PDA

View Full Version : Combating Sneak Attack [3.5]



Jacque
2010-03-23, 02:58 AM
Hello everyone,

First time poster, long time reader.

I'm running a scenario where my players have been allowed to create a level 16 character. One of my players have made a rogue/avenger who uses sneak attack, the Splitting weapon enhancement and a wand of improved invisibility. He does also have the improved precise shot feat.

Other than fortification on armor, is there any way to counter his sneak attack? Or is invisibility purge/dispel magic/antimagic field the only way?

It's not my intention to blatantly disable his character concept, but as it is now, he's gonna stride through most of the encounters dealing loads of damage without self being in any serious danger.

2xMachina
2010-03-23, 03:13 AM
Use stuff with Scent, See Invisible, True Seeing, Blind Sense, Blind Sight, good Listen scores.

Rixx
2010-03-23, 03:17 AM
Waist-high water.

Thespianus
2010-03-23, 03:25 AM
Oozes, Plants, Undead, Constructs?

Emmerask
2010-03-23, 03:33 AM
Hello everyone,

First time poster, long time reader.

I'm running a scenario where my players have been allowed to create a level 16 character. One of my players have made a rogue/avenger who uses sneak attack, the Splitting weapon enhancement and a wand of improved invisibility. He does also have the improved precise shot feat.

Other than fortification on armor, is there any way to counter his sneak attack? Or is invisibility purge/dispel magic/antimagic field the only way?

It's not my intention to blatantly disable his character concept, but as it is now, he's gonna stride through most of the encounters dealing loads of damage without self being in any serious danger.


Glitterdust, any high enough particle concentration in the air + enough light,
muddy underground or water + a high enough spot check (still attacks against total concealment), area attacks.

Curmudgeon
2010-03-23, 03:34 AM
See Invisibility and ranged attacks are good. Sneak attack is only within 30' by default.

Also burrowing enemies with tremorsense.

Keld Denar
2010-03-23, 03:40 AM
Warshaper1 gives you immunity to crits (and thus SA) as long as you aren't in your default form. Easy to fit in one level for any Changeling melee character.

Arcanes and Druids get access to the 4 Heart of X spells. All 4 Hearts together give you 100% fortification for HOURS per level, as long as you don't discharge any of them. Check out Complete Mage.

At higher levels, the Elemental Body spell gives you the exact same thing, along with some other nifty abilities. Its a 6th level spell in SpC.

Killer Angel
2010-03-23, 04:01 AM
It's very easy to screw a rogue with SA. A good half of the monsters are immune, for the others, you can even use feats as Blind Fight, spells, etc.

Don't do it often: it would be very unfair. I suggest, eventually, to use groups of enemies with different immunities, so the rogue (and the group) must learn to divide their attacks, to be effective.

Jacque
2010-03-23, 05:24 AM
I've been reading up on some of your suggestions, and I have a few additional questions.

First let me point out, that the character is a ranged attacker with a bow, so the Blind-Fighting feat is no help here. He also has Improved Precise Shot so he ignores most cover and concealment.

Some of you point out listen and spot checks, water and muddy underground and other ways to detect the presence of invisible creatures. The SRD states the following:

"Visually undetectable. An invisible creature gains a +2 bonus on attack rolls against sighted opponents, and ignores its opponents’ Dexterity bonuses to AC (if any). (See Invisibility, under Special Abilities.)"

Is 'knowing the presence of invisible creatures' via spot and listen checks enough to avoid getting sneak attacked?

Many of your other suggestions and advices are conserning defeating an invisible rogue. While this of course is important in order to challenge the player, I am to begin with most interested in finding out ways to avoid receiving the sneak attack damage.

We use all 3.5 books, so the suggested spells looks promising. I especially like See Invisibility and Glitterdust which seems like solid low level spells that every high level spellcaster would memorize.

