Sneak Attack Against Those Normally Immune?

[skywalker]

Hey all, I've got a friend looking for a weapon bonus/augment crystal/feat that gives a rogue sneak attack against targets that are normally immune, such as constructs, undead, and the like.

It's for an Eberron campaign that is apparently very heavy on warforged and souped-up undead.

I already know about the greater truedeath crystal from the MIC, but that is only useful against undead. I'm pretty sure I saw something out there for use against constructs.

[Catch]

The spell Golemstrike lets you sneak attack constructs and Gravestrike lets you sneak attack undead. They're both first level spells, so a magic item with a few uses per day would be fairly cheap.

Complete Adventurer is the sourcebook for 'em, I should note.

[Dhavaer]

The Golemstrike spell, from Complete Adventurer and the Spell Compendium.

[Roog]

Hey all, I've got a friend looking for a weapon bonus/augment crystal/feat that gives a rogue sneak attack against targets that are normally immune, such as constructs, undead, and the like.

Dungeonscape p13.
Alternative Class Feature: Penetrating strike
replaces trap sense at level 3
Allows 1/2 SA dice against SA immune creatures, but only when flanking.

[OzymandiasVolt]

The Demolition Crystal [constructs] and the Truedeath Crystal [undead] from the Magic Item Compendium.

[Funkyodor]

Well, there is the Mace of Smiting that destroies constructs on a crit (no save) but that is expensive. I'm sure that you can home brew something cheaper but reduced effectiveness using that as a reference.

[Beren One-Hand]

Or you could just take the hit, and take the alternate level four ability (instead of Uncanny Dodge, which you get later instead of Imp. Uncanny Dodge) from the Player Handbook II. It lets you drop all sneak attack dice to give the target -5 to AC for a round. Now the heavy hitters can really Power Attack.

[Zeful]

There's a feat floating around called Raizing strike that allows you to burn spell slots to strike undead and constructs. Though you have to be a divine or arcane caster to do it respectivally.

[lord_khaine]

our party rogue allways got a couple of wands of grave strike and golemstrike, cost allmost nothing due to being a lv 1 wand.

[InaVegt]

It's for an Eberron campaign that is apparently very heavy on warforged and souped-up undead.

Warforged aren't immune to precision, it's only gotten 25% chance to fail against them.

[bigbaddragon]

Warforged aren't immune to precision, it's only gotten 25% chance to fail against them.

Which can be increased to 75% via Belt of Fortification from Secrets of Xen'drik.

[Wraithy]

most things immune to sneak attacks and critical hits have DR, you could houserule that if you can overcome DR you can also sneak attack etc. (eg: hitting a critical joint in a construct). this rule makes less sense for undead and NEVER apply it to oozes...NEVER.

or you could just homebrew a +3/+4 weapon property that does that for you. it would be a powerful weapon property, so it would have a powerful price.

[Iku Rex]

Deathstrike Bracers (MIC 93, 5000 gp) lets him sneak attack anything for one round 3/day.

[Thinker]

our party rogue allways got a couple of wands of grave strike and golemstrike, cost allmost nothing due to being a lv 1 wand.

How did this work? Both are spells that are swift actions to cast and last 1 round. On a wand they become standard actions to cast. Were you using some sort of house rule?

[Fax Celestis]

Gravestrike, Golem strike, and Vine Strike (undead, constructs, and plants, respectively) can be applied as a continuous on-hit affect to a weapon for a mere 8000gp a piece, using the "use activated or continuous" entry.

The formula, as outlined in the DMG, for "use activated or continuous" is "Spell Level * Caster Level * 2000". Since the duration of the original spell is measured in rounds (1 round, to be precise), we multiply this cost by 4.

Plugging in, we end up with (1 * 1 * 2000 * 4). 8000 gp.

[ArmorArmadillo]

Gravestrike, Golem strike, and Vine Strike (undead, constructs, and plants, respectively) can be applied as a continuous on-hit affect to a weapon for a mere 8000gp a piece, using the "use activated or continuous" entry.

