|
Is the monster flatfooted against the rogue? The stomach does still have an AC. Does the rogue have darkvision or a light source to negate the total concealment from the lack of light?
You know how that's gonna end up?
Rogue (muffled sounds): GUYS! SOMEBODY GET ON THE LEFT SIDE OF HIS BELLY JUST BELOW THE THIRD TENTACLE AND RIGHT NEXT TO THE SPLEEN! I'M OVER THERE, IF WE FLANK HIS KIDNEY I'LL BE ABLE TO SNEAK ATTACK THE MOTHERTRUCKER!
Party: ...
It would seem that the answer would be yes to both questions, which makes getting deliberately swallowed a valid rogue tactic...
Hey, it worked for Tommy Lee Jones...
if your attacking from inside a creature how is any of your attacks not hitting a vital area. i say yes, sneak attack would apply to every attack from the inside.
Is the monster flatfooted against the rogue? The stomach does still have an AC. Does the rogue have darkvision or a light source to negate the total concealment from the lack of light?
+1
Being swallowed isn't the best way to get sneak attack :p
Rogue (muffled sounds): GUYS! SOMEBODY GET ON THE LEFT SIDE OF HIS BELLY JUST BELOW THE THIRD TENTACLE AND RIGHT NEXT TO THE SPLEEN! I'M OVER THERE, IF WE FLANK HIS KIDNEY I'LL BE ABLE TO SNEAK ATTACK THE MOTHERTRUCKER!Party: ...
I really really really surprised this hasn't happened in any of my games. I have one player in particular that plays characters that would say that.
Also in such a case I'd totally give it to them for sheer hilarity.
If a rogue attacks a monster's stomach while they are swallowed, is that automatically a sneak attack? Does the swallowing monster take full damage from such attacks?
Two conditions allow a rogue to sneak attack. One is the rogue flanks its target. Which in this case I'm just going to set aside as not possible.
The second condition is that the target is denied it Dexterity bonus to AC. Let' see when swallowed whole the Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity. Is that really the same as loses Dexterity bonus to AC? While I don't think there is a definitive answer, I would say no they are not the same, because Dexterity modifier is not the same as Dexterity bonus.
I would not consider that the rogue is "invisible" because while swallowed you are still considered grappled and "If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives no other benefit."
Let's see what else, to sneak attack a rogue must be able to see a 'vital spot' and reach it. We'll assume the use of dark vision or light source. But does that mean a rogue can actually see and reach a 'vital spot.' I have to admit many vital organs are located near the gullet and stomach of must animals.
So, in the end no sneak attack unless someone can convince me that the creature is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC.
The biggest problem I see here is the rogue in question thinks there is room to move about and select targets, such as in various stories of being swallowed by giant whales.
From a biological viewpoint, even if a creature's mouth and throat is big enough to engulf, innards are rarely if ever big vast caverns. Soft Vore (once you've been swallowed) propably is fairly close to reality in that aspect and as such you can consider yourself grappled or even pinned while in the throat or stomach of whatever swallowed you.
|
if your attacking from inside a creature how is any of your attacks not hitting a vital area. i say yes, sneak attack would apply to every attack from the inside.
If every hit is striking a vital area, shouldn't any swallowed character get extra damage for attacking while swallowed? Why just people with sneak attack, if sneak attack is about hitting vital areas?
You can't sneak attack a target with concealment, and creatures usually don't hang lamps up in their innards so that rogues can see to stab them better, so unless you have darkvision or another way to avoid concealment it won't work.
I would, and have, allowed it. To me, sneak attack is possible when the rogue has enough time to aim properly, while the creature is unable to simply change their guard or block. Since the creature can do nothing to avoid the rogue getting that split-second time to aim, I rule that sneak attack is possible.
I would, and have, allowed it. To me, sneak attack is possible when the rogue has enough time to aim properly, while the creature is unable to simply change their guard or block. Since the creature can do nothing to avoid the rogue getting that split-second time to aim, I rule that sneak attack is possible.
However the rogue is being digested by acid and being crushed inside the creature, which I could see as a reason that they'd have problems getting proper aiming. You know rather than slicing like crazy to get out.
