| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When a rogue gets sneak attack and is using two weapons, does the sneak attack apply to both the primary and the secondary attacks or just the primary?
both
Every attack, even your iteratives. Why would you think otherwise if I can ask?
Both, provided the condition that allows sneak attack still applies.
when flanking, absolutely....
when attacking from invisibility I think the first attack would negate the concealment you are benefiting from for the sneak attack, so your second attack, your target would no longer be flat-footed.
During surprise rounds you generally can't attack twice anyway.
You are correct, the first attack negates the stealth and every attack after doesn't get the sneak attack dice.
And you never know, somewhere out there, there could be a panther with 5 levels in ninja. Or a were-tiger rogue. Or an arcane trickster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When a rogue gets sneak attack and is using two weapons, does the sneak attack apply to both the primary and the secondary attacks or just the primary?
This is a very situational question. For example, the answers change if you are IN combat are attacking OUT of combat.
IF YOU ARE IN COMBAT...
If you are flanking? DEFINITELY. This is really the only regular way to get SA damage to tick off on every attack.
If you are attacking an enemy BEFORE they have taken a turn in combat, all of the attacks you make would tick with extra damage if you have sneak attack or a similar ability. This is of course not the case if your enemy cannot be flat-footed, such as a barbarian or a rogue with the Improved Uncanny Dodge feature.
Once your enemy has taken a turn in combat, however, they are no longer considered flat-footed. You would have to find a way to make them flat-footed. At this point, it depends on how long your action causes the flat-footed condition to persist. For example, if you feint the enemy via the Bluff skill, ONLY YOUR NEXT ATTACK gets the benefit. Thus, only the next attack roll you make could tick SA damage, whether or not you hit.
IF YOU ARE OUT OF COMBAT...
If you are invisible, no. Once you attempt that first attack, your invisibility ends and you have no announced your presence to the enemy. Notice, I said once you attempt the attack. Whether or not you hit, taking an attack action ends invisibility or you. This is NOT the case if you are under the effects of greater invisibility, however, as I believe you remain invisible even after attacking.
If you are attacking from mundane stealth, I can't see a way to get SA damage on more than one attack. In melee? No. Once again, your first attempted attack ruins your Stealth and announces your presence. That first attack - IF IT HITS - gets sneak attack damage, but no more. Even at range, you can only use Stealth to snipe (see the description of the Stealth skill in the CRB) if you make only a SINGLE attack anyway.
Of course, like I said earlier, if you have an ability to render the enemy flat-footed, then you can still get your SA damage on any attack that catches them flat-footed. You just can't do it naturally from stealth.
FFs....this again?
Thank you for the clarification. The Rogue in my game finally started to use flanking in combat and started outputting some amazing damage, much higher then the group average. So I just wanted to make sure we were doing it correctly.
I searched the boards but wasn't able to locate anything about this specifically. It was always a question about stealth or invis and TWF was kind of thrown into the discussion but never answered directly. So I wanted to present the question directly without any other circumstances.
Yep, a TWF rogue can be a sight to behold if they can get their full-attack off and they hit. The rogue is an interesting class because they're built around the idea of big damage when they hit, but they don't really get much in the ways to increase their ability to hit. Due to them being a 3/4ths BAB class, at mid to higher levels they'll need to rely on that flanking bonus to be able to hit often enough (doubly so if they're TWFing), but when it works, it works beautifully.
If the damage concerns are getting to you, a suggestion would be to have more mobile enemies. This makes it harder to set up flanks, and the rogue can't get a full-attack that way either. Plus, it just makes combat more interesting due to all the movement :) Another suggestion would be to have the enemies make note of the guy who is shredding their allies apart. Creatures tend not to take too kindly too that, so maybe they'll focus fire on the rogue to take out the "most important" enemy first. With the rogue's light armor and d8 hit die (and probably only blah Constitution), they can't withstand a ton of focus, so they'll be more mobile to get away from the full attacks of the enemies.
Cheers!
>.>
That just ain't right.
Oh, but it is.
Sneak attack by a raging power attacking werewolf barbarian with a greataxe. These things happen, best not to question it.
I sneak attack with a ballista!
Well, you certainly wouldn't see that coming now would you?
Every attack, even your iteratives. Why would you think otherwise if I can ask?
If I had to guess, because of some residual 3.5 D&D rules about how sneak attacks just apply to the first attack, as the opponent is no longer vulnerable to it after one hit.
Basically, if the opponent is vulnerable to sneak attacks for each strike, it takes extra damage.
I agree with everything except SA while raging, your can not get precise damage attacks like SA while raging.
What? Says who?
Nevermind the necro of a long dead thread... please support your argument, as I have never heard of anything like this before.
By RAW, Sneak Attack requires neither patience or concentration... nor is it a Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride)...
I've heard all this before. People equate "rage" to "mindlessness/recklessness" and "precision" to something that requires patience and/or concentration.
I can see where they're coming from, but I don't think flavor rulings should make characters less potent than the rules allow, and it's not like a raging sneak attack is broken or anything.
Back in 3rd, I had an NPC Barbarian Blackguard who spurred his mount into combat, into a flanking position, while entering a rage. Raging-spirited-sneak attack charge.
I agree with everything except SA while raging, your can not get precise damage attacks like SA while raging.What? Says who?
Nevermind the necro of a long dead thread... please support your argument, as I have never heard of anything like this before.
By RAW, Sneak Attack requires neither patience or concentration... nor is it a Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride)...
Best kind of thread necro, to make a claim that is at odds with the rules. eg VoodistMonk is correct, nothing in the rules precludes raging and sneak attacks.
Just to remove any uncertainty, the Two-Fanged Pounce Rage Power contains an explicit mention of dealing precision damage while in Rage, making PipinGold's statement objectively false.
I also love how nothing in the Rogue description that describes Sneak Attack as involving precision, and the Rogue is only required to be able to "pick out a vital spot". Apparently people think that Rage makes the user so brain-damaged that hitting someone on the head is too complicated.
Because Barbarian brain not muscle, is small because can't flex brain.