The formula, as outlined in the DMG, for "use activated or continuous" is "Spell Level * Caster Level * 2000". Since the duration of the original spell is measured in rounds (1 round, to be precise), we multiply this cost by 4.

Plugging in, we end up with (1 * 1 * 2000 * 4). 8000 gp.

Remember to ask your DM though, because the same cost would be applied to continuous True Strike :)

[Person_Man]

There are a bunch of feats in the various supplements that let you trade Sneak Attack dice for special attacks. Complete Adventurer and Scoundrel have most of them. Normally they're a poor trade, but if your enemy is otherwise only going to take half Sneak Attack damage, its a great idea.

Also, UMD is your best friend. There's a ton of anti-undead magic items out there. And remember, you can apply Sneak Attack to Touch Attacks or Ranged Touch Attacks, which opens up a lot of Wand possibilities for you.

[Fax Celestis]

Actually, according to the rules of item creation, you should price continuous true strike according to its bonus provided instead of its spell level. The spell level formula is for spells that don't provide measurable bonuses.

Continuous true strike (that is, +20 on every attack roll) would be priced as an attack bonus: bonus squared * 2000.

However, that covers enhancement bonuses to items, so we can reasonably divide that cost in 2 for the purposes of this, since True Strike doesn't cover damage at all.

So: bonus squared * 1000, or (20*20)*1000.

Continuous True Strike costs 400,000gp.

[ArmorArmadillo]

Actually, according to the rules of item creation, you should price continuous true strike according to its bonus provided instead of its spell level. The spell level formula is for spells that don't provide measurable bonuses.

Continuous true strike (that is, +20 on every attack roll) would be priced as an attack bonus: bonus squared * 2000.

However, that covers enhancement bonuses to items, so we can reasonably divide that cost in 2 for the purposes of this, since True Strike doesn't cover damage at all.

So: bonus squared * 1000, or (20*20)*1000.

Continuous True Strike costs 400,000gp.Heh, I knew there was good answer to why that didn't work, but I never knew what it was. Thanks.

[Iku Rex]

Gravestrike, Golem strike, and Vine Strike (undead, constructs, and plants, respectively) can be applied as a continuous on-hit affect to a weapon for a mere 8000gp a piece, using the "use activated or continuous" entry.

The formula, as outlined in the DMG, for "use activated or continuous" is "Spell Level * Caster Level * 2000". Since the duration of the original spell is measured in rounds (1 round, to be precise), we multiply this cost by 4.

Plugging in, we end up with (1 * 1 * 2000 * 4). 8000 gp.That seems underpriced to me and, I suspect, to most other DMs. According to the rules, the guidelines in the table for estimating magic item values come second to the DM's good sense.

Actually, according to the rules of item creation, you should price continuous true strike according to its bonus provided instead of its spell level. The spell level formula is for spells that don't provide measurable bonuses.

Continuous true strike (that is, +20 on every attack roll) would be priced as an attack bonus: bonus squared * 2000.

However, that covers enhancement bonuses to items, so we can reasonably divide that cost in 2 for the purposes of this, since True Strike doesn't cover damage at all.

So: bonus squared * 1000, or (20*20)*1000.

Continuous True Strike costs 400,000gp. According to the guidelines in the table for estimating magic item values an enhancement bonus to attack and damage is bonus squared * 2000. An insight bonus is better than an enhancement bonus, since it stacks with almost every other bonus from spells or magic items. The table doesn't even have an entry for pricing insight bonuses on attacks, suggesting that it's impossible.

The DMG does have non-enhancement bonus-to-attacks items: Pale Green Ioun Stone (+1 competence on attacks) and Bracers of Archery.

The ioun stone is 30 000 gp, so if you subtract the cost of a Stone of Good Luck (unslotted, same stackable bonuses for skills, checks and saves, 20 000 gp) you're left with 10 000 gp for an unslotted, stackable +1 on all attacks. That's 5000 gp if slotted. Lesser Bracers of Archery are indeed 5000 gp for +1 competence on attack rolls. Greater Bracers of Archery are 25 000 gp for +2 competence on attacks and +1 competence on damage, suggesting bonus squared * 5000 + 5000 = 25 000 .

