Just what exactly can the rogue sneak attack now? I know it will probably be spelled out in Beta if I just wait a couple more weeks but I'm tired of not knowing if certain creatures are on the expanded sneak attack list. Specifically skeletons, zombies and other corporeal undead are in question. I read the blurb in Alpha but that just added more confusion and hinted at an extended list. It gave some general examples but it left me (and my DM I think) confused.
Any help?
Both Zombies and Skeletons can be victims of sneak attacks since they still have anatomical weaknesses such as knee joints for example. So while these ceatures won't feel the pain and react the way a living creature will, their bodies still need certain parts to keep moving and fighting. The same goes for constructs mimicking the shapes of real creatures.
|
In order to make sense of a Rogue's Sneak Attack ability according to Pathfinder rules, you have to decide what creatures have an effective anatomy or construction for sneak attacks. We decided that Incorporeal Undead, Oozes, and Elementals are all immune to sneal attacks. Most other undead, aberrations, and Constructs have some weak point to exploit.
that doesn't seem right to me, that undead can be sneak attacked. Sure they have vulnerable points like legs but that is where basic damage comes in. They also lack nerves, a ciculatory system or internal organs that are used for anything. 'oh great you slit the zombies throat. All that does is give you a whiff of whatever is decompsing inside it.'
that doesn't seem right to me, that undead can be sneak attacked. Sure they have vulnerable points like legs but that is where basic damage comes in. They also lack nerves, a ciculatory system or internal organs that are used for anything. 'oh great you slit the zombies throat. All that does is give you a whiff of whatever is decompsing inside it.'
But the point is that a Rogue knows that going for the organs is useless. So he instead aims his attack at a joint or a part of the anatomy needed for movement etc. 'Basic Damage' can be described as anything and so can sneak damage. The difference would be in the precision and placement of the attack(due to the creature being unaware or unable to defend properly) to severely affect the enemy. Besides sneak attacking was never limited to internal organs anyway. It could always be described as slicing tendons, dislocating joints, breaking a support limb etc.
Sneak Attacking a skeleton's knee/shoulder/spine/head with a warhammer or axe makes sense to me as it breaks the integral structure the skeleton needs to keep going.
I find it really hard to believe that a fighter doesn't realise that hitting someone in the knee makes him fall over. The difference between humans and undead is that we are squishier.. sticking a knife in a nerve cluster ruins a human. Damaging the right vertebrae instantly paralyses us. Femoral artery and we bleed to death in 12 seconds. Not on undead. It is arguable whether undead even use muscles for animation at all (Hmmmm muscles on a skeleton) and are instead animated by whatever hideous spirit is inside them who are merely wearing a corpse like an unnatractive suit. Gee what kills a human, sticking a knife in it's eye. I'll try that on the zombie, apart from icky sound effects would it really bother the zombie? Also, when would rogues learn the vital areas of some creatures. "Oh look class, we have captured a dragon for you to practice sticking knives into."
Just don't seem right. "Ha ha you filthy zombie, now you are extra dead."!!!
that doesn't seem right to me, that undead can be sneak attacked. Sure they have vulnerable points like legs but that is where basic damage comes in. They also lack nerves, a ciculatory system or internal organs that are used for anything. 'oh great you slit the zombies throat. All that does is give you a whiff of whatever is decompsing inside it.'
Are you trying to apply logical sense to a corpse animated by magic? :)
Seriously, think of Buffy the Vampire slayer kicking a stake right into a vampire's heart or Ash lobbing off a deadite's head in one stroke. Or the classic "shoot the head" zombie movie cliché.
The Pathfinder Rogue sneak attack is about finding the Achille's Heel of an opponent, not about striking vital areas like in 3.5 D&D. You can make up whatever you want that makes sense for the opponent to explain the extra damage. Maybe the rogue hit a skeleton's vertebrae and caused its entire backbone to collapse, or maybe she dislodged the onyx gem in its eye socket. Use creative license to explain it.
|
Not a big fan of the way sneak attack works now after all if its only a matter of stacking a vampire or lobbing off a head why cant a fighter do it? Also why are they immune to critical hits but not sneak attack since a critical could be described as as stacking a vampire or lobbing off a deadites head?
that doesn't seem right to me, that undead can be sneak attacked. Sure they have vulnerable points like legs but that is where basic damage comes in. They also lack nerves, a ciculatory system or internal organs that are used for anything. 'oh great you slit the zombies throat. All that does is give you a whiff of whatever is decompsing inside it.'Are you trying to apply logical sense to a corpse animated by magic? :)
Seriously, think of Buffy the Vampire slayer kicking a stake right into a vampire's heart or Ash lobbing off a deadite's head in one stroke. Or the classic "shoot the head" zombie movie cliché.
The Pathfinder Rogue sneak attack is about finding the Achille's Heel of an opponent, not about striking vital areas like in 3.5 D&D. You can make up whatever you want that makes sense for the opponent to explain the extra damage. Maybe the rogue hit a skeleton's vertebrae and caused its entire backbone to collapse, or maybe she dislodged the onyx gem in its eye socket. Use creative license to explain it.
Trouble with that rationale surely if a fighter(or other Martial PC class) see's a Rogue stabbing a Zombie in the Brain to kill it then surely the fighter should get the same Sneak attack advantage. A fighter spends his life learning how to kill in the most effective way possible so why should the Rogue be better at it than the fighter?
I can live with a Rogue stepping out of a shadow, grabbing an enemy round the neck and stabbing him in the kidneys but as for getting the Sneak Attack for pretty much everything..no...sorry...I can do it!!
