I was looking at a build idea when something I had never considered occurred to me; sneak attack says a rogue's attack deals extra damage when certain conditions are met, but a combat maneuver is also an attack (or at the very least uses an attack roll). So could I deal sneak attack if I used a maneuver vs a flat footed or flanked enemy?
Short answer: I don't know.
Long answer: It's possible, but... the phrasing "extra damage" suggests to me that the attack must deal some degree of damage in the first place.
On the other hand, the wording of Sneak Attack largely is unchanged from 3.x. Combat maneuvers are a newer mechanic -- although some 3.x maneuvers did require some kind of attack roll so the question would remain there.
Having no clear rules (IMO) to go by, if I were a GM in this situation, I'd probably judge it on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances of the action--making it clear to the players that it would be case by case. I can see combining a dirty trick with a sneak attack, for example--talk about a low blow. I can see trips and bull rushes dealing damage in certain cases. Sunder actually DOES deal damage in the cases of extreme success...
On the other hand, I'm not sure I would allow it with a grapple check, for example -- that seems a bit manipulative and if you're trying to grab onto someone AND deal damage at the same time that seems a bit tricky. Not sure about overruns or drags, definitely not reposition I don't think... disarms would have to be circumstantial as well.
Short answer: I don't know.
Long answer: It's possible, but... the phrasing "extra damage" suggests to me that the attack must deal some degree of damage in the first place.
On the other hand, the wording of Sneak Attack largely is unchanged from 3.x. Combat maneuvers are a newer mechanic -- although some 3.x maneuvers did require some kind of attack roll so the question would remain there.
Having no clear rules (IMO) to go by, if I were a GM in this situation, I'd probably judge it on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances of the action--making it clear to the players that it would be case by case. I can see combining a dirty trick with a sneak attack, for example--talk about a low blow. I can see trips and bull rushes dealing damage in certain cases. Sunder actually DOES deal damage in the cases of extreme success...
On the other hand, I'm not sure I would allow it with a grapple check, for example -- that seems a bit manipulative and if you're trying to grab onto someone AND deal damage at the same time that seems a bit tricky. Not sure about overruns or drags, definitely not reposition I don't think... disarms would have to be circumstantial as well.
I agree exactly with DeathQuaker here. I'm pretty sure nothing in the rules specifies this, but sneak attack damage seems to be meant to apply only to attacks that already deal damage. So, for example, if you are flanking a foe and successfully grapple them, it's not a sneak attack.
EDIT: However, if you successfully maintain that grapple on the following round and decide to damage the foe as part of that standard action (per the grapple rules), and you're still flanking the foe, sneak attack damage WOULD apply.
That makes sense. I was thinking it would probably require an attack to do damage or be circumstantial.
To further muddy the waters, what if I was a rogue/barbarian with the rage power Knockdown, which lets me make a trip attempt as one of my attacks and do my str mod in damage if successful. Since this is both an attack and does HP damage, do you think it would qualify for sneak attack?
There was a feat in 3E that let you trade SA damage, to whatever amount of d6's you wanted up to how many you got. In return for the damage, you instead got +2 to hit per SA die you forfeited. If your DM allows 3E material, you could ask him for that feat. As combat maneuvers are attack rolls, that WOULD buff your CMB roll.
Here's a synopsis of the feat, originally in dragon magazine (possibly in Dragon Compendium volume 1):
Precise Strike [General] (Dragon #310 p69)
Prerequisite: Sneak Attack class ability, Dexterity 13
Benefit: When making a Sneak Attack, you may reduce the number of Sneak Attack dice that will apply to damage in exchange for a +2 Competence bonus to hit per die sacrificed.
Note: The bonus to attack & reduction to damage applies to every Sneak Attack for one round.
To further muddy the waters, what if I was a rogue/barbarian with the rage power Knockdown, which lets me make a trip attempt as one of my attacks and do my str mod in damage if successful. Since this is both an attack and does HP damage, do you think it would qualify for sneak attack?
interesting thought, but i would have to say "no". The Str bonus to damage is a result of a successful combat manuever check, not an attack roll with a weapon. There is at least one specific feat that allows you to do SA damage with a combat maneuver check, it's one of the Grapple feats.
However, it's not hard to get some AoO's that qualify for sneak attack when doing combat manuevers. For instance with a ninja you could get Improved Unarmed Strike, Improved Trip, Greater Trip (AoO), Ki Throw (reposition opponent to be flanked) and Vicious Stomp (IUS AoO). When you trip the target, the trip itself provokes an AoO from you, if he's flanked or you have Greater Invis up you'd get SA damage. Then you can reposition the target to any square you threaten with Ki Throw, so just put him in a spot where you'd have a flanking partner, and the Vicious Stomp AoO for the target now being prone would also give you SA damage.