Using this formula we get 20 * 20 * 5000 = 2 000 000gp for a slotted +20 insight bonus on attacks item.

If you're basing it on enhancement bonuses you need to first increase the price for being stackable - call it *2.5 based on stackable AC bonuses compared to an enhancement bonus to AC. (See table.) Then you can lower the price because the insight bonus doesn't increase damage, but multiplying with 2/3 seems more reasonable than 1/2 since AB is more valuable than damage. That makes 20*20*5000*(2/3) = 1 333 333gp .

[Arbitrarity]

Uhhh... greater bracers of archery give you free bow proficiency, and furthermore, next to nothing gives you competence bonuses to attack. Fewer things, in fact, than luck bonuses. Competence bonues do NOT stack, circumstance bonuses do. Therefore, 10000 gp for a +1 non-stacking, unslotted item.

[Fax Celestis]

I was going to make an argument here, but I'll just say, "What Arbitrarity said."

[Iku Rex]

Uhhh... greater bracers of archery give you free bow proficiency, and furthermore, next to nothing gives you competence bonuses to attack. Fewer things, in fact, than luck bonuses. Competence bonues do NOT stack, circumstance bonuses do. Therefore, 10000 gp for a +1 non-stacking, unslotted item.Huh? Your post doesn't make any sense.

What has the bow proficiency to do with anything?

And yes, next to nothing gives you competence bonuses to attacks. Next to nothing gives you luck bonuses to attack. Next to nothing gives you insight bonsues to attack. That's why I'm pricing them the same.

By "stackable" I mean that it stacks with almost every other bonus from spells or magic items. (It stacks with everything but itself.) I have no idea why you think "non-stacking" is a good way to describe a bonus that stacks with everything except "next to nothing" (as you put it). Enhancement bonuses on the other hand are common as dirt.

[Fax Celestis]

Huh? Your post doesn't make any sense.

What has the bow proficiency to do with anything?

And yes, next to nothing gives you competence bonuses to attacks. Next to nothing gives you luck bonuses to attack. Next to nothing gives you insight bonsues to attack. That's why I'm pricing them the same.

By "stackable" I mean that it stacks with almost every other bonus from spells or magic items. (It stacks with everything but itself.) I have no idea why you think "non-stacking" is a good way to describe a bonus that stacks with everything except "next to nothing" (as you put it). Enhancement bonuses on the other hand are common as dirt.

An item giving proficiency carries its own price. As for stacking bonuses? Insight bonuses are remarkably easy to acquire.

[BardicDuelist]

So as to not derail the thread: The dungeonscape thing, a wand of the spells listed above, etc. work really well.

For somthing else:
In a two person undead campaign with a rogue, we created an item that lets you see pockets of concentrated negative energy on undead (which is what presumably animates them), and if your weapon was holy or dipped in holy water, you could use sneak attack (from a fluff standpoint you were disrupting those vitals).

You could do the same thing against constructs by seeing pockets of concentrated magical energy (which presumably animates them). The weapon would have to be magical.

Goggles, lenses would probably be the best slot to use. I admittedly never figured out a cost for this item, as it would seem silly for the rogue to want to sell it. I would guess it would cost w/e it would cost to have a continous 1st level spell.

[Iku Rex]

An item giving proficiency carries its own price. As for stacking bonuses? Insight bonuses are remarkably easy to acquire.If you read the item description you'll discover that if you get the bonuses you don't get the proficiency (because you already have it). It wouldn't make sense to charge you extra for an ability you're never going to use.

It is not "remarkably easy" to acquire an insight bonus on attacks. Not a single core item provides it and other than true strike the only core spell that can do it is the 8th level moment of prescience. If you get one from an ability, feat, spell or item in a supplement it's usually to give you a bonus that will most likely stack with the bonuses you already have.

