Solonar1's page

I agree with Diego.

Ready

The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so).

Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, a swift action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, anytime before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character's activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action.

You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don't otherwise move any distance during the round.

Readying a Weapon against a Charge: You can ready weapons with the brace feature, setting them to receive charges. A readied weapon of this type deals double damage if you score a hit with it against a charging character.

So the damage (based upon how I interpret the rules) would be 1d8 + 3 (normal damage) + (1d8 + 3 braced damage) + 1d8 (vital strike), for a total of 3d8 + 6.

Hello, please forgive me if this has been discussed elsewhere. I gave a cursory search but couldn't find anything. I have a rules question and I was hoping that the gaming community might lend me a hand in working it out.

I am making a ranger with the guide archetype. One of the abilities that is changed with the guide is the loss of a favored enemy. Instead, guides gain the ability Ranger's Focus which allows them to select one specific enemy a number of times per day and gain bonuses against that specific foe.

Here is the problem: The Slayer's Knack feat states that the prerequisite requires the Favored Enemy class feature. At first glance, this seems pretty cut and dry - a guide cannot take the feat as that ability was replaced. However, the guide does not lose the ability of Master Hunter, which, when you get high enough level, allows you a special death attack against your favored enemies.

Now, if Favored Enemy is replaced and you cannot select feats which rely on them, shouldn't the Master Hunter ability also be replaced? Or should abilities like Master Hunter and feats like Slayer's Knack allow you to apply the bonuses they give to the target of the Ranger's Focus ability?

Right now, the RAW is against such a pairing, but I think this is one of those situations that wasn't initially foreseen. This happens often as new materials with class abilities and feats in them get introduced into the game - you just can't track down and evaluate every possible ability and feat combination and how they effect each other - and we've all seen many problems like this before.

In my opinion, as both player and GM, I don't see why allowing the use of favored enemy feats like Slayer's Knack shouldn't be allowed. It doesn't upset the play balance any, but since I'm trying to make the ranger character to which this ruling applies, I'd like some feedback.

What do you guys think?

Yes, it takes some feats to use TWF. But isn't that the point of the fighter?

Very true. I suppose since I really want to play a dervish-type character I'm just gonna have to suck it up and take the -4/-4 penalty (at least until Paizo puts out some new data). I'm waiting breathlessly for Ultimate Combat.

The number of feats used by a dual-wielding fighter is irrelevant.

Actually, nothing could be more relevant, since one of the prime points I was making with this post was the fact that it DOES take quite a number of feats to do, and it really shouldn't (if classes and builds are supposed to remain relatively close). With those extra feats that a 2H fighter saves, he could improve his chances to score a critical hit, increase his AC, or any number of other things, many of which would increase his mathematical averages (skewing the "scientific community's" perception even further). :P It is relevant because the combat mechanics have provided an uneven playing field due primarily to the increased feat expenditure required to fight with two weapons - the whole reason for this post.

Regardless of whether you agree with using a scimitar in the off-hand as a light weapon or not, or using dex for damage, you do have to admit that a two-weapon fighter shouldn't have to spend so many feats to accomplish so little.

Inner Sea Primer. Also here.

First off, I want to say "Thank You" to everyone who has posted here so far. The input, and more importantly, the intelligent and articulated input, has been very constructive and insightful. You've all given me a wonderful array of opposed opinions, and much to think about.

For a two weapon fighter, I'd propose a Dawnflower Dervish. They don't get as many special abilities as the two weapon fighter archetype, but they get the ability to move and full attack which is huge. They also keep weapon training which allows them to use dueling gloves and is less restrictive than the ability the mobile fighter gets. They lose armor training, so they're going to use either a celestial armor or a mithral breastplate. The weapon of choice is the kukri since it has a nice threat range and is a light weapon. It only does 1d4, but that becomes less relevant pretty soon.

They are still strength based, because this way they get more damage and also gain much extra damage from Two Weapon Rend. They really get to shine at 11th level and later because at that point their mobility kicks in and they gain access to critical feats.
THF may still be stronger at low levels, but a feat like Improved Dervish Dance is not going to change that (considering it costs three feats in addition to TWF).

