Because it's a different system and they wanted to run it a different way? Also note that the FAQ you choose doesn't say anything about sneak attack -- only weapon specialization.
Please also note that most of the rules you are after were in the 3.5 complete arcane which cannot be referenced since it is not OGL. As such even if Paizo wanted to use those same rules they couldn't -- they have to come up with their own rulings and put them in their own words even if the end effects are almost completely the same.
I don't see what the error is here.
Even if it did ability damage, why would sneak attack add to it?
I'm confused as to why this is a problem with the FAQ. SKR specifically states that those feats only apply to rays that deal hit point damage. Ray of enfeeblement and ray of enervation do not deal hit point damage.
As for sneak attack, while it doesn't say it specifically it does discuss lethal and non-lethal damage which only applies to hit point damage. There is no such thing as lethal or non-lethal ability damage or negative levels.
|
Even if it did ability damage, why would sneak attack add to it?
Sneak attack adds damage to a successful attack. That attack can be a spell that has an attack roll. If using the Complete Arcane rule, then the damage added is of the type of damage done; sneak attack with acid splash adds acid damage while sneak attack with scorching ray adds fire damage. But, also per the CAr rule, the SA damage to a spell that does energy drain or ability damage is negative energy damage. If not using the CAr rule, the damage type is undefined.
Note to mods: this post does not include non-OGC. It includes a summary of non-OGC.
|
|
It's saying that Ray of Enfeeblement does ability damage, but it does not. It's a common mistake. It led many to think that they could sneak attack with it when they cannot.
Can you take Weapon Specialization (ray) or Improved Critical (ray) as feats? How about Weapon Specialization (bomb) or Improved Critical (bomb)?
All four of those are valid choices.
Note that Weapon Specialization (ray) only adds to hit point damage caused by a ray attack that would normally deal hit point damage; it doesn't increase ability score damage (such as from ray of enfeeblement) or drain, negative levels (such as from enervation), or other damage or penalties from rays.
—Sean K Reynolds, 10/22/10
Bolded the part where Ray of Enfeeblement would be covered, despite the problem with grouping it with the wrong type
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whether ray of enfeeblement deals ability damage or it applies a penalty to an ability score, the FAQ is correct in that it says:
1) Weapon Specialization (ray) only adds to hit point damage caused by a ray attack that would normally deal hit point damage.
2) Weapon Specialization (ray) doesn't increase ability score damage or drain, negative levels or other damage or penalties from rays.
I'm not sure what sneak attack has to do with this. I don't see where you're getting that a FAQ about Improved Critical and Weapon Specialization (a FAQ which doesn't mention sneak attack at all) has anything to do with sneak attack.
Whether ray of enfeeblement deals ability damage or it applies a penalty to an ability score, the FAQ is correct in that it says:
1) Weapon Specialization (ray) only adds to hit point damage caused by a ray attack that would normally deal hit point damage.
2) Weapon Specialization (ray) doesn't increase ability score damage or drain, negative levels or other damage or penalties from rays.I'm not sure what sneak attack has to do with this. I don't see where you're getting that a FAQ about Improved Critical and Weapon Specialization (a FAQ which doesn't mention sneak attack at all) has anything to do with sneak attack.
First, I think of all places the FAQ should not promote errors such as calling ray of enfeeblement ability damage because it's an easy error to make and has been made very often.
This was the main purpose for my starting this thread, as I would like to see that fixed so as not to further confuse. But while I was doing so, what seem to me as natural questions arise and then propagate.
Second, you call weapon spec for only hit point damage, what about point blank shot and sneak attack? Do they only apply for 'hit point damage' as well? It seems a natural follow up.
I'm sure that they should not do more ability damage or negative levels, but I'm not sure, absent rulings, whether we have departed from 3.5 here as we have in the case of weapon specialization (ray) via the FAQ.
1. So if a rogue hits a flatfooted target with an enervation, do they get sneak attack dice? It's an attack roll and certainly deals damage.
2. If it does deal damage, is this damage in any way typed?
3. Is sneak attack damage (or extra precision damage via PBS, et al) ever typed?
4. If a rogue hits for 5 normal damage and 13 sneak damage against something with DR 10, what happens? Assuming that the normal damage doesn't bypass the DR of course. Does he deal 13, 8, or no damage whatsoever?
-James
It only counts specifically for hit point damage. If it doesn't damage the enemy's hit points, it doesn't deal sneak attack.
Fairly certain it's untyped damage.
