting up precision damage.
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.
Ummm... just what would be the "vital spot" on a swarm of hundreds or even thousands of creatures, making up a swarm?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.Ummm... just what would be the "vital spot" on a swarm of hundreds or even thousands of creatures, making up a swarm?
Having access to swarmbane magic may alter the situation.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
My definition matches the majority of players, GMs, and the entire Pathfinder Design Team.Proof?
My proof is basically every other person who reads this post and agrees. Of course someone will disagree now just to be that guy.
I could link you every debated thread where people disagree with you by virtue of arguing over the meaning.
You can find plenty of developer posts where they have said that the rules don't say what some think. So they don't change it in errata, but leave as is and clarify.
The point is there isn't any benefit to asserting there is only one way to read a debated rule. It does nothing but harm the game and reduce the chance of actually helping posters.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, the swarm traits state:
"A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernible anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking."
There's no mention of sneak attacks or precision damage. The info box on the rogue page on d20pfsrd.com also doesn't list swarms as among the creature types/subtypes which are immune to precision damage. Unless I've missed something, swarms appear immune only to critical hits and flanking. Aeons similarly are immune to critical hits, but still susceptible to precision damage.
A swam is immune to single creature damage in most cases. So adding extra lines that it'd be immune to sneak attack damage would be rather redundant.
However a swarmbane effect can enable someone to damage it with a weapon, in which case it's immunities to critical hits and flanking DO become an issue. The immunity to flanking does remove one avenue for setting up precision damage.
An Underground Chemist deals sneak attack damage with splash weapons. So presumably if you surprised them with alchemist's fire that would work. (And be increased by 50%, since the sneak attack damage would also be fire damage.)
swarm. You cannot crit against a swarm, but you can totally sneak attack it (although only when it's flat-footedPrecision damage is damaged not multiplied on a critical. That is it.
I'm interested as to your logic here. By this token, a Flaming weapon's extra d6 is precision damage, and not simply additional fire damage?
I'd be hard-pressed to argue that one myself.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
swarm. You cannot crit against a swarm, but you can totally sneak attack it (although only when it's flat-footedPrecision damage is damaged not multiplied on a critical. That is it.I'm interested as to your logic here. By this token, a Flaming weapon's extra d6 is precision damage, and not simply additional fire damage?
I'd be hard-pressed to argue that one myself.
No where in that did I say it was the only damage not multiplied on a critical.
The rules cover two reasons: Precision and Additional Damage Dice.
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.Ummm... just what would be the "vital spot" on a swarm of hundreds or even thousands of creatures, making up a swarm?
The spot where they congregate together in larger numbers, whatever creature or group of creatures that seems to be directing and leading the pack, or just the hand-waived "the rules are sometimes dumb but these are the rules".
Lots of people are here house-ruling a prohibition against sneak attacks against swarms - How does it make the game more fun for fewer characters to be effective against swarms? Swarms are boring enough, particularly at low level. Having another character able to be effective against them is one more character who isn't running away while the wizard Burning Hands them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You say "house rule", I say "recognizing a clear oversight in the port over from 3.5".
*shrug*
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of people are here house-ruling a prohibition against sneak attacks against swarms - How does it make the game more fun for fewer characters to be effective against swarms? Swarms are boring enough, particularly at low level. Having another character able to be effective against them is one more character who isn't running away while the wizard Burning Hands them.
Allowing swarms to be sneak attacked does not have an appreciable effect on the effectiveness of PCs against swarms.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of people are here house-ruling a prohibition against sneak attacks against swarms - How does it make the game more fun for fewer characters to be effective against swarms? Swarms are boring enough, particularly at low level. Having another character able to be effective against them is one more character who isn't running away while the wizard Burning Hands them.Allowing swarms to be sneak attacked does not have an appreciable effect on the effectiveness of PCs against swarms.
It's one more character who can do appreciable damage to them instead of running away while someone else fights them. That's an appreciable effect on the enjoyment of the encounter.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
That's an appreciable effect on the enjoyment of the encounter.
So you'd rather make some at the table uncomfortable by clearly using the rules in a way they were not written to be used?
We have a good idea what the rules say, swarms can not be Sneak Attacked despite not saying "immune to precision" in the wall of text that is the swarm traits.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You say "house rule", I say "recognizing a clear oversight in the port over from 3.5".
*shrug*
That... doesn't make something not a house rule.
Even if it's a mistake made by the authors, there is a differentiation in desire (what is intended) and print (what is written). Thus patching is a (perfectly legitimate) house rule (and a good idea to boot - if it fits your table's gaming concept better).
Lots of people are here house-ruling a prohibition against sneak attacks against swarms - How does it make the game more fun for fewer characters to be effective against swarms? Swarms are boring enough, particularly at low level. Having another character able to be effective against them is one more character who isn't running away while the wizard Burning Hands them.Allowing swarms to be sneak attacked does not have an appreciable effect on the effectiveness of PCs against swarms.