2xMachina
2010-03-23, 05:51 AM
Hmm, I think they do keep the bonus. I think to negate invisibility, you need more than just knowing it's there.

Though, you can always just spot/listen + throw bag of flour.

Darrin
2010-03-23, 07:21 AM
If the target has any kind of concealment, then you can't sneak attack it. So fog, smoke, blur, blinking, displacement all should work.

Constructs, Elementals, Oozes, Plants, and Undead also have immunity to sneak attack. You can circumvent this somewhat with ACFs (Penetrating Strike), but Elementals, Oozes and Plants still have immunity to flanking, so you still need some way to counter their vision/senses/detection.

To counter the invisibility, faerie fire and glitterdust are the usual go-to's (but be careful with glitterdust, since while it does reveal an invisible creature's location, it does not by RAW reduce or negate the miss chance).

You might want to take a look at some of the planar templates (celestial, fiendish, pseudonatural, axiomatic, etc.) which may offer some of these counter-spells as SLAs.

Scent, blindsense, blindsight, tremorsense, and lifesense (Libris Mortis) can also help defeat invisibility. Dragonborn of Bahumat can provide blindsense, and there may be other templates that grant sense-related abilities.

Bags of flour (Dungeonscape has rules for this) work well as splash weapons, but only reduce the miss chance of invisible creatures to 20%.

Torch Bug Paste (Complete Scoundrel, 25GP) has a non-magical faerie fire splash effect that pinpoints invisible creatures and completely negates their miss chance.

2xMachina
2010-03-23, 08:26 AM
Does Blindsense work? You just know there are they. You don't really see it.

ericgrau
2010-03-23, 08:58 AM
Best non-contrived way to deal with greater invisibility is a good listen modifier. It's a DC 20 listen check to find his square whenever he attacks. Now the monsters can attack him as much as they want, although they still have a 50% miss chance. From there you can also add on see invisibility, glitterdust, flour bombs (tossed bags of flour, popular since 2e). Area spells work fine to damage without revealing. One quick tip on glitterdust and flour bombs though; they're almost useless if you don't also have see invisibility or listen or some other way to target them. One last misc. thing; the splitting enchantment creates a volley which means his sneak attack only applies to the first arrow, not all of them.

There's that plus invisibility is a very common high level tactic. Any smart opponents at this level should frequently have the above. Even monsters may commonly have blind fight and listen, though this is less common. Some may even have blindsight, blindsense or tremor sense. That and many monsters are immune to sneak attack.

Really, "rogue" and "dominate combat" don't belong in the same sentence. Either you need to be ignorant about invisibility counters or you need to play monsters dumb or you need to ignore their given special abilities and skills. I think if this is done at all reasonably that player will be disappointed and griping about how ineffective he is. Better throw some traps his way too, and whatever else his skills are good at. Use the standard DCs, even if they seem low or automatically passed, or else he'll be even more screwed the one time he rolls low and gets shish-kebobed.

Curmudgeon
2010-03-23, 08:59 AM
Does Blindsense work?
Nope; concealment still foils sneak attack.
Any opponent the creature cannot see has total concealment (50% miss chance) against the creature with blindsense, and the blindsensing creature still has the normal miss chance when attacking foes that have concealment.
A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach.

Amiel
2010-03-23, 09:07 AM
Deny him flanking opportunities; with objects, humanoids, the environment et al.

Liberally seed the area with caltrops and tanglefoot bags.

Spells to counter include (but are not limited to) antilife shell, gaseous form, transmute rock to mud, waves of fatigue, symbols.

2xMachina
2010-03-23, 09:13 AM
Nope; concealment still foils sneak attack.

No, I meant, can you foil his SA because you have Blindsense? I always thought that it only lets you know something is there, but not exactly where, and certainly not enough to prevent SA.

Darrin
2010-03-23, 10:15 AM
No, I meant, can you foil his SA because you have Blindsense? I always thought that it only lets you know something is there, but not exactly where, and certainly not enough to prevent SA.

