[3.5] Sneak Attack vs Sudden Strike

[Valwyn]

Is there really much of a difference between Sneak Attack and Sudden Strike? I know SA gets more support (Ambush feats and the like), but is there something other than that? It seems a bit pointless to have two class features so similar that many feats basically say "this is really for Rogues with SA, but it's okay if Ninjas with SS use it as well". Am I missing something?

[Xervous]

Sneak attack works while flanking, sudden strike only works for denied dex. So you can't sudden strike anything that has uncanny dodge unless it's immobilized.

[Nettlekid]

It is a bit strange, really. Keep in mind that you can use Sudden Strike for any prereq that requires Sneak Attack, so really Sudden Strike has just as much support as Sneak Attack does.

The only difference is that Sudden Strike doesn't work when flanking, unlike Sneak Attack. So Sneak Attack is just better, but not by a huge amount, because they're both basically the same.

[Curmudgeon]

The only difference is that Sudden Strike doesn't work when flanking, unlike Sneak Attack. So Sneak Attack is just better, but not by a huge amount, because they're both basically the same.
Actually the difference is huge when you figure in an important Rogue ACF: Lightbringer Penetrating Strike (Expedition to Castle Ravenloft, page 208). That lets the Rogue swap out their (pretty useless) trap sense for the ability to deal sneak attack damage, with ½ the normal dice, to flanked enemies who are normally immune to sneak attack. Add in Craven, a non-dice bonus to sneak attack damage, and the Rogue becomes fairly effective at sneak attacking Undead, Constructs, and Plant creatures.

[Der_DWSage]

While that's a pretty nice combination of ACF and feats...

It doesn't really change the fact that, for a large majority of people, Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack are largely the same. It actually comes back to what the original post said-that sneak attack gets much better splatbook support.

[Maginomicon]

The fluff is very different.

Sneak attack is knowing where to strike at a weak point to deal the most damage (which is why flanking triggers it).

Sudden Strike is striking so fast (i.e. "like a ninja") that the impact deals extra damage, regardless of a weakpoint.

Skirmish is the use of great momentum (from movement) to deal extra damage, regardless of a weakpoint.

That's why they all exist as separate abilities.

[Psyren]

Flanking the enemy is a much, much, much more common scenario in actual play than denying their Dex. The former simply relies on there being another melee character in the party (there generally will be, even if its just an animal companion or summon) while the latter relies on attacking a target who is unaware of you - and with all the extranormal senses monsters have, this is extremely difficult for most rogues to pull off. Even the Ninja with their ghost step power has to deal with various forms of blindsense and blindsight in their targets, plus their very limited ki.



Sudden Strike is striking so fast (i.e. "like a ninja") that the impact deals extra damage, regardless of a weakpoint.

Actually, Sudden Strike relies on weakpoints too - which is why monsters that don't have any, like oozes, are immune to both SS and SA alike.

[Fax Celestis]

While that's a pretty nice combination of ACF and feats...

It doesn't really change the fact that, for a large majority of people, Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack are largely the same. It actually comes back to what the original post said-that sneak attack gets much better splatbook support.

No, they're not.

Sneak Attack works on flanked targets, while Sudden Strike does not. That is a pretty major difference, and removes quite possibly the easiest way to qualify for Sneak Attack, especially if you discount the options that UMD allows you to use to qualify for Sneak Attack (even in core, there are a lot).