AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic

Does Sneak Attack inherently have to be "sneaky", just because the ability's OOC label contains that word? Or can it be merely tactical precision, cannily aiming your strikes for a foe's least protected bits in order to get the most bang for your buck?

To put the question in context... I'm wondering whether/why using Sneak Attack is commonly thought to be inherently contrary to a paladin's oaths. Yes, I realize this is yet another "would a paladin act like that" question, and I apologize in advance.

If the answer is that Sneak Attack might be appropriate for some paladins and not for others, what defines the difference between those two paladins? (The varying gods that sponsor them? Differences in the dogmas of their particular Orders? Cultural/regional/racial differences?)

I had always thought that a sneak attack is an attack that targets vital areas, and also it is somewhat of a 'suprise' attack.

The game definition of the ability, just for reference...

NWNWiki wrote:

Whenever the character makes a successful attack against an opponent who is flat-footed, cannot see them, or who is in combat with someone else, the character's blow delivers extra damage. This extra damage is +1d6 at first level and an additional +1d6 every two levels thereafter.

Sneak attack works when your opponent is pre-occupied, not paying attention(flatfooted), or somehow incapacitated(KD'ed, prone, paralyzed).

There's nothing in most Paladin codes that would say "don't go for your enemy's obvious weaknesses." That's why paladin's can take Rogue just fine. There are just a few things that are commonly considered roguish that the majority of paladins would be frowned upon in doing. Sneaking around, attacking a completely unprepared enemy, backstabbing. And again, as always, that's just generally speaking. I'm sure there are even some orders or deities in the realms that wouldn't have a problem with that, given the right circumstances.

But again, as an extremely general, vaccum-sealed, non-likely-example, I don't see any paladin falling for stabbing an opponent in the armpit when they raise their sword the strike. That would be a "sneak attack" of sorts. And completely fine, under normal circumstances. So again, if that means "tactical precision" and "uncanny aiming", then go for your paladin/rogue. Just be aware of some of the other roguey stuff rogues are known for doing and think of how that lines up with your paladin's code.

From my point of view: WRONG! Backstabbing and honour do NOT mix. All the paladin codes of honour and chivalry I have ever used have very very clearly forbidden anything roquish. Sneak Attacks really are just that, backstabbing, attacks witout honourable warning and challenge etc.

Taking roque as a paladin is just a cheap trick to get UMD and Tumble and I very much disapprove of it.

Don't forget Evasion - with a paladin's saves, plus the reflex save progression for rogue levels, they'll be laughing.

Selmak wrote:

Don't forget Evasion - with a paladin's saves, plus the reflex save progression for rogue levels, they'll be laughing.

Ah, very true. Probably the most important one of them all. Evasion and Tumble can be gotten from Monk levels too, which is a bit less cringeworthy than Roque.

A paladin with rogue levels is not so bad if you take the rogue class (and skills) to represent one of the less sneaky 'careers' under the rogue umbrella. such as diplomat. A very good fit for a charismatic paladin.

What every sub-classification of any rogue has is versatility, adaptability, and resourcefulness. Things a tactician-paladin would very much benefit from with the right training.

Saying that, though, taking rogue as a paladin and using it to dump skill points into UMD and tumble is pure horrifying cheese.

Anyway, back to the point of the OP, the sneak attacks aren't necessarily 'sneaky', only taking advantage of an opponent's weakness or vulnerability. This is not restricted to backstabbing. It can be like taking advantage of flanking using a bit more personal tactics rather than plain drilled training etc.

The assassin's equivalent, however, is quite different. That would only be striking from hiding. But the sneak attack from rogue is much more general (from how I personally understand it).

Silvarus wrote:

Sneak Attacks really are just that, backstabbing, attacks witout honourable warning and challenge etc.

Not always.

I think there's a clear distinction between getting extra damage as a result of flanking or Knockdown during a fairly warned battle and the damage gained from coming out of stealth or just by sudden attack.

If there isn't, then Paladins shouldn't allow themselves the AB benefit of flanking and prone either. Now, if you say they shouldn't, then you have a logically consistent case and that's fair enough.