Where can I find the stats for the Dawnflower Dervish? It definitely sounds like an interesting class.

you guys do realise that the magus cant dualwield? or what kinda cheesyness have i missed?

LOL. One of the players in my group is playing with the new spellblade magus archetype. He uses a weapon in one hand (bastard sword) and a spell effect or arcana from the other. He quite often does his normal sword damage and deals an extra 2d6 energy damage. Quite a lot for a 4th level character.

THF benefits from extra attack (like haste or Dawnflower Dervish), TWF benefits from bonus damage. TWF also has a much greater chance of landing critical hits which is pretty useful for a high level fighter. There are several ways to move and gain a full attack. Fighters can do it, Barbarians can do it, Rangers and Cavaliers can do it. The magus can do it, too, but a TWF magus is incredibly cheesy.

Two weapon fighting is quite powerful if you know how to use it.

I agree completely. Some of the new magus rules can blow this whole system out of the water. Also, I've seen other posts where rogues tend to skew the 2w results just as badly, if not more.

Sigh.

As has been pointed out, your suggestion is broken.

Also, you neglected to point out that your improved dervish dancer at level 4, using power attack, gets: +6/+6 (1d6 + 8) damage

That is incorrect. The 2W fighter did not have power attack in the example. If he did, that would be yet ANOTHER feat down, plus it would lower his attack to + 6/ + 6 and his damage to 1d6 + 10/1d6 + 6.

Plus, you have to figure that the 2W fighter has to hit with both attacks on a full attack action to come close to the 2H fighter. Increase the level to 6th with the same stats and abilities, and then have each fighter perform a full attack.

2H gets 2 attacks at + 10 and + 5, and does 2d6 + 14 on each (total average damage 42 points).

2W gets 3 attacks at + 10, + 10, and + 5, and does 1d6 + 6/1d6 + 4/1d6 + 6 (total average damage 26 points).

EDIT: What would be the mathematical formula for these attacks?

Nearly any combat oriented class has some bonus damage that is applied to a weapon, no matter if it's one-handed, two-handed or off-hand. Also, scimitars should not be compared to greatswords but to falchions or curveblades. Yes, a character with improved dervish dance would need three feats. How many feats does it take a strength based character to get strength on initiative, AC, reflex saves and skill checks?

Getting dexterity on damage is extremely powerful. Dervish Dance is fine because it has some rather severe limitations (that are less severe for a magus). Not only does Improved Dervish Dance remove this restrictions, it also makes the scimitar the best martial light weapon in the game.

Again, whether or not the feat makes a weapon more useful is irrelevant when compared to the impact it has on the game as a whole. I wasn't comparing a scimitar to a greatsword, only that 2-weapon combat doesn't stack up to 2-handed combat.

As the rules are written, there is almost no point to EVER playing a 2-weapon fighter. In fact, you could remove the light weapon restriction to finesse (allowing it to be used for any 1-handed weapon), and also apply dex for damage instead of strength with finesse for all weapons, and it still wouldn't exactly match up, but it would then be close. You would still have to spend the extra feat for finesse. Plus, with a standard attack (cleave, vital strike, etc), the 2-handed fighter will still be head and shoulders above a 2-weapon fighter.

You know, my first reaction was to agree about it being broken, but the more I looked into the mechanics and compared the relative worth in combat, the more I will have to disagree. Here's why:

When D&D first came out, it was almost pointless to take ranged weapons. They only did one die of damage and that was only modified by magical means, you didn't even get a Str bonus.

When 3.0 came out, or sometime around then, you could purchase increased Str bonuses for bows, but they were costly, and the benefits still didn't stack up.

It wasn't until the recent Pathfinder (version 3.75) came out that archers were able to hold their own, finally. Deadly Aim and all the other new ranged combat feats suddenly made ranged combat an equal aspect to melee. (And there was much rejoicing....yayyy)

But now, it seems that two-weapon fighting has fallen behind, requiring many more feats to become good at, while not producing nearly as great results.