It can be done, it just takes some creativity and dedication!
From the Combat section, Attacks and Combat Maneuvers are two different actions.
The Sneak Attack definition specifies that it deals extra damage to the rogue's attack.
If you look at Trip, Disarm or Sunder, it says that you can make those maneuvers in place of an attack.
So my take on it is you can't use sneak attack on maneuvers.
Aye, it's a safe bet to restrict sneak attacks to actual attacks and not maneuvers. The rules don't come out and say that anywhere, but all the context seems to imply it.
Here is the one & only feat I can think of that would let you incorporate SA as part of a combat maneuver. Well, sort of, it's a swift action after a successful grapple check to maintain: Strangler
You could always dip Barbarian for 2 levels, pick up the Knockback rage power, and sneak attack on bull rush checks with that once/round while raging, since that DOES deal hit point damage...
You could always dip Barbarian for 2 levels, pick up the Knockback rage power, and sneak attack on bull rush checks with that once/round while raging, since that DOES deal hit point damage...
I did mention that as a hypothetical here ;p
Ah, you did. Except Knockdown, which is oddly only 1/rage, so you'd need rage cycling to use that with any regularity.
Yeah, that should work. I see no good reason why it shouldn't. Combat maneuvers are attacks, they are explicitly said to be so. You're attacking, you're doing hp damage. Sneak Attack should apply.
If you allow 3.5 material, Rage cycling is quite easy. There's a regional feat from the Player's Guide to Faerun which makes it so that something that would make you exhausted would only make you fatigued and if something would make you fatigued it instead does nothing, so you can rage cycle all day as long as someone doesn't hit you with a spell that causes exhaustion (fatigue now).
Along the same line with 3.5 material, there is also an alternate class feature for barbarian in one book that lets you give up fast movement for pounce, and an alternative from another book that changes rage to +4 str, +2 AC/reflex, and as a full attack you can make second attack at highest bab but with everything at -2 (as per TWF and Rapid Shot, but you can use it with two handed weapons).
I want to play a half orc Barbarian/Rogue (skulking slayer/scout). Charge everything with a two hander and get d8s for sneak attack and a full attack :O... still would probably be weaker than a lot of standard builds even with the 3.5 material though.
That build idea is what got me thinking on the wording of sneak attack to begin with.
If you can use 3E material, you could just use the feat I referenced before...
The previous feat is related, but not quite what I was talking about. The feat is certainly interesting (and I'm going to make a note to remember it for future reference :D), but I was more looking at the idea of being able to apply sneak attack on things besides normal attacks, not for ways to buff CMB effectiveness for rogue, if you understand what I mean.
you can always sneak attack with ray spells & melee touch spells via wands & UMD....
interesting thought, but i would have to say "no". The Str bonus to damage is a result of a successful combat manuever check, not an attack roll with a weapon.
From the Combat section, Attacks and Combat Maneuvers are two different actions.
combat maneuvers ARE attack rolls.
their action varies, but the same goes for 'normal' melee/ranged attacks.(iteratives, attack action, AoO, 'special' standard action for Cleave, free attacks from spellcasting)
here is the text straight from the PRD:
When performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action...
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus
Whether CMB or 'normal' attack, you are making an attack roll
(and an attack, for things that care, like attack-triggered defensive effects)the only difference is the bonus you are adding,
and the effect of the attack, which already varies outside of CMB: stunning fist, touch attacks, spells.
ALL of those should be subject to the requirement of 'doing hp damage' for Sneak Attack's ADDITIONAL damage to kick in,
if you aren't doing damage to begin with, there's nothing to add on to...
NOTE: in PRPG it is now ruled that Sneak Attack damage is combined with 'normal' damage BEFORE DR/Resistance is applied.
...SO, CMBs can work fine with Sneak Attack, but they need to do damage.
Knockdown/Knockback do damage, even if it's not weapon damage, so they should work.
Any 'normal' attack may well not do weapon damage, but the 'minimum 1' damage which isn't variable either.
Sunder always does damage, and Sneak Attack should work fine with it.
(items are immune to Crits, but I don't see anything saying Precision Damage/SA doesn't work.)
(even if it didn't for some reason, you COULD do SA damage and have it 'carry thru' to the target themself via Great Sunder)
Grapple for damage is an option,
the only maneuver I want to call out as NOT working (that seems like it is doing damage)
is Greater Trip or similar effects which let you take an extra AoO on the target:
that is a distinct, separate attack, and wouldn't automatically qualify for SA just because the Trip did.
Of course, if the Trip did, and nothing else has changed in the last instant,
the AoO will in all likelyhood qualify for SA itself, but you have to judge the AoO separately.