Uberuce wrote:

Silvarus wrote:

Sneak Attacks really are just that, backstabbing, attacks witout honourable warning and challenge etc.

Not always.

I think there's a clear distinction between getting extra damage as a result of flanking or Knockdown during a fairly warned battle and the damage gained from coming out of stealth or just by sudden attack.

If there isn't, then Paladins shouldn't allow themselves the AB benefit of flanking and prone either. Now, if you say they shouldn't, then you have a logically consistent case and that's fair enough.

This is why they invented the 'Grey Guard', They do whatever [Insert gruesome act] to get the job done.
Besides, Roguish behaviour is tolerated differently in different paladin-orders.

BUT
I heard a story, Not long ago, About a paladin getting a fall out of partying with an assassin. Wont mention names, But if that's true - Then the General DM stance would be that 'Sneak attacks are Ok', But 'Death attacks are naughty' .

Very_Svensk wrote:

I heard a story, Not long ago, About a paladin getting a fall out of partying with an assassin. Wont mention names, But if that's true - Then the General DM stance would be that 'Sneak attacks are Ok', But 'Death attacks are naughty' .

How do you know if someone is an assassin?
Metagame the death attack pop-up?

Dramatic_Prince wrote:

Very_Svensk wrote:

I heard a story, Not long ago, About a paladin getting a fall out of partying with an assassin. Wont mention names, But if that's true - Then the General DM stance would be that 'Sneak attacks are Ok', But 'Death attacks are naughty' .

How do you know if someone is an assassin?
Metagame the death attack pop-up?

Curious about that as well. Is there a difference, Ic'ly, Of how Sneak attacks and death attacks are done?
Does one of them strike at the lower-spinal cord to render the victim's legs/lower parts paralysed, or is the other just a genital kick?

Quote:

Specifics: At first level, an assassin may use a death attack, which functions similarly to a sneak attack in that if the target is not in combat they become victim to the death attack.

Besides, you're probably too busy paying attention to your own fight, rather than staring at your party member trying to steal peaches.

Dramatic_Prince wrote:

Quote:

Specifics: At first level, an assassin may use a death attack, which functions similarly to a sneak attack in that if the target is not in combat they become victim to the death attack.

Besides, you're probably too busy paying attention to your own fight, rather than staring at your party member trying to steal peaches.

You're Quoting the Mechanical Death attack, Aka, The OCC part.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 13:05 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Rogues and Assassins both get sneak attack in pnp it's just when an Assassin attempts a paralyzing strike the sneak attack -becomes- a "death attack". In nwn it's different as the 3 rounds you -would- wait to study an opponent is forgone and the game mechanics makes it so the assassin with every sneak attack goes for paralysis, making everyone of their sneak attacks a death attack.

Death Attack
"If an assassin studies his victim for 3 rounds and then makes a sneak attack with a melee weapon that successfully deals damage, the sneak attack has the additional effect of possibly either paralyzing or killing the target (assassin’s choice). "-srd20 site (in NWN you lose the killing option and Paralysis wait time is taken out and applied with every sneak attack)

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/assassin.htm

Sneak Attack
"If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage."-d20srd (That is why undead are immune to sneak attack) "Any creature that is immune to critical hits is not vulnerable to sneak attacks...(more)"-srd20 site

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/rogue.htm#sneakAttack

They are both a low-down, dirty and dishonorable attempt to kill or mame someone when they are not looking. Unless they are using a blunt object to try to knock someone out.(not very Paladinlike lol)

Sneak Attack: Xd6 damage from stealth attack
Death Attack: Xd6 damage from stealth attack and a chance to paralyze

...Topic:
It's cowardly, cruel and quesionable tactics even in the eyes of good aligned non-paladins. No way a "true to faith and cause" Paladin would use a sneak attack. lol even for the extra skill dump

editted: I thought I'd add also Blackguards get sneak attack as a class feat that should tell you something right there.

The Character
You are a Paladin of a Good aligned God. You're out hunting for a vile criminal who has been seen in the vicinity of the area. You kick in a door, and find him.