As an example, I'll compare two fighters, one a 2-handed fighter (2H) and one a 2-weapon fighter (2W). Let's assume that both fighters are 4th level, human, have 18 in their prime stat (Str for 2H and Dex for 2W) and 14 in all others. Let's also assume that they each have weapon focus and weapon specialization in their weapon of choice. 2H has power attack and 2W has two-weapon fighting and weapon finesse (already one feat choice more than 2H). Let's also assume that both fighters' weapons are masterwork.

2H chooses the greatsword as his weapon of choice. He uses power attack and has an attack bonus of + 8 and does 2d6 + 14 damage (21 average).

2W chooses the shortsword as his weapon of choice (to maximize his feat bonuses and limit his penalties, since he wields two weapons). He has an attack bonus of + 8/ + 8 and does 1d6 + 4/1d6 + 3 damage (14 average). 2W not only does an average of 7 points less with a full attack, but has had to spend one extra feat slot.

Let's introduce the Dervish Dance feat above, with my modifications.

2W now chooses the scimitar as his weapon of choice. He has an attack bonus of + 8/ + 8 and does 1d6 + 6/1d6 + 4 damage (17 average). He still doesn't do as much damage, and is now down by TWO feat choices.

As you can see, 2-weapon combat as written is what is truly broken, not the introduction of rules that help even things out.

Pathfinder took some great steps forward in evening out ranged combat. Now they just need to even out 2-weapon combat.

I'm sure somebody has posted something similar in another thread, but I just had some ideas for updating the Dervish Dance feat (found in the new Inner Sea Guide).

I wasn't the most pleased with the reduction in damage that the Pathfinder rules gave the scimitar, but the increase in crit range is nice. A fair compromise. However, the fact that the scimitar is considered a 1-handed weapon and suffers big penalites when dual-wielding was a bit much. I mean, almost every other melee weapon that does 1d6 damage or less is a light weapon. To fix this, we have to turn to feats (printed or custom).

The Dervish Dance feat was almost perfect in solving this dilemma. It allowed the wielder of the scimitar to not only use his dex bonus to hit, but also to damage. Wonderful! However, you could only use one scimitar, and the other hand had to either be empty or be carrying anything but a weapon.

With the rules posted as they are, major NPCs such as the famous Drizzt Do'Urden would be rendered almost completely useless. So, some house rules seem in order.

I propose modifying Dervish Dance to the following:

Prerequisites: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (Scimitar), and Perform (Dance) 2 Ranks.
Benefit: As written, but the wielder may use a scimitar in his off-hand, and that scimitar is treated as a light weapon for dual-wielding purposes.

What does everyone think?

Well, I have a rough draft completed and written to pdf. If anyone wants to check it out, just let me know. I'll be more than happy to email a copy for your perusal.

Here are some highlights and additional changes I've made:

Deadly Focus provides bonus to hit and damage, +1 at 1st level and progressing by +1 every two levels.

Saving throws were even across the board, starting at +1 and ending at +5.

Assassin Talents include arcane training, bleeding attack, combat trick, conceal blade, crippling strike, deadly stare, devastating strike, evasion, improved evasion, nondetection, silent strike, sniper shot, and swift strike. I'm trying to think of a few more talents, but the list as it stands is very playable.

I did add in spells. I felt it was just too important of a mechanic to toss out. They cast spells as a bard and receive no arcane penalty for wearing light armor. The spell list provided in the pdf I have is tailored specifically for the campaign my group plays in, so minor alterations will have to be made to fit different groups.

There are some really good points and ideas here. I really like having varied opinions on a subject, as it helps view issues from many angles.

I'm going to write down the skeletal framework for building a new Assassin prestige class below. I will be using the rules from the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, and will be building the class to reflect those same rules. The primary focus with this PrC was to build a class that fit the niche between Ranger and Rogue, and I used both classes as as an inspirational model. I will go section by section and explain why I believe it should either stay the same or change. As always, feedback is very necessary and much appreciated.

Prerequisites: I would change the requirement of evil only to any non-good, with the reason being - you don't have to be evil to kill for a cause. There are many historical as well as fictional characters that were very strictly neutral in all matters. I would also just get rid of the requirement to "kill someone for no other reason than to become an assassin." That requirement is just plain silly.