He deals 8 damage. 18-10=8
Sorry to say this but you are adding rules to 3.5 that never existed. The extra damage from SA NEVER added to ability damage or level drain. Here is the full text:
SNEAK ATTACKS Any weaponlike spell can be used to make a sneak attack, including ranged spells used against targets within 30 feet (just as with any other ranged sneak attack). A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell deals extra damage of the same type as the spell normally deals. For example, a 10th-level rogue/3rd-level wizard who makes a successful sneak attack with Melf's acid arrow deals 2d4 points of acid damage, plus an extra 5d6 points of acid damage for the sneak attack (with the spell continuing to deal acid damage as normal in subsequent rounds). The exception is spells that deal energy drain or ability damage, which deal negative energy damage on a sneak attack, not extra negative levels or ability damage. For example, a 5th-level rogue/8th-level sorcerer who makes a successful enervation sneak attack bestows 1d4 negative levels and deals 3d6 points of negative energy damage. If a sneak attack with a weaponlike spell results in a critical hit, the spell damage is doubled, but not the extra damage (as with any sneak attack critical hit).
The same for feats like Point Blank shot:
Point Blank Shot: You get a +1 bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls with ranged spells that deal hit point damage at ranges of up to 30 feet. Spells that deal only ability damage, bestow penalties on ability scores, or deal energy drain gain a +1 bonus on their attack rolls but get no bonus on damage.
He actually specifically discussed the negative energy typing in 3.5-Complete Arcane.
Such language (in CA) isn`t in PRPG, and as such is `undefined`, which is his question.
And personally, I expect if/when Paizo addresses this via FAQ/Errata, they will in fact NOT choose the same way as Compete Arcane, because Negative Energy typing just doesn`t make any sense unless you`re deliving the Sneak Attack via Negative Energy to begin with: Flame Blade Sneak Attack vs. Fire Vulnerable target: What damage is increased due to vulnerability? What about Undead, which are now GENERALLY Sneak Attack-able? Seems silly to hit them with some Negative Energy. ...Thus, sharing the same damage type as the delivering attack makes much more sense. ...In fact, that should really just be a general rule, for all Precision Damage, and all damage bonuses and extra damage in general (bane, smite, wpn spec), that it defaults to the damage type of the base attack unless otherwise specified.
I`m fairly sure I saw a Paizo post saying that Sneak Attack is `agglomerated` to the delivering attack`s damage, i.e. it helps overcome DR (but DR still fully applies vs. the attack as a whole)... But that`s not in the FAQ yet AFAIK.
First, I think of all places the FAQ should not promote errors such as calling ray of enfeeblement ability damage because it's an easy error to make and has been made very often.
Sure, and that's easy to fix when I get back to the office tomorrow.
Second, you call weapon spec for only hit point damage, what about point blank shot and sneak attack? Do they only apply for 'hit point damage' as well? It seems a natural follow up.
That's a fair question, but not relevant to the question that prompted the original FAQ.
4. If a rogue hits for 5 normal damage and 13 sneak damage against something with DR 10, what happens? Assuming that the normal damage doesn't bypass the DR of course. Does he deal 13, 8, or no damage whatsoever?
What in the rules suggests that the SA damage is conditional on the base damage getting through the DR?
|
1. So if a rogue hits a flatfooted target with an enervation, do they get sneak attack dice? It's an attack roll and certainly deals damage.
Huh?!?! Enervation does no damage.
[url]http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/e/enervation[/url]
4. If a rogue hits for 5 normal damage and 13 sneak damage against something with DR 10, what happens? Assuming that the normal damage doesn't bypass the DR of course. Does he deal 13, 8, or no damage whatsoever?
You tired dude? This makes little sense.
I can see making a case for "8" as is the right answer, but 13? Why would the sneak damage avoid DR @ all? And no damage? Why not 3?
I do not see why you are separating SA damage from the weapon damage.
|
|
What in the rules suggests that the SA damage is conditional on the base damage getting through the DR?I don't believe that it is.
However if sneak attacks deal untyped damage then will it ignore DR?
I was under the impression, and run it as such, that sneak attack damage is the same damage type as the normal damage. If it is with a silver dagger, it is silver weapon damage. If it is an acid splash, it is acid damage.
I was under the impression, and run it as such, that sneak attack damage is the same damage type as the normal damage. If it is with a silver dagger, it is silver weapon damage. If it is an acid splash, it is acid damage.
What in the rules suggests that the SA damage is conditional on the base damage getting through the DR?I don't believe that it is.
However if sneak attacks deal untyped damage then will it ignore DR?
It is not only the same damage type it is also the same attack, it enhances the attack but does not otherwise alter it.