The Story
The man in front of you have just sodomised a child, Then tossed it into an oven and baked a PIE Out of it. Just as you intercept him, He's happily munching away on a piece of said pie.
Behind him lies numerous skulls and fragments of previous children, Whom have all suffered the same fate.

What do you do?
A - Valiantly take up your sword, Quote a famous saying from your god, and smite the sucker?
B - Reach for the closest thing, A frying pan, And smack him in the face
C - Groin Kick him

A and B aren't Sneak attacks
C is

I always think of Sneak Attack as a good kick in the groin when they least expect it. Or maybe in the kidneys.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 13:09 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Groin kick equals sneak attack...ROFL!! agreed! >.< Or trying to catch someone in the throat or eye with a blade.

See? In the right context, It's not very sneak at all. It's a just punishment for a vile criminal.

I've always thought SA as a clout to some vulnerable spot, e.g. an uncovered part in one's armour, a knife up someone's gut, etc. Nonetheless, it ought to be somewhat unexpected so the sneaky type can get a clear shot.

It's all about making your cutting edge edgier. Dishonourable or not, it's efficient as hell.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 13:14 PM, edited 1 time in total.

groin kick would be non-lethal sneak attack like using a sap though. Knockout blow? lol might as well be!

Sneak Attack needs to be done with a melee weapon according to pnp..not sure about NWN or not.

Greyweaver wrote:

..makes a sneak attack with a melee weapon..

If i groin Kick you with my sharp-metal boot, so hard, That your balls crack open and fall down the floor, I'd say that's a pretty lethal attack.

Sneak attacks doesn't need a melee weapon. Never heard of Monk/Rogues?

Sneak attacks are not lethal. They are hitting a weakpoint.

If you hit someone in a weak point with a sap hard enough you can kill them. They have the potential to be lethal because they do so much damage when hitting an identified weakpoint.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 13:19 PM, edited 1 time in total.

I'm just going by what the site says...none the less as far as the topic is concerned for Paladins it would be a nono. Like I said since Blackguards get the bonus feat sneak attack that should tell you something right there.

Greyweaver wrote:

I'm just going by what the site says...none the less as far as the topic is concerned for Paladins it would be a nono. Like I said if Blackguards get the bonus feat sneak attack that should tell you something right there.

D20srd.org wrote:

she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.

Im trying to prove a point, That it all depends on the circumstances, Whether a Sneak attack is appropriate for a paladin or not.

Very_Svensk wrote:

Im trying to prove a point, That it all depends on the circumstances, Whether a Sneak attack is appropriate for a paladin or not.

No. Its not really. But in Terms of NWN, in which you can't really decide to stab for a sneak attack or not, it's fine.

it's never appropriate it's cowardly, dishonorable and low. A true Paladin would never go against their vows and dishonor themselves like that. A hit to the Vitals for a Paladin would be a Crit.

That's the same as saying you weren't allowed to use GMW to beat the crap out of a BG because it's more glorious to brawl him to death. Well, roughly at least, it is. It greatly depends on the god, and how you want to RP your SA and Paladin, IMO.

Except that all paladins follow a code similar enough to show that dishonourable stuff is a no go.

Greyweaver wrote:

it's never appropriate it's cowardly, dishonorable and low. A true Paladin would never go against their vows and dishonor themselves like that. A hit to the Vitals for a Paladin would be a Crit.

Depends entirely on the circumstances.
This is a situation where Pot(Me) meets kettle(you).

Very_Svensk wrote:

Greyweaver wrote:

it's never appropriate it's cowardly, dishonorable and low. A true Paladin would never go against their vows and dishonor themselves like that. A hit to the Vitals for a Paladin would be a Crit.

Depends entirely on the circumstances.
This is a situation where Pot(Me) meets kettle(you).

Paladin is not a class that is allowed to break their oaths for the greater good. That is called falling.

I'm pretty sure the War Knights would suddenly have an influx of recruits that are ex-paladins if Sneak Attack was every considered fall worthy xD

Uberuce wrote:

I think there's a clear distinction between getting extra damage as a result of flanking or Knockdown during a fairly warned battle and the damage gained from coming out of stealth or just by sudden attack.

If there isn't, then Paladins shouldn't allow themselves the AB benefit of flanking and prone either. Now, if you say they shouldn't, then you have a logically consistent case and that's fair enough.