Creatures with blindsense can pinpoint invisible targets, but the invisible target still gets its full 50% miss chance. If the creature doesn't have any other method to visually see the target, he still loses his Dex bonus to invisible attackers (and thus can be sneak attacked). Looks like you need full blindsight to keep your Dex bonus against invisible attackers.

Tremorsense and Scent don't specify how they treat invisible attackers, so that may be a DM call.

Ormagoden
2010-03-23, 10:34 AM
Locate, Dominate, "Stab your friends."

Locate, Dispel, "I see you!"


Should take care of that.

You could also get some bears...

ericgrau
2010-03-23, 10:44 AM
Blindsense is still ok, though not ideal... or a DC 20 listen check even. Even with a 50% miss chance rogues are pretty fragile. Even with their sneak attack damage rogues miss a lot.

If the blindsense guy is intelligent it also means he can then use something else to reveal the rogue.

Jacque
2010-03-23, 11:21 AM
One last misc. thing; the splitting enchantment creates a volley which means his sneak attack only applies to the first arrow, not all of them.


Can you direct me to this rule in the books? Potential double sneak attack on every single one of his attacks has especially worried me.

Curmudgeon
2010-03-23, 11:37 AM
No, I meant, can you foil his SA because you have Blindsense?
Oh, OK. Got it the other way around, but your "Does Blindsense work?" doesn't really indicate if you're talking about the person combating sneak attack, or the sneak attacker. Anyway, you're still denied your DEX bonus to AC, as Darrin pointed out, so no joy that way either.

Blindsense seems to be disappointing on both sides of this equation.

ericgrau
2010-03-23, 11:46 AM
Can you direct me to this rule in the books? Potential double sneak attack on every single one of his attacks has especially worried me.

It usually says so in each individual ability. Try checking the multishot enchantment. If not, I think it's in complete arcane or some such, I forget. It's a general rule for precision based damage.

Ernir
2010-03-23, 12:07 PM
It usually says so in each individual ability. Try checking the multishot enchantment. If not, I think it's in complete arcane or some such, I forget. It's a general rule for precision based damage.

Hmm. It does indeed say so in the Manyshot feat description, but I have never seen this as a general rule. It is even listed under "special" in the Manyshot description.

Was it a typo, or is there an enhancement called Multishot somewhere out there?


EDIT: General rule has been located, Rules Compendium page 42.
Apparently, precision damage only applies once when due abilities that enable multiple attacks in the same action are involved, with the specific exception of the full attack.
So make full attacks with your Splitting bow, and you're good? :smallconfused:

Curmudgeon
2010-03-23, 12:19 PM
One last misc. thing; the splitting enchantment creates a volley which means his sneak attack only applies to the first arrow, not all of them.

Can you direct me to this rule in the books? Potential double sneak attack on every single one of his attacks has especially worried me.
There are two places this exists, and they're both questionable.

First, let's cover the unquestionable volley rules. There's a specific limitation for precision damage with the Mayshot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#manyshot) feat, and Complete Arcane adds a specific limitation for weaponlike spells (see page 86). The Greater Manyshot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#greaterManyshot) feat (from Expanded Psionics Handbook), conversely, explicitly allows precision damage with each shot of a standard action volley.

The general "volley" limitation is something that was made up by Skip Williams, in an online article: Rules of the Game: All About Sneak Attacks (Part Four) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a). ("Rules of the Game" articles were about the rules, but not authoritative; several later official D&D books explicitly disavowed some things Skip wrote there.) However, Skip's volley rule was repeated (with an exception added for full attacks) in Rules Compendium on page 42.

