Wait. Now we're saying sneak attack isn't sneak attack and multiplies on a crit?
Oh come on, do read it carefully, I even used capitalization to make it stand out as different: Surprise Spells is not a form of Sneak Attack.
You can use Surprise Spells for example on things like Fireball, that don't even require an attack roll and therefore can't crit at all.
You can also use Surprise Spells on Scorching Ray, and in the case of a crit, the damage doubles.
In fact, you can even use Surprise Spells for a Sneak Attack Surprise Spells-Scorching Ray, having your sneak attack dice come in twice: once as ordinary spell damage (which doubles on a crit) and once as precision spell damage (which doesn't double on a crit).
Edit: sword-saged by Skrayper.
Wait. Now we're saying sneak attack isn't sneak attack and multiplies on a crit?
Lol.
Black is white, up is down, short is long
This is what happens when you (people in general) try to justify an ability working to a logical extreme. Each allowance you give to allow the ability to logically work the way you want it creates cracks and faults of logic in already established rule systems. This is why I take the strictest reading of an ability.
The spell deals no damage. Sneak attack cannot apply. What damage the spell could do (maintaining that sneak attack still does not apply because the spell does not actually do any damage) is halved and then converted to healing. This reading resolves the issue neatly and without mechanical hangups. It only leaves a disappointed player who finds out that the neat trick they thought they stumbled upon doesn't work. I empathize but feelings do not change my mind.
As far as the Arcane Trickster's capstone ability goes, there is some room for argument since their sneak attack can apply to non-damaging spells. The cleanest way of resolving the issue is simply to stand your ground and hold that spells that heal damage (whether inflict to heal undead or cure to heal living) cannot have sneak attack damage applied to the healing. Sneak attack is intended to allow a character to deal MORE damage through attacking vulnerable areas with precise strikes.
I do get what you're saying Theaitetos, and that SnA is only added dice to a spell that deals damage, and that a fire spell deals damage, therefore with the Phoenix bloodline all of this damage is then converted to 1/2 dmg as a heal. I get it. But this is extreme finagling of the intent of both the Phoenix bloodline arcana (which is to cause no damage but instead heal 1/2 the regular damage it would cause) and the Arcane Trickster's abilities that an Arcane Trickster can cause SnA damage with damage-causing spells.
There's no way that this was intended. If it was intended, they would've spent at least one ounce of thought/action into providing an FAQ/Errata saying that it was indeed intended.
Throw this on the small mountain of examples of bad writing if you want, but what you're suggesting is frankly absurd.
It would need to say somewhere in the Arcane Trickster rules something to the effect that Spells cast with the Healing Subdiscipline by an Arcane Trickster can add their SnA dice to the heal. And there isn't anything in the AT rules that alludes to anything even close.
A Scorching Ray cast from an AT10 with 3 rays x4d6 dmg + 7d6 SnA and scores a critical on the ranged touch doesn't deal 38d6 points of dmg. It's 24d6 + 7d6 SnA.
I think this is exceptional words-lawyering and an even more massive leap in logic.
There's no way that this was intended. If it was intended, they would've spent at least one ounce of thought/action into providing an FAQ/Errata saying that it was indeed intended.I dunno. I see way, way too many topics, most of them old, that have over 50 faq requests, that never got addressed. Considering that that is actually a lot for a (relatively speaking) random internet forum, they don’t actually address things as often as you think.
Yeah, I know they don't FAQ as often as they should, and to be fair, PF1 is now an afterthought to PF2 and getting any FAQ's today would be the same chance as getting struck by lightning.
But you have AT specific rules that say SnA applies to only damage spells. You have Phoenix bloodline arcana specific rules that say fire spells can cause no damage, but instead heal for 1/2. No specific rule exists anywhere in SnA rules allowing cure/inflict spells to apply SnA dice when healing, but DO allow SnA for cure/inflict while harming. No specific rule in AT allows healing spells to apply SnA dice (in fact, we have a rule stating the exact opposite). We have no specific rule nor FAQ/Errata confirming the intention of Phoenix Bloodline Arcana as to interact with AT10 Surprise Spells to provide SnA dice while casting a spell that heals.
So in order to make this work, it takes an excessive amount of word-lawyering and technicalities. Remember this game wasn't written by lawyers for lawyers, but by humans for humans.
