I've always enjoyed the "magical rogue" concept since I played a mage/thief in 2e.
It seems Paizo really paid attention to the discussion of this class, and fixed the big problems and gave it some useful toys, to boot.
*2nd level spells, not 3rd, to qualify. Wiz3, or Brd4/Sor4. Yay!
*Ranged legerdemain all day long
*Tricky Spells (they used the name I suggested, if not the mechanic! I feel like I've contributed!)
*Invisible thief feature at 9th
Is anyone playing one? It looks like a much better class, power-wise, and I'm curious to see how it's working out. What'cha think, Paizo pundits?
It looks like they did listen to most comments.
I love that they fixed ranged legerdemain (man was a /day limit on that stupid). I love invisible thief and tricky spells.
My one complaint is surprise spells. I hate this ability. Nuking doesn't fit the arcane trickster, and I hate the idea that not only is a "trickster" the best nuker in the game, they're the only half-decent nuker in the game.
Overall, a pretty darn solid class.
I've always enjoyed the "magical rogue" concept since I played a mage/thief in 2e.
It seems Paizo really paid attention to the discussion of this class, and fixed the big problems and gave it some useful toys, to boot.
*2nd level spells, not 3rd, to qualify. Wiz3, or Brd4/Sor4. Yay!
*Ranged legerdemain all day long
*Tricky Spells (they used the name I suggested, if not the mechanic! I feel like I've contributed!)
*Invisible thief feature at 9thIs anyone playing one? It looks like a much better class, power-wise, and I'm curious to see how it's working out. What'cha think, Paizo pundits?
Right now my group is playing 3.5, and I'm playing a rogue who is on track to be a AT... he's second level so we have a ways to go. Hopefully we will convert well before 6th level. If not I'm going to see if the GM will at least let me use the much more reasonable entry requirements.
My overall impression of the class is awesome! I would have liked to see some utility stuff added to the class to help it move away from the arcane sniper role but overall I'm happy with the changes. The most important change IMO was moving the qualification down 2 levels so it's now accessible at 7th/ 8th for sorcerers,
Looks good to me.
My thought was to reduce the entrance requirement to a total of 3 spell levels and sneak dice. That way you could qualify with 3 wizard levels and 1 rogue or 3 rogue and 1 wizard.
This gives the player an option of whether to be a wizy with sneak powers or a rogue with a few magic tricks up his sleeve.
No prestige class should open up that early in character level.Looks good to me.
My thought was to reduce the entrance requirement to a total of 3 spell levels and sneak dice. That way you could qualify with 3 wizard levels and 1 rogue or 3 rogue and 1 wizard.
This gives the player an option of whether to be a wizy with sneak powers or a rogue with a few magic tricks up his sleeve.
I'm guessing here, but I think what they meant was the requirements should have been 3d6 sneak attack and 1st level spells OR 1d6 sneak attack and 3rd level spells. Both would require at least a 6th level character to meet the requirements, with entry into the PrC at 7th level.
I think your choice of arcane class is a great way to fine-tune the AT for the character you like.
Sneaky blaster? Sorcerer! Smart, skillful sneak-thief with the right spells for the job? Wizard! Silver-tongued charmer who can infiltrate the castle and blend in among the courtiers (then kill them)? Bard!
The surprise spells feature doesn't bother me too much. An extra 7d6 damage is a lot, but it's mitigated by the need for your foes to be flat-footed, and you're at least 3 levels behind a straight-up caster of your level. Your targets get saves against most damage spells, including the SA damage.
All the same, if they don't make their saves, it's a (insert snarky song here)...Ballroom Blitz? Panic at the Disco? The trickster's way of making a grand entrance!
Some people have mentioned the devastation of a meteor swarm, but a wizard version of this class could only get one per day at 20th level, with less than a 28 int. Only one of the 4 spheres adds the SA damage, so if you're spreading it out, it's not waaaay worse than the spell cast by a full caster of your level. There are better lower-level spells for cleaning out the basement. A widened, empowered fireball comes to mind, but it's an easier save, too.
Sorcerer tricksters won't have any 9th level spells at 20th.
No prestige class should open up that early in character level.Looks good to me.
My thought was to reduce the entrance requirement to a total of 3 spell levels and sneak dice. That way you could qualify with 3 wizard levels and 1 rogue or 3 rogue and 1 wizard.
This gives the player an option of whether to be a wizy with sneak powers or a rogue with a few magic tricks up his sleeve.
Actually I had my own ruling wrong.
It was a total of 4 sneak and spell levels.
5 wiz/1 rogue
or
3 Wiz/3 rogue
or
1 Sorcerer/5 rogue
You can get into the class by level 7 and you have more options for how you want to focus.