Absolutely. Sneak Attack is not the Backstab of previous editions: the name and mechanics are different. I don't see the need to define any ability any further than the mechanics absolutely require. You should be free to create your own fluff around your PC's abilities, as long as they're somewhat consistent with the original intent.

On Paladins specifically:

Paladins universally wouldn't be restricted in the mundane tactics they use, I think. Chivalry and honor are completely context-specific, and in fact person-specific. Something is chivalric or honorable only insofar as it's considered such, so they can't be used as a universal standard. The universal standard applied here would be Alignment, and you can hardly say Sneak Attack is Evil or Chaotic.

In general though, I think paladins of most cultures would be expected to challenge their opponent openly and announce their intentions fairly. This means they wouldn't sneak up on an unsuspecting victim and slit their throat. However, they might shout their challenge and then fairly engage in combat using all the tactics they know, such as lurking around the opponent to flank and backstab. Combat in general is based on surprise and deception, after all. There's no fundamental difference between a backstab and a feint through the enemy's defence. You don't announce your intention to hit a specific spot face-to-face, either.

Thank you Iron, That was my point.

IronAngel wrote:

they might shout their challenge and then fairly engage in combat using all the tactics they know, such as lurking around the opponent to flank and backstab.

I disagree Paladins don't "backstab" (lol just what that word states should tell you something) or they'd get the sneak attack bonus feat or option to take it in the list.

Confusing tactical Melee with the dark underhanded things a rogue would do to save his cowardly, selfish, looking after his own hide, butt, otherwise known as a sneak attack, would be whats being done here. They might not take a fall for it mmediately, but they would disdain themselves for doing it. There self loathing might or would eventually make them fall.

No way, I'm resolute on this. A Paladin wouldn't use a sneak attack not in any form fitting the definition. If the toon is a Paladin/Rogue then to me they are cheese build. If there a Scout type paladin then take ranger levels for it.

Yus. Standard bab progression implies ability to strike accurately where it hurts. Its the first lesson of all combat training. Sneak Attacks are something more than just not being dumb and hitting places that actually matter. Implying everything else than sneaks is just brutish clubbing makes no sense.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 14:21 PM, edited 1 time in total.

Yup!

Weaponmasters being the heh, well masters of Tactical Combat able to move around in combat without penalty for the purpose of throwing there opponent off balance and finding those tactical spots, hitting them with extreme accuracy. Basically face to face martial combat, with no questionable tactics. Now if it's WM/rogue well for the most part they've taken the time to learn trickery and cheating so there rogue skills along with extremely tactical fighting would give them the mentality and training to look for questionable attacks, like a gouge to eye or neck with the pummel of a sword, or possibly a dagger hidden in the hilt or handle, crossed blades gazing in one anothers eyes and the other pulls the dagger from the handle and stabs the one he's fighting in the kidney or whereever, lol classic movie villain stuff. Pally's aren't villains.

Silvarus wrote:

From my point of view: WRONG! Backstabbing and honour do NOT mix. All the paladin codes of honour and chivalry I have ever used have very very clearly forbidden anything roquish. Sneak Attacks really are just that, backstabbing, attacks witout honourable warning and challenge etc.
Taking roque as a paladin is just a cheap trick to get UMD and Tumble and I very much disapprove of it.

Isn't there a prestige class for rogue/paladins?
I think it's Darkbane Inquisitor or something...they work in teams with another prestige...
*goes to check his library*

AB progression is the progression of how skilled you are with the weapon your using. Thus, your AB goes up when you take feats such as weapon focus, and prowess. Sneak Attack is the ability to aim for, recognize and hit vital points on an enemy. One form of Sneak Attacking may be backstabbing, though I doubt most paladins would do this.

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Sneak Attack is the ability to aim for, recognize and hit vital points on an enemy.

