Assassin Sneak Attack question

[magehammer]

In the PH, it says that a victim has to be unaware of the assassin for his death attack to be effective. Yet, it says that the assassin must make a sneak attack; sneak attack states that the victim can be aware of the assassin.

Is the assassin's "sneak attack" actually supposed to be like the Rogue's back attack?

Or should it be assumed that the victim can't be aware they were being studied for three rounds, but then after that, they can be aware and struck at by the assassin for the death attack?

Or some other idea?

I can make the call, but I was curious as to how anyone else would interpret this rule. Or--better yet--encountered it in play?

_________________
If you are looking for something to read:
http://bit.ly/QOfso

Visit magehammer's Keep on the Weblands at http://magehammer.googlepages.com

[serleran]

The victim can be aware that the assassin is present, but cannot be wise to the attack itself. For example, if the assassin is just hanging around a shop, eyeing the owner, let's say, he's casing the victim for some bonuses and just cause he can, and he wants to make the guy feel weird from being all checked out, and then continues on for the requisite three rounds death attack requires, when, suddenly, from his wrist, the assassin flings a poisoned blade and strikes the shop-owner (where is rather unimportant, but let's say he gets the unlucky SOB in the gut), and the dude fails his DA save, dying, rendering the fact it was poisoned rather moot.

Anyway, I think you see how it works.

[magehammer]

Thanks, serleran. That makes sense.

Cool.
_________________
If you are looking for something to read:
http://bit.ly/QOfso

Visit magehammer's Keep on the Weblands at http://magehammer.googlepages.com

[miller6]

The way I run it is as follows:

For a rogue backstab...must have suprise or sacrifice an action to set up the backstab...if the opponent has an action before the backstab, they can move to avoid the backstab, thereby requiring another action to set it up (i.e. may need a distraction to help the rogue succeed).

Assassin...must have surprise. If opponent is sleeping or unconscious, automatic success...otherwise run as a back attack but opponent must be completely unsuspecting of the assassination attempt.

Brian Miller
_________________
"The adventure continues"

[serleran]

Brian, not to be rude, but that would be good... if an assassin had the back stab (back attack) ability, but they do not, because they are not restricted to striking to kill from the rear of an opponent, nor are they required to be totally unobservable. They simply must catch a potential victim off-guard. A sleeping character is automatically slain by any character (not just assassins) so that situation is moot. Adding additional complications and restrictions to the assassin's abilities greatly weakens the class (having to study for three rounds and still get a surprise is damn hard as is, especially in an ongoing combat scenario.)

[gideon_thorne]

Bear in mind that the class is not designed as an overt attacker. Using the death attack ability ought to be considered in the light of a one strike weapon. This after ample time preparing the ground, observing the target, and carefull consideration of the risk.

Death attack is best used from surprise. Otherwise the class is best utilized, IMHO, via the use of poison bolts, or a deft tip of a vial of iocane in a wine glass.

Subtlety, always subtlety.

Whump it with a hammer the class is not.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[magehammer]

Thank you all for your feedback it has been quite helpful. My player and I are using a combination of back attack for assassinations only and sneak attack for those unaware moments. We are going to see how these options go in play then adjust if necessary for balance...and in the meantime have fun stormin' the castle.

_________________
If you are looking for something to read:
http://bit.ly/QOfso

Visit magehammer's Keep on the Weblands at http://magehammer.googlepages.com

[mmtbb]

While looking at the assassin, I came across this paragragh as well. I thought this was writen a little confusing myself. I did a search to make sense of it and found this thread.

Your example is nice and descriptive, serleran, and I mean no disrespect. However, you mentioned that the target can know the assaissin is present. The book states precisely if the target knows the assassin is present, a death attack is

not possible (word for word). It further gives no example of a situation where you could extract the meaning of this (like the one you gave). They seem to be complete opposite statements.

Was the description just poorly written?

[gideon_thorne]

For a death attack to work, the target needs to be unaware of the assassin.

If the assassin is using sneak attack, the target can be aware of the assassin, if not necessarily the angle of attack.

Clear as glass.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[serleran]

Quote:
However, you mentioned that the target can know the assaissin is present. The book states precisely if the target knows the assassin is present, a death attack is not possible (word for word). It further gives no example of a situation where you could extract the meaning of this (like the one you gave). They seem to be complete opposite statements.

Not quite right. If the assassin's target is aware of the assassin's presence, the Death Attack is not possible - a sneak attack is, however, which might result in death anyway (especially with an envenomed blade.) However, it does not mention "confused presence." In the example I gave earlier, perhaps the assassin ducked back and forth between aisles in the store, opened the door to ring the bell when the clerk looked down, making him think the assassin had left... basically, death attack is not possible in strict face-to-face melee combat. You have to catch the opponent off guard, but after you've had enough time to understand them -- I've heard that called an ambush.

I do not see why this would be confusing, other than, naturally "does the clerk know the assassin is there?" And that... is to the CK and character roleplaying to determine.

However, I would remove the line "cannot be detected" line -- I find it counterproductive.

[mmtbb]

That all makes sense. Thanks.

I was confused because your example seemed to describe a death attack (dude waits 3 round, shop owner fails DA save, etc) while it looked like the shop owner knew the assassin was there. I must have read that wrong.