Scorching Ray and Sneak Attack

[Deathedge]

Do I understand this correctly in that a rogue/wizard/arcane trickster with a caster level of 11 will be able to apply sneak attack damage to ALL THREE scorching rays under the correct circumstances?

[flash_cxxi]

No.

Any kinds of Bonus Damage (such as Sneak Attack) only apply to the first attack (in the same way that Iterative Attacks do not gain the Sneak Attack damage, only the first attack).
Each Ray uses a seperate Attack Roll and so each is treated as a seperate attack.

[Mr.Fishy]

Mr. Fishy stoped to say damn that would hurt. Mr. Fishy would allow one sneak attack per target of a scorching ray (three rays). Mr. Fishy would say no to three rays and three sneak attacks on the same target. DM's differ so ask yours. The ray+sneak attack to three different single targets seems fair. But Mr. Fishy would do it back to the party so be careful about giving your DM any ideas that your party may hate you for.

[Deathedge]

Whoa...sneak attack does not apply to iterative attacks? Really? So.....my gaming group has been doing it wrong for years?

[flash_cxxi]

Deathedge wrote:

Whoa...sneak attack does not apply to iterative attacks? Really? So.....my gaming group has been doing it wrong for years?

hmmm... I may have spoken incorrectly and gotten myself confused with Bonus Damage not being applied to Criticals and therefore being multiplied.

Teach me to Post at 1am after not enough sleep. :/

I apologise.

So therefore...
As long as they continue to be denied their DEX Bonus to AC (Flanking in this case wouldn't count as it's a Ranged Attack) then yes in fact the damage would apply to all 3 Rays.

[kyrt-ryder]

Scorching Ray is an odd spot in the rules.

On one hand, it's been published that scorching ray counts as a 'volley' (Like manyshot) and sneak attack only counts once.

On the other hand, each of them has it's own attack roll, and can crit separately.

Honestly I don't see it particularly imbalanced, especially after pathfinder reduced the number of max rays from four to three.

An arcane trickster is going to be 1.5 spell levels below a wizard or sorcerer (and 3 caster levels, though 2 of them can be made up with a trait), and will be 2 sneak attack dice lower than a full rogue.

The full rogue can make a full attack (with rapidshot) for 3 chances at 2 higher sneak attack dice per round, all day every day. 4 chances to gain the damage with haste active.

Now, to an extent, the spell is better, it's a ranged touch attack. But it's not without it's flaws.

Energy resistance (especially fire) goes alot higher than damage resistance and can't be circumvented as easily.

Spell Resistance applies.

and it can't penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability.

[psionichamster]

yes, each Scorching Ray is its own fire-ray attack.

If the target is Sneak-Attackable (denied dex bonus, etc...) then any and all Rays that hit will allow for sneak attack damage to be applied.

If the Rogue is Invisible (the regular kind), and that's the only thing that allows for sneak attack at the time, then the 2nd and 3rd rays would NOT apply sneak attack; the Invisibility would be nullified by the 1st attack and therefore not be in effect for the 2nd and 3rd rays.

-t

[Hunterofthedusk]

Well, all of the rays are fired simultaneously so why would they get their dex against the second and third?

www.d20srd.com wrote:

The rays may be fired at the same or different targets, but all rays must be aimed at targets within 30 feet of each other and fired simultaneously.

Emphasis mine. I don't see why you wouldn't get all the sneak attacks for the rays when coming out of invisibility.

[Dork Lord]

Deathedge wrote:

Whoa...sneak attack does not apply to iterative attacks? Really? So.....my gaming group has been doing it wrong for years?

You get sneak attack damage as long as your opponent is denied his Dex bonus. So the question is whether the opponent is considered still flat footed past the first attack in an iterative attack chain.

Would a flanking Rogue get sneak attack for each attack as long as he's flanking? If so, a high level Rogue is outdamaging nearly every other class (Well, aside from a Power Attacking, leaping Frenzied Berserker).

[Kirth Gersen]

I allow it with the first ray normally, and with all 3 if you have the Greater Manyshot feat from 3.5e.

[kyrt-ryder]

Kirth Gersen wrote:

I allow it with the first ray normally, and with all 3 if you have the Greater Manyshot feat from 3.5e.

Damn you Kirth that's the houserule I came up with for a 3.5 spellwarp sniper build a player of mine was playing once.

Quit stealing my ideas!!! ;)

lol

[Kirth Gersen]

kyrt-ryder wrote:

[Damn you Kirth that's the houserule I came up with

Great minds, dude.

[kyrt-ryder]

Kirth Gersen wrote:

kyrt-ryder wrote:

[Damn you Kirth that's the houserule I came up with

Great minds, dude.

Indeed. Of course, it was very entertaining when he went through the expense of buying CL 12 wands of the spell and took the double-wand-wielder feat. The build was pretty feat intensive for a caster, but he was throwing out 8 ranged touch sneak attacks per round. Expensive too lol.

[Harley]

I would give him all three rays IF the target was flatfooted. If he's flanked, that does not deny him dexterity bonus and only counts for the two melee that have him flanked, not for a missile weapon. If you have a feat that allows you to flank from a distance (I know of none) or one that lets you flank with a missile weapon as a melee weapon (I know of one for bows) then all rays should have sneak attack since they all require a separate attack roll.