Come to think of it, I suspect that being submerged in an opaque soup of stomach acid and partly digested food might also interfere with the clause that you must be able to see your target clearly in order to sneak attack them, so a rogue might still be out of luck even with darkvision.
|
You can't sneak attack a target with concealment, and creatures usually don't hang lamps up in their innards so that rogues can see to stab them better, so unless you have darkvision or another way to avoid concealment it won't work.
A 50% miss chance while you actively can't miss (since you're in the damn stomach) is silly. And nowhere in the rules does it say that the swallowing creature has concealment, which they'd likely mention if it were the case.
That said, there's no mechanical way for a Rogue inside a creature to get sneak attack, and that makes a fair amount of thematic sense (most vital organs are not located in the stomach), so I wouldn't give it to 'em.
The rogue could sneak attack with an improvised melee weapon if he or she had the feat "catch-off-guard". IF the opponent was considered unarmed at least, for this to work.
I'm tempted to say that since internal organs can't "dodge" that they have no Dexterity. If they have no Dexterity and the Rogue has a light source, sunrod/torch/magic weapon/goggles/etc they should be able to Sneak Attack just fine.
Aside from that creatures who engulf live prey likely have reinforced stomach lining and/or methods for immobilizing swallowed prey (such as constriction), why are people still talking about the rogue having all the opportunity in the world to pick a 'target' and sneak attack?
Picture this - constricting muscles are actively forcing you down a narrow throat (this is how swallowing generally works) into a flexible stomach that changes shape and size to accomondate whatever is put into it, any excess air is expelled (can you say burp?) removing any excess space around the swallowed victim and thus removing things like stable footing, space to swing any weapon and even the ability to breath.
At minimum you have the grappled condition, and I don't see how something actively grappling you (with its stomach/throat) could be flatfooted against you, as it knows exactly where you are and what you'd be trying to do.
The big thing about Men in Black is he was using an energy weapon, which doesn't care what it hits and blasts a big hole.
Now to the rules:
Swallow Whole (Ex)
If a creature with this special attack begins its turn with an opponent grappled in its mouth (see Grab), it can attempt a new combat maneuver check (as though attempting to pin the opponent). If it succeeds, it swallows its prey, and the opponent takes bite damage. Unless otherwise noted, the opponent can be up to one size category Smaller than the swallowing creature. Being swallowed causes a creature to take damage each round. The amount and type of damage varies and is given in the creature’s Statistics. A swallowed creature keeps the grappled condition, while the creature that did the swallowing does not. A swallowed creature can try to cut its way free with any light slashing or piercing weapon (the amount of cutting damage required to get free is equal to 1/10 the creature’s total hit points), or it can just try to escape the grapple. The Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity. If a swallowed creature cuts its way out, the swallowing creature cannot use swallow whole again until the damage is healed. If the swallowed creature escapes the grapple, success puts it back in the attacker’s mouth, where it may be bitten or swallowed again.
If you go straight off the rules, you are grappled, are taking damage, and can only use a light slash/pierce weapon (not even a 1-handed non-light weapon or a bludgeon which you could still use in a normal grapple). Considering how restricted you already are, why are people even considering being able to use precision damage?
I don't think there is an official answer, but here is my opinion.
1. Organs can't dodge attacks so yeah I would allow sneak attack.
2. ..,but I am sure it is dark in there so unless you have darkvision or a light source then no sneak attacking, and you still take penalties for being grappled.
PS:The comment about being grappled may not be used, but I would definitely force you to be able to see in order to sneak attack anything.
@Lythe: I seriously doubt that the monster can do anything. It can't see the attack to dodge it so it does not matter if it knows you are about to attack it or not. That is like if I know an invisible creature is about to attack that I can avoid the sneak attack because I know it is there. The monster can't see you so it should lose dex by the rules. Being grappled does not prevent crits, sneak attacks or any other precision attack.
@Lythe: I seriously doubt that the monster can do anything. It can't see the attack to dodge it so it does not matter if it knows you are about to attack it or not. That is like if I know an invisible creature is about to attack that I can avoid the sneak attack because I know it is there. The monster can't see you so it should lose dex by the rules. Being grappled does not prevent crits, sneak attacks or any other precision attack.
And you can't see an invisible creature, but still have no miss chance or a loss of dex bonus when you have it in a grapple, nor does the grappler become flatfooted. "If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives no other benefit."