The part that's questionable about Rules Compendium is this:
[Rules Compendium] updates and elucidates the rules, as well as expanding on them in ways that make it more fun and easier to play. When a preexisting core book or supplement differs with the rules herein, Rules Compendium is meant to take precedence. in conjunction with this:
Errata Rule: Primary Sources

When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. So Rules Compendium proclaims itself to the be the ultimate authority, yet every other D&D source says that the 3 core books always retain that distinction. The primary sneak attack rules (Player's Handbook) don't have a general volley limitation, and the rules supplement Complete Arcane adds such a limitation for weaponlike spells only. By the Primary Sources Rule you and your DM are free to ignore this change in the Rules Compendium with something that works like Greater Manyshot but doesn't have a specific precision damage exception. So the real answer is: talk to your DM. You're allowed to make full attacks with splitting getting sneak attack on each arrow. Why not the same with standard action attacks?

ericgrau
2010-03-23, 12:29 PM
If you don't trust Rules Compendium or examples from similar things, then you can try common sense combined with the rule that you must be able to strike precisely to sneak attack. You can't accurately aim both arrows when the 2nd one magically splits from the first. The 1st one might hit the heart, the 2nd might hit a rib.

That and the splitting enchantment is known to be crazy powerful. I just made an archer and despite the power-gaming things that the group does allow (which I did get so I could keep up), I didn't even dare ask permission on splitting. I skipped right over it. I mean it would have almost doubled my damage, as I am not playing a rogue.

Yakk
2010-03-23, 12:33 PM
So, you have a level 16 rogue. Who can kill a target within 30' of them after locating them and making enough hits on an attack roll.

How does this compare with a level 16 wizard? Let's even go pure-class wizard, never mind any PrCs.

Is there really a problem?

Jacque
2010-03-23, 12:39 PM
Thanks for all the help and clarification. This thread has been a much greater help than I could ever have expected - and it also seems like a few others learned a thing or two about sneak attack.

Again, thanks!

CheshireCatAW
2010-03-23, 12:40 PM
There are two places this exists, and they're both questionable.

First, let's cover the unquestionable volley rules. There's a specific limitation for precision damage with the Mayshot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#manyshot) feat, and Complete Arcane adds a specific limitation for weaponlike spells (see page 86). The Greater Manyshot (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/psionicFeats.htm#greaterManyshot) feat (from Expanded Psionics Handbook), conversely, explicitly allows precision damage with each shot of a standard action volley.

The general "volley" limitation is something that was made up by Skip Williams, in an online article: Rules of the Game: All About Sneak Attacks (Part Four) (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a). ("Rules of the Game" articles were about the rules, but not authoritative; several later official D&D books explicitly disavowed some things Skip wrote there.) However, Skip's volley rule was repeated (with an exception added for full attacks) in Rules Compendium on page 42.

The part that's questionable about Rules Compendium is this: in conjunction with this: So Rules Compendium proclaims itself to the be the ultimate authority, yet every other D&D source says that the 3 core books always retain that distinction. The primary sneak attack rules (Player's Handbook) don't have a general volley limitation, and the rules supplement Complete Arcane adds such a limitation for weaponlike spells only. By the Primary Sources Rule you and your DM are free to ignore this change in the Rules Compendium with something that works like Greater Manyshot but doesn't have a specific precision damage exception. So the real answer is: talk to your DM. You're allowed to make full attacks with splitting getting sneak attack on each arrow. Why not the same with standard action attacks?

Wouldn't this be a case where specific trumps general? Rules Compendium in this case trumping the general primary sources rules?

Curmudgeon
2010-03-23, 12:41 PM
If you don't trust Rules Compendium or examples from similar things, then you can try common sense combined with the rule that you must be able to strike precisely to sneak attack.
The thing is, Greater Manyshot allows up to 4 sneak attacks on a standard action. Rules Compendium allows as many sneak attacks as you can get: (4 + 1 from Haste) x2 from splitting -- as long as it's on a full attack. So it's not a matter of striking precisely, but rather a weird corner case that Rules Compendium adds: non-full attacks that don't use Greater Manyshot are the only ones that can't get sneak attack on all splitting arrows.