[Arbitrarity]

Then what about, say... Skillful weapons? Free Proficiency, Use with 3/4 BAB. Cost? +2 equivalent enhancement.

Minor nitpick: True strike negates concealment, somewhat equivalent to a seeking weapon.

Proficiency is worth something, seeing as I often use lesser bracers of archery in conjunction with greatbows to get ranged attacks (particularly for warblades). Thereby, I postulate that randomnly adding together numbers, ignoring +1 damage on ranged attacks, and random jazz like that, makes me think that Greater Bracers of Archery provide the equivalent of a +1 to a weapon, compared to lesser bracers of archery, for 20K. Therefore, the bonus is 20K/+1, with some sort of scaling thingy. Potatoes.

There, that made no sense during the last 2/3. Furthermore, it directly contradicted other examples. Please allow me to think for a second, and recall something.

Oh yes. It would be cheaper to raise your strength score with a custom +40 str item!.

Really. Because you have to apply epic pricing to both, the epic strength enhancer is a mere 1.6 million gp (without epic pricing), with the same effect, and an enormous damage bonus.

[Iku Rex]

Then what about, say... Skillful weapons? Free Proficiency, Use with 3/4 BAB. Cost? +2 equivalent enhancement.What? :smallconfused:

What does the skillful enhancement have to do with anything? That doesn't make any sense.


Minor nitpick: True strike negates concealment, somewhat equivalent to a seeking weapon.Good point with regards to Fax_Celestis' price. (I restricted myself to a +20 insight bonus on attacks to simplify matters.)

Proficiency is worth something, seeing as I often use lesser bracers of archery in conjunction with greatbows to get ranged attacks (particularly for warblades). Yes they're "worth something" - but not if you already have the proficiency, and only then do you get the +1 competence bonus on attacks. If you're proficient you buy the lesser bracers for the +1 competence bonus. If you're not proficient you buy them for the proficiency. You don't get both.


Thereby, I postulate that randomnly adding together numbers, ignoring +1 damage on ranged attacks, and random jazz like that, makes me think that Greater Bracers of Archery provide the equivalent of a +1 to a weapon, compared to lesser bracers of archery, for 20K. Therefore, the bonus is 20K/+1, with some sort of scaling thingy. Potatoes.Right. That does it. It's bunny time.

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/5885/bunnykn8.jpg


There, that made no sense during the last 2/3. What made "more sense during the last 2/3". :smalleek:

If you're referring to me multiplying with 2/3 in my second example that's based on the "+1 attack bonus = +2 damage" rule of thumb for melee weapons. Power Attack is the feat manifestation of this. This means that a +1 bonus on attacks (=2 extra average damage) is worth roughly 2/3 of a +1 bonus on attacks and damage (=3 extra average damage).


Furthermore, it directly contradicted other examples. Please allow me to think for a second, and recall something.

Oh yes. It would be cheaper to raise your strength score with a custom +40 str item!.

Really. Because you have to apply epic pricing to both, the epic strength enhancer is a mere 1.6 million gp (without epic pricing), with the same effect, and an enormous damage bonus.Yes, it would be cheaper. Why? Because that would be a +40 enhancement bonus to Strength. Enhancement bonuses to ability scores are common. I guess you're going to disprove the existence of the Lesser Bracers of Archery next by pointing out that Gloves of Dexterity +2 are cheaper, provide the same bonus to your ranged attacks, and improve your AC, initiative, Dex skills, and reflex saves as well.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm not arguing this any more until three things: confrontationalism stops, a new thread is made, and all points are equally considered for validity.

[Arbitrarity]

What? :smallconfused:
What does the skillful enhancement have to do with anything? That doesn't make any sense.


To begin. Skillful enhancement provides proficiency with a weapon that has it (when using that weapon), as well as providing 3/4 BAB. Thereby, proficiency has a value.


