If you have a magic item or effect that simply adds elemental damage to a regular weapon, then the core damage that sneak attack increases will still be PSB, as that is the weapon damage. Now, if you are using something like a Shadow Blade whose base damage is a different type, then the Sneak Attack damage will be that type as well.
"Sneak Attack damage is meant to be of the type that's dealt by the weapon, and it's subject to resistance."
The "is meant to be" sounds sorta like an apology that they forgot to write it correctly. Lol.
Anyway, yes, you need to add it to a damage type the weapon deals. Of course. But which? That's the question and this tweet doesn't answer it.
RAW it says:
"Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll."
And, while it is safe to assume the damage needs to be of the type being dealt for the words "an extra" to make sense...
It doesn't clarify which type of damage this extra damage is applied to. And, given that, you should be able to apply it to whichever damage type you want to have deal more. So long as the attack deals it.
So if your arrow deals 1d6 piercing and 1d6 fire damage, and you got a 1d6 sneak attack, you can either have it deal 2d6 piercing and 1d6 fire damage, or choose to have it deal 1d6 piercing and 2d6 fire damage. In either case you had it deal 1d6 extra damage, which is what sneak attack offers you.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
While RAW does not explicitly spell it out, it’s clearly RAI to use the weapon’s damage, and every feature, spell, or magic item that adds additional types of damage calls it that- “additional damage”. The actual damage that the core weapon deals remains unchanged, ergo extra damage from the weapon will use the damage type listed in Equipment unless a feature expressly uses a different type.
Yeah, the "additional damage" line is really what gets you here. A few examples.
You fire an arrow from a bow that deals piercing damage, and adds additional fire damage - Sneak Attack deals piercing You fire an arrow from a bow that deals radiant damage - Sneak Attack deals radiant You fire an arrow from a bow that deals piercing and cold damage, both as regular weapon damage (phrased similar to how the Flame Strike spell gives both as damage types on equal footing) - Sneak Attack can deal either piercing or cold damage
Of course, your DM can handwave it and say any additional damage qualifies as a type to use, that's up to you to discuss with your DM.
The thing being there's little to no official weapons that inherently deal two different types of damage without that language. A [Tooltip Not Found] and other such weapons deal their element as "additional damage", putting them in that first category. So while hypothetically if one made an attack that qualified for Sneak Attack that used language as with a spell like Flame Strike the Sneak Attack damage type would be up in the air, I don't think there's any way to make that actually happen in play using official weapons, and once you get into homebrew the rules are more like guidelines and there is no "correct" answer.
By a strict reading of RAW Sneak Attack extra damage is untyped AFAIK there is no general rule for extra damage saying they're of the same type as the attack delivering it.
The thing being there's little to no official weapons that inherently deal two different types of damage without that language. A [Tooltip Not Found] and other such weapons deal their element as "additional damage", putting them in that first category. So while hypothetically if one made an attack that qualified for Sneak Attack that used language as with a spell like Flame Strike the Sneak Attack damage type would be up in the air, I don't think there's any way to make that actually happen in play using official weapons, and once you get into homebrew the rules are more like guidelines and there is no "correct" answer.
I'd agree but for the sneak attack deals "extra damage" from the attack, not from the weapon. And the attack absolutely deals both types, even if it is a weapon that has an "additional damage" clause on it also.
So if your weapon deals both piercing and fire damage, you'd pick wichever you wanted for the sneak damage. Since they're both the damage dealt by your weapon attack.
Edit for examples: Eg.1) Dragon's wrath weapon says:
"On a hit, the weapon deals an extra 1d6 damage of the type dealt by the dragon’s breath weapon."
So this one the weapon/attack deals the extra damage.
But Eg.2) Crystal blade says:
"When you hit with an attack roll using this sword, the target takes an extra 1d8 radiant damage."
This one is trickier, because it doesn't say the damage is a result of the attack or the weapon, simply that it also happens when they get hit.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What would happen in this scenario?
A Rogue has an arrow that does 1d6 piercing and 1d6 flame. The enemy is immune to pierce damage.