A Scorching Ray cast from an AT10 with 3 rays x4d6 dmg + 7d6 SnA and scores a critical on the ranged touch doesn't deal 38d6 points of dmg. It's 24d6 + 7d6 SnA.
Every ray is considered its own attack, so you're talking about 3 crits here, not just one; the chance to hit 3 times in a row with a crit is 1:8000 - that's close to a Vegeta meme likelihood. (1:1000 chance with Weapon Focus: Ray).
And that is a single target spell - by no means huge damage at that level.
A Scorching Ray cast from an AT10 with 3 rays x4d6 dmg + 7d6 SnA and scores a critical on the ranged touch doesn't deal 38d6 points of dmg. It's 24d6 + 7d6 SnA.Every ray is considered its own attack, so you're talking about 3 crits here, not just one; the chance to hit 3 times in a row with a crit is 1:8000 - that's close to a Vegeta meme likelihood. (1:1000 chance with Weapon Focus: Ray).
And that is a single target spell - by no means huge damage at that level.
I know, let's say that you have 3 rays that each deal 4d6 dmg, and you're an AT10 with 7d6 SnA.
Which example do we use in the event of a Scorching Ray with 3 criticals?
Example1:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 SnA
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6
Example2:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 SnA
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6
Example3:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 SnA
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 SnA
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 SnA
Example4:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 SnA
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 SnA
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 SnA
Example5:
Ray1: Nat 20, 15d6
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6
Example6:
Ray1: Nat 20, 22d6
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6
Exampl7:
Ray1: Nat 20, 15d6
Ray2: Nat 20, 15d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 15d6
Example8:
Ray1: Nat 20, 22d6
Ray2: Nat 20, 22d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 22d6
Which example do we use in the event of a Scorching Ray with 3 criticals?
Where's the difference between the additions and the sums, e.g. example 4 & 8?
Unless the answer is something unexpected, I'd say it's example 8.
Example 8 is {(4d6 + 7d6)x2} x3 rays. What rule(s) are you basing this off of?
A Scorching Ray cast from an AT10 with 3 rays x4d6 dmg + 7d6 SnA and scores a critical on the ranged touch doesn't deal 38d6 points of dmg. It's 24d6 + 7d6 SnA.Every ray is considered its own attack, so you're talking about 3 crits here, not just one; the chance to hit 3 times in a row with a crit is 1:8000 - that's close to a Vegeta meme likelihood. (1:1000 chance with Weapon Focus: Ray).
And that is a single target spell - by no means huge damage at that level.
I know, let's say that you have 3 rays that each deal 4d6 dmg, and you're an AT10 with 7d6 SnA.
Which example do we use in the event of a Scorching Ray with 3 criticals?
Example1:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 critical
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6Example2:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 critical
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6Example3:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 critical
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 critical
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6 + 7d6 criticalExample4:
Ray1: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 critical
Ray2: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 critical
Ray3: Nat 20, 8d6 + 14d6 criticalUnder normal circumstances, Example 1.
Under surprise spell? Either #1 or #2, based on this FAQ:
In the case of magic missile, the extra damage is only added once to one missile, chosen by the caster when the spell is cast.So probably #1, based on the board's reasoning behind the logic of Surprise Spell, meaning it's basically worthless for spells that can already have attack rolls (with the exception of potential crit chance). Surprise Spell is definitely meant to extend the ability to do sneak attack with AoE and spells that don't require attack rolls, like Magic Missile (but only one missile).
Yes, per the rules, example #1 is correct. The SnA damage is calculated separately, and only once, and is not multiplied on a critical.
Example 8 is {(4d6 + 7d6)x2} x3 rays. What rule(s) are you basing this off of?
Yeah, but what is the difference to Example 4? It's the same amount of damage, just written down differently? 22 = 8 + 14.
You say it's 3 critical hits with a Surprise Spells Scorching Ray. I don't see why the rays would deal different amounts of damage then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Example 8 is {(4d6 + 7d6)x2} x3 rays. What rule(s) are you basing this off of?Yeah, but what is the difference to Example 4? It's the same amount of damage, just written down differently? 22 = 8 + 14.
You say it's 3 critical hits with a Surprise Spells Scorching Ray. I don't see why the rays would deal different amounts of damage then.
It does make a difference though as to how the damage is calculated. The SnA damage is considered precision damage, and is calculated separately, and added AFTER the standard damage from the spell is multiplied.