Skills: I don't think there is any doubt or conflict with this change - the assassin needs more skill points. As a skill-oriented class, the assassin simply needs to be good at what he does. I think the skill selection is fine the way it is, but skill points should increase to 6+Int. The only reason I don't think it should be raised to 8+Int is that the assassin is a focused PrC, and more skill points would take him closer into the realm of the Rogue (a generalist class), also the assassin will be gaining quite a few abilities to supplement this.

BAB: There have been some who suggested raising the assassin's BAB because they felt the assassin is highly trained in combat (and other such points). I feel the class is fine how it is. The assassin should be a good combatant, but not on par with a fighter of similar level, in my opinion. Keeping a medium BAB progression keeps the assassin as competent in combat, but also shows that the focus in assassin training is not solely combat.

Remember: if you want to make your assassin more combat-oriented, mystical, or magical, you need to take appropriate class choices before becoming an assassin. Since the requirements for assassin are 5 ranks of Stealth and 2 ranks of Disguise, this PrC can be accessed from any class. If you like the idea of a combat-oriented assassin, be sure to take fighter levels before your PrC. If you want mystical, take monk levels. And if you want magical, take wizard or sorcerer. Another interesting build would be to start out as a cleric of darkness and/or trickery.

Saves: Saves really don't define a class too much, so I could really go either way on this. Since the assassin is usually required to perform alone, a solid base of skills and abilities are needed. As the rules stand now, the assassin's only fast save progression is in Reflex, with Fortitude and Will being slow. I would prefer seeing saves similar to the monk's (with all progressing similarly), but not as rapidly. I suggest a medium rate of progression in all saves. In looking over some of the other prestige classes, I noticed many with a 5/5/3 build. We could re-work this to be a 5/4/4 build (Fort +4, Ref +5, Wil +4).

Special Abilities: Okay, here's where things get more involved. I want to keep sneak attack progression the same - assassins are supposed to be good, if not the best, at doing this. I also want to keep poison use and the increasing save vs poison - poison has long been an iconic method of assassination. I think death attack should be replaced with deadly focus. Death attack is a good ability, but an ability that could potentially kill anybody, regardless of level or hit dice, at 6th level is a little too much.

I believe that the assassin's deadly focus ability should be a more powerful ability than normal, simply because it won't come in to play that often, and when it does, it probably won't be used again soon. This will ensure that the main focus of the class stays along the lines of eliminating a specific target, but will alleviate the all-or-nothing feel that death attack had.

With that in mind, I think the base mechanic for deadly focus should be similar to death attack (3 rounds of study while remaining undetected/unthreatening) and then give the assassin a bonus to hit and damage vs the target of their deadly focus that increases with the assassin level. This would allow for better combat abilities, at least vs the target, and would also be a nice incentive to stay in class for the full 10 levels. Deadly focus can also be improved with assassin talents (see below). The bonuses gained from deadly focus should last for the encounter or until the target dies (or is incapacitated), whichever comes first.

I'm still undecided as how exactly to implement assassin talents. I think the best way would be to allow one assassin talent at each even level, and at 6th level assassin, a list of advanced talents could be introduced. I also think that assassin levels should stack with Rogue levels for determining access to advanced Rogue talents, once the character leaves the PrC. These, combined with the above abilities should make for a balanced and customizable character.

Of course, we will yank out the true death, quiet death, swift death, and angel of death abilities. Variants of these abilities will most likely be found within the list of assassin talents.

I like the inclusion of uncanny dodge. This adds to the feel that the assassin is more aware of his surroundings than the average character. Would it be too powerful to also introduce evasion? Maybe as a talent choice...

I also think that the hide in plain sight ability should become available at a lower level, say between 3rd and 5th. This would mean the character would be on average from 9th to 11th level when he gained this ability, and it would not be overpowered. Maybe we could also include it on the list of assassin talents. Of course, if we did so, we'd have to replace the ability with something else (maybe evasion).

The 10th level ability, the pinnacle of assassin training should be...I don't know yet. Perhaps this should be a death attack with normal saves (at this level the DC would be 20+Int bonus, so not too shabby), and there could also be some extra assassin talent modifications already added to this, so it might not be a bad idea. After all, the death attack ability has always been the forte of the assassin since 1st edition ad&d. The death attack will also be allowed for use with range weapons within 30', lol.