"A grappled creature cannot use Stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if a special ability, such as hide in plain sight, would normally allow it to do so"
If you can't use stealth, then you can't catch an opponent flat footed.
Another point is you are facing more restrictions than a regular grapple.
"The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot."
When you are so restricted that you can't use bludgeoning weapons at all, or any non-light slashing/piercing, I fail to see how you can effectively reach a vital spot (never mind needing Anatomy 103: orientating yourself from inside a monster's gut).
@Lythe: I seriously doubt that the monster can do anything. It can't see the attack to dodge it so it does not matter if it knows you are about to attack it or not. That is like if I know an invisible creature is about to attack that I can avoid the sneak attack because I know it is there. The monster can't see you so it should lose dex by the rules. Being grappled does not prevent crits, sneak attacks or any other precision attack.And you can't see an invisible creature, but still have no miss chance or a loss of dex bonus when you have it in a grapple, nor does the grappler become flatfooted. "If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives no other benefit."
The point is you are facing more restrictions than a regular grapple.
"The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot."
When you are so restricted that you can't use bludgeoning weapons at all, or any non-light slashing/piercing, I fail to see how you can effectively reach a vital spot (never mind needing Anatomy 103: orientating yourself from inside a monster's gut).
My point with the invisible creature is that you don't know where it is, and where does it say an invisible creature can not ignore your bonus to AC?
I agree with the pick out a vital spot argument, which is why I said if they can't see they can't sneak attack.
My point with the invisible creature is that you don't know where it is, and where does it say an invisible creature can not ignore your bonus to AC?
The point is if you have a creature in a grapple, then invisible or no, all it gains is a +2 to CMD, but you know exactly where it is. Swallowing would be no different, even though you don't see it, you know exactly where it is.
If a rogue attacks a monster's stomach while they are swallowed, is that automatically a sneak attack? Does the swallowing monster take full damage from such attacks?Two conditions allow a rogue to sneak attack. One is the rogue flanks its target. Which in this case I'm just going to set aside as not possible.
The second condition is that the target is denied it Dexterity bonus to AC. Let' see when swallowed whole the Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity. Is that really the same as loses Dexterity bonus to AC? While I don't think there is a definitive answer, I would say no they are not the same, because Dexterity modifier is not the same as Dexterity bonus.
I would not consider that the rogue is "invisible" because while swallowed you are still considered grappled and "If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives no other benefit."
Let's see what else, to sneak attack a rogue must be able to see a 'vital spot' and reach it. We'll assume the use of dark vision or light source. But does that mean a rogue can actually see and reach a 'vital spot.' I have to admit many vital organs are located near the gullet and stomach of must animals.
So, in the end no sneak attack unless someone can convince me that the creature is denied its Dexterity bonus to AC.
I generally agree with your rules assessment. With the exception of seeing a "vital spot" when swallowed whole. Everything is vital when swallowed whole imo so the need to see it is irrelevant. However some GM's seem rule against the player when there is the slightest hint of a chance the RAW is questionably in favor of the player.
I would rule in favor of the rogue here and I'm a little surprised that others are not. I would rule that since there's no Dex bonus to AC then the rogue would get his sneak attack. Anyone who's played a rogue knows that your best damage is situational, at best used maybe 20% of total combat time. So being nerfed like that and then still being denied sneak attack damage when swallowed whole? I would definitely rule in favor of the rogue here, rules notwithstanding.
I am with Lythe and TOZ on this one. Really, the grappled victim cannot move, gets maluses to DEX, and "cannot use stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if an ability such as hide in plain sight would allow him to do so."
At this point, tearing out of a stomach from a fighter's point of view is no different than the rogue's, so... no sneak attack for me.
Cutting your way out of a stomach doesn't deal direct damage, IIRC. It simply accumulates to an amount of damage sufficient to free yourself without harming the creature's total health. As severely illogical as the whole situation is, I'd say even if a rogue could do this sneak damage, they're only getting themselves out of the monster's belly faster, not working toward killing it.
...And now I am recalling the /tg/ thread about making Escape Artist checks through the bowels. Hm.
Cutting your way out of a stomach doesn't deal direct damage, IIRC. It simply accumulates to an amount of damage sufficient to free yourself without harming the creature's total health. As severely illogical as the whole situation is, I'd say even if a rogue could do this sneak damage, they're only getting themselves out of the monster's belly faster, not working toward killing it.