In fact with the PF system giving the Rogue Basically fighter feats I am even more adamant that the Rogue only get sneak attack when the opponent is flat footed( as in 1 sneak attack per round). All the players and DM's in the group I'm in agree on it as well.
On the surface it seems a fighter would also get the sneak attack bonus, but face it, a rogue does not fight like a fighter. The fighter is brawn and experience, and is more capapble of serious damage than a rogue. The rogue is using a different approach. Fighter, to some extent, have some honorifics in the way they fight. Rogues dont see it that way. Not saying all fighter look for a fair fight, but they go at it differently. Either way, if a fighter bashes you to death with a club or a rogue surgically removes your spleen....you are still dead.
I like the new rule. It puts the rogue in the game and makes it more appealing. That is if the rogue takes that avenue and skill set.
|
Trouble with that rationale surely if a fighter(or other Martial PC class) see's a Rogue stabbing a Zombie in the Brain to kill it then surely the fighter should get the same Sneak attack advantage. A fighter spends his life learning how to kill in the most effective way possible so why should the Rogue be better at it than the fighter?I can live with a Rogue stepping out of a shadow, grabbing an enemy round the neck and stabbing him in the kidneys but as for getting the Sneak Attack for pretty much everything..no...sorry...I can do it!!
In fact with the PF system giving the Rogue Basically fighter feats I am even more adamant that the Rogue only get sneak attack when the opponent is flat footed( as in 1 sneak attack per round). All the players and DM's in the group I'm in agree on it as well.
And the same can be said about a fighter if successfully sneaking up on a person, I don't understand the rational that the fighter should be able to do it, because there's no reason that a fighter shouldn't be able to do sneak attack in any situation a rogue could. So unless you are arguing about sneak attack becoming a feat instead of a class feature, arguing that it makes no sense in situation a but not situation b because the fighter should be able to is just silly.
Rouge's get sneak and fighters don't because Rougue's are opportunistic fighters.
A fighter is trying to block, dodge and parry while at the same time trying to hack at ANY exposed part of an enemy who is also bocking, dodging and parrying.
A Rogue is sidling around looking for weaknessess, maneuvering to a weak spot, using speed to his advantage and waiting for the best possible time and spot to attack. Very different from a fighter.
As mentioned previously all sneak attack needs "to be somewhat logical"(which I don't even feel is necessary in an imaginary world)is some creativity on the part of the DM and Players. And isn't that what the game is all about?
ie as Darth_boreHD mentioned dislodging an onyx gem that the fighter couldn't take the time to see on a construct or a tiny fetish charm animating a skeleton are good creative ways of 'explaining sneak attack'
|
I find it really hard to believe that a fighter doesn't realise that hitting someone in the knee makes him fall over....
Logically, it doesn't make sense.
However, it's not a matter of logic, it's a matter of game design. Simply put, Rogues need something to make them different from Fighters. The fact that the something they get also makes them more combat effective is icing on the cake. If fighters could sneak attack in the same manner as a Rogue, why play the Rogue? Because you want to disable traps? Because you want evasion?
Fighters are the "toe-to-toe" combatants. They have a high BAB, plenty of HP, and (generally) high AC. They can take the damage and dela it out.
Rogues have a middle-of-the-road BAB and not alot of HP. Rogues have a sneak attack because it's expected that at least once every couple of rounds he's going to use a move action to Tumble or otherwise move in combat to get a flanking position, thus leaving him with the single standard attack action. Without Sneak Attack, the Rogue will do 8 points of so damage with that attack (assuming you're not using some sort of optomized high Strength, power attacking, greatsword packing Rogue build ... if you are, why not just make him a Fighter and be done with it?). The Rogue needs that +5d6 of however much Sneak damage, or else Players won't want to take them into melee.
Just my thoughts.
-Skeld
Trouble with that rationale surely if a fighter(or other Martial PC class) see's a Rogue stabbing a Zombie in the Brain to kill it then surely the fighter should get the same Sneak attack advantage. A fighter spends his life learning how to kill in the most effective way possible so why should the Rogue be better at it than the fighter?I can live with a Rogue stepping out of a shadow, grabbing an enemy round the neck and stabbing him in the kidneys but as for getting the Sneak Attack for pretty much everything..no...sorry...I can do it!!
In fact with the PF system giving the Rogue Basically fighter feats I am even more adamant that the Rogue only get sneak attack when the opponent is flat footed( as in 1 sneak attack per round). All the players and DM's in the group I'm in agree on it as well.And the same can be said about a fighter if successfully sneaking up on a person, I don't understand the rational that the fighter should be able to do it, because there's no reason that a fighter shouldn't be able to do sneak attack in any situation a rogue could. So unless you are arguing about sneak attack becoming a feat instead of a class feature, arguing that it makes no sense in situation a but not situation b because the fighter should be able to is just silly.
The Rogue was given the Sneak Attack to give them an edge to help Balance them with the other characters but giving them the ability to sneak attack with all their attacks whenever they get a flank is ridiculous. I've seen way too many examples where the fighter is slogging it out with giants and similar but the rogue gets his sneak attacks and does 3 times the damage to the enemy creature, killing it easily and making the fighter appear second rate especially at Higher levels.10th Level Rogue BAB+7+Dex= Average+9 and Damage per weapon+5D6
with a minimum of 6 and Max of 30(plus weapon damage). 10th level Fighter +10 BAB+Str= Average+12 and damage per weapon+2(Str) with a minimum of 3 and a max of 5(plus weapon damage).Restricting the Rogues to opportunist attacks( 1 per round max) seems reasonable especially as the Rogue now has D8 HD and extra feats. I like the feats though, it does round the Rogue character off.