Another idea is to have an ability called "One Shot, One Kill" (or similar) that would allow the assassin the ability to either double his sneak attack dice vs his target or raise the sneak attack dice from d6 to d8, or some other form of high damage dealing involving sneak attacks vs his target. This ability could have limited uses (such as a few times per day, or even just once). I'm not a big fan of this option, but I'm just throwing it out here as another idea.

Spells: There has been quite a debate over spells for the assassin. In reviewing the pros and cons for spells, I've noticed that the all of the arguments against spells were the same - "I just don't see assassins as spell-users" or "assassins are more physical", and so on. I think that the main reason many people dislike assassins having spells stems more from the fact that they see spell-users as waggly-fingered wizard types rather than the demi-spell users that they were designed as (similar to the ranger).

The best example of a demi-spell user in action would be Aragorn in Lord of the Rings. At many points throughout the books, and even movies, Aragorn "listened to the ground" or "let his consciousness scan the horizons". In game terms, these would be spells (or at least spell-like abilities for some of them). They required concentration and some somatic gestures (pressing ear to ground for several rounds, etc..). Looking at it this way can help ease the all-or-nothing concept of spell users that I think many people have (at least the ones that think assassins shouldn't have spells).

It's hard to take a concept and make it fit into the mechanics of a game system. In this case, the game mechanics support a concept of demi-spell user, as the assassin has many useful abilities. Having these abilities represented by a spell list provides for a much broader base of abilities and thus, usefulness. If we were to replace the spell list with a list of spell-like or supernatural abilities, I think it would overpower the class a bit.

I believe that a small spell list, similar to that of the 3.5 assassin, or even better - the red mantis assassin, would be appropriate. Some assassin talents that we could introduce could change one or more of these spells to spell-like abilities (or just allow for an extra spell feat - same thing).

So, to recap:

Changes include an even progression of saves, more skill points, replacing death attack with deadly focus, adding in a custom talent list, lower the level requirement for hide in plain sight, and adding in spells again.

It might sound like more is going in than coming out, but remember, the class was woefully underpowered as it stood, with many abilities that enhanced the one-shot death attack ability and left little room for anything else. The goal of reworking this PrC was to make it level-appropriate and have a more useful range of abilities.

How does this sound so far?

Okay, try number 2.

(huh-huh, huh-huh...he said number 2...huh-huh)...

I like the direction all this is going. I love the concept of a very customizable class - the option to choose from talents, abilities, and more allows for a very unique character.

I'd actually like to reference the Shadow Assassin here. Their Deadly Focus ability is an example of how to give something the feel of Assassin without it being an Auto-win.

I looked over the Shadow Assassin and I like the concept of the Deadly Focus ability, just not it's implementation. I don't mind the study mechanic of the Death Attack ability, as it allows for multiple uses per day, so I'm thinking of keeping that part. Even the Red Mantis Assassin's ability required 3 rounds of activation, so that seems like a good place to start.

As far as general thoughts go, I think Death Attack, while iconic is unnecessary for the Assassin class and actually in fact limits it's playability.

You as a Game Designer can't give too much opportunity to let the Death Attack ability be improved, as it's an auto-win. At the same time, it's the main class feature, so you can't just nerf it and make it useless.

So instead it's delicately balanced and... bland...So you resolve to add on things like True Death and Quiet Death. Neat abilities but ultimately not relevant in most campaigns.

In this respect the Assassin is a very tricky class to balance...I'd almost like to get rid of Death Attack all together for an alternative set of class features that still complimented an Assassin, and have potentially a wider range of use. (Talents or abilities that could potentially synergize and be built upon).
After all PrCs in Pathfinder are supposed to offer Versatility more so than Optimal abilities...so why stick with the one-trick-pony that is Death Attack?

But back to topic...After giving it a little more thought, I do have to say I'd pretty much like to see Death Attack be removed entirely in favor of other class abilities.