It does make a difference though as to how the damage is calculated. The SnA damage is considered precision damage, and is calculated separately, and added AFTER the standard damage from the spell is multiplied.
OK, then I go with example 8 for the Rogue and example 3 for the Unchained Rogue. :D
Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied.
This additional damage is precision damage and is not multiplied on a critical hit.
The rogue rules say that the extra damage isn't multiplied when scoring a critical hit with a Sneak Attack, but Surprise Spells is not a Sneak Attack...
The unchained rogue rules say that the extra damage is precision damage, that is never multiplied on a critical hit, regardless whether it was a Sneak Attack or not.I still maintain that you can do actual Sneak Attacks with Surprise Spells though.
Since the Unchained Rogue is the latest iteration of the rules, I'd say example 3. But I haven't looked at all the FAQ on precision damage.
Edit: Yes, I changed my opinion. Surprise Spells says it adds the sneak attack damage, not the sneak attack dice (my bad for misreading, sorry). So I don't think the sneak attack damage is multiplied on a crit due to it still being precision damage, even when used with Surprise Spells. The Unchained Rogue rules say as much, the Rogue rules do not.
|
Sneak Attack FAQ wrote:
Sneak Attack: Can I add sneak attack damage to simultaneous attacks from a spell?
No. For example, scorching ray fires simultaneous rays at one or more targets, and the extra damage is only added once to one ray, chosen by the caster when the spell is cast.
Spell-based attacks which are not simultaneous, such as multiple attacks per round by a 8th-level druid using flame blade, may apply sneak attack damage to each attack so long as each attack qualifies for sneak attack (the target is denied its Dex bonus or the caster is flanking the target).
Sneak Attack FAQ wrote:
Sneak Attack: Can I add sneak attack damage to simultaneous attacks from a spell?
That FAQ covers Sneak Attacks, but we're talking about Surprise Spells. That's something different entirely.
|
|
Well, honestly I'm content with letting surprise spells adding sneak attack to a spell that wouldn't usually get it. Not jumping threw mental gymnastics to make it do zany heals.
To me it is sneak attack for whatever intents and purposes, and that's probably the intended reading. I don't think it's meant to add to heals or do extra damage against things immune to sneak attack
I'm just gonna say it's never gonna run that other way in one of my games and agree to disagree on this one.
@Theaitetos
I think we can just chalk this up to bad writing, or at least lack of an adequately-clarifying FAQ or Errata.
But how it's supposed to work is that an AT1-9 is already allowed to SnA with any Ranged or Melee Touch attack spell, provided that the spell 1) has an attack roll, and 2) that attack qualifies for SnA (invis, FF'ed target, etc.). The intent of Surprise Spells is to allow SnA to affect spells that don't have attack rolls.
I think your argument would have merit if precision healing rules existed, or if Cure/Inflict spells could use SnA while being used to heal, or if there was any specific rule in AT or Phoenix bloodline that allowed for SnA or precision-based healing.
The intent of Surprise Spells is to allow SnA to affect spells that don't have attack rolls.
That is quite likely, yes. I wish RPG rule designers (and lawmakers) would use wikis to write their rules, so there were no repetitive text, but immediate cross-referencing, identical phrasing, and no ambiguity on what applies where.
On another tangent:
Does Orc blooded add +1 to every die applied from a spell, or only from the initial spell?
Expect much table variation, but for my table... the extra damage applies only the damage dice that come from the spell, not the precision damage that rides along with it.
Also, I will presume that the wording "whenever you cast a spell that deals damage" would preclude it from benefiting the Phoenix's healing ability.
Correct. Your spells would only be more powerful with the Orc bloodline when they deal damage, not when they heal. As much as I want to have a knee-jerk reaction to this and say the opposite, "The spell deals NO damage" cannot be ignored.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow this exploded overnight.
Ok I finally get where Theaitetos and the others are coming from. I'm back to thinking it doesn't work again.
Surprise spells adds sneak attack damage to a spell. Saying "it's the damage, not actual sneak attack" is reeeaaally trying hard to misread the rules. Paizo has said many times that they don't write in legalese, they write in common english.
Sneak Attack = Sneak Attack.
Surlrise Spells lets you add it when not flanking or when the target isn't denied it's DEX bonus (and might let you ignore the 30 foot max distance rule, I'll check at lunch), but it doesn't change the dice from sneak attack dice to something else.