Sneak Attack - denied Dex bonus


Rules Questions


The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.

I'm not sure I understand this phrase "denied a Dexterity bonus to AC"

Does this mean a 12 dex (+1) creature in a net gets -4 to its dex and is denied the 'positive' bonus of +1 (as it is now -1)? Or that since it has a dex bonus of -1, there is no sneak attack.


Chovesh wrote:

The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target.

I'm not sure I understand this phrase "denied a Dexterity bonus to AC"

Does this mean a 12 dex (+1) creature in a net gets -4 to its dex and is denied the 'positive' bonus of +1 (as it is now -1)? Or that since it has a dex bonus of -1, there is no sneak attack.

Taking a penalty that reduces your Dex modifier to 0 or less is not the same as losing your Dexterity bonus. The two most common ways of losing your Dex is when you're flatfooted or when you're facing an invisible opponent. Feinting in combat is another way to deny a Dex bonus.

I'm sure others can explain it better, but that's the basics. :)


It has to have a condition that causes them to lose dex bonus whether they have one or not, having a 9 dex does not mean that creature can always be sneak attacked. Interestingly though I wonder if anyone has tried a grappling rogue or paired a rogue with a grappler, the pinned condition denies dex bonus


A penalty to dexterity is not the same as denied dexterity. So in the case of your net his dex becomes 8 but no sneak attack.

Denied dexmis usually specific situations like an invisible opponent ornthe surprise round when combat starts.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

He's not denied his Dexterity bonus. His Dexterity was reduced. If his Dexterity started at 20, he would still have a bonus. Entangled creatures aren't denied Dexterity bonuses. Their Dexterity is reduced.

Effects that deny you a bonus should make that clear.

Blinded: The creature cannot see. It takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class, loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any), and takes a –4 penalty on most Strength- and Dexterity-based skill checks and on opposed Perception skill checks. All checks and activities that rely on vision (such as reading and Perception checks based on sight) automatically fail. All opponents are considered to have total concealment (50% miss chance) against the blinded character. Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone. Characters who remain blinded for a long time grow accustomed to these drawbacks and can overcome some of them.

Cowering: The character is frozen in fear and can take no actions. A cowering character takes a –2 penalty to Armor Class and loses his Dexterity bonus (if any).

Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.

Invisible: Invisible creatures are visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents' Dexterity bonuses to AC (if any). See Invisibility, under Special Abilities.

Stunned: A stunned creature drops everything held, can't take actions, takes a –2 penalty to AC, and loses its Dexterity bonus to AC (if any).

Paralyzed and Helpless characters have an effective Dexterity of 0 so it can be argued that they are denied a Dexterity bonus to AC. Helpless condition specifically states that a rogue can use his sneak attack against the helpless target. Paralyzed does not state that clearly but logically it should be allowed.


Shadow_of_death wrote:
It has to have a condition that causes them to lose dex bonus whether they have one or not, having a 9 dex does not mean that creature can always be sneak attacked. Interestingly though I wonder if anyone has tried a grappling rogue or paired a rogue with a grappler, the pinned condition denies dex bonus

It's a neat concept but I'm guessing the lack of BAB keeps people from doing it. It would for me unless there's some way to make up for it.


DrDew wrote:
Shadow_of_death wrote:
It has to have a condition that causes them to lose dex bonus whether they have one or not, having a 9 dex does not mean that creature can always be sneak attacked. Interestingly though I wonder if anyone has tried a grappling rogue or paired a rogue with a grappler, the pinned condition denies dex bonus
It's a neat concept but I'm guessing the lack of BAB keeps people from doing it. It would for me unless there's some way to make up for it.

I am currently playing a druid that focuses on grappling and constricting, makes me almost wish there was a rogue in my party

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

As a monk player alongside houstonderek's rogue, I can say for a fact that grappling an enemy to allow sneak attacks is a very effective strategy. :)


Good to hear it, now I am just curious if this can be used to let the rogue stand on his own. Nothing I have thought of would be an overly effective build. I'd ask for one of the better character builders to see how high we can get a rogues grapple but I am not sure if that should be a new topic...


Shadow_of_death wrote:
Good to hear it, now I am just curious if this can be used to let the rogue stand on his own. Nothing I have thought of would be an overly effective build. I'd ask for one of the better character builders to see how high we can get a rogues grapple but I am not sure if that should be a new topic...

It doesn't work out that way. The sneak attacker can't be the one grappling.


Really? I cant think of why not....


The Paralyzed status states that someone that is paralyzed is helpless, since being helpless denies you your Dex bonus you can be sneak attacked while paralyzed.

Paralyzed = helpless = denied dex = can be sneak attacked.


Grappling does not cause loss of dex, but being pinned does. By the rules it seem that it is legal to pin someone and sneak attack them, but most rogue's don't have the BAB+strength or dex to be a competent grappler/pinner.


Maintaining a Grapple requires a standard action every round. At best you 'might' get unarmed/armor spikes sneak attack with your grapple check.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Maintaining a Grapple requires a standard action every round. At best you 'might' get unarmed/armor spikes sneak attack with your grapple check.

The successful maneuver allows you do deal damage with a light weapon (or one handed) so once pinned you sneak attack away. Also with the greater grapple feat you can grapple as a move action allowing you a standard to be mean with... now if you only had a way to coup'd'grac as a standard action...


Abraham spalding wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Maintaining a Grapple requires a standard action every round. At best you 'might' get unarmed/armor spikes sneak attack with your grapple check.
The successful maneuver allows you do deal damage with a light weapon (or one handed) so once pinned you sneak attack away. Also with the greater grapple feat you can grapple as a move action allowing you a standard to be mean with... now if you only had a way to coup'd'grac as a standard action...

There is a 3.5 feat that does that. I could look it up if anybody really wanted to know.


Agile Maneuvers lets you use your Dex bonus for CMB instead of Strength. Perfect for rogues and ninjas.

Sczarni

The Rival wrote:
Agile Maneuvers lets you use your Dex bonus for CMB instead of Strength. Perfect for rogues and ninjas.

sure, but the 3/4 BAB is gonna hurt...

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
As a monk player alongside houstonderek's rogue, I can say for a fact that grappling an enemy to allow sneak attacks is a very effective strategy. :)

So is flanking (especially if the two of you have the 'Outflank' feat).

My monk prefers to trip the opponent, rather than grappling. That gives the rogue +4 to hit from outflank, and a prone opponent takes a -4 penalty to AC. This means that the rogue is quite likely to hit, even on an iterative attck, so a full-round attack with two weapons can deliver an impressive number of d6 of precision damage.


JohnF wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
As a monk player alongside houstonderek's rogue, I can say for a fact that grappling an enemy to allow sneak attacks is a very effective strategy. :)

So is flanking (especially if the two of you have the 'Outflank' feat).

My monk prefers to trip the opponent, rather than grappling. That gives the rogue +4 to hit from outflank, and a prone opponent takes a -4 penalty to AC. This means that the rogue is quite likely to hit, even on an iterative attck, so a full-round attack with two weapons can deliver an impressive number of d6 of precision damage.

Actually grappling is not an effective way to get in sneak attack damage. Grappled does not deny dex, it gives a -4 to dex penalty.

PRD wrote:


Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity.

The only advantage grappling will give is preventing the enemy from moving out of the square you want them in so you can set up a flank.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Sneak Attack - denied Dex bonus All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.