This just strikes me as bizarre. Precision damage is allowed when it will apply the most: 10 applications of sneak attack because you used a full attack + splitting + Haste, 8 sneak attacks with Greater Manyshot + splitting, but RC adds a rule that forbids that second sneak attack when you use a splitting bow for a standard action attack.

ericgrau
2010-03-23, 12:41 PM
Greater manyshot specifically explains that it allows precision multiple times. That's the point of the feat. It even allowing you to attack different targets and makes you roll a different attack roll for each. What does the text on splitting say?


So, you have a level 16 rogue. Who can kill a target within 30' of them after locating them and making enough hits on an attack roll.

How does this compare with a level 16 wizard? Let's even go pure-class wizard, never mind any PrCs.

Is there really a problem?
Ah, that old fallacy.
1. It doesn't make the ability less broken. If anything that means it should be a rogue class feature, not X ability from Y book.
2. Breaking the game more just because something else does it doesn't help.
3. Most groups don't try to break the game, even when they play casters, and the game turns out just fine. They fail their SR check, the monsters saves, etc.

Curmudgeon
2010-03-23, 12:49 PM
Wouldn't this be a case where specific trumps general? Rules Compendium in this case trumping the general primary sources rules?
That's the rule for supplements, which Rules Compendium specifically says it is not. By claiming they're a definitive rules guide, yet with every other official WotC book and errata file saying that can't be the case, RC is left in a sort of rules limbo.

Mauther
2010-03-23, 12:56 PM
At level 16, a wand of greater invis shouldn't be a large tactical advantage. The dispel check should be easy enough that most arcane opponents nix it right away. Heck, a level 15 cleric can have Invis Purge radiating at 75'. Sneak attack that. Feel silly, widen it as 6th level spell and you've got 150' radius. Ranger, come out and play. Also Greater Iron Guard will let those pesky arrows pass right thru with out harm.

I wouldn't work too hard to negate the sneak attack, its a core ability. There's enough natural immunities out there that I wouldn't begrudge the opportunity. But I'd smack the PC around for being dependent on a 3rd level spell at that level, so nerfing the Invis itself would be OK.

LichPrinceAlim
2010-03-23, 01:10 PM
From my repitoire of knowledge, I have a few tips for this "Invisible Autoturret"

1. Rune of Dispelling Field is a nasty surprise for anyone using stealth tricks such as Blink and the like

2. Make the room filled with a nondamaging smoke, but it would bend around him, thus making him visible

3. Better than that, fill the room with hanging tapastries (see Hero with Jet Li), then have a humanoid with blindsense with a length of rope, then simply sneak attack the sneak attacker and keep him detained

4. If all else fails, an Undead Beholder wins against basically anything

Jacque
2010-03-23, 01:30 PM
What does the text on splitting say?


Any arrow or bolt fired from a splitting weapon magically splits into two missiles in mid-flight. Both missiles are identical, sharing the nonsplitting propertiesof the original missle; for example, a +1 splitting arrow splits into two +1 arrows in mid-flight. Both missiles attack the same target. Make a seperate attack roll for each missile using the same attack bonus.


I fully realise that designing an encounter around a rogue, with improved invisibility from a wand and his avenger spell list, with the purpose of disabling him is not a difficult task. Sadly, or fortunately, the scenario isn't appropriate for oozes, undeads, constructs, plants or elementals, but is pretty much down to earth humanoids versus humanoids.

In this specific example, the group is infiltrating an enemy military encampment to kill the enemy commander. He's just an aristocrat/fighter who has bought his position through his noble heritage. There's also a duskblade/Calastian Battle-Mage who is his advisor, but other than that doesn't possess a powerful spell list (other than blur which I intend to use). So many of the suggested ways to disable the rogue aren't really viable, as most of them requires too exotic means compared to the low-fantasy setting which this scenario is placed in.