Overall, I'm very impressed. My one remaining complaint is that, even though the descriptive text explicitly says that sorcerers are the more common spellcaster base class, they still have more difficulty qualifying for the prestige class. Sigh. I'll probably house rule that entry requirement to "3rd level arcane caster."
Granted, sorcerers can still qualify at 7th level by going Sorcerer4/Rogue1/Assassin1, but this seems a little forced.
|
I'll probably house rule that entry requirement to "3rd level arcane caster."
Might amend that to "3rd level arcane caster, without regard to traits, feats, or magical items." Otherwise a Fighter 10/Rogue 3/Wizard 1 with the Magical Knack trait and an Orange Prism Ioun Stone could technically qualify.
The "more difficulty" means that sorcerer combos have to wait ONE more level in order to qualify. You know compared to the old days when I had to be 10th level for my Rogue/Sorcerer to qualify, they have it easy. I don't see this as a problem.Overall, I'm very impressed. My one remaining complaint is that, even though the descriptive text explicitly says that sorcerers are the more common spellcaster base class, they still have more difficulty qualifying for the prestige class. Sigh. I'll probably house rule that entry requirement to "3rd level arcane caster."
Granted, sorcerers can still qualify at 7th level by going Sorcerer4/Rogue1/Assassin1, but this seems a little forced.
I'm not comparing it to "the old days", I'm comparing it to the wizard. And I'm not denying that this is a major improvement. As I said:
Overall, I'm very impressed.
The games in which I play tend to end at around levels 10-11, so a one-level imbalance can create a significant difference as to which abilities become available before the end of the campaign. Furthermore, the multiclassing levels prior to qualifying for a prestige class tend to be rather painful, so getting out of that a level earlier means a lot.
That's understandable, however in terms of balancing entry into magical RRCs requiring spell levels implies that the class is balanced by having sorcerers wait one more level to acquire it.
And one should not underestimate the potential of going the Wizard route in building an Arcane Trickster, more adaptability in spells, options in item creation etc. The wizard AT is the Batman, the James Bond of the AT crowd.
I completely agree. For the Arcane trickster the spells are literally the "Get out of Jail Free card" The bonded item's ability to pull that one spell out of thin air when you most need it is very telling for a rogue.
Also they are more likely to plan their way through a job by stealth and good intel. The Sorcerers ability to blast their way out has no style. You don't bring artillery to the bank job.
That's understandable, however in terms of balancing entry into magical RRCs requiring spell levels implies that the class is balanced by having sorcerers wait one more level to acquire it.
And one should not underestimate the potential of going the Wizard route in building an Arcane Trickster, more adaptability in spells, options in item creation etc. The wizard AT is the Batman, the James Bond of the AT crowd.
I completely agree. For the Arcane trickster the spells are literally the "Get out of Jail Free card" The bonded item's ability to pull that one spell out of thin air when you most need it is very telling for a rogue.
Also they are more likely to plan their way through a job by stealth and good intel. The Sorcerers ability to blast their way out has no style. You don't bring artillery to the bank job.
I also thought it sorta odd that the description makes wizard seem less desireable than sorcerer, too. At least,less common. An AT wizard will certainly max out his Int., making sure he has plenty of spells, and just as important, skill points to spread around his considerable repertoire. Between useful rogue skills and all the things a spellcaster needs to put ranks in, you could never have enough. I've seen many players insist that Int. is the most important stat for rogues, even more than Dex.
The sorcerer wouldn't be so skillful, overall, with Cha. being more important than his Int.
The levels of rogue and the available skills are what set him apart from a straight caster. The trickster part is just as cool as the arcane part, IMHO. I'd play an evoker, just to be sure to have some blasts when needed (it's too cool an ability to ignore!). If your campaign uses Spell Compendium, there are other great damage spells for the AT.
That said, with the PF sorcerer bloodlines, there are some intriguing possibilites for some really cool sorcerer-based ATs, too.
The bard isn't as exciting an option, in most ways, but with the spells he gets, he could be an excellent spy, and with his healing spells, pretty darn self-sufficient. He'd be great as the leader of a small guerrilla resistance group, and could keep them going.
My 2 coppers.=)
Overall, I'm very impressed. My one remaining complaint is that, even though the descriptive text explicitly says that sorcerers are the more common spellcaster base class,
This is a general issue with the sorcerer class and not so much an issue with the AT itself.
As an aside
One thing I noticed is that with SA on spells there is a lot more synergy between arcane casters and rogues than for example fighters and casters. Rogues don't rely on armor so much and your damage bonus you picked up as a rogue stays with you when you cast.
Someone mentioned aberrant bloodline + AT as a good combination. The idea is quite intriguing. Being able to sneak attack with a touch spell from 5+ feet away is a nice option and gives you the ability to use improved feint which doesn't work with ranged spells.