Yes they're "worth something" - but not if you already have the proficiency, and only then do you get the +1 competence bonus on attacks. If you're proficient you buy the lesser bracers for the +1 competence bonus. If you're not proficient you buy them for the proficiency. You don't get both.
True. However, this does not allow you to seperate the effects, just as a ring of shooting stars has various effects which are mutually exclusive.

Having multiple powers, even if they are not applicable to the same character, does not mean that they can be removed from pricing.

What a cute bunny :smallsmile:


What made "more sense during the last 2/3".

If you're referring to me multiplying with 2/3 in my second example that's based on the "+1 attack bonus = +2 damage" rule of thumb for melee weapons. Power Attack is the feat manifestation of this. This means that a +1 bonus on attacks (=2 extra average damage) is worth roughly 2/3 of a +1 bonus on attacks and damage (=3 extra average damage).

Last 2/3 of the paragraph, the "bunny" section. It's what I like to call "madness".


Yes, it would be cheaper. Why? Because that would be a +40 enhancement bonus to Strength. Enhancement bonuses to ability scores are common. I guess you're going to disprove the existence of the Lesser Bracers of Archery next by pointing out that Gloves of Dexterity +2 are cheaper, provide the same bonus to your ranged attacks, and improve your AC, initiative, Dex skills, and reflex saves as well.
Given, however, that bracers of archery have a useful secondary effect in some instances, there is still a reason for their existence. The lack of a...

Ok, you know what? Screw it. We're making up custom items, debating pricing, pulling the thread of topic, and using costs which are only expressible in levels 30+, which are rarely, if ever, played. This has no relation to ANYTHING, except that Armour_Armadillo mentioned true strike, then fax mentiontioned how true strike SHOULD be priced, then you mentioned how YOU thought it should be priced. This is idiotic, tangential, and of no assistance to the OP.

[Aquillion]

All of this comes down to one thing anyway: The costs listed are guidelines, not hard-and-fast rules. On top of that, they're rules geared towards the normal, day-to-day items players will actually encounter while adventuring, not absurd +20 bonuses... the numbers are going to fall apart at that point no matter how you cut it, since they were designed for the +1 to +6 range or so.

For undead and constructs... you might want to figure out of it's really worthwhile to spend this much countering them. Honestly, it's not like your contribution to combat as a rogue is usually vital anyway; you're supposed to be good at other things. Unless your DM is really throwing solid walls of constructs and undead at you, just get a cheap wand or two of some spell or another so you can contribute a little bit in fights against things you can't backstab, and invest the money you save in bonuses to help you against the enemies you don't have disadvantages against.

[Iku Rex]

I'm not arguing this any more until three things: confrontationalism stops, a new thread is made, and all points are equally considered for validity.All points have been equally considered for validity on my part. This consideration has shown me that all points are not equally valid.

Since both you and Arbitrarity have decided to back out I'm not going to post any more replies.

[Rockphed]

You could do the same thing against constructs by seeing pockets of concentrated magical energy (which presumably animates them). The weapon would have to be magical.

Perhaps a cold Iron Weapon would be better as cold iron is the most non magical core material, so it would suck up magic.

[skywalker]

Aquillion, while this is the path I would take, the player of which I speak is very combat oriented. Further, he didn't intend to play a rogue, and had it virtually forced on him. As I said in the original post, he claims they are mostly fighting undead, which means he will be less-than-useful a majority of the time. Supposedly, there is an eberron specific undead/skeleton that is much better than the standard skeleton, this is what they will mostly be fighting.

I'm pretty sure he's stuck on the whole sneak attack thing, not really interested in possible replacements. I will mention the cheap bonus, wand, and deathstrike ideas, they should be damned easy for him to get because of Eberron's magic-ease. Although his DM has already dis-allowed Slayer of Domiel because the fluff isn't Eberron...

[BardicDuelist]

Perhaps a cold Iron Weapon would be better as cold iron is the most non magical core material, so it would suck up magic.

That would work too. Really, the Dungeonscape thing would probably be the easiest way to go. Trap sense is good, but cutting the rogue's biggest flaw in half is better.