I personally thought the ruling of WotC a bit stupid concerning spells that do not normally deal hp damage to get a SA damage bonus, I never played by that, same for WS and PB, the damage only comes into play when the spell does hp damage, to me it seems SKR agrees with that as a logical follow up from WS not applying, but perhaps you can goad SKR or another paizo staff member to give a definitive answer on that.
First, I think of all places the FAQ should not promote errors such as calling ray of enfeeblement ability damage because it's an easy error to make and has been made very often.Sure, and that's easy to fix when I get back to the office tomorrow.
And... fixed! :)
Removed a post. Please post civilly, thanks!
On Sneak Attack: although there was a ruling back in 3.5 that unless the base damage can overcome DR, you could not deal SA damage. This is not the case with PF because there's no such clause in any of the released materials.
On SA damage typing: on effects that deal hp damage, I'd say it make a great deal more sense to follow the type of the base damage; for example, if you sneak-attack'd a Troll with an Acid Splash, all damage will bypass its regeneration, not just the AS damage. With Enervation and the ilk though, I think it should be handled much like Weapon Specialization line as discussed and confirmed by this thread.
On Sneak Attack: although there was a ruling back in 3.5 that unless the base damage can overcome DR, you could not deal SA damage. This is not the case with PF because there's no such clause in any of the released materials.
On SA damage typing: on effects that deal hp damage, I'd say it make a great deal more sense to follow the type of the base damage; for example, if you sneak-attack'd a Troll with an Acid Splash, all damage will bypass its regeneration, not just the AS damage. With Enervation and the ilk though, I think it should be handled much like Weapon Specialization line as discussed and confirmed by this thread.
Correct idea but regeneration doesn't work like that any more. Instead it is always on unless turned off for the round by the correct damage type. There is no more of the 'non-lethal damage' nonsense, regeneration simply heals of the listed amount of damage each round and prevents bleed damage or death from damage.
On Sneak Attack: although there was a ruling back in 3.5 that unless the base damage can overcome DR, you could not deal SA damage.
I'm not sure where you got that idea from. The 3.0 FAQ says "A sneak attack provides bonus damage, not a special effect. In a sneak attack, roll the bonus damage and apply that against the DR." It goes on with a specific example of a rogue only managing to do damage past the DR because of the bonus SA dice. The 3.5 FAQ doesn't address it, but it certainly wasn't explicitly changed.
Hopefully SKR is still monitoring this thread.
Is there any way to get the FAQ page to make it easier to find new additions? I spent 6 months checking the 'Last Updated' date thinking nothing was being added, and turns out it was after all. Now I have to wade through the entire thing looking for updates and checking their dates to see if they are new. It's getting long enough that this takes 5 or 10 minutes now (mainly because if I go too fast, I miss something and have to page back up again).
Could we get an update to the 'Last Update' date? Or color coding? Every 1st of the month entries that are new turn black, and new entries are red or something? Some way to draw attention to the new stuff without having to check the date on everything? It could be in the links honestly, at the top, a * at the front of new ones would work even.
That's more of a Gary question, I'll send him a message about it.
Senior Software Developer
|
The FAQ not auto-updating its last updated date is either a bug or a complete brain fart on my part since I could've sworn I added that the last time I worked on the FAQ code. I know I meant to, anyway. Color coding entries is an interesting idea.
We are still planning on putting together an overall integrated here's-every-FAQ-there-is page, which would include all product FAQs, errata, website FAQ, customer service, etc. Browseable, searchable, etc. There are always just a couple things ahead of it on the todo list at the moment, as usual.
There are always just a couple things ahead of it on the todo list at the moment, as usual.
*sigh*
Seems like a congenital issue.
The FAQ not auto-updating its last updated date is either a bug or a complete brain fart on my part since I could've sworn I added that the last time I worked on the FAQ code. I know I meant to, anyway. Color coding entries is an interesting idea.
LOL
I've done that before. :) The whole thinking I put something in and then realizing I didn't, or I replaced the source code I put it in with a different update. :)
Color coding was done in the 3.5 FAQ to let people know the new additions. That was a PDF document, so it was a bit easier, but it would seem doable. Even as a small tweak to the code (If Update Date > 1st of current month, text = red, else text = black).
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. |
So, might not be an error, but this thread was already made so I think it'd be best to bring up the issue here.
The following two FAQ entries seem to be a bit contradictory.
Related FAQ, where Favored Class bonus is defined as "not an effect".
There's also a line in the Humanoid type in the ARG's Race Creator that states that having the subtype lets you meet prerequisites for that race.