But I am grateful for the spot/listen hints, the clarification on displacement vs. sneak attack and the rules about volleys and sneak attack. I also intend to place a few Greater Glyphs with Greater Dispel Magic which are all-around rather effective spells without completely erradicating the PCs but enough to be a serious harrasment.

Quietus
2010-03-23, 01:33 PM
In this specific example, the group is infiltrating an enemy military encampment to kill the enemy commander. He's just an aristocrat/fighter who has bought his position through his noble heritage. There's also a duskblade/Calastian Battle-Mage who is his advisor, but other than that doesn't possess a powerful spell list (other than blur which I intend to use). So many of the suggested ways to disable the rogue aren't really viable, as most of them requires too exotic means compared to the low-fantasy setting which this scenario is placed in.

And there goes the sneak attack. Blur gives concealment; A creature with concealment cannot be sneak attacked due to it being difficult to pinpoint exactly where to aim.

Telonius
2010-03-23, 01:37 PM
Hello everyone,

First time poster, long time reader.

I'm running a scenario where my players have been allowed to create a level 16 character. One of my players have made a rogue/avenger who uses sneak attack, the Splitting weapon enhancement and a wand of improved invisibility. He does also have the improved precise shot feat.

Other than fortification on armor, is there any way to counter his sneak attack? Or is invisibility purge/dispel magic/antimagic field the only way?

It's not my intention to blatantly disable his character concept, but as it is now, he's gonna stride through most of the encounters dealing loads of damage without self being in any serious danger.

Give the opponent two levels of Barbarian, or four levels of Rogue. Uncanny Dodge negates sneak attack due to invisibility, since the character retains dex to AC. Note that the regular Uncanny Dodge ability isn't limited by the attacker's Rogue levels, the way Improved Uncanny Dodge is.

Greenish
2010-03-23, 02:20 PM
And there goes the sneak attack. Blur gives concealment; A creature with concealment cannot be sneak attacked due to it being difficult to pinpoint exactly where to aim.Except if you happen to have, say, a feat that allows you to ignore all but total concealment. :smallamused:

Optimator
2010-03-23, 02:34 PM
Uncanny dodge.

Yakk
2010-03-23, 02:40 PM
Except if you happen to have, say, a feat that allows you to ignore all but total concealment. :smallamused:

A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment"

Your ranged attacks ignore the AC bonus granted to targets by anything less than total cover, and the miss chance granted to targets by anything less than total concealment.
See? Concealment still exists, but you ignore the miss chance. And while concealment exists, sneak attack doesn't work.

Of course, this is merely RAW.

Mauther
2010-03-23, 02:54 PM
In this specific example, the group is infiltrating an enemy military encampment to kill the enemy commander. He's just an aristocrat/fighter who has bought his position through his noble heritage. There's also a duskblade/Calastian Battle-Mage who is his advisor, but other than that doesn't possess a powerful spell list (other than blur which I intend to use). So many of the suggested ways to disable the rogue aren't really viable, as most of them requires too exotic means compared to the low-fantasy setting which this scenario is placed in.

This specific encounter may be one the Rogue gets to excel at. Nothing wrong with that. If the boss hasn't set proper protection, there's no reason a high level rogue wouldn't gut him like a fish. This kind of head hunter operation is sort of the rogue's bread and butter. Just keep some of the suggestions in your back pocket for later encounters.

thubby
2010-03-23, 03:01 PM
put sand on the ground. it won't stop the sneak attacks but will make the rogue easier to find.
tower shields can provide total cover.
put those together and you have soldiers who can close to melee with relative ease.

krossbow
2010-03-23, 03:10 PM
A lich Riding an Epic Golem with True seeing, and an army of oozes.

Gorilla2038
2010-03-23, 03:30 PM
Ill go with a simpler one than every one else: high AC enemies. After all, as a 3/4 class he should have a hard time hitting the tank-types.