Two questions about sneak attack (rogue)

1) Page 68, Core Rules: "The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC or when the rogue flanks her target."

Does this mean that every time a rogue has flanking - ie., has an ally on the opposite side of the opponent - he gets the extra 1d6 damage?

2) Say a rogue has successfully used Stealth to hide behind a corner during a combat. On his turn, he moves out of concealment and attacks an opponent. Does the rogue need to make another stealh check to approach unnoticed? And if he does approach unnoticed, does he get the extra 1d6 sneak attack damage?

1) Yes, that's right. Note that some creatures (as elementals) cannot be flanked, others are completely immune to sneak attack (incorporeal creatures mainly).

2) No, once someone leaves cover or breakes concealment, they cannot use stealth. So there's no apporoaching unnoticed, unless the rogue is invisible or has some other feature like 'hide in plain sight', which allows stealth without cover. A hidden rogue can only sneak attack once, while using a ranged weapon.

1) Page 68, Core Rules: "The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC or when the rogue flanks her target."

Does this mean that every time a rogue has flanking - ie., has an ally on the opposite side of the opponent - he gets the extra 1d6 damage?

Yes, provided the target is not immune to sneak attack.

2) Say a rogue has successfully used Stealth to hide behind a corner during a combat. On his turn, he moves out of concealment and attacks an opponent. Does the rogue need to make another stealh check to approach unnoticed?

I would say yes, because you made the check in the previous round, and now you want to leave your cover going unnoticed. If you don't make stealth check, that's mean you don't care about being noticed. Technically speaking however if you approach to your target you break stealth, as you don't end your move in a cover zone. Aside that, anyway, you must make a stealth check every round you move.

And if he does approach unnoticed, does he get the extra 1d6 sneak attack damage?

If he don't notice you he's unaware of you, so you take him with pants down, so yes.

Lanassa is correct, but many tables house rule the way Blackstorm appears to.

The development team has recently changed the way stealth works; I'd highly recommend reading all about it in the FAQ.

Lanassa is correct, but many tables house rule the way Blackstorm appears to.

I normally rule as the RAW, anyway. But some DM of mine ruled as you can leave cover remaining stealth.

@TempusAvatar: can you point me to the link?

1) Yes, that's right. Note that some creatures (as elementals) cannot be flanked, others are completely immune to sneak attack (incorporeal creatures mainly).

2) No, once someone leaves cover or breakes concealment, they cannot use stealth. So there's no apporoaching unnoticed, unless the rogue is invisible or has some other feature like 'hide in plain sight', which allows stealth without cover. A hidden rogue can only sneak attack once, while using a ranged weapon.

I am delighted to inform you that 2) has changed, and the devs have explicitly ruled to allow a rogue to approach and sneak attack.

The relevant text:

Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make an attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).

You can get the errata document at this page.

2) No, once someone leaves cover or breakes concealment, they cannot use stealth. So there's no apporoaching unnoticed, unless the rogue is invisible or has some other feature like 'hide in plain sight', which allows stealth without cover. A hidden rogue can only sneak attack once, while using a ranged weapon.

A lot of people forget stealth isn't always about moving so no one hears you. It's also about seizing opportunities when people aren't paying attention.

e.g. you don't always need to be invisible even when in line of sight. When someone looks away for a couple seconds that's when you move. That's often how stealth works in the real world. We don't have invisibility potions.

Using this logic, I would say it is plausible to sneak up behind someone, especially when they are distracted by something like combat, and they don't know you were behind that corner. I don't see why you couldn't make that second stealth check.

Really! AWESOME! I still have the fifth printing!

I don't remember much other world-changing stuff, but amulet of mighty fists got cheaper.

Wow, sneak attack is much better than I initially believed; rogues always want to be flanking: +2 to hit *and* +d6 damage! Flanking is obviously a
good idea in general but is apparently extra good for the rogue.

Thanks for the help.

No, Sneak Attack is not that good.

You must have thought it was pretty dang horrible to think it's good now.

Yep, it's pretty nice. The main problem is that rogues can't generally stay flanking for long :)

Rogues can do damage just fine. They just require more tactics than AM Barbarian or a THF or Archer, so most people on the boards underrate them.

Seems to be based on the fact that in general people forget that a lot of the combat is a tactical minis game.

If most GM's knew the rules better, the Rage-Pounce uber builds and such wouldn't get to do as much as they do either, since full attacking wouldn't happen as much, and terrain would slow down charge builds.

::Not to say that for static damage, barb/fig/smiting pally don't hit harder than the rogue.::

Terrain rules are probably the most ignored rules in the game, yet they are the rules that can change every single fight. Rather than spend tons of time on creating outragoues creature builds, I like to work on the battlefield. It is easier and the payout is much higher, in my opinion.

