Many shot explicitly says that and has a single attack roll. Scorching Ray does not.
True, but beyond that distinction is interpretation.
One possible interpretation (yours, if I read you right) is that such text only applies to Manyshot, and nothing else.
Another is that such is a clarification that Sneak Attack is gained once for the action, regardless of attacks (or hits) made (excepting iterative attacks that otherwise qualify).
The one they went with was the latter, and that's the one that they've been using all along. The text of Manyshot that says Sneak Attack doesn't apply twice is context-neutral. It doesn't say "Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for Manyshot." It says, "Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack." It applied the same in the FAQ regarding the Arcane Trickster's capstone ability (only once to Magic Missile). They haven't exactly been inconsistent, and I personally don't see it as "stealth errata" or a Retcon. I see it as a clarification where the rules were unclear, which is what the FAQ section is for. It's impractical to apply the text "apply sneak attack damage only once" to every single case where it may be the truth, so they clarified in FAQ what the interpretation was.
Anyway, I've gotten what I needed. Thanks to those who weighed in.
To use an analogy, it's like trying to hit specific weak areas of one (or more) targets with a burst-fire weapon. If you have a gun that shoots three bullets every time you pull the trigger, at best you can make one of those bullets hit a vital area. Even as that first one is hitting, the target is going to be moving, the gun was moving as it fired (recoil), and so the bullets are very unlikely to a) be on identical trajectories, and b) it's highly unlikely that the target is maintaining the same attitude toward the shooter.
So is there an AN-94 spell that can?
That's the point, though.
deuxhero wrote:
This FAQ stinks of complete retcon like many stupid FAQs before it. It doesn't reference any existing rules.
I think someone hates sneak attack, especially ranged ones, being useful, as it got LOADS of nerfs from multiple sources (multiple parts of core).
I'd disagree with this. If you actually go through the thread that ruling is from, they do reference other rules as precedent, such as Manyshot, as precedent for ruling that sneak attack is only applied once to a single action (excepting iterative attacks). It is also consistent with previous interpretations of Sneak Attack from earlier in Pathfinder and from earlier editions of the OGL system.
So what you're saying is that technically, according to the FAQ, Fiery Shuriken should only get one SA roll, right? As far as the reasoning behind it, I don't think they're wrong at all.
To use an analogy, it's like trying to hit specific weak areas of one (or more) targets with a burst-fire weapon. If you have a gun that shoots three bullets every time you pull the trigger, at best you can make one of those bullets hit a vital area. Even as that first one is hitting, the target is going to be moving, the gun was moving as it fired (recoil), and so the bullets are very unlikely to a) be on identical trajectories, and b) it's highly unlikely that the target is maintaining the same attitude toward the shooter.
It also does appear to follow the precedent granted by other FAQ rulings (such as the Surprise Spells ruling with regards to an attack like Magic Missile) and with other rules unrelated to spells (such as Manyshot). Attacks that happen as part of the same action only roll Sneak Attack once and apply it once. Full-Attack actions are separate because you can choose to not do them after the first attack, thus making it hard and fast that they are not "simultaneous" according to the FAQ. Their example of something that gets around the FAQ is also dependent on iterative attacks.
Any other weigh-ins, or am I sticking with the interpretation that I have which says that "simultaneous attacks" don't require the word "simultaneous" to be in the spell description?
8 people marked this as FAQ candidate.
2 people marked this as a favorite.
So I got into a discussion with one of my players over Arcane Trickster and how I was going to rule as far as the FAQ regarding Scorching Ray and Sneak Attack. He's a newer player, and part of his build depended on what spells he focused on using. If I ruled against the FAQ, he'd go Evocation focus and use Scorching Ray. If I ruled with it, he'd go Conjuration focus and use Fiery Shuriken.
My question is in interpreting the ruling for Scorching Ray.
Spell Sneak Attack FAQ:
PDT wrote:
Sneak Attack: Can I add sneak attack damage to simultaneous attacks from a spell?
No. For example, scorching ray fires simultaneous rays at one or more targets, and the extra damage is only added once to one ray, chosen by the caster when the spell is cast.
Spell-based attacks which are not simultaneous, such as multiple attacks per round by a 8th-level druid using flame blade, may apply sneak attack damage to each attack so long as each attack qualifies for sneak attack (the target is denied its Dex bonus or the caster is flanking the target).
—Pathfinder Design Team, 06/19/13
Now the argument that has been made is that, according to the ruling, any spell that grants multiple attacks per round can gain multiple Sneak Attacks per round. I think the intent of the FAQ was along the lines of you can't gain Sneak Attack more than once an Action, or once a Standard Action, or once per iterative attack granted by your choice of Action, or somesuch. The example that they use in the FAQ is a spell benefiting from iterative attacks.
My question, then. For the purpose of the Sneak Attack FAQ, what does simultaneously mean?
As far as I can tell, possibly definitions include:
- spells that include the word simultaneously (i.e. Scorching Ray)
- multiple spell attacks made in a single action
- multiple spell attacks made in a standard action
- multiple attacks that ignore normal iterative rules
Example:
Here's an example that looks a bit absurd to me, if the definition of simultaneous is "spells that use the word simultaneously."
A Rogue 3/Wizard 3/AT 10 is caster level 13. Add in Magical Knack to bring it to caster level 15.
Player casts Fiery Shuriken, generating 8 shuriken. All can be launched when they appear, at the same or different targets, as Ranged Touch Attacks.
If the FAQ refers only to spells that use "simultaneously" as part of the wording, then the damage breakdown follows:
At level 16, that's 8*(1d8+7d6) = 8d8+56d6 damage against a single target if they all hit touch AC (Avg 232 damage).
At level 20, assuming 4 more Rogue levels, it turns into 8*(1d8+9d6) = 8d8+72d6 if all hit (Avg 288 damage).
So, just throwing it out there. I'm not trying to nerf anybody's Arcane Trickster build, I'm just wanting to clarify for my own sake (and for others who have this question) how far the ruling actually covers, and what "simultaneous" means in context of the ruling. Dev response appreciated if possible, but I know this is a semi-repeat thread.