The Rogue score a hit and qualifies for Sneak damage.
Does the Rogue get to do any sneak damage? Is the Sneak damage based off of the Flame damage now?
Similar scenario:
Rogue has an arrow that does 1d6 piercing + 3 Cold damage (not a 1d6) vs that same pierce immune foe. Any sneak damage on that one?
If you have a magic item or effect that simply adds elemental damage to a regular weapon, then the core damage that sneak attack increases will still be PSB, as that is the weapon damage. Now, if you are using something like a Shadow Blade whose base damage is a different type, then the Sneak Attack damage will be that type as well.
I agree with The_Ace_of_Rogues extra damage would be bludgeoning piercing or slashing.
Sneak Attack damage is meant to be of the type that's dealt by the weapon, and it's subject to resistance
"Sneak Attack damage is meant to be of the type that's dealt by the weapon, and it's subject to resistance."
The "is meant to be" sounds sorta like an apology that they forgot to write it correctly. Lol.
Anyway, yes, you need to add it to a damage type the weapon deals. Of course. But which? That's the question and this tweet doesn't answer it.
RAW it says:
"Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll."
And, while it is safe to assume the damage needs to be of the type being dealt for the words "an extra" to make sense...
It doesn't clarify which type of damage this extra damage is applied to. And, given that, you should be able to apply it to whichever damage type you want to have deal more. So long as the attack deals it.
So if your arrow deals 1d6 piercing and 1d6 fire damage, and you got a 1d6 sneak attack, you can either have it deal 2d6 piercing and 1d6 fire damage, or choose to have it deal 1d6 piercing and 2d6 fire damage. In either case you had it deal 1d6 extra damage, which is what sneak attack offers you.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
While RAW does not explicitly spell it out, it’s clearly RAI to use the weapon’s damage, and every feature, spell, or magic item that adds additional types of damage calls it that- “additional damage”. The actual damage that the core weapon deals remains unchanged, ergo extra damage from the weapon will use the damage type listed in Equipment unless a feature expressly uses a different type.
Yeah, the "additional damage" line is really what gets you here. A few examples.
You fire an arrow from a bow that deals piercing damage, and adds additional fire damage - Sneak Attack deals piercing
You fire an arrow from a bow that deals radiant damage - Sneak Attack deals radiant
You fire an arrow from a bow that deals piercing and cold damage, both as regular weapon damage (phrased similar to how the Flame Strike spell gives both as damage types on equal footing) - Sneak Attack can deal either piercing or cold damage
Of course, your DM can handwave it and say any additional damage qualifies as a type to use, that's up to you to discuss with your DM.
The thing being there's little to no official weapons that inherently deal two different types of damage without that language. A [Tooltip Not Found] and other such weapons deal their element as "additional damage", putting them in that first category. So while hypothetically if one made an attack that qualified for Sneak Attack that used language as with a spell like Flame Strike the Sneak Attack damage type would be up in the air, I don't think there's any way to make that actually happen in play using official weapons, and once you get into homebrew the rules are more like guidelines and there is no "correct" answer.
By a strict reading of RAW Sneak Attack extra damage is untyped AFAIK there is no general rule for extra damage saying they're of the same type as the attack delivering it.
I'd agree but for the sneak attack deals "extra damage" from the attack, not from the weapon. And the attack absolutely deals both types, even if it is a weapon that has an "additional damage" clause on it also.
So if your weapon deals both piercing and fire damage, you'd pick wichever you wanted for the sneak damage. Since they're both the damage dealt by your weapon attack.
Edit for examples: Eg.1) Dragon's wrath weapon says:
"On a hit, the weapon deals an extra 1d6 damage of the type dealt by the dragon’s breath weapon."
So this one the weapon/attack deals the extra damage.
But Eg.2) Crystal blade says:
"When you hit with an attack roll using this sword, the target takes an extra 1d8 radiant damage."
This one is trickier, because it doesn't say the damage is a result of the attack or the weapon, simply that it also happens when they get hit.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.