Invisibilty and Full-Attack Action

[MesiDoomstalker]

So my poor little rogue is under the effect of Mr. Wizard's Invisibilty spell. My rogue decides to sneak up to an enemy, and unleash a full attack the following round. Now, since my little rogue is attacking, the Invisibility is broken. The first attack catches my enemy flat-footed. What about others? Off-hand, later iteative, secondary natural attacks? Are they hitting flat-footed or has the enemy had time to recover and be able to reliably dodge attacks?

[RagnaroksChosen]

They are regular attacks no sneak attack unless something else is granting it(like flanking).

[Anxe]

The spell says immediately, so by RAW the secondary attacks are normal attacks. The enemy would have his Dex to AC. However, I think that'd be an acceptable house rule to change. You could consider the situation to cause the enemy to be flat-footed or something like that.

[MesiDoomstalker]

The spell says immediately, so by RAW the secondary attacks are normal attacks. The enemy would have his Dex to AC. However, I think that'd be an acceptable house rule to change. You could consider the situation to cause the enemy to be flat-footed or something like that.

This is my thinking. Sure after the first hit your visible, but the opponent still has to recover from both the sudden appearence of an enemy (you) and from your sneak attack. Maybe an opposed Dex check to keep it from being overly abused and each attack after the first gives a culmative +1 to the defender.

Example: Mr. 10th TWF Rouge with Haste and invisiblity on him. Thats 6 attacks. So it would look like this FF/Dex check/Dex check +1/Dex check +2/Dex check +3/Dex check +4

Does that sound reasonable?

[King Atticus]

My group plays that if you're a TWF your first attack and your first off-hand are considered happening at the same time. So we would rule you get it SA on both of your first attacks but not on the rest of the attacks.

But that's just a house rule we play by.

[KillianHawkeye]

This is my thinking. Sure after the first hit your visible, but the opponent still has to recover from both the sudden appearence of an enemy (you) and from your sneak attack. Maybe an opposed Dex check to keep it from being overly abused and each attack after the first gives a culmative +1 to the defender.

Example: Mr. 10th TWF Rouge with Haste and invisiblity on him. Thats 6 attacks. So it would look like this FF/Dex check/Dex check +1/Dex check +2/Dex check +3/Dex check +4

Does that sound reasonable?

That is too much rolling. The rules are clear that any attack you make after becoming visible again doesn't benefit from the effects of invisibility.

[MesiDoomstalker]

That is too much rolling. The rules are clear that any attack you make after becoming visible again doesn't benefit from the effects of invisibility.

I'm not challenging the rules. I'm suggesting a houserule and asking whether is sounds reasonable. But it is too much rolling. Then a opposed Dex check with the defender getting a bonus based on the number of attacks in question.

[Fax Celestis]

Why not use an initiative check instead of a dexterity check? It is, after all, supposed to represent your reaction ability.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Why not use an initiative check instead of a dexterity check? It is, after all, supposed to represent your reaction ability.

That would make sense. Give another really good reason for a Rogue (and Assassains especially) to take Improved Iniative.

[Hague]

Presumably, had the encounter not started or the presence of the rogue was completely unknown then the rogue should get total surprise in that round and all enemies that were unaware of the rogue's presence would be flat-footed. However, had the rogue been spotted prior to the invisibility being cast then the enemies are aware of an invisible rogue's presence and would not be flat-footed but still lose their dex bonus on the first attack

A way to simulate this would be to take the rogue's initial initiative check and apply it against the initiative of the targets if they had no reason to suspect the rogue of being there. If the rogue wins against a target, that target is flat-footed with regards to the rogue. If the enemy wins initiative, they cannot target the rogue on their turn but they will still lose their dexterity bonus on the first attack. The result is the same if the target were aware of the presence of an invisible enemy. They are not flat-footed as they have reason to suspect an attack and would not be denied the ability to make attack rolls against he invisible rogue. (even if they are in the wrong space)

[Zagaroth]

If they have still not acted in a combat round though, they are still flat footed. It'd essentially be more like a surprise round, you get a standard action for free (they just became aware of you.. make it count!) and then initiative. If you win initiative, you still have them flat footed.

[DodgerH2O]

I personally would change it depending on how you view the abstraction of combat. I see each "attack" action as an exchange of feints, parries, and blows, and so only the first should count (Roll 17, your blade slides down the club and takes a chunk out of the goblin's shoulder before you dance out of reach). Most people don't even think too hard about it and if that's the case (Roll 17, you hit for x damage) then I'd say bring in the optional rules here to prevent it from too much abuse.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Isn't the loss of Dex to AC the definition of Flat-Footed (with the exception of Uncanny Dodge)?

[Cog]

Isn't the loss of Dex to AC the definition of Flat-Footed (with the exception of Uncanny Dodge)?
The former is one result of the latter, but they are not interchangeable.

[KillianHawkeye]

Losing your Dex bonus to AC is much more common than actually being flat-footed.

[Elboxo]

Surprise round...? They are still flat footed in this case, if it's not the surprise round I'd still allow them to be sneak attacks, it's like hiding and shanking someone; you still have the drop on them, it's hard to come back and defend yourself in a second after someone stabs your liver. But that's more house-ruling than actual rules

[candycorn]

Flat footed and initiative represents going from a non-combat to a combat mentality. Once you're in battle, you're in battle. Special conditions can negate your dex to AC, but you're not flat footed. Once you've acted in combat, you're assumed to be reacting, and dodging... Your nerves are on edge, you are at a heightened state of awareness. After the first hit, you're rolling away, not standing there shocked.

That's what it represents. Get improved invisibility if you want full attacks.