Doesn't this depend on the swarm and the PC?
As noted, if nothing else, Underground Chemist can sneak attack on splash weapons. That could be relatively significant.
That said, I've suddenly realized.
Swarms of tiny or diminutive are immune to "all" weapon damage. Does that include splash weapons? While it does note that swarms take half-again as much damage from spells and effects that cover an area, and it includes splash weapons as examples, it doesn't inherently contradict itself - if swarms are, as a general rule, susceptible to those effects, but small swarms of small enough sizes are immune to weapons, that would include splash weapons by default (given that they're weapons). I'm pretty sure that's not the intent, however.
Anyway, for comparison sake and data points, I'll link a ton of swarms now. I don't know if it's all of 'em It's definitely not all of 'em (), but it's a lot!
*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part one...
=====================================
EDIT: To add more, 'cause OCD... and "how much more could there be? >:I
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Part two...
=====================================
EDIT: Adding more, 'cause OCD... and "how much more could there be? >:I
ALSO:
Plague Locusts aren't listed, but I'm guessing they go here?
E: Especially, given the mythic version
Part three...
=====================================
Also, I'm pretty sure they used to be, but Vermin are subject to critical hits and sneak attack as well.
Apocalypse Swarm template
E: Plague Swarm tempalte
E-more: TEMPLATES; have TEMPLATES
=====================================
Though I tapped out, one of the immediate take-aways is that there are a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooot of swarms. Many more than I was thinking.
Other than that, most of the Tiny swarms (the only kind that could be hypothetically subject to sneak attacks or flanks, barring exceptionally specific builds), there are a lot of undead and a lot of third-party... but there remains quite a few beyond those two sets.
Interesting data, to be sure.
EDIT: For the record, I've not had time to thoroughly read and verify everything I linked up there. Sorry! At most I've quick-scanned it and noted things I thought were kind of important to think about at the time. I'm also not saying that 3PP are inferior to Paizo stuff - but I'm marking it as 3PP (when I noticed) just so that people know, and don't base rules interpretations off of a different company... unless they want to (which is fine); and I didn't include any other data-points than "this is 3P" because... it was already time-consuming and a lot of information, and I was kind of getting tired and running out of time. :/ Sorry!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's an appreciable effect on the enjoyment of the encounter.So you'd rather make some at the table uncomfortable by clearly using the rules in a way they were not written to be used?
We have a good idea what the rules say, swarms can not be Sneak Attacked despite not saying "immune to precision" in the wall of text that is the swarm traits.
People you play with get uncomfortable when other people interpret the rules differently than they do? Particularly when they're neither directly hindering nor hampering their particular character?
The rules don't say anywhere that swarms can't be sneak attacked. The best we have are two disconnected statements which people pull together to get something that kind of goes along with the rule in 3.5.
That said, after doing quite a bit of digging, I'm convinced that the RAI is to have them immune to sneak attack: Sneak Attack
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
swarm. You cannot crit against a swarm, but you can totally sneak attack it (although only when it's flat-footedPrecision damage is damaged not multiplied on a critical. That is it.I'm interested as to your logic here. By this token, a Flaming weapon's extra d6 is precision damage, and not simply additional fire damage?
I'd be hard-pressed to argue that one myself.
No where in that did I say it was the only damage not multiplied on a critical.
The rules cover two reasons: Precision and Additional Damage Dice.
That doesn't seem like a particularly helpful definition, then.
|
|
It's one more character who can do appreciable damage to them instead of running away while someone else fights them.
No, it really isn't. If they have a swarmbane clasp, they were already doing appreciable damage. If the swarm is tiny, they're still immune to the characters damage. If they were doing half damage, they need a way to render the swarm flat footed or it doesn't matter.
The only character this has an appreciable effect on is the Underground Chemist. That's it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you gave the monkey swarm 300 Hats of Disguise, could it disguise itself as a different monkey swarm?
This one time, at swarm camp...
If they were doing half damage, they need a way to render the swarm flat footed or it doesn't matter.
First attack via initiative; invisibility; or feinting*?
*
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's one more character who can do appreciable damage to them instead of running away while someone else fights them.No, it really isn't. If they have a swarmbane clasp, they were already doing appreciable damage. If the swarm is tiny, they're still immune to the characters damage. If they were doing half damage, they need a way to render the swarm flat footed or it doesn't matter.
The only character this has an appreciable effect on is the Underground Chemist. That's it.
If you can get SA vs swarms, wouldn't every character with SA & a torch be able to get SA the first round if they beat the swarms initiative?
If a torch is used in combat, treat it as a one-handed improvised weapon that deals bludgeoning damage equal to that of a gauntlet of its size, plus 1 point of fire damage.
A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernible anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking. A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
Swarms are immune to the weapon damage - not the fire damage. Since the rogue/ninja/slayer/etc. is doing fire damage with an attack roll, the SA would apply. (I'm with what others have said though. While it looks like it works RAW, RAI seems to be that it's not supposed to.)