aoe sneak attack?

[thecrimsondawn]

Just wondering, Is there a way to do your sneak attack damage to a mob, swarm, or otherwise more then one target?

[Troacctid]

Sure. You just need a multi-target attack that uses an attack roll for each target. Off the top of my head, some examples are the whirling blade spell, the eldritch chain Warlock invocation, the Blade Storm ability of a Bloodstorm Blade, and the Whirlwind Attack feat (or a Whirling weapon from MIC). Or just make a full attack and aim each attack at a different target. Note though that per the Rules Compendium, it has to be a full-round action, or else the sneak attack damage will only apply to the first hit.

[Curmudgeon]

A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. A swarm composed of Fine or Diminutive creatures is immune to all weapon damage.
You might want to take note of these properties of an unarmed strike:

It deals bludgeoning damage.
That's not weapon damage.

unarmed strike: A successful blow, typically dealing nonlethal damage, from a character attacking without weapons.
Improved Unarmed Strike is your friend.

[Zweisteine]

It deals bludgeoning damage.
That's not weapon damage.
.
I am reasonably sure that this is not one of the places where minor dysfunction abuse is the intended goal.

In any case, I am also fairly certain that "weapon damage" includes all bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from nonmagical sources.

And remember that unarmed strike treats you as armed even when unarmed, so only a normal unarmed strike would work on a miniature swarm. :smalltongue:

[atemu1234]

I am reasonably sure that this is not one of the places where minor dysfunction abuse is the intended goal.

In any case, I am also fairly certain that "weapon damage" includes all bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from nonmagical sources.

And remember that unarmed strike treats you as armed even when unarmed, so only a normal unarmed strike would work on a miniature swarm. :smalltongue:

Wasn't it listed somewhere that an unarmed strike qualifies both as a natural weapon and a manufactured weapon? I'm AFB.

[Killer Angel]

And remember that unarmed strike treats you as armed even when unarmed, so only a normal unarmed strike would work on a miniature swarm. :smalltongue:

I'm not a monk, and I've killed many mosquitoes with bare hands, so I can confirm that, at least, non-magical unarmed strike works. :smalltongue:

[HammeredWharf]

Regarding swarms:


A swarm takes half again as much damage (+50%) from spells or effects that affect an area, such as splash weapons and many evocation spells.

We could argue RAW all day long, but I think it's pretty clear splash weapons are supposed to deal their direct hit damage to opponents according to RAI, because otherwise the 50% bonus wouldn't make sense. However, you'd have to get a way to SA a swarm in the first place, as they're immune to both critical hits and flanking in addition to the immunities their base type may provide.

[Psyren]

Swarms are specifically immune to sneak attack. Swarm and Rogue entries:


A swarm has no clear front or back and no discernable anatomy, so it is not subject to critical hits or flanking.

A rogue can sneak attack only living creatures with discernible anatomies—undead, constructs, oozes, plants, and incorporeal creatures lack vital areas to attack. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks.

Thus, even though the swarm traits do not mention sneak attack immunity, sneak attack itself does, and just about every other source of sneak attack in 3.5 refers back to the Rogue entry.


You might want to take note of these properties of an unarmed strike:

It deals bludgeoning damage.
That's not weapon damage.

Improved Unarmed Strike is your friend.

This interpretation leads to the thorniest of 3.5's thorny questions - what is an effect? And does an unarmed strike count? Because even discounting "weapon damage," there is still this broader clause:


A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures...

In most cases, an attack roll does target "a specific number of creatures" - namely, one:


An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target’s Armor Class, you hit and deal damage.

Therefore, if an attack (or even the result of an attack) counts as an effect, it means you cannot punch a swarm to death - at least, not using any single-target punches.

[Bronk]

I'm not a monk, and I've killed many mosquitoes with bare hands, so I can confirm that, at least, non-magical unarmed strike works. :smalltongue:

Heh, if you managed to kill all the mosquitoes at once, I'd love to know your secret!

[thecrimsondawn]

Thanks for all the replies guys.
The game I am in is currently swarm heavy, so it seems I will need to pick up scrolls or alch fire or something to deal with that then...

So to sneak attack more then one person I "have" to use a full attack, or otherwise attack all the targets in one round since I can only sneak attack once per round right?