For example, what if they were granted some extra effects on critical hits? (Similar perhaps too much to Fighter's Critical Feats...?)
It makes sense in fluff for Assassins, their goal is to do lethal damage. So let's build a version that rewards and specializes in hitting that 'sweet spot' without having it be an auto-win.

As far as the instant death part, I also say yank it out. Replace it with abilities that give you certain bonuses against your studied target. In general, I believe these should add on to the Assassin's sneak attack against the target (such as bleed, cripple, blind, silence, etc..), but could also give situational bonuses or effects (bonus to hit/damage, keen effects, etc..).

I really like the idea of an Assassin preparing certain Spell Like Abilities or Gaining a choice of certain SU, SP or EX abilities for a day.

In a similar fashion to Rogue talents, save that these are more appropriately designed for the Assassin class and operate on a day to day basis. A blending of Spells Known/Prepared and Talents.
THAT sounds potentially very exciting, and would bring something unique to the class play-style-wise.

Perhaps SU or SP abilities that could allow for more effects with Bleed Damage? (Con Bleed and the like?)

I also like the idea of customizable talents. These could be Rogue talents and/or new Assassin talents. Adding Assassin talents only would ensure the character was following a specific path, but would still allow for some individuality. Since we'll also be giving abilities (see below), I think talents should be limited to mostly (Ex) abilities, maybe with the option of picking up extra (Sp) or (Su) abilities if you wanted to play a more spiritual-type assassin.

The biggest issue seems to be spells vs spell-like abilities. Many people I've talked to like the idea of converting spells to spell-like abilities, but it would be difficult to implement.

One way to do this, and still provide for versatility, would be to use a system similar to creature powers. For example, in Savage Species (page 197) the Succubus gains a couple of lists of powers that are usable as spell-like abilities a certain number of times per day. I think this is a good option, but instead of all at x number of times per day, it should be x number of powers off the list per day. You can increase the number of powers per day as well as add new lists as the Assassin levels, this would allow the abilities to be on par with spells at the same level.

The only downside with doing this option is the fact that having spell-like abilities tends to be more powerful than actual spells (no memorization, spell book, components, etc..). To balance this out, the list of spell-like abilities would need to be smaller, and that (IMO) would start to restrict the class again.

The last issue is the 10th level ability. The final level in any class (core or PrC) usually has some sort of unique ability not found anywhere else, and I think the Assassin should have one. Most of these exceptional abilities either amplify an existing power or work in conjunction with the other class abilities.

One thing to keep in mind with the rebuild of this class and in figuring out an appropriate 10th level ability I would like to see, is the concept that the Assassin should no longer be a one trick pony and should have some versatility. That said, I think the 10th level ability, if it's applied to the Assassin's target only, needs to be quite powerful, since it won't come into play as often (such as doubling sneak attack dice vs the target or something similar). If it is a general ability, able to be used more often and in more circumstances, then it doesn't need to be as powerful.

GAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!

I just spent the last half hour creating a very well thought out and presented post, and when I hit submit, everything was lost!!!!

(sigh)

I'll try again, lol.

However, I absolutely agree with assasins NOT having spells. They simply do not fit the archtype. Now, giving a few more class abilities that mirror a few of the spells that were on a 3.5 assasin makes sense ...

I agree with you in regards to the fact that IF you take the Assassin spells away, you should replace them with appropriate (Su) and (Sp) abilities.

I am assuming that you want to take spells away because you see the Assassin as more of a physical character class and less of a caster class. If this were the case, wouldn't it also stand to reason that you would need to either beef up the BAB, grant more skill points and/or class skills, or especially grant more abilities? Another thing that might help balance this class out is to add in Rogue talents and have the levels of Assassin and Rogue stack for determining whether or not you could take advanced Rogue talents.

One argument for spells, though. The Assassin's spell list from 3.5 was a smaller list, similar to that of the Ranger or Paladin. I don't consider either of those classes to really fit in to the whole caster archetype (like wizard and cleric) either, but the list of spells that they have greatly enhances the feel of the class without overpowering it by making them (the spell list) all abilities (which would be an overpowering feature, if implemented). It just means that each class can choose a certain number of additional abilities (spells) from that list to use each day, and since a spell list provides you with a greater number of abilities to choose from, the character then becomes much more versatile and useful. You could even allow such demi-casters to use some of their spells without the normal spell-casting limitations (such as armor check penalties, having hands full, etc..), this might help remove some of the caster "feel" to the class(es). Perhaps the assassin, instead of memorizing a number of spells, could instead "prepare" a number of spells per day for use as spell-like abilities (Sp).

I originally came to the forum here in search of an answer. I was looking to see if an Assassin could use a ranged weapon to perform a death attack. After reading through many posts, I began to see more and more issues with the Assassin, and began to realize that another posting should be started with regards to reworking the Assassin prestige class, as well as addressing the issue of ranged death attacks.

First, I'd like to address my initial concern - Assassins using ranged weapons for their death attack. Strictly by RAW and even RAI it would seem clear that the game designers did not want Assassins using ranged attacks to perform a death attack. It also appears that the designers didn't put much thought into the Pathfinder Assassin (but I'll go into that later).

Would using a ranged weapon for a death attack make the ability overpowered somehow? Would it upset the balance of play and make the Assassin too powerful? In every case, I believe it would not, and I also see no reason why a ranged attack shouldn't be able to be used to deliver a death attack.

Just to prove my point - an Arcane Archer at 10th level gains the ability to create an arrow of death. Granted, it takes a day to create this arrow, but it can be fired from farther away than 30' (somewhere around 1100', unless the bow has the distance enchantment, in which case it would be 2200'), plus he could then use the seeker arrow ability and/or imbue arrow to make the shot (even use true strike), and achieve the same effect. This means that once per day, the Arcane Archer can fire an arrow of death at a known target up to 2200' away, the arrow can turn corners and guide itself to the target (ignoring cover and concealment), and if the target was max distance away, the Arcane Archer would still get a +10 to hit on top of his normal attack roll, and then possibly slaying the target. This is way cooler, and much more useful, than anything the Assassin has.

The requirements for making a successful death attack are:
1) The Assassin must study his target for 3 rounds, and each round of study requires a standard action, AND the target must not detect the Assassin or recognize the Assassin as an enemy.
2) The Assassin must then successfully sneak attack the target within the next 3 rounds and do damage.
3) The target then must fail a Fortitude save (DC 10 + Assassin's level + Assassin's Int mod) or else the attack is treated as just a normal sneak attack.

There are a lot of "ifs" here, and at best the death attack could only be used once every four rounds - and that is very highly unlikely to ever happen.

Picture this: an Assassin crouches within some shadows at night, watching a guard patrol a wall the Assassin needs to get over. The Assassin studies the guard for 3 rounds, then throws his dagger/shoots his bow or crossbow/throws his shuriken (for you ninjas out there), and slays the guard in a dramatic fashion. Neat-O, death attack! That is, assuming the guard dies and doesn't turn around saying "Ouch!...Hey!...ATTACK! ALARM!"

So, does this seem in any way unfair or unbalanced? I think not. Is it possible for a character to find a way to abuse this power and make it unbalanced? More than likely, but that applies to all situations, and as such, it would need to be handled by the respective DMs, but as of right now I can't think of any way for it to be abused. The point is: the use of a ranged weapon to deliver a sneak attack, in my opinion, should be allowed. Also remember, by the rules of sneak attack, you must be within 30' of your target to use a ranged weapon for a sneak attack.

Now to get to the issues with the actual Assassin prestige class, as written in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook. Compared to the D&D 3.5 version of Assassin, this new Assassin is a horrible, emasculated, weaker prestige class in almost every aspect.

To give specific examples: The 3.5 version has slightly better saves and gains spells of up to 4th level (and it is an impressive list of spells that are very useful, including a spell that lets you use a ranged weapon for a death attack - in case your DM doesn't agree with my above points), whereas the Pathfinder Assassin gains an ability that give a bonus to concealing weapons (oooo...) and a couple abilities that modify death attack. Let's take a look at these death attack modifications.