Nothing in the RAW says something specific about the stomach having an HP counter of its own. It's still internal damage. I can't imagine the burn of my own stomach acids pouring out in the rest of my body.
RAW says : "A swallowed creature can try to cut it's way free with any light slashing or piercing weapon (The amount of damage required to get free is equal to 1/10 the creature's total hit points) [...] If a swallowed creature cuts its way out, the swallowing creature cannot us swallow whole again until the damage is healed.
I will suppose the creature needs to heal its own HP counter to heal said stomach. If the victim has access to full-attacks, working the way out of a stomach of an appropriate CR can take about a turn or two, exceptionnally 3. sounds fair to me.
The point is if you have a creature in a grapple, then invisible or no, all it gains is a +2 to CMD, but you know exactly where it is. Swallowing would be no different, even though you don't see it, you know exactly where it is.
My point with the invisible creature is that you don't know where it is, and where does it say an invisible creature can not ignore your bonus to AC?
Knowing where it is does not help. You don't know where it is aiming its attacks so you can't dodge them well enough. By the rules you can't see me so you lose your dex to AC.
By the rules you can't see me so you lose your dex to AC.
By the rules, the victim is considered having the GRAPPLED condition.
Grappled : A grappled creature cannot use Stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if a special ability allows it to do so. If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives NO OTHER BENEFIT.
No other benefit. No flanking, no surprise, no sneak attack prerequisite.
By the rules you can't see me so you lose your dex to AC.By the rules, the victim is considered having the GRAPPLED condition.
Grappled : A grappled creature cannot use Stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if a special ability allows it to do so. If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives NO OTHER BENEFIT.No other benefit. No flanking, no surprise, no sneak attack prerequisite.
That entry also assumes the monster is in face to face combat. Sneak attack is not a benefit. The +2 to attack while invisible is what they mean by benefit. Calling sneak attack a benefit is like calling the fighter's bonus to attack and damage granted by its class a benefit that can't be gained in the same situation.
If a rogue attacks a monster's stomach while they are swallowed, is that automatically a sneak attack? Does the swallowing monster take full damage from such attacks?Two conditions allow a rogue to sneak attack. One is the rogue flanks its target. Which in this case I'm just going to set aside as not possible.
The second condition is that the target is denied it Dexterity bonus to AC. Let' see when swallowed whole the Armor Class of the interior of a creature that swallows whole is normally 10 + 1/2 its natural armor bonus, with no modifiers for size or Dexterity. Is that really the same as loses Dexterity bonus to AC? While I don't think there is a definitive answer, I would say no they are not the same, because Dexterity modifier is not the same as Dexterity bonus.
What is the Sense Motive check of a stomach? FEINT THAT MOFO!
I'm just going to throw out this visual and see if it helps at all.
If you were tightly wrapped up in an opaque blanket and bouncing around would you be able to aim an attack at a specific spot outside of the blanket without any kind of landmark to indicate where that spot was?
Even if you had darkvision it wouldn't help. You would be able to cut whatever was near your dagger and that's it.
I'm just going to throw out this visual and see if it helps at all.
If you were tightly wrapped up in an opaque blanket and bouncing around would you be able to aim an attack at a specific spot outside of the blanket without any kind of landmark to indicate where that spot was?
Even if you had darkvision it wouldn't help. You would be able to cut whatever was near your dagger and that's it.
I don't think grappled equals being wrapped up in a blanket. If it was pinned I would agree.
I don't think grappled equals being wrapped up in a blanket. If it was pinned I would agree.
except it's not actually grappled, it's all the penalties of grappled plus more restrictions on what weapons you can actually use, which would make it a half step closer to pinned. The blanket analogy is pretty good.
As to anything being vulnerable because it is the stomach... animals which swallow rocks to aid digestion tend to have a digestive system capable of handling swallowing rocks. You'd think that monsters that swallow live prey whole would have a reinforced stomach that can handle swallowing live prey whole.
I don't think grappled equals being wrapped up in a blanket. If it was pinned I would agree.except it's not actually grappled, it's all the penalties of grappled plus more restrictions on what weapons you can actually use, which would make it a half step closer to pinned. The blanket analogy is pretty good.