As a dagger focused rogue, Im thinking maybe picking up a feat or two to throw would be one of my better options. Or maybe something from the ToB.

[Psyren]

So to sneak attack more then one person I "have" to use a full attack, or otherwise attack all the targets in one round since I can only sneak attack once per round right?

You get sneak attack every time (a) you roll to attack and (b) the target meets the requirements for sneak attack. It doesn't matter how many times you do it in one round as long as you meet those two criteria with every instance.

[Flickerdart]

What about Whirlwind Attack with an unarmed strike? It's not an effect that targets a specific number of creatures.

[Psyren]

What about Whirlwind Attack with an unarmed strike? It's not an effect that targets a specific number of creatures.

Yep, I would personally say that could hit a swarm. Though you could also argue that a "whirlwind attack" is in actuality a series of individual attacks.

Tatsumaki Senpukyaku!

[Curmudgeon]

In most cases, an attack roll does target "a specific number of creatures" - namely, one:
That's the case for most creatures, but a swarm acts as, and is treated as, a single creature.

A swarm is a collection of Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creatures that acts as a single creature.

Therefore, if an attack (or even the result of an attack) counts as an effect, it means you cannot punch a swarm to death - at least, not using any single-target punches.
The premise was wrong, so this conclusion is also wrong. You can attack certain types of swarms with weapons just fine.
A swarm made up of Tiny creatures takes half damage from slashing and piercing weapons. That swarm of Tiny creatures will take full damage from bludgeoning weapons. You're not targeting individuals, but the collection.

[Psyren]

That's the case for most creatures, but a swarm acts as, and is treated as, a single creature.

That doesn't change the fact that an attack targets a single creature.


You're not targeting individuals, but the collection.

Right, which is treated as a single creature per your own quote.

[Curmudgeon]

That doesn't change the fact that an attack targets a single creature.

Right, which is treated as a single creature per your own quote.
So it appears we're in agreement: you can use your unarmed strike attack against the swarm's AC just as you would any creature. Because they're only immune to weapon damage you can still hit them with your weaponless attacks for regular damage. (You'll suffer the usual consequences for them sharing your space.) Any extra effects on top of your damage won't work if they're specific to some number (like 1) of creatures; if they're not specific as to number, they'll still work.

[Psyren]

So it appears we're in agreement: you can use your unarmed strike attack against the swarm's AC just as you would any creature. Because they're only immune to weapon damage you can still hit them with your weaponless attacks for regular damage. (You'll suffer the usual consequences for them sharing your space.) Any extra effects on top of your damage won't work if they're specific to some number (like 1) of creatures; if they're not specific as to number, they'll still work.

For the most part we are, but it seems the sticking point is whether an attack (or even the result of an attack, i.e. the damage) is considered an "effect." As per usual when that term comes up, it isn't defined anywhere. The weapon damage immunity is separate and I'm not disputing that.

It's moot for this thread of course since they're immune to sneak attack via yet another clause.

[Curmudgeon]

For the most part we are, but it seems the sticking point is whether an attack (or even the result of an attack, i.e. the damage) is considered an "effect." As per usual when that term comes up, it isn't defined anywhere.
No, "effect" isn't defined. However, damage (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_damage&alpha=D) is:
damage

A decrease in hit points, an ability score, or other aspects of a character caused by an injury, illness, or magical effect. The three main categories of damage are lethal damage, nonlethal damage, and ability damage. In addition, wherever it is relevant, the type of damage an attack deals is specified, since natural abilities, magic items, or spell effects may grant immunity to certain types of damage. Damage types include weapon damage (subdivided into bludgeoning, slashing, and piercing) and energy damage (positive, negative, acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic). Modifiers to melee damage rolls apply to both subcategories of weapon damage (melee and unarmed). Some modifiers apply to both weapon and spell damage, but only if so stated. Damage points are deducted from whatever character attribute has been harmed -- lethal and nonlethal damage from current hit points, and ability damage from the relevant ability score). Damage heals naturally over time, but can also be negated wholly or partially by curative magic. So we know that an effect can cause damage, but damage is not described as an effect itself.

[Killer Angel]

Heh, if you managed to kill all the mosquitoes at once, I'd love to know your secret!

Oh, no, those were long fights, that lasted many rounds... :smallwink: