Matthew Downie wrote: Basic common sense would suggest that someone hacking their way out of your stomach/neck would cause you severe harm. That's because we don't have the swallow whole special ability though. I was working under the assumption that the special ability comes with its own unique rules. Though you could still consider it damage to the creature, it would just be its own separate pool of hitpoints, not included in the creature's standard hit points listing.
But I did find a FAQ from the old dnd 3.5 about this subject.
Quote: Can a rogue who has been swallowed whole by a monster use sneak attack against it? And does this damage apply to the monster’s normal hit points?
Yes and yes, though that first yes has a qualification attached. Since a creature that has used swallow whole to gulp down a foe is effectively denied its Dexterity bonus to AC, it’s potentially vulnerable to a sneak attack. (Intuitively speaking, this makes pretty good sense. It’s hard to imagine a better place to attack a monster’s vulnerable parts than from inside the monster itself.)
However, keep in mind that the inside of a stomach is almost certainly pitch-black, and therefore the critter has total concealment against attacks. The rules indicate that a rogue can’t use sneak attack against a creature with concealment, so unless she’s packing a light source in there she’s probably out of luck vis-à-vis sneak attack. (The Sage imagines that most DMs ignore the 50% miss chance in such situations, which seems like a reasonable house rule.)
Damage done to a creature to cut your way out is applied to its hit points as normal.
Now of course, those FAQs aren't exactly a deciding factor for Pathfinder, as they have diverged in the past, but they're probably the closest you will get to an official answer.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
blahpers wrote: Matthew Downie wrote: Sneak Attack wrote: 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. I've never liked rules like that. Is the GM really supposed to adjudicate which bits of every creature are vital spots and whether the halfling rogue can currently reach them? Yes. +1. Yes, the GM is the one who adjudicates such situations.
A GM adjudicates situations that crop up that require rules interpretation. For instance, if you are firing straight down at a target and they go prone, a GM can fairly rule (emphasis on fairly, not arbitrarily), that despite the rules granting a +4 to AC against ranged attacks while prone, that the target you are attacking is not actually at a lower profile and negate or reduce the AC bonus. Similarly, if a creature is reaching its fingers under a door, trying to grab a dropped key or pull a rug out from under your feet, they can rule you are able to attack (even cut off) those fingers, even though you technically can't actually hit or have line of effect to the target itself, and can fairly say that the creature's vital spots are not in any danger because they can't be picked out or struck (whether or not the creature or its vitals would otherwise be in reach if the door wasn't between you). This is all specified in the wording on making a Sneak Attack.
I agree with those as examples of miniature house-rules the GM can choose to apply if they're confident it's a good idea to make the game more complicated by coming up with rules for cutting off fingers, etc.
But I still don't like official rules telling the GM to apply detailed realism to situations such as a gnome sneak-attacking an aboleth. Which parts of the aboleth can the gnome reach? Which bits of the aboleth are vitals? I don't even have the medical knowledge to judge which bits of a human are vitals...
I think a good rule of thumb is that the vitals include anything on the head or body, but not the limbs unless specified otherwise.
Now of course there are things like a femoral artery, so even the limbs could be considered a vital spot, but if the whole body is supposed to be a vital spot, then the text about being able to reach it seems meaningless. So as a rules abstraction, I think being able to reach a non-limb body part should be sufficient for most creatures.
F!+$ yeah. It's the sneakiest of all attacks possible. The dumb s~%& that swallowed the rogue is probably too dumb to know if the guy has a knife on him or not.
Melkiador wrote: So as a rules abstraction, I think being able to reach a non-limb body part should be sufficient for most creatures. So how many GMs would allow a human rogue with a dagger to get sneak damage against a cloud giant? A cloud giant is about 18 feet tall. You might just about be able to reach up and stab their groin, I guess?
(The situation is similar with a halfling rogue and a hill giant, but I find it easier to imagine the capabilities of a human...)
I don't think you can precisely hit a creature's stomach. You're drowning in liquid, and it's dark in there. There should be rules for suffocating, not just taking acid damage (which shouldn't be that high, to be honest).
Having said that, I feel like you should be getting free critical hits on any attack that you could realistically make (such as with a one-handed piercing weapon that you were wielding when swallowed). Furthermore AC should be much lower. Few creatures have any kind of armoring for their stomach, at least nothing as thick as their skin.
Melkiador wrote: So as a rules abstraction, I think being able to reach a non-limb body part should be sufficient for most creatures. That's what having the squares (body) of the creature be within your reach, and not just having their threatened area (limbs) within your reach represents.
Matthew Downie wrote: So how many GMs would allow a human rogue with a dagger to get sneak damage against a cloud giant? A cloud giant is about 18 feet tall. You might just about be able to reach up and stab their groin, I guess?
(The situation is similar with a halfling rogue and a hill giant, but I find it easier to imagine the capabilities of a human...)
I mean, as long as the rogue is flanking or the creature is denied dex (and isn't immune to precision/sneak), I'd allow it.
Matthew Downie wrote: So how many GMs would allow a human rogue with a dagger to get sneak damage against a cloud giant? A cloud giant is about 18 feet tall. You might just about be able to reach up and stab their groin, I guess? There is something much lower.
Cevah wrote: Scott Wilhelm wrote: Cevah wrote: I am just saying that the rules don't tell you where the vitals are. That's pretty funny: prior to inflicting Sneak Attack Damage, the Rogue must make the appropriate Knowledge check at a DC of 10 + the Monster's CR. The Rogue gets a +4 Circumstance Bonus if she is the same Type as her victim (Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoid, Abberation etc.). The Rogue can substitute a Healing or Profession, Assassin Check for the appropriate Knowledge check at a DC of +5! I have not heard about this rule. Can you cite? I can cite it. That came from me. I made that up. It was a joke.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