Flanking means they're out where they can't easily drop into the back line like a fragile skirmisher should and are, until level 8, halfway to being flanked themselves. They have a d8 hit die with light armor, no shield, and no defensive magic, making them the single most fragile class that isn't a 9 level arcane caster. Their "tactical" decision is to stick their ass in the whirling blade pitcher so they can flank or stay where they have a clear retreat into the group and not sneak attack.

The relevant text:

CRB, 6th errata, page 106 wrote:

Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make an attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).

You can get the errata document at this page.

Sorry, but I still don't get it. Can someone explain me better? I mean, the text says that you reamain unobserved as long as you end your movement in cover/concealment. But if my opponent is not near to a cover or I have some way to gain concealment, I don't end my move in cover or concealmente, so when I'm ending my move I'm already visible to opponent. This specification doesn't seems to change rules to allow a steath move+sneak. The latter phrase, that the stealth immediately end when I attack, seems contraddictory or ininfluent at least, for this purpouse.

When you start your turn with concealment you can make a stealth check, move to your opponent (if your stealth beats their perception check, you're hidden) and then attack. Because you're hidden you're opponent is unware of you, denied their dex to AC and you are able to sneak attack. After your first attack you are no longer hidden and no longer receive sneak attacks against the creature. If you happened to have something that allowed you to Hide In Plain sight and Spring Attack you could stealth, move, attack, stealth(in plain sight), and move away.

As it stands attack at all breaks stealth, and you can't use stealth while observed without something like Hide In Plain Sight so the enemy will always be aware and able to find you after you attack.

You can also move between open spaces and maintain stealth if you start with concealment and end with concealment, but this is to move from place to place, not attack. Attacking ends stealth. This is so you can sneak between alleyways, without getting noticed. With the old rule set if you didn't have concealment you could use stealth which meant as soon as you walk out from behind one building they could see you step across to next building, negating any point in using stealth to move from position to position.

Ok, thank. It seemed to me from previous post that this new errata would allow rogue to move and attack a target gaining sneak attack. My misread.

It basically means that if you have two pillars that are granting you concealment from an enemy, you can 'sneak' between them without being seen. Previously, the rules as written had you immediately be noticed if you moved.

So, diagram.

0.......0
X

You're the X, 0 are the pillars.

Previously, if you moved like this:

0.......0
X->

You'd be seen.

But now, the rule is that you can make it undetected to the other pillar.

BUT! If along the way to the other pillar you attacked someone, then your stealth is done.

The relevant text:

CRB, 6th errata, page 106 wrote:

Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make an attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted below).

You can get the errata document at this page.

I was aware of this change, it's just that at first it seemed to me that you couldn't sneak up on someone if your movement didn't end in cover or concealment.

Ok, thank. It seemed to me from previous post that this new errata would allow rogue to move and attack a target gaining sneak attack. My misread.

You do, but for only one attack. Then your stealth breaks and the enemy is no longer denied their dex against your attacks. Previously RAW didn't allow for any Sneak Attacks when attacking from stealth because moving from behind concealment/cover meant that you could not use stealth to be hidden.

You do, but for only one attack. Then your stealth breaks and the enemy is no longer denied their dex against your attacks. Previously RAW didn't allow for any Sneak Attacks when attacking from stealth because moving from behind concealment/cover meant that you could not use stealth to be hidden.

Hmmmm. Something strange here. You're saying that I can approach an opponent without breaking stealth, but the rules says that if I end my movement out of cover I break the stealth. The problem here is: if I sneak behind an enemy, I end my movement out of cover, so when I'm going to attack him, he notice me, so I can't add sneak attack damage.

Hmmmm. Something strange here. You're saying that I can approach an opponent without breaking stealth, but the rules says that if I end my movement out of cover I break the stealth. The problem here is: if I sneak behind an enemy, I end my movement out of cover, so when I'm going to attack him, he notice me, so I can't add sneak attack damage.

A quote from Jason Bulmahn the lead designer for PF

Not really correct here. The wording was intentionally put together to specify "at the end of your turn". That is the moment when you check your status to see if you can maintain Stealth. This does allow you to move from cover, use Stealth to approach a target, and make a single attack, at which point, Stealth is broken, regardless of the outcome. Now, if you slay that target with one hit, and still could maintain Stealth from all other foes in the area (if say, it is dark and they cannot see you), a GM might reasonably interpret that you could maintain Stealth from other foes, but that requires GM interpretation and is not really the point of this particular situation.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

The lead designer of PF got on the Stealth Eratta thread to clarify some of these questions. Check it out.

This is a good quote too about Stealth granting Sneak Attack.

Thank you, Shadowlord. This is exactly the piece I missed to complete the puzzle :)