As to anything being vulnerable because it is the stomach... animals which swallow rocks to aid digestion tend to have a digestive system capable of handling swallowing rocks. You'd think that monsters that swallow live prey whole would have a reinforced stomach that can handle swallowing live prey whole.
If you are wrapped in a blanket you don't get to attack anyone therefore I still disagree. Look at Full Metal Jacket when they held the fat kid in the blanket down while they beat him with socks.
Being able to handle live prey would be represented by a better AC or DR.PS:I don't think sneak attack was meant to work after thinking about it, only because it would have come up a long time ago, but that is more a gamist answer than a simulationist answer.
That would have gone a lot differently if he had a dagger in his hand.
If you are wrapped in a blanket you don't get to attack anyone therefore I still disagree. Look at Full Metal Jacket when they held the fat kid in the blanket down while they beat him with socks.
If he had been awake or paying attention they never would have wrapped him up anyway, much less with a knife in hand. IIRC they quietly snuck up on him in order to not wake him up.
Which means nothing to my point of 'he could have cut out of the blanket had he a sharp knife'.
I don't think he would have been able to cut his way out. You still need to be able to move well enough and to put enough pressure to punch through the blanket. If he was sleeping with the knife in hand, and they pull the blanket tight enough he is not doing anything.
The point is if you have a creature in a grapple, then invisible or no, all it gains is a +2 to CMD, but you know exactly where it is. Swallowing would be no different, even though you don't see it, you know exactly where it is.
One minor thing I'd like to point out, is that while a Rogue who's been swallowed whole is definitely grappled, the Rogue is grappled by stomach lining, which is not consciously controllable by the actual creature who's swallowed the Rogue. So i.e. the creature who's swallowed the Rogue knows that the Rogue is in it's stomach, but neither it nor it's organs know much else--so still no Dexterity to AC. I would think it's like having a Rogue "trapped" with you in a dark room...
Now if the creature who's swallowed the Rogue has intelligent organs that are able to move and dodge that's a different story ;)
|
|
I'd personally give a percentage chance of hitting something vital. Maybe fairly low at first, but if they make a knowledge check for that particular creature, I'd probably increase it (knowledge of a particular creature could easily include an approximate knowledge of where it's vital organs are.)
Of course, in that situation it's not just the Rogue who has a greater chance of hitting something vital. I'd also allow a similar chance for any other class, though probably just as a critical hit, not automatically granting them sneak attack bonuses.
(my bad, misread ;))
I'm going to go with no, rogues can't sneak attack the monster.
1) You are grappled ++. To swallow someone, a monster makes a CMB check "as though attempting to pin the opponent", which is pretty suggestive. Then once swallowed, a creature "keeps the grappled condition". You cannot sneak attack someone who is grappling you without a flank, as has been pointed out.
2) If something specifically doesn't apply Dex to its AC, you can't deny it its Dex bonus to AC. In other words, the stomach has a - for the stat, not a 0 or a 10 (+0 modifier). Therefore anything that requires you to affect or look at Dex modifier to AC, like sneak attack, doesn't apply.
3) If rules aren't convincing enough, imagine what it's like being trapped in a moving cavern full of acid. You're burning, you can't catch your footing if you're even upright to begin with, you're being squeezed and tumbled about by stomach contractions, and you have very little leverage or room to swing. You'll be able to make small incisions at best to try to cut a slit for yourself to get out, not big gaping wounds.
As always, in home games rule however you feel like. Purely RAW, however, rogues cannot sneak attack when swallowed whole.
First off I don't think it was the intent to allow sneak attack, but there are no rules to support that so I am mostly doing this because I have nothing else to do.
1.Where was it pointed out? If it was the "no benefits" statement then what is your answer to my reply to that.
2.You are attacking the monster and it does have dex to AC unless you are trying to say damage does to the stomach does not apply to the monster.
3.Rules have been mentioned on both sides of the argument, but none are thread ending. There is nothing mentioned about how tight you are held. For the sake of argument though let's assume the leverage example is true. Wouldn't that also lessen the amount of damage done from strength since you could not get all of your strength behind a blow? Little incisions? What if I have an axe? Are you supporting the reduced strength mod idea?
edit:I have not seen the no sneak attack while swallowed rule.
Id allow it. Unless has been pointed out before, said creaature had eyes in its stomache.