Dude. All martial training anywhere ever focuses on hitting vital points. By your logic only roques are even close to proper warriors and all others are barely more than peasant militia.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 14:33 PM, edited 1 time in total.

for non-rogues lol and lucky rogues...hitting the vital points of a challenger is called a crit. If your toon is face to face with the opponent and gets a crit your toon has hit a vital point and done so with honor and tact. Rogues don't operate the same way. There BAB is lower, well mainly cause they hide and strike when it's favorable for them when their opponent is at there most vulnerable, therefore not focusing as much on fighting as in saving there own skin. -Most- martial fighters that has actually put in the time and effort undergoing the training would see what rogues do as cheap and low and for the most part dishonorable, even non-paladins. Most fighters looks for a predominantly -fair- fight. The unspoken warrior's code. They don't have to cheat and would prefer others know they beat them fair and square. lol So they'll have bragging rights

'Most fighters' want to survive, Not look for a fair fight.

Last edited by Greyweaver on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 14:36 PM, edited 1 time in total.

you mean -some-

I would have to say this depends on alignement but there is still that unspoken warriors code.

Silvarus wrote:

Selvec Darkon wrote:

Sneak Attack is the ability to aim for, recognize and hit vital points on an enemy.

Dude. All martial training anywhere ever focuses on hitting vital points. By your logic only roques are even close to proper warriors and all others are barely more than peasant militia.

Its D&D, not the Medieval Ages, despite what quite a few people tend to think. A good example is in Dragonlance the character Caramon. He didn't know any of the finer points of combat till later in the series, but was considered one of the best fighters because he knew to swing hard, how to swing, and had a lot of Strength to back it up.

Thats basically a fighter. They don't have all that expert finesse and training. They just know how to swing something really really hard and to not get hit.

Seeing critical hits mean you hit a vital point, it does not matter if it is medieval or D&D monsieur.

Phearnun wrote:

Seeing critical hits mean you hit a vital point, it does not matter if it is medieval or D&D monsieur.

Sure it does. Because Criticals are Luck. Sneaks are skill.

Last edited by Silvarus on Fri, Jan 14 2011, 14:42 PM, edited 2 times in total.

I am so not agreeing to that. My mind goes numb every time I try to imagine a skilled swordsman in the style you just described, not to mention a Weapon Master.

Phearnun wrote:

Seeing critical hits mean you hit a vital point, it does not matter if it is medieval or D&D monsieur.

Or that you chopped off an arm or a foot. It's all relative, and depends on the situation. ><

Greyweaver wrote:

IronAngel wrote:

they might shout their challenge and then fairly engage in combat using all the tactics they know, such as lurking around the opponent to flank and backstab.

I disagree Paladins don't "backstab" (lol just what that word states should tell you something) or they'd get the sneak attack bonus feat or option to take it in the list.

Confusing tactical Melee with the dark underhanded things a rogue would do to save his cowardly, selfish, looking after his own hide, butt, otherwise known as a sneak attack, would be whats being done here. They might not take a fall for it mmediately, but they would disdain themselves for doing it. There self loathing might or would eventually make them fall.

No way, I'm resolute on this. A Paladin wouldn't use a sneak attack not in any form fitting the definition. If the toon is a Paladin/Rogue then to me they are cheese build. If there a Scout type paladin then take ranger levels for it.

I'm not sure what your evidence is, to be honest. What is the causal connection between the (supposed, unproven) cowardice and selfishness of the rogue and his Sneak Attack? That's an ad hominen fallacy: the personal character of the rogue doesn't logically imply the immorality of everyone who happens to have something in common with him. What you're saying is actually analogous to claiming that because Hitler was vegetarian, vegetarians are bad.

The description of Sneak Attack suggests nothing underhanded: "If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage." Neither the Rogue class nor the Sneak Attack ability has any alignment restrictions - Rogues can be Lawful Good or any other alignment.

I won't repeat my earlier points which still stand. In this post, I have shown 1) that your argument is formally inadequate and 2) that there is clear positive evidence that Lawful Good does not conflict with Sneak Attack. This doesn't mean that Paladins couldn't have additional restrictions to other LG characters, but you would have to point them out. I've already explained why chivalry and honor can't be used as a universal standard. You simply don't seem to have evidence or a rational argument, to be honest. You said yourself that you consider it cheesy, which is an emotional response.

What's So Sneaky About Sneak Attack?

Who is online