Is the Arcane Trickster harder to qualify for than the eldritch or mystic?
Edlritch knight needs to be a 5th level wizard and a 1st level fighter-class. So 6th,
Mystic Theurge needs to a 3rd level wizard and 3rd level cleric, so 6th again.
Arcane Trickster needs to be a 5th level wizard and a 4th level rogue, so 9th.And that is where your unbalance is.
Note that qualifying for arcane trickster requires 5th level wizard and 3rd level rogue (not 4th), for 8th level total.
Continuing the comparison of benefits (at 16th level):
Wizard 5/fighter 1/eldritch knight 10--BAB +13, CL 14
Cleric 3/wizard 3/mystic theurge 10--BAB +8, CL cleric 13 and wizard 13
Wizard 5/rogue 3/arcane trickster 8--BAB +8, CL 13, +6d6 Sneak Attack
Changing the arcane trickster's BAB to +3/4 levels:
Wizard 5/rogue 3/arcane trickster 8--BAB +10, CL 13, +6d6 Sneak Attack
If the requirement is changed to +1d6 Sneak Attack and Evasion instead of +2d6 Sneak Attack, then we end up with:
Wizard 5/rogue 2/arcane trickster 9--BAB +7, CL 14, +5d6 Sneak Attack
With the lower requirement and +3/4 levels BAB:
Wizard 5/rogue 2/arcane trickster 9--BAB +9, CL 14, +5d6 Sneak Attack
Alternately, reducing the casting requirement to 2nd level arcane spells and leaving the +2d6 Sneak Attack requirement results in:
Wizard 3/rogue 3/arcane trickster 10--BAB +8, CL 13, +7d6 Sneak Attack
Using the +3/4 level BAB:
Wizard 3/rogue 3/arcane trickster 10--BAB +10, CL 13, +7d6 Sneak Attack
Reducing the requirement and/or improving the PrC is probably called for, but the question is whether to treat the arcane trickster as a caster with some rogue abilities (the 3.x version) or as a character where caster and rogue are more equal. As far as improvements go, I'd prefer an improvement in skill points to 6 + Int mod instead of +3/4 level BAB.
How do dragons move around their treasure?
How do the treasure hoardes get there?
(like pirates spent years moving the stuff around with ships and men and men and men and more men)
I dont understand the critque, humans are new an they can make money? I dont get.
All I said is there is no store in my games where you can just go to and if you have enough gold exect to buy a bag of holding.
Small magic shops might have something extra you can buy (3000 gold or under) but its still rolled randomly for what stuff they have.
It just makes the magic you do get more special and cool, rather than annoyingly common and boring ( i Like putting histories and reasons for magic items existing together)
My adventurers find Glamdring the foehammer, in a treasure, not a +2 goblin slaying sword.
If the gamers were to finda bag of holding, it would, pretty much be, the only one in the game. rather than a pocket knife everyone had.
Why fight dragons? well thats in the story, not the treasure. And Im sure you could find a way to get all that treasure move, if there wasnt an easy way (tensers floating disc maybe?)
Back to the AT, it's really a character class I have found hard to use.
I think it still has to do with the name arcane trickster... Ive always pictured a bard/rogue super class that has some annoying gnome picking your pocket from 30 feet away.
the way most people want to use it (a rogue/mage superclass) the whole arcane trickster theme doesnt even fit well. I think thats my problem with this class, mentally picturing it.
Its probably the name. I just never tought of it as a spell casting rogue. I kind of thought of it the same as the horizon walker, why?
Im not even sure I like PrCs at all now to think of it. (Assassin HAS to be around, its a classic) And others annoy me, like Arcane Archer, that could be so much more than it is (too many goofy "green arrow feats")
if your going to have these classes, i would have to agree that once you got to level 20 using them, the end result would be everyone saying "WOW"
there certainly isnt enough WOW to the AT, so although I see the DESIRE to be amin/max spell chucking rogue. I look at this class and still say why? Cant most of the rogues, talents and feats be duplicated or outclassed by creative spell use anyway? Wouldn't you be better off as a full on caster?
Sure augmenting your rouge with his own list of buff and sneaky spells is cool, but everyone really wants a sneaky ray shooter.
I just dont see sneak attacking with fireball, except for those who only want it because they want to take fireball damage and add sneak attack damage.
I really feel most people would be fine with "you can add 7d6 to your spells if you cast them in a flanking position"
this just sounds like people who want more "nuke" for their spells.
IT just not very intersting to me.
Good points, all.
I'll try to respond to the last few posts in no particular order.
I played the 3.5 AT on 2 occasions, once at 10th level, then at 20th in a couple one-shot games. I (and the other players) found it underwhelming. Granted, I didn't play it for long, but long enough to agree with practically every message board I saw on the subject:
"It's a good class if your party lacks both a rogue and an arcane caster. Otherwise, NOT."
At a minimum, adding 2 skill points and qualifying to enter the class at 7th level would make the AT more viable. I still think the small improvement in Bab for 10 levels would help, too. Being able to hit a little better than a straight wizard just keeps the class more of a blend of two classes, which is how I would like to see it.
I also agree that a wizard or sorcerer, with the right spells, can do whatever sneaky tricks a rogue can, and can teleport out once he's stolen the battle plans/rescued the princess, etc.
By the same token, he can turn himself into a competent melee fighter, speak any language, and do all kinds of things the other classes can't do. It's just the nature of the beast. The limiting factor is that he only has a certain number of spells per day, and can only manage so many scrolls, wands, etc. at a given level.
I don't need to mention how bad it can get when the wizard is expecting one situation, then finds another, rendering half his spells useless or unneeded. Neutralize his magic, and he has little to fall back on.
A rogue, on the other hand, still has a few tricks up his sleeve as long as he's still breathing. He's a survivor. It's just part of his charm.
At the risk of being redundant, I see the AT as a character who has something more to fall back on than a straight wizard when his magic doesn't get the job done. As written, it isn't much.
I think ability to cast 2nd level spells instead of 3rd will be a fair entry requirement comparable to the mingling of mystic theurge class.
skillpoints to 6 + int seems to fit the class
D6 for hp and poor attack adjustment seems ok to me
my suggestion to improve the class slightly, offering a few more uses of legerdemain rogue talents on level 1 and 9 and uncanny dodge at level 5. casting increases remain the same.
1) ranged legerdemain 1/day, rogue talent
2) sneak attack
3) impromptu sneak attack 1/day, ranged legerdemain 2/day
4) sneak attack
5) ranged legerdemain 3/day, uncanny dodge
6) sneak attack
7) impromptu sneak attack 2/day, ranged legerdemain 4/day
8) sneak attack
9) ranged legerdemain 5/day, rogue talent
10) sneak attack, surprise spells
I was thinking the same thing. A couple rogue talents, or a metamagic feat or two (let the player decide?) would keep the class closer to that mix of both I keep harping about, without being too much. The suggested scaling of Ranged Legerdemain by Cathat89 (Master's Hand, etc.,) on page one makes sense, too.
If it's a class feature, it should be impressive at higher levels.