1) True Death (Su). This ability makes someone you killed using death attack more difficult to bring back from the dead. (Wow...what a great ability...hold me back...)
2) Quiet Death (Ex). This allows the Assassin to use a Stealth check after successfully killing a target using death attack in order to avoid detection. (Not bad, at least for a couple levels.)
3) Swift Death (Ex). Once per day the Assassin can use death attack without studying his victim for 3 rounds. (Really? Once per day? I mean, my character is at least 14th level now, and I can use this ability once per day?...)
4) The culmination of all Assassin abilities; the crown jewel; that ability which you have toiled through 10 levels of this prestige class to gain: Angel of Death (Su). Once per day (sigh) you can cause a target's body that you have slain with death attack to crumble to dust, causing him to be EVEN HARDER to bring back. Of course, you must declare the use of this ability BEFORE you make your attack. (Need I even say anything about this...)

These abilities are woefully underpowered and really have no useful place within the average campaign, with the exception of Quiet Death, but even that ability becomes redundant after the Assassin gains Hide in Plain Sight. I mean, really, this class needs a serious overhaul. Let's take a look at how classes and prestige classes are built, and let's re-examine the Assassin and compare it to other Pathfinder prestige classes.

When designing any class, you have to look at it's base mechanics and weigh the value of each. What is the hit die for the class? Does the class have fast, medium, or slow progression for it's BAB and saves? How many skill points does it give each level? What are the class skills? Does the class allow for spell use? If so, does the class allow for full spellcasting (such as Wizard or Cleric) or demi-casting (such as Ranger or Paladin)? Most important is how the class' special abilities weigh in. How often are they used? How powerful are they compared to other abilities? How unique is the ability? And so on...

All of these questions need to be addressed, and the build for the class should even out. This means that a class strong in BAB, saves, or spells probably won't have too many skill points, and vice versa. If the class is strong in one area, it will most likely be weak in another.

Prestige classes, in addition to the above concerns, also need to consider a few more things such as prerequisites. Prerequisites determine how hard a prestige class is to get into and it also sets the theme for the class (at least in principle). Another aspect of prestige classes you need to consider when designing them is to determine what the minimum level a PC needs to be to enter it. This will help you determine at what power level the prestige class' abilities will start. After all, if it takes you 8 levels of prerequisites to gain access to a certain prestige class, and the abilities that you then gain are present at a lower level for another class, you'll more than likely feel cheated. Also, when designing a prestige class, one of the most common features is to have a great ability available to it at 10th level

With these considerations in mind, let's take another look at the Pathfinder Assassin. In my opinion, the Assassin is a rogue-type prestige class, so we'll compare it to not only the Rogue core class, but other rogue-type prestige classes.

1) BAB - medium progression, same as the Rogue and most rogue-type prestige classes.
2) Saves - similar to other prestige classes, but slower than the Rogue (and lower than the 3.5 Assassin), so we'll say medium.
3) Skills - medium, slower than the Rogue and some rogue-type classes.
4) Spells - no spells any more.
5) Special Abilities - number and type of abilities are gained slower than for a Rogue and have much less usefulness in play than other prestige classes. Death Attack becomes powerful at higher levels, but is still a one-shot ability with many "ifs".

Overall, the Assassin doesn't even make it to "middle-of-the-road" status. The lack of more useful special abilities and the removal of spells suggests a more physical character, yet the BAB and saves are still that of a Rogue (with worse saves than a Rogue, and not as many abilities or skills as a Rogue). Likewise, the average progression of BAB and saves coupled with the lack of spells suggests a character with strong skills and/or special abilities, but that is also not the case.

It was suggested in many posts to just make Death Attack and Poison Use Rogue talents and do away with the Assassin entirely. This is plausible, but would negate a uniqueness of character types that would normally be found.

I just now reviewed the Red Mantis Assassin found in the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting book, and WOW! Now that is what a prestige class should look like! Same BAB, much better saves, more skills, SPELLS up to 5th level!, and plenty of GREAT abilities, and also greater weapon specialization!!! I just drooled...

That being said, it is a 3.5 prestige class, but it is a great source to base a new Assassin build off of.

I will work on a new build for the Assassin prestige class and post it soon. I would love some feedback on the material presented here and some ideas